Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

2024 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #46

Posted on 17 November 2024 by BaerbelW, Doug Bostrom, John Hartz

A listing of 33 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, November 10, 2024 thru Sat, November 16, 2024.

Story of the week

Our Story of the Week is completely "meta" (no, not that Meta). It's about our exploring how to improve the utility of the feature you're reading right now.

Sharp-eyed or possibly even distracted regular readers of our weekly climate news roundup will have noticed some distinct differences in the prior two editions to this latest, compared with the past 634 releases. 

Typically our weekly listing of news and analysis centered on climate change has been displayed in chronological order, more-or-less following the sequence of original article publication dates. This is a perspective that sometimes affords readers a sense of the development of particlarly prominent stories, a useful view of major developments.

There are other ways of measuring the weight and meaning of news about our climate. Given that many of us are likely to have special areas of interest, it can be particularly helpful when articles are categorized by their common themes of topic matter (click here or the thumbnail for an example). Our readers have remarked on this and we'd certainly like to follow through on worthy suggestions for improvements. But categorization means effort— time taken from the scanty and overcommited budget of minutes afforded by the all-volunteer crew running our weekly features.

For the past three weeks we've experimented with creating digests of the respective week's news via "AI" services, first with Google's Gemini and then (when Gemini proved unreliable) OpenAI's ChatGPT.

Neither method produces exactly what we'd like to see, which ideally would be comprehensive categorization of thematically related news and analysis, with direct link access to component articles of each category and with "lede" elements offering readers a hint of why they might be interested in reading any given item.  We're left with a twist on the old "80:20" rule; here the last 20% of what we need is quite materially important to our objectives. 

We're going to continue tinkering with what we think may well end up as an improved "product." The semi-automated work flow behind the Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup is well suited to an additional integration step. It's a plain fact that uncategorized information is harder for readers to access, so if there's a way to achieve this improvement we'll seek to follow it.

In connection with any decision to use the current achingly energy inefficient generative LLMs, it's worth taking energy usage into account. Kilowatt hours in still mean kilograms of CO2 out despite whatever handwaving about offsets or other accounting tricks are used to salve our consciences. An astute reader pointed this out in comments, unsurprisingly given that AI industry "demands" for power are reaching absurd levels definitely needing to be questioned and possibly denied permission. The answer to this, in our context? It may come as a surprise, but even with the generosity of ignoring embodied carbon costs for creating a human capable of productively spending an hour at a computer keyboard it appears that for our context here, it's likely more efficient to use a stochastic parrot as an assistant. 

At any rate we've paused our experimentation to step back and consider where to go next, and so this week's liisting is in the chronological format we've been using for the past few months— similar to that of the prior 600 or so editions. Meanwhile we'd be delighted to hear your thoughts on where we might best go with this feature, AI-augmented or not. 

Stories we promoted this week, by publication date:

Before November 10

November 10

November 11

November 12

November 13

November 14

November 15

November 16

If you happen upon high quality climate-science and/or climate-myth busting articles from reliable sources while surfing the web, please feel free to submit them via this Google form so that we may share them widely. Thanks!

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 12:

  1. You might check the May 2021 article out from PLoS One on Article level classification of scieentific publications. What came to mine when I skimmed this article is that for your purposes it might be worth getting a bibliometric analyst involved in your stable of volunteers and she/he might be able to take your latest batch of articles you want to post on the site and whip them into taxonomic shape in no time, categorizing them into clear categories without any AI involved. I suspect that there are some out there who would understand the carbon footprint issues that AI represents and could figure out a way to do it sans the energy intensive approach.

    0 0
  2. I am willing to accept that there may be a positive efficiency difference between using a stochastic parrot and a human, or humans, to hunt for relevant articles that readers of this site will find informative or even useful. I'm not entirely convinced, and the link in this Story of the Week post is broken regarding AI vs. human writing and illustrating work. And it sounds a little too much like the John Henry fable updated.

    There is also the ethical question that comes with using the products of large corporations whose investors who don't give a fig about the climate impact of the energy use from running LLMs. What they want is to continue to capture huge swaths of surplus value from the labor of others (as the Marxists would call it) and use their profits to extract excess rent (as economists would call it) in the form of public policy that favors their interests.

    I don't know what the best solution is for the humans working very hard to maintain this site. For my own purposes, the chronological listing of reports and articles is more than satisfactory. It is easy to sift through to find what interests me, which tend to be the peer-reviewed research. So please accept my thanks for all that you do to inform us. I accept that it is best to leave up to you how to improve the product and ease your burdens.

    0 0
  3. Cleanair27 @2

    Thanks for the heads-up regarding the broken link. It's now fixed (and goes to the same published paper linked to in my earlier comment about this topic.

