local climate change impacts

[forkyfork]

this thread is for discussing local effects of climate change. no debates about co2 (the science is settled) or politics

[forkyfork]

good video originally posted by @bluewave

 

[uncle W]

a much wetter climate started around 1971 and warmer in 1990...warmer minimums from more moisture in the air...many more hot summer nights staying above 70...Back in the 1960's the drought was a big problem...a much bigger problem for the city than whats happening now...also air and water is cleaner than the 1960's...

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

Since I work as a horticulturalist, extreme late fall and early spring  blocking events and subsequent Arctic outbreaks are killer.

 

[rclab]

15 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

Since I work as a horticulturalist, extreme late fall and early spring  blocking events and subsequent Arctic outbreaks are killer.

 

Good afternoon LBSF. Before the sub freezing temperatures I took a photo of my just blooming Camilla shrubs. I’m admittedly on the northern end of this particular plants growing zone. The shrub is over 30 years old. I understand their are new varieties that can tolerate too zone 6. After two days of sub freezing temperatures the blooms took some damage. The top two photos are from Sunday early, the bottom two were taken this afternoon. Stay well, as always …

[uncle W]

5 minutes ago, rclab said:

Good afternoon LBSF. Before the sub freezing temperatures I took a photo of my just blooming Camilla shrubs. I’m admittedly on the northern end of this particular plants growing zone. The shrub is over 30 years old. I understand their are new varieties that can tolerate too zone 6. After two days of sub freezing temperatures the blooms took some damage. The top two photos are from Sunday early, the bottom two were taken this afternoon. Stay well, as always …

if that plant was here the deer would have eaten them...looks a little bigger than a postage stamp...

[uncle W]

1 hour ago, uncle W said:

a much wetter climate started around 1971 and warmer in 1990...warmer minimums from more moisture in the air...many more hot summer nights staying above 70...Back in the 1960's the drought was a big problem...a much bigger problem for the city than whats happening now...also air and water is cleaner than the 1960's...

 

[rclab]

56 minutes ago, uncle W said:

if that plant was here the deer would have eaten them...looks a little bigger than a postage stamp...

Good evening, Unc. The postage stamp has hosted possums, raccoons, bushy and non bushy tailed rodents. Those Camilla plants at 3 decades have done well. At this point they, even after the freeze, look a lot better than I do. Interesting though, my sisters plants in the Bay Ridge Ft Ham section bloomed earlier than mine. She is about 6 to 8 miles to the south and a bit west of me. If I see anything big enough to feast on the upper blooms I sure hope it’s on 4 legs and is a dedicated plant eater. Stay well, as always ….

[gpsnavigator]

A white flowering tree up the street for us was looking healthy four days ago.  Not anymore.  I'm not sure what type of tree it is, but lows of 16, 20, and probably another 20 tonight, coupled with mostly below freezing days has done it in.  

I'm not even sure my daffodils will make it.  They were up already in the last week of February and are only days from blooming.  I tried covering them, so we'll see, but they don't look as good as they did before this freeze.

It got me to thinking - with the warming climate, blooms are likely occurring earlier and earlier, as was the case this year, making them even more vulnerable to late season freezes, which will continue to happen despite the overall warming.  This is probably stating the obvious to some, but I remember reading somewhere that things are much more resilient to cold as long as they haven't flowered yet.  We'll see, but this is the most brutal late March cold that I can remember just based upon it's duration.  

[lee59]

The biggest climate affects around our area are milder temperatures and wetter conditions and more snow. As far as flowering plants and trees being threatened by cold, this has always been a big problem down south, I would assume. My daffodils seemed very droopy this morning but I think they will survive.

[Cfa]

3 hours ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

Since I work as a horticulturalist, extreme late fall and early spring  blocking events and subsequent Arctic outbreaks are killer.

 

Such damage is more common in the south, especially inland, where spring warmth comes on much stronger than here but final freeze dates aren’t too disimilar from ours. Things start growing weeks before they’re fully out of the woods in terms of cold blasts.

Our muted early spring warmth (coastal location/seasonal lag) coupled with very early last freeze dates for our latitude (coastal location/heavy urbanization) usually work to prevent such damage from occurring here in most cases, since things generally don’t grow an appreciable amount before our last freeze occurs there isn’t much (if any) new growth to damage. This may change as our climate warms, this March has been a good example of that, sustained warmth followed by a sharp cold outbreak.

[LibertyBell]

8 hours ago, uncle W said:

a much wetter climate started around 1971 and warmer in 1990...warmer minimums from more moisture in the air...many more hot summer nights staying above 70...Back in the 1960's the drought was a big problem...a much bigger problem for the city than whats happening now...also air and water is cleaner than the 1960's...

I dispute the air and water being cleaner....I cant breathe this shit, with so much more pollen in the air than what we had in the 80s and the ozone impact is much worse with higher humidity and more dirty fuel powered cars on the road.  How do we take the water vapor out of the air?

 

[bluewave]

18 hours ago, forkyfork said:

good video originally posted by @bluewave

This is the full thread with all the supporting material.

 

[uncle W]

7 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I dispute the air and water being cleaner....I cant breathe this shit, with so much more pollen in the air than what we had in the 80s and the ozone impact is much worse with higher humidity and more dirty fuel powered cars on the road.  How do we take the water vapor out of the air?

 

you weren't around in the 1960's when swimming at Coney Island you would be surrounded by all kinds of yucky stuff...when was the last time NYC had a air pollution alert?...

1966...

 

[lee59]

16 minutes ago, uncle W said:

you weren't around in the 1960's when swimming at Coney Island you would be surrounded by all kinds of yucky stuff...when was the last time NYC had a air pollution alert?...

1966...

 

I agree as far as Long Island  Sound goes, it is cleaner now than in the 1960s.

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

55 minutes ago, uncle W said:

you weren't around in the 1960's when swimming at Coney Island you would be surrounded by all kinds of yucky stuff...when was the last time NYC had a air pollution alert?...

1966...

 

It’s way cleaner then even the 80s.

Growing up at Jones Beach, we used to call the water Jones Beach brown. You would often come out of the water with tar on your skin.

now, clean water days are the norm, and I can’t remember the last time we had tar

[JustinRP37]

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I dispute the air and water being cleaner....I cant breathe this shit, with so much more pollen in the air than what we had in the 80s and the ozone impact is much worse with higher humidity and more dirty fuel powered cars on the road.  How do we take the water vapor out of the air?

 

The air is most definitely cleaner now. Even with more cars on the road, emissions standards are much more strict today than they were back then. Same with water. At least rivers are no longer catching on fire… But even on a beautiful day, you couldn’t see the top of the Empire State Building back in the 60s. I wasn’t alive back then, but have studied this stuff as I have to teach it. The sound is also much cleaner. The pollen issue though is worse and getting worse. We have to stop planting these non-native plants.

[coastalplainsnowman]

Nowadays it seems that every other day sites like Accuweather will have an Air Quality Alert for NYC metro, often rating it as Poor, and I see similar alerts, though not as frequent, from Upton as well.

I realize the Accuweather thing is recent, but I don't remember seeing so many alerts from NWS either, say 5-10 years ago.  I don't remember alerts or official warnings like this other than an occasional 'smog' alert once in a blue moon in the 80s/90s.

Is this just because we run more sensitive tests now, and that if we had today's tests running 30 years ago they'd be lighting up every day?

[uncle W]

1966 New York City smog - Wikipedia

there used to be many manufacturing and other polluting businesses in and around the city that are gone...

[wishcast_hater]

11 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I dispute the air and water being cleaner....I cant breathe this shit, with so much more pollen in the air than what we had in the 80s and the ozone impact is much worse with higher humidity and more dirty fuel powered cars on the road.  How do we take the water vapor out of the air?

 

I work for the Department of Environmental Protection here in NYC and I can tell you that the water is MUCH cleaner than it has been in almost 100 years. In the mid 80's the North River Waste Water Treatment Plant was the final Treatment Plant to come online and ended the practice of NYC expelling waste water (human waste, soaps, detergents, grease etc.) from entering the waterways.  As we monitor the waterways we can see aquatic life returning to the area which we have not seen in many years.  I do take exception to the "science being settled" comment as shut down of debate is not true science and therefore becomes a narrative.

