Nanny Bloomberg: NYC Doomed From “Climate Change”

Alternate headline: Guy with a pretty darned big carbon footprint who’s mayor of a city with a pretty darned big carbon footprint forgot to take his meds (via Watts Up With That?)

(NY Daily News) CLIMATE CHANGE is real — and it could turn the city into a flood-prone danger zone with summers as sweltering as the deep South’s in the not-too-distant future, according to an expert panel of scientists.

The panel, which Mayor Bloomberg tasked with studying weather patterns in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, predicts the greatest threats to Gotham will be catastrophic heat waves and frequent bouts of heavy rains for days on end.

The bad weather patterns should kick in as early as 2020, according to the findings released on Monday.

So, within 7 years, when most won’t remember the predictions.

In that year, the city will see an average temperature of 57 degrees — up from the current 54 — and 10% more rainfall.

Increases in rainfall tend to support cooling, not warming, when the Sun is less active, allowing the solar wind to strike the earth and create more cloud cover.

That rainfall will come with an alarming, nearly 1-foot rise in the already high sea level — which will likely increase the city’s flood risk.

A 12 inch rise in 7 years? Good luck with that. Anthony Watts features info on the sea rise at Battery Park, the same as I mentioned July 2012, where The Battery is seeing a rise of 2.77mm.

Here’s 3mm

Scared yet? It would take 100 years to hit 1 foot.

Anthony also notes info from Joe D’Aleo which plots temperature to population in NYC, making a strong case for the UHI.

When the infants of today are hitting their mid-life crises — around the middle of the century, in the 2050s — New York’s summers will be similar to the summers in sultry Birmingham, Ala., today.

That means an average of 39 to 52 days a year with temps over 90, the panel found. The current norm for the city is just 18 days over 90.

Steven Goddard notes

One hundred degree days are much less common than they used to be in New York. During the 1930s they occurred about once every 400 days, and now they occur about once every 900 days.

So, the panel is hysterical and unhinged? And, what do they want? Lots of government spending and bad weather prevention programs which restrict liberty and control companies. Surprise!

Oh, and reading the Washington Post after I had wrote this post I see that Excitable Dana Milbank has a piece entitle “Bloomberg’s race to protect NYC from climate change“, and is whininh about the threat for flooding in D.C. It might surprise the hell out of Dana to learn that D.C. was built on…wait for it…marshy land. The swamp thing is kinda a myth, but the area has always been prone to flooding. Dana forgets to mention the massive carbon footprint of Bloomberg and NYC.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

RSS feed

You can login to comment with:

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

5 Comments

Comment by john
2013-06-12 17:36:53

Sandy did 50 billion in damage. Before Sandy hit you said
it was over hyped” well it wasn’t.

 
Comment by William Teach
2013-06-12 20:41:50

Again with that? Never said it wasn’t dangerous, just that it was not an actual hurricane at landfall.

And I love how you ignore the actual hard facts provided.

 
Comment by Mark E
2013-06-12 21:03:03

NYC Doomed? …. And what is the downside?

 
Comment by john
2013-06-13 20:05:07

I am unsure that there is a universal correlation between temps and rainfall. Most of the land mass of the continental USA is in a long term severe drought. Farmers are increasingly believing in climate change

 
Comment by Idiot_Gumballs Subscribed to comments via email
2013-06-15 20:07:05

John, you are an idiot. Everyone believes in climate change. Like everyone believes you are an idiot troll. It is only you and your anti-free market Socialist ilk that believe the climate can be made static through taxation or control of the populace.

But, john is a perfect example of our failed education system. THis hyper-partisan anti-business tax-them-all plan will be believed by those voters who vote based on their emotions and their lack of information. Granted, those in power don’t want the people to have information. Information is detrimental to Democrat\Liberal\Socialist dogma.

When education is put on the lowest rung of importance, even compared to the intent to punish business and tax consumers, then our kids, and our society, will continue to decline.

Our society is doomed.

 

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Bad Behavior has blocked 9439 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE