Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NOAA Report: World Labor Capacity Dropping Because of Increased Temperatures

Unknown Lamer posted about a year and a half ago | from the air-condition-the-planet dept.

Earth 337

pigrabbitbear writes with a story about some interesting possible effects of Global Warming. From the article: "It's a good thing that robots are stealing our jobs, because in about thirty-five years, nobody in their right mind is going to want to do them. Scientists from NOAA just published a report ... that details how a warming climate impacts the way we work, and the results are pretty clear — we do less of it. NOAA discovered that over the last 60 years, the hotter, wetter climate has decreased human labor capacity by 10%. And it projects that by 2050, that number will double."

cancel ×

337 comments

Wrong page. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024393)

Please repost to 9gag.

Sorry, too lazy to read summary (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024395)

Sun is shining here in Portugal...

Could someone tell me in one sentence what it was about?

Re:Sorry, too lazy to read summary (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024481)

Sun is shining here in Portugal...

Could someone tell me in one sentence what it was about?

Work.

In other words, nothing you Portuguese would know about.

NO sense at all! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024411)

NO sense at all!

So the people of the tropic or in sunny weathers do not work as much as the people of icy weathers?
I guess that the Eskimos must be a super civilization of hard working machines and achievements!

Re:NO sense at all! (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024635)

Up to a limit yes.

Visit a nice tropical nation and look around vs North America or Northern Europe.

In one climate you can survive without any effort, in the other you will work or die outside in the winter.

Obviously once it gets cold enough that also impacts how much work can get done since now all energy must go into just not freezing to death.

Re:NO sense at all! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024737)

It may also something to have to do that heat makes some people stupid. I have personally a lot of problems with temperature changes. Drop the temperature by ten Kelvins and I'll catch a nasty cold. Raise it by ten Kelvins and I'll suffer from headaches, nausea, and I'll start vomiting. My mental output decreases seriously in both cases. I hate summer and winter, for obvious reasons. They're the least productive parts of the year for me.

Re:NO sense at all! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024825)

Low temperature does not make you sick. Viruses, bacteria, and diseases make you sick.

Causality can involve more than one step (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025035)

We're all quite glad that you discovered that you don't "catch a cold" by stepping out into the cold. At this rate you'll soon learn about the Transistor!

That said, low temperatures make many people more susceptible the viruses and bacteria that are ultimately responsible, and ironically, the low humidity caused by running our heating systems during this weather contributes greatly to that problem. At the other end, heat intolerance is a condition people in my family suffer from and it makes them quite useless at temperatures I find perfectly comfortable.

The GP's post was on topic and required no correction. These are real problems. If the average temperatures in your climate zone go up or down 5 degrees, it's not hard to imagine that workers in unairconditioned spaces (often called laborers) would end up less productive as a result.

Re:Causality can involve more than one step (1)

JDevers (83155) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025123)

W Drop the temperature by ten Kelvins and I'll catch a nasty cold.

Seems to me that he most certainly blamed catching a cold on a pretty minor temperature drop.

Re:NO sense at all! (0)

flayzernax (1060680) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024757)

If you want anything done in Puerto Rico give it an extra 30 days, DSL installed, Power line Fixed, cabinets built, increase the time it takes to get anything done by a factor of 30 =)

P.S. Peurto Rico is a beautiful country and if you are a layed back and not uptight about your perfected 1950's Utopian industrial society its great.

Re:NO sense at all! (1, Funny)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024789)

Peurto Rico is a beautiful country...

Tee hee... so is Africa... and Europe!

Re:NO sense at all! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024929)

Puerto Rico is not a continent and more importantly it is one continguous political entity. if you're gonna be snarky don't also be wrong. If it's anything other than a country it would be a US state.

Now if I can only convince my supervisor... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024421)

it is just too hot ... I need my siesta break!

Now you're cook'in! (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024569)

it is just too hot ... I need my siesta break!

After reading, I see that whoever did these studies, never seen a Mexican construction crew in August here in Georgia - in 100+ heat.

And they got their work done well and on time.

So all these siestas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024431)

of the last three hundred years can be blamed on global warming? Great!

Huh? (1, Funny)

rs79 (71822) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024443)

Somebody should invent some way to cool the air down. Think of all those poor bakery workers. Oh if only there was some sort of box you could plug into the window and it would make the air colder in the room it was in. Oh wait...

An increasingly obese America is getting too warm when it works? Good God man the temperature is up a degree, have some chips and try to last the night.

Dumbest. Report. Ever. But I can't want to see what they'd say in an ice age. Presumably "oh well, that's it, we're all gonna die then".

Who pays for crap like this?

Re:Huh? (3, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024539)

Man doesn't understand report, calls it 'dumb'. News at 11.

Alternatively:

Yeah, it's the report that's dumb~

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024549)

Not everybody is working in an enclosed space...

Re:Huh? (0)

StoneyMahoney (1488261) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024565)

RTFA.

That is all.

Re:Huh? (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024719)

Air conditioning only makes the problem worse. It may make your room cooler, by adding heat outside. In cities, when everyone runs the AC, the heat goes up and everyone cranks up the AC. Meanwhile, the additional strain on the power grid means more coal is burned and more heat generated. And not to mention all those people who have to *gasp* WORK OUTSIDE!

Re:Huh? (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024985)

and a cooler climate means colder winters and more oil is burned to keep warm. and in NYC there are lots of decades old boilers that spew toxic fumes into the air after burning the oil. no one wants to replace them until they break due to cost
i'll take AC's and slightly warmer outside air any day over toxic smoke

DUH

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024727)

have you ever tried working productively in a hot, humid island climate (example: trinidad and tobago)?

believe me, the last thing you want to do is sit down at a desk when the weather is nice, or as nice as it is usually there.

the report has nothing to do with air conditioning and everything to do with human nature.

Re:Huh? (4, Insightful)

1u3hr (530656) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024811)

Somebody should invent some way to cool the air down.

Moron. It's not about office workers. RTFA.

The impact will be felt the most by those who work outside or in hot environments, such as firefighters, bakery workers, farmers, construction workers, factory workers, and others who will be forced to slow down due to increases in heat and humidity.

Let me know when you can aircondition a farm or construction site.

Re:Huh? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025013)

Considering our rather primitive ancestors managed to survive the last ice-age, which peaked fewer than 25,000 years ago, I'd dare suggest that, as a species, we probably wouldn't all die out if the earth experienced another one in the future. In fact, given all of the advances we've made since that time, we'd almost certainly end up faring far better than any of our ancestors did previously.

it's not the weather (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024451)

it's not the weather, it's sitting on my ass playing video games and writing on the computer all my life instead of doing things that has decreased my labor capacity compared to my father (in my case, much more than 10%)

Re:it's not the weather (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024653)

it's not the weather, it's sitting on my ass playing video games and writing on the computer all my life instead of doing things that has decreased my labor capacity compared to my father (in my case, much more than 10%)

Your report makes sense. It must be thrown in the trash. That's how it goes, ol' chap!

Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024453)

Global Warming is there anything it cannot do?

Re:Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (2, Funny)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024533)

Ah yes, my favorite was the reporter [msn.com] last week who seriously asked Bill Nye if global warming had anything to do with the asteroid near-miss.

Re:Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024945)

Heat makes things expand, the hotter the Earth is the larger it is, so passing asteroids are closer.

Makes perfect sense if you're brain damaged enough to work for MSN.

Re:Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025057)

Of course it has. The asteroid actually would have hit, but then it figured out that on earth it is now too hot for its taste and thus decided to pass the planet instead of hitting it. :-)

Re:Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024823)

To elaborate: Can it create a rock it can't lift?

Re:Global Warming is there anything it cannot do? (2)

macbeth66 (204889) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024833)

I bet it can't core a apple.

Not This Shit Again. (2, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024465)

Is there anything bad in the world that is not caused by global warming?

Re:Not This Shit Again. (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024501)

Is there anything bad in the world that is not caused by global warming?

...

Drone strikes?

Re:Not This Shit Again. (3, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024571)

Why are drone strike bad?

