<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	 xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>KQED&#039;s Climate Watch &#187; James Hansen</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/tag/james-hansen/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch</link>
	<description>KQED&#039;s multimedia series providing in-depth coverage of climate-related science and policy issues from a California perspective.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:37:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/><atom:link rel="hub" href="http://kqed.superfeedr.com"/>		<item>
		<title>NASA: Climate Changes Coming Faster Than We Thought</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/12/06/nasa-climate-changes-coming-faster-than-we-thought/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/12/06/nasa-climate-changes-coming-faster-than-we-thought/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Ayers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ice sheets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sea level rise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/?p=17218</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["We cannot burn all the fossil fuels we have. If we burn all the fossil fuels we would send the planet back to an ice-free state." -- James Hansen <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/12/06/nasa-climate-changes-coming-faster-than-we-thought/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>&#8220;If we burn all the fossil fuels, we would send the planet back to an ice-free state.&#8221; &#8212; James Hansen, NASA<br />
</strong></p>
<p>A new investigation of the ancient climate record shows that time to stop climate change is running out &#8212; maybe sooner than scientists had thought.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the message from an international team of scientists reporting today at the <a href="http://www.agu.org">American Geophysical Union</a> annual meeting in San Francisco (#AGU11 on Twitter).</p>
<div id="attachment_17251"  class="wp-caption module image left" style="width: 250px;"><a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/12/06/nasa-climate-changes-coming-faster-than-we-thought/greenland_meltwater-250/" rel="attachment wp-att-17251"><img class="size-full wp-image-17251" title="greenland_meltwater-250" src="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/12/greenland_meltwater-250.jpg" alt="" width="250" height="208" /></a><p class="wp-media-credit">NASA</p><p class="wp-caption-text">Melt water tumbles through a Greenland ice sheet.</p></div>
<p>James Hansen is director of NASA&#8217;s <a href="http:///www.giss.nasa.gov/">Goddard Institute for Space Studies</a> in New York, and was one of the scientists on the study. He says that even the accepted benchmark of a 2-degree Celsius rise (3.6 F) in temperature that might result from doubling of current carbon dioxide levels would have a much greater impact than was previously thought.</p>
<p>&#8220;Once the <a title="Sci Daily - story" href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110308150228.htm">ice sheets</a> begin to disintegrate, then you&#8217;ve got an unstable shoreline, which is going to be continuing to change over time,&#8221; said Hansen in a presentation to fellow scientists. &#8220;It would be a mess for those people living at that time to deal with. And it looks like that time will be this century.&#8221;</p>
<p>The team&#8217;s new examination of the paleo-climate record now shows that  &#8221;a global warming of a couple degrees Celsius would basically create a different planet,&#8221; Hansen warned. It&#8217;s different than the one that humanity, that civilization knows about. If we look at the paleo record, the target of two degrees Celsius is actually a prescription for long-term disaster.&#8221;</p>
<p>The two-degree mark gets a lot of focus in both scientific and policy circles, as it&#8217;s emerged as the one clear benchmark for controlling warming that industrialized nations have been able to rally around.</p>
<p>Hansen says another measure of climate change deserves a second look in light of this new investigation: The atmospheric carbon reduction target of 350 parts per million (ppm) may not be enough. &#8220;It really should be somewhat less than that,&#8221; he told the gathering. &#8220;It&#8217;s necessary if we want to maintain stable ice sheets and shorelines.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hansen&#8217;s warning is based on his team&#8217;s finding that long-ago changes of less than two degrees in the Earth&#8217;s temperature resulted in oceans rising by about 25 meters (about 82 feet). Current science on global ice sheets concludes that they&#8217;re shedding ice, and the rate of that is increasing.</p>
<p>&#8220;We&#8217;ve got to slow down this experiment that we&#8217;re doing with the planet,&#8221; says Hansen, &#8220;because otherwise we&#8217;re leaving for young people a situation that&#8217;s going to be out of their control.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hansen began publicly warning about the consequences of climate change at congressional hearings in the late 1980s. He&#8217;s become a more controversial figure recently, due to his high profile as an environmental activist.</p>
<div></div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/12/06/nasa-climate-changes-coming-faster-than-we-thought/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/12/greenland_meltwater-250.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">greenland_meltwater-250</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Was 2008 Relatively Warm or Cool?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2009/02/24/was-2008-relatively-warm-or-cool/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2009/02/24/was-2008-relatively-warm-or-cool/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gretchen Weber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[El Nino]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[La Nina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oceans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Temperature]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/?p=388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Answer: Both. It depends on your historical time frame.
With a global average surface temperature of 79 degrees Fahrenheit, 2008 was the coolest year since 2000, according to climatologists at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). But it's also the ninth-warmest year since 1880. <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2009/02/24/was-2008-relatively-warm-or-cool/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Answer: Both. It depends on your historical time frame.</p>
<p>With a global average surface temperature of 79 degrees Fahrenheit, 2008 was the coolest year since 2000, <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2008_temps.html">according to climatologists </a>at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). But it&#8217;s also the ninth-warmest year since 1880, so it&#8217;s probably not time to invest in a ski resort just yet.</p>
<p>Including the 2008 dip, the 10 warmest years on record (since 1880) have all occurred between 1997 and 2008, according to NASA.</p>
<p>The NASA scientists attribute 2008&#8242;s relatively lower temperature to a cooler Pacific Ocean, due to a strong <a title="NOAA La Nina" href="http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/lanina.html">La Nina</a> pattern in the first half of 2008. La Nina and El Nino are opposite phases of a natural oscillation of  upwelling and subsequent temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/314648main_graph_temp_lg.jpg">2008 temperatures</a> in the United States were cooler than any other year this decade, but, as illustrated on the map below, other parts of the world such as Eurasia and the Arctic were exceptionally warm.</p>
<p>Director of GISS James Hansen predicts that because a shift to El Nino is expected to start this year or next, it &#8220;still seems likely&#8221; that we&#8217;ll see a new record high for the average global surface air temperature in that time frame.</p>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-393" src="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2009/02/smallmain_graph_temp_lg1.jpg" alt="smallmain_graph_temp_lg1" width="497" height="174" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2009/02/24/was-2008-relatively-warm-or-cool/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2009/02/smallmain_graph_temp_lg1.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">smallmain_graph_temp_lg1</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