    As an aside (and most likely stating the obvious): if you are especially interested in peer-reviewed literature, our weekly compilation has "tons" of just that!

    0 0
  4. I agree with wilddouglascounty’s recommendation. Climate science communication specialists should be able establish a helpful set of categories for the Weekly News Items.

    Part of my work as a Civil/Structural technical specialist in a major engineering organization was collecting reference information on a diversity of relevant topics. My approach was to use a high-level set of identifiable categories with General (or Other) for everything that did not fit in an established category. As the information accumulated I would create new basic categories for suitable groups of information from the General category. And when appropriate I would create sub-categories in the basic categories.

    Though they would not be relevant for the Weekly News Items, here are some categories I had that were related directly to climate change (they indicate why I pursued learning about rapid human caused climate change):

    • Loads and Forces: Wind; Rain; Snow; Ice; Range of Temperature Change
    • Surface Runoff: Rain Intensity and Duration; Snow Melt Rates
    • Foundations: Slope Stability; Permafrost (It was expected to remain frozen for centuries. So we tried to build on it in ways that would not cause it to melt.)
    0 0
  5. Possible categories are the science of climate change,  climate projections, climate mitigation and adaptation, politics of climate change, the denialist campaign, and miscellaneous issues. 

    0 0
  6. I am reviewing the categories created by AI for Weekly News #43, #44, and #45. I hope to post a result soon.

    However, I have noticed a problem that using AI did not solve. In Week #44 the first category was for COP16. This Week's list is dominated by COP29. The problem is the failure to fully describe the COPs. They are:

    • UN Biodiversity COP16
    • UN Climate Change COP29

    That full understanding is clear when reading each article. But the category title should fully describe the content rather than require a review of the content to determine what is in the category.

    0 0
  7. A Climate Science Communications specialist could likely develop a better categorization. However, I compiled the following ‘primary categories’ based on the Weekly News categories created by AI in Weeks #43, 44, and 45 and the set of categories suggested by nigelj @5.

    Climate Change Impacts: Environmental-Social-Economic (interrelated)

    Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Intimately correlated. More mitigation requires less adaptation.

    Climate Science and Research:

    Public Misconceptions and Climate Science: Disinformation and Misinformation

    Climate Policy and Politics:

    International Climate Conferences and Agreements:

    • UN Climate Change COPs
    • UN Biodiversity COPs

    Miscellaneous (Other):

    The AI generated listings for Weeks #43, 44 and 45 also provide a large number of potential ‘secondary categories’.

    0 0
  8. I would change one of the Primary Categories I listed @7. I had simply copied the category AI created for Weekly News Roundup #45. But I think the following would be better.

    Public Misunderstandings about Climate Science: Disinformation and Misinformation

    Also, when appropriate, a News Items should be listed in more than one Primary Category. This wouold particularly apply to news items reporting on climate sciemce and research that also would fit under another category.

    0 0
  9. I have some additional adjustments of my suggested list of Primary Category headings for the Weekly News Roundup. Each primary heading should refer to the primary interest which is learning about everything related to Rapid Human-Caused Climate Change.

    Climate Change Impacts: Environment-Social-Economic (interrelated)

    Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Intimately correlated. More mitigation requires less adaptation.

    Climate Change Science/Research:

    Public Misunderstandings about Climate Change: Disinformation and Misinformation

    Climate Change Policy and Politics:

    International Climate Change related Conferences and Agreements:

    • UN Climate Change COPs
    • UN Biodiversity COPs

    Miscellaneous (Other):

    0 0
  10. OPOF @9, your categories look  good to me. Seven primary categories is also a good number. Any more and it would overcomplicate things.

    I would have put climate science and research first on the list because everything starts with the science, but perhaps you were putting impacts first because this is such an important issue. 

    0 0
  11. OPOF @ 8&9

    Thanks much for these suggestions! I had asked Google's NotebookLM to identify topics based on several but fairly random editions of our weekly news roundup and the listing - while a lot more fine-grained - is not that much different from what you came up with. What we plan to do - as soon as we get around to finalizing the list - is to add a drop-down selection field to the Google form we already use to collect articles suitable for sharing on our social media channels. We can then in turn use that information when we generate the round-up blog post.

    0 0
  12. nigelj @10,

    I am not too concerned about the order of the listing. My thinking was to:

    1. Start with 'what people should be interested in learning about' through the reporting of harms done.
    2. Next is learning about what could be done to reduce the harms.
    3. Then comes news reports specifically on new published science/research. Note that these news items will probably also be tagged for a second category.
    4. News exposing and correcting dis- and mis-information
    5. News about leadership actions can then be understood in the context of all the above.
    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us