There are vilified becasue of the accuracy and effectiveness.
.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (2)

therealkevinkretz (1585825) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024645)

Really? Most of the complaints I've read about them include mentions of all the collateral damage (including child-killing, etc). That would seem to belie your assertion.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (2, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024731)

Why are drone strike bad?

A) summary executions of American citizens, thereby denying due process, and B) exceedingly high rate of innocent civilian casualties.

There are vilified becasue of the accuracy and effectiveness. .

Which I'm certain is a fully evidence-based assertion, right?

Re:Not This Shit Again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024913)

The majority of missile strikes being executed are done by fixed wing aircraft as opposed to helicopters as well. Does that mean that fixed wing aircraft are worse than helicopters for human rights?

People are complaining about an escalation in the aggressiveness in American rules of engagement and blaming the tool. Drones are not pulling the trigger. Jet pilots looking at a targeting screen while flying through the air do not have better aim than drone pilots looking at a targeting screen while sitting in a trailer.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024577)

That goes back to not wanting to work. Why fly a fighter when a drone can do it, and you can stay at home.

Global warming = drone strikes!

Re:Not This Shit Again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024595)

Nope. Increased global temperatures are making people more hotblooded.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (4, Insightful)

EmagGeek (574360) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024605)

Global warming theoretically might cause increased competition for resources. Increased competition for resources sometimes leads to armed conflict. Armed conflict over resources sometimes results in the US getting involved militarily. The US sometimes uses drones when it is so involved.

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that global warming definitely causes drone strikes.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024551)

A great many things. Climate changes, being a global event, will impact everything ion the globe to some degree.
Well for a while, eventually the world won't be habitable. Then it won't get worse for us.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024865)

...eventually the world won't be habitable...

Yeah, in about 4 or 5 billion years...

Whew! It's hot... I need a nap

According to deniers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024763)

According to deniers, is there anything global warming CAN do?

Hurricanes? Nope.
Sea level rise? Nope.
Heatwaves? Nope.
Flooding? Nope.
Storms? Nope.
Change the weather at all? Nope.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024859)

Yes, you see this is the problem with slashdot. It's supposed to be full of clever people, who know the difference between a model and actual reality. Unfortunately, for some reason none of the editors seem to have a fucking clue when a story is bollocks.

Regardless, it seems to me that one of the reasons people might work less in hot climates is because some fucking cretin has forced increases in the prices of various previously cheap fossil fuels, by adding carbon taxes, resulting in the fucking air conditioning no longer being affordable.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (1)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024941)

Too clever by half.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024883)

as societies evolve into an automated, higher-tech world, we're all just getting lazier. no real surprise there. nothing to do with global warming other than the fact that all that industry and pollution that lets us be lazier contributes to it.

Re:Not This Shit Again. (1)

phlinn (819946) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025067)

Apparently not [numberwatch.co.uk]

Doing Robots (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024471)

"It's a good thing that robots are stealing our jobs, because in about thirty-five years, nobody in their right mind is going to want to do them. "

I don't want to do robots now. I mean some people in Japan might. But not me.

Doubt (2, Insightful)

Bigby (659157) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024473)

Talk about a study that has too many variables to conclude something so major... How did they eliminate the effect of today's technology and culture on work ethic and demand? Among the thousands of other variables...

5 degrees isn't going to reduce overall labor by 5%, let alone 10%. And the 10% is considered with far less than 5 degrees in increased temperature.

Re:Doubt (2)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024587)

he said, based on NOTHING.

Re:Doubt (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024685)

Well, there are other studies that have concluded amazing things based on bullshit. So that's a bit more than NOTHING. Personally, I'm interested in how the study can claim labor has a temperature sensitivity of around 10% decline per degree C. That's huge. If it were true, then any sort of energy conservation via raising the thermostat in hot weather, would be greatly counterproductive.

Re:Doubt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024743)

How about you RTFA before you start flapping your retard hole.

Re:Doubt (3, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024701)

From Jamesl in "Below the headline...

--- ... far below the headline ...

Uncertainties and caveats associated with these projections include climate sensitivity, climate warming patterns, CO2 emissions, future population distributions, and technological and societal change.