[Rjay]

9 minutes ago, wishcast_hater said:

I work for the Department of Environmental Protection here in NYC and I can tell you that the water is MUCH cleaner than it has been in almost 100 years. In the mid 80's the North River Waste Water Treatment Plant was the final Treatment Plant to come online and ended the practice of NYC expelling waste water (human waste, soaps, detergents, grease etc.) from entering the waterways.  As we monitor the waterways we can see aquatic life returning to the area which we have not seen in many years.  I do take exception to the "science being settled" comment as shut down of debate is not true science and therefore becomes a narrative.

Take exception all you want bud.  It's settled in regards to co2.   The rest is political.  I couldn't care less what either party says on the topic.     

[Rjay]

Sorry Forky

[LibertyBell]

16 hours ago, JustinRP37 said:

The air is most definitely cleaner now. Even with more cars on the road, emissions standards are much more strict today than they were back then. Same with water. At least rivers are no longer catching on fire… But even on a beautiful day, you couldn’t see the top of the Empire State Building back in the 60s. I wasn’t alive back then, but have studied this stuff as I have to teach it. The sound is also much cleaner. The pollen issue though is worse and getting worse. We have to stop planting these non-native plants.

Compared to the 80s it seems worse, the higher humidity isn't a good thing either, it traps air particulates closer to the ground, like NO2.  Air pollution is the number one killer on the planet.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58657224

 

 

[LibertyBell]

13 hours ago, wishcast_hater said:

I work for the Department of Environmental Protection here in NYC and I can tell you that the water is MUCH cleaner than it has been in almost 100 years. In the mid 80's the North River Waste Water Treatment Plant was the final Treatment Plant to come online and ended the practice of NYC expelling waste water (human waste, soaps, detergents, grease etc.) from entering the waterways.  As we monitor the waterways we can see aquatic life returning to the area which we have not seen in many years.  I do take exception to the "science being settled" comment as shut down of debate is not true science and therefore becomes a narrative.

That might be for NYC but it isn't the case on Long Island where I can't drink tap water during the summer (I don't drink tap water anyway, it's highly filtered to take out whatever it is that made me sick whenever I drank it-- reports are it's anything from pesticides from farm run off to high metal quantity)

[LibertyBell]

17 hours ago, uncle W said:

you weren't around in the 1960's when swimming at Coney Island you would be surrounded by all kinds of yucky stuff...when was the last time NYC had a air pollution alert?...

1966...

 

I thought we had one of these alerts just last year didn't we?  When the air around here was yellow because of particulates from distant wildfires made it here?

 

[psv88]

7 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

That might be for NYC but it isn't the case on Long Island where I can't drink tap water during the summer (I don't drink tap water anyway, it's highly filtered to take out whatever it is that made me sick whenever I drank it-- reports are it's anything from pesticides from farm run off to high metal quantity)

Long Island water is very high quality. I’m not sure what you are talking about 

[Brian5671]

The warm summer nights are noticeable here in CT.   Rare for us to see low's in the 50's in the heart of summer anymore.    Central AC is a must where as a generation ago you could get away with a couple window units for the handful of truly hot uncomfortable days/nights.

[forkyfork]

i made this thread for when someone like bluewave or don sutherland has a good long post about the local changes so those posts don't get lost in the regular discussion threads. anything remotely into denier territory gets scrubbed

[LibertyBell]

6 hours ago, psv88 said:

Long Island water is very high quality. I’m not sure what you are talking about 

This

https://www.highwaterstandard.com/blog/long-island-water-quality

 

A high-quality water filter can purify your drinking water and protect it from the contaminants listed below. Liz Moran, who is the Environmental Protection Policy Director of NYPIRG, has stated that Long Island’s water contains harmful levels of PFOA, 1,4-dioxane, PFOS, and PFAS.

1,4-Dioxane

The water on Long Island has been found to have harmful levels of 1-4-dioxane. This is a synthetic chemical that is flammable and resistant to biodegradation. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified 1-4-dioxane as a likely carcinogen, meaning that it probably causes cancer with long-term usage. In the short-term, 1-4-dioxane exposure can cause irritation of the throat, eyes, and nose. Other symptoms include liver and kidney damage.

