Click to enlarge. From here, p23. |
But the Synthesis Report doesn't really say this. The chart above is a summary. There's a lot there, so I've summarised a bit, by circling those areas the Report has a "High" confidence that it's man-made climate change affecting it.
This is my summary, from the chart above, of "Observed impacts attributed to climate change" with a "HIGH degree of confidence" for:
- Glaciers, snow, ice and/or permafrost: Canada, North of the US, Europe, Central America
- Rivers, lakes, floods and/or droughts: Southern US, Northern Asia, Central S. America, Australia.
- Terrestrial ecosystems: Polar Regions, Central Asia Australia
- Marine Ecosystems: Southern US, Southern Europe, Small Islands, Southern S. America, Southern Africa
So, it's pretty much global, and it's pretty much in all areas, all with a "high" degree of confidence. The figures at the bottom of each section in the chart above are the number of papers that relate to the issue in question. If there is one bright spot, and it's a pretty dim one, it's that there is no single item on which the IPCC authors have a "Very High" degree of confidence.
On with Nuclear! It's in the mitigation measures set out by the IPCC authors. But very little mentioned when discussing what to do. It's all Wind and Sun. Which, fine. But we need baseload and that's nuclear.
For full disclosure: An article on how Wind and Solar are outdoing Nuclear in China, where there is strong support for Nuclear and no viable NIMBY-ism.
OTOH: Gates and Buffett are financing a new type of reactor, and these are not men given to frivolous investments.