Because this is after all, just a projection based on computer models. And we know how well they work "out of sample."
---
Spot on. In other words, they make a statement and then say that it could be wrong based on just about everything.

Garbage.

Re:Doubt (1)

poofmeisterp (650750) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024881)

Talk about a study that has too many variables to conclude something so major... How did they eliminate the effect of today's technology and culture on work ethic and demand? Among the thousands of other variables...

5 degrees isn't going to reduce overall labor by 5%, let alone 10%. And the 10% is considered with far less than 5 degrees in increased temperature.

Your math makes my head hurt. :>

Below the headline ... (2, Informative)

jamesl (106902) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024477)

... far below the headline ...

Uncertainties and caveats associated with these projections include climate sensitivity, climate warming patterns, CO2 emissions, future population distributions, and technological and societal change.

Because this is after all, just a projection based on computer models. And we know how well they work "out of sample."

Re:Below the headline ... (0)

poofmeisterp (650750) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024917)

... far below the headline ...

Uncertainties and caveats associated with these projections include climate sensitivity, climate warming patterns, CO2 emissions, future population distributions, and technological and societal change.

Because this is after all, just a projection based on computer models. And we know how well they work "out of sample."

Looks like John's doing an awesome job of feeding the computers data, getting result sets, massaging the results into a nifty little report, then throwing complete garbage logic into the report with little result set image representations in it to make it look all on the up-n-up. :)

Re:Below the headline ... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025097)

The actual scientific paper makes it very clear that they're making a projeciton on known metrics about heat stress and known data about tropical climate. It would take Slashdot to turn it into a straw-man like "World Labor Capacity Dropping Because of Increased Temperatures".

What global warming? (0, Flamebait)

scorp1us (235526) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024491)

Even IPCC head Pachauri admits [wattsupwiththat.com] no warming for 17 years. So what warming are they talking about? 17 years is not a small amount of time. It's 0 change for 1/5 of a century. Given that it's also the most recent fifth, I don't know how they can forecast anything. The OP report says over the "last 60 years", what they mean is 60 years ago for 43 years, ignoring the most recent 17. I don't know how anyone can have any confidence in that trend line when it stops 2/3 through the period.

Re:What global warming? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024691)

Rebuttal: http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/

Re:What global warming? (1, Funny)

Reverand Dave (1959652) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024777)

Awesome, so there is no such thing as global climate change? I'll let you tell the turtle that holds our flat earth disk in space while the sun revolves around us. Maybe all of our humors are out of balance too.

Re:What global warming? (3, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024809)

"Even IPCC head Pachauri admits [wattsupwiththat.com] no warming for 17 years."
false. That has been thoroughly debunked.

It amuses me..angers really, that someone would dispose of the work from 1000's of experts from around the globe, through out all the collected data, but trust some yahoo website.

Do you even know how to think?
At this stage in out body of knowledge about this issue, people lie you are right up there with anti-vaccers, 911 conspiracy cranks and bigfoot believers.

The worse part is that we can still do something about it pretty cheaply, all thing considered, but it gets more expensive every year.
Out of the last 10 years, 9 of them have been the warmest on record. Yes, even after homogenization of the data sets.
That's not debatable. It's a fact.

The 10th one was in 98.
17 of the top 20 warmest were in the last 20 years.

start hear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record [wikipedia.org]

Re:What global warming? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025113)

I agree - man made global warming 'science' is indeed up there with anti-vaccers, 911 conspiracy cranks and bigfoot believers.

Good point.

Re:What global warming? (1)

SoupGuru (723634) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024887)

"17 years" seems like an oddly specific number.

misleading synopsis (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024507)

The statistic mentioned by /. in their synopsis is very misleading. It implies (to me at least) that world total labor capacity has decreased by 10%, but the NOAA study is just stating that when it is hot out, people tend to be 10% less productive.

Re:misleading synopsis (2)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024649)

Humans will continue to adapt and advance, and productivity will continue to increase...barring massive government intervention.

Re:misleading synopsis (2)

poofmeisterp (650750) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024965)

The statistic mentioned by /. in their synopsis is very misleading. It implies (to me at least) that world total labor capacity has decreased by 10%, but the NOAA study is just stating that when it is hot out, people tend to be 10% less productive.

If that's true, I have some nifty data to throw in.......

When temperatures exceed a certain limit with humidity at a certain point (dewpoint), they issue a Heat Advisory or Heat Warning. In each warning, they advise people to drink lots of water and to, GASP, take more breaks in the shade!

Wait, so are they saying that their warnings are actually working?

Oh, wait, that only includes the U.S. My central logic processor is overloading and using adrenaline to cool. This sort of report pisses me off! lol

In breaking news... (-1, Troll)

Atrox Canis (1266568) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024513)

NOAA researchers discovered to be former DOJ Prosecutors. Why do we continue to pay for this. Let the sequester happen.

Jaw drop (1, Interesting)

poofmeisterp (650750) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024517)

NOAA was one of the most respected organizations in my head until this BS.

Is John P. Dunne trying to keep his job or something??? How in one's sane and collected mind are they actually corroborating reduction in labor by increased temperature?

This is akin to me releasing a report, with data of my choosing that has changed since 1991, stating that the fall of the Soviet Union contributed to the increase in population in the rest of the world.

The two are completely unrelated! There is NO evidence whatsoever that they can possibly be connected. I don't care if one is a believer in climate change/global warming or not, this is complete tripe!

Oh, and let me tell you while I'm at it, my headache frequency has increased by 10% due to the EMI from electronics in the past decade. Rubbish!

Re:Jaw drop (1)

dywolf (2673597) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024707)

You've never actually worked outside in the South in the summer have you?
There was a reason it was sparsely settled and all the work was done by poor farmers/sharecroppers, and slaves.
There is a reason little manual labor or hard outdoor work is done in the middle east, particularly during the middle 6 hours of the day.

Humid locals get more humid.
Dry locations get dryer.

Raise the temp just a couple degrees and the max humidty may not change (hard to go over 100%), but it duration sure as hell does. To the point it no longer goes down overnight. Eventually its no longer only too hot and too humid during the worst of the day, but for the most of the night as well. And there are jobs that depend on the cooler/dryer nighttime (asphalt laying is one example from my own past experience). In fact, some models consider the effect of that humidity not going down over night and show it has (or can have; depends on location and replenishment) the effect of drying an area out, cause the water vapor doesnt get reabsorbed into the local environment. IE, desertification.

Re:Jaw drop (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025011)

In fact, some models consider the effect of that humidity not going down over night and show it has (or can have; depends on location and replenishment) the effect of drying an area out, cause the water vapor doesnt get reabsorbed into the local environment. IE, desertification.

And in other models, a drying atmosphere causes a drying biosphere, because of, y'know, equilibrium. Seeing how the Sahara has desertified during the period of time that saw massive ice accretion on Antarctica (3+ miles now!) during a long-term cooling trend, those models have a decent explanation and evidence.

Re:Jaw drop (2, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024735)

How else can they justify the 70+ Billion dollars [dailycaller.com] on climate change research?

Got to produce reports!

Re:Jaw drop (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024891)

If only there was a paper explaining it~

Did you read the paper? if so please show me where it's rubbish. If not, STFU and let us adults who have read the paper talk about it, m'kay?

. One heat-stress metric with broad occupational health applications4, 5, 6 is wet-bulb globe temperature. We combine wet-bulb globe temperatures from global climate historical reanalysis7 and Earth System Model (ESM2M) projections8, 9, 10 with industrial4 and military5 guidelines for an acclimated individual’s occupational capacity to safely perform sustained labour under environmental heat stress (labour capacity)"

SO they took known data involving sustaining labour under heat stressed and applied it to the climate change.

They aren't making data up.

YOU otoh are claiming an increase in temperature does not effect production based on..what, your ass?
please, tell me, specifically, what you find wrong with the report:
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate1827-s1.pdf [nature.com]

Re:Jaw drop (-1, Flamebait)

poofmeisterp (650750) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025081)

If only there was a paper explaining it~

Did you read the paper? if so please show me where it's rubbish. If not, STFU and let us adults who have read the paper talk about it, m'kay?