PFOA (Perfluorooctanoic Acid)

PFOA is considered to be an emerging contaminant – this classification of contaminants refers to a material or a chemical that has either a potential, perceived, or real threat to the environment or to human health. PFOA is classified as one since it is pervasive and mobile within aquatic environments and the atmosphere. This synthetic contaminant’s most widely produced form is ammonium salt. According to the EPA, certain exposure levels of PFOA may result in birth defects, kidney and testicular cancer, and other adverse symptoms.

PFOS (Perfluorooctane Sulfonate)

PFOS is another emerging contaminant that Long Island’s public water has high levels of. The same EPA study showed that exposure to PFOS can cause effects like liver tissue damage, cholesterol changes, fetus developmental effects, and cancer.

PFAS (Per- and Polyfluroralkyl Substances), the family of similar chemicals including PFOA/PFOS

PFAS refers to a family of man-made synthetic chemicals, including the aforementioned PFOA and PFOS. These chemicals have been produced worldwide since the 1940s. Out of all the substances in the PFAS family, PFOA and PFOS have been studied and produced the most. These chemicals are both persistent, meaning that they are highly resistant to breaking down. They build up in your body’s system over time, causing adverse health reactions. This is why it is crucial to use a high-quality filter to purify Long Island’s drinking water. If you’re ready to start drinking clean water in Long Island, we recommend checking out our favorite water filters.

 

and this

 

https://bronx.news12.com/nassau-provider-informs-customers-their-drinking-water-may-contain-cancer-causing-chemicals

 

Some Nassau residents have received letters from their water provider saying that their drinking water might contain toxic contaminants. The notices are part of a process passed into law last year.

The Water Authority of Western Nassau County sent the letter out, alerting residents that the water supply contains cancer-causing chemicals known as PFOS, PFOA and 1,4-dioxane.

Last August, the state passed a law that water providers must work immediately toward removing these contaminants if they are found in drinking wells. If the contaminants could not be removed within a three-month period, water authorities could apply for more time with a deferral.

However, if the deferral is granted, customers must be contacted with information letting them know that the water doesn't meet New York's new drinking water standards.

According to the New York state Department of Health, 21 water providers in Nassau and Suffolk have applied for more time to get the cancer-causing chemicals out of its water. The deferral gives the water provider two years or more to get filtration systems up and running.

Kris Thomas, a mother of three from Floral Park, was among those to receive the concerning letter. She says she was shocked.

"They are basically informing us that we are consuming a cancer-causing agent and continue drinking this until we get further news in a year and half," says Thomas.

"It is infuriating and upsetting that residents are getting letters from their water supplier here on Long Island telling them there is now contamination in your water and it will go on for another two years until we get the treatment installed," says Adrienne Esposito, of Citizens Campaign for the Environment. "That's unacceptable, the public shouldn't accept it and we don't accept it."

According to the Nassau County Health Department, 17 water providers have applied for more time to get the cancer-causing agents out of the water. The Suffolk County Water Authority says they have also applied for deferral for its water supply.

[LibertyBell]

There's also concern about estuaries and surrounding waters....people have this false sense of security that we don't need to improve our environment.

https://news.stonybrook.edu/featuredpost/long-island-water-quality-assessment-shows-cause-for-concern/

Scientists and environmental activists are raising the alarm about an increasing trend of poor water quality on the South Shore and in the Long Island Sound.

Those who came out to Patchogue to check out the water say nitrogen runoff is primarily to blame for toxic algae blooms and rust tides that have made the South Shore and Long Island Sound inhospitable for thin fish and shellfish to thrive.

Strong weather events like tropical storms have become more prevalent and increase nitrogen runoff.

Christopher Gobler, a professor with Stony Brook University’s School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, says scientists are predicting storms will become more frequent, which is going to impact more than just fish in the area.

“What that means is the amount of nitrogen going from land to sea is going to increase and continue to threaten our water bodies, our marine life and even frankly, human health,” Gobler says.

Centereach resident Marguerite Mencke says she can see the water issues every time she goes fishing.

“This is our future, this is what our kids are eating, this is what we are eating,” Mencke says. “We want it as clean as possible.”

Scientists say fixing outdated septic systems and getting more homes on sewer systems is one solution to reducing nitrogen in the water.

https://longisland.news12.com/scientists-raise-concerns-about-trend-of-poor-water-quality-on-south-shore-long-island-sound

The outbreaks of blue-green algal blooms in 2021 is a concern for both human and animal health. For the past six years, Suffolk County has had more lakes with blue-green algal blooms than any other of the 64 counties in New York State, a distinction that is likely to be repeated in 2021. Blue-green algae make toxins that can be harmful to humans and animals, and have been linked to dog illnesses and dog deaths across the U.S. and on Long Island.

Of equal concern is the widespread nature of dead zones across Long Island. Dead zones are regions of low or no oxygen. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation indicates that marine waters should never have less than three milligrams of dissolved oxygen per liter to allow fish to survive. Through the summer, more than two dozen sites across Long Island did not meet this criterion, and in several cases, fish kills occurred. 

“The data reveals that many sites are not suitable habitats for sustaining fish and shellfish,” added Gobler.

The occurrence of events like brown tide and rust tide have led to the collapse of critical marine habitats such as seagrass, major fisheries on Long Island such as scallops and clams, and the coastal wetlands that help protect waterfront communities from the damaging impacts of storms. Groups like The Nature Conservancy have been working for more than a decade to revive and restore these habitats and shellfish, but have been challenged by algal blooms such as those witnessed during Summer 2021.

“It has gotten to the point that we have to watch News 12 each week to see where it is safe to swim or fish,” said Carl LoBue, senior scientist for The Nature Conservancy. “The research findings are conclusive. We know how to fix this, and it’s time to act. The longer we wait to fix our water quality problems, the longer it will take and the more expensive it will be.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58657224

 

 

Air pollution is even more dangerous than previously thought, the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned, as it slashes maximum safe levels of key pollutants such nitrogen dioxide.

An estimated seven million people die prematurely each year from diseases linked to air pollution, the WHO says.

Low- and middle-income countries suffer the most, because of their reliance on fossil fuels for economic development.

The WHO puts air pollution on a par with smoking and unhealthy eating.

It is urging its 194 member states to cut emissions and take action on climate change, ahead of the COP26 summit in November.

 

Decade by decade, the limits for what's considered a safe amount of pollution are being ratcheted down.

It's not news to people suffering from heart and lung problems that toxic particles and gases can harm people at much lower levels than previously thought.

The changes to the guidelines mean the UK's legal limits for the most harmful pollutants are now four times higher than the maximum levels recommended by the WHO.

The trouble is that the worst pollution - tiny particles which can be breathed into the lungs - is so terribly hard to stop.

Pollution comes from vehicle exhausts and gas central heating. But harmful particles are also released into the air in other ways - or formed in the air in reaction with other chemicals.

Particle sources include paints, cleaning fluids, and solvents. Add to that car tyres wearing on the road, or brakes - meaning that even electric cars can't offer a perfect solution.

How many people know that farm slurry also gives off gases that contribute to deaths in cities?

 

That's why the new advice is so challenging to governments. If you live in a city, it's very hard to escape pollution, however hard you try.

The new guidelines, released on Wednesday, halve the recommended maximum for exposure to tiny particles called PM2.5s.

These are produced by burning fuels in power generation, domestic heating and vehicle engines.

"Almost 80% of deaths related to PM2.5 could be avoided in the world if the current air pollution levels were reduced to those proposed in the updated guideline," the WHO said.

It is also cutting the recommended limit for another class of microparticles, known as PM10s, by 25%.

• UK to set limits on harmful airborne particles
• Pollution increases risks of Covid, study finds
• President found negligent over Jakarta filthy air

Other pollutants singled out in the guidelines include ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and carbon monoxide.

 

Air pollution is linked to conditions such as heart disease and strokes. In children, it can reduce lung growth and cause aggravated asthma.

"Improving air quality can enhance climate change mitigation efforts, while reducing emissions will in turn improve air quality," the WHO says.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-58461907

Living in areas of high air pollution increases the risk of hospitalisation with Covid-19 a new study has found.

Imperial College London researchers also found evidence people living in polluted areas may have an increased risk of catching the disease.

The review is the most "comprehensive overview" of studies on air pollution and coronavirus, researchers said.