. One heat-stress metric with broad occupational health applications4, 5, 6 is wet-bulb globe temperature. We combine wet-bulb globe temperatures from global climate historical reanalysis7 and Earth System Model (ESM2M) projections8, 9, 10 with industrial4 and military5 guidelines for an acclimated individual’s occupational capacity to safely perform sustained labour under environmental heat stress (labour capacity)"

SO they took known data involving sustaining labour under heat stressed and applied it to the climate change.

They aren't making data up.

YOU otoh are claiming an increase in temperature does not effect production based on..what, your ass?
please, tell me, specifically, what you find wrong with the report:
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate1827-s1.pdf [nature.com]

You apparently can't read comments when they don't agree with your logic.

I'm not saying the data is wrong; I am saying there is NO PROOF OF CORRELATION because there are more external variables than you can possibly count or even use. Therefore, the report is a conjecture of unproven relational attributes and theoretical, hypothetical, time-wasting attempts to tie information together into something that proves *ANY POINT* in relation.

That data can be read, reported, graphed, and put into reports all you want. What you can't do, unless you're completely lacking scientific process, is to tie something that has hundreds of thousands (and I'm just making that number up, BTW) of external modifiers to data points and to say that they are related in a cause-effect relationship.

The fucking data is fine. The use of the data in generating a relational cause and effect REPORT is COMPLETE BS.

Did I stutter on this reply, or is my initial comment clear now?

Re:Jaw drop (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024923)

Well, the NOAA is up for budget cuts. It's a 'crisis' within a 'crisis'... you know... the Great Sequester and all.

i hope we get some cooling (3, Interesting)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024537)

then when the east river in NYC freezes during winter and the temps are so bitter cold that the hipster idiots will go crazy and blame it on global warming

and then the intelligent people can point out that this is completely normal. it used to happen in the 1800's all the time before global warming screwed things up with a warmer winter

Total Bullshit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024555)

NOAA has no credibility as a scientific organization.

In temperate climates we'll just time shift (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024607)

" In this case of 6 degrees C (11 degrees F) global warming, heat stress in New York City [during the hottest months] would exceed that of any location in the present day."

There, fixed that for you.

Here in NYC, it's often too hot during late July and August to do outside work. And, it's often too cold during February and March to do outside work. So maybe we lose some outdoor work days during July and early September, but won't we gain some outdoor work days in February and March?

I understand that the topics won't be able to adapt to the loss of outdoor working days by time shifting them to the winter, but it seems to be a pretty even swap for the temperate climates.

Also, it seems that in cold climates like Canada and Scandinavia, they will have a net gain of outside work days.

Or am I being too optimistic?

Re:In temperate climates we'll just time shift (2)

Xemu (50595) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024773)

I understand that the topics won't be able to adapt to the loss of outdoor working days by time shifting them to the winter, but it seems to be a pretty even swap for the temperate climates.

Also, it seems that in cold climates like Canada and Scandinavia, they will have a net gain of outside work days.

Or am I being too optimistic?

Yes, too optimistic. Warming is not a "swap "- global warming is destabilising the climate, leading to more violent ups-and-downs, like hurricanes and blizzards. In the case of Scandinavia, a global warming could mean constant heavy rains, which reduces the outside work days a lot. In Canada, warming can mean violent ice storms and draughts. It is not so much the warm peaks that are the problem but that the average temperature is changing and causing temperatures to be distributed differently.

Large population drop projected (1)

dragisha (788) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024609)

In other news...

Resulting from average temperature and humidity growth, 98% people are 72% less inclined to indulge in sexual activities. Scientists from UN IPCC's climatodemography subcommittee agreed on 82%-91% less babies will be born in next 20 years than expected. 20 years after that, figure is a bit more fuzzy and goes from 86%-100% drop in new births.

Dig deeper, sleep cooler, ... and keep your genes in global pool :)

They don't NEED to. (3, Informative)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024613)

A warmer climate means more food, simpler shelters, and lower energy costs. (Or they would be, without air conditioning, which is a luxury in all but the hottest places.) Where it snows, everything is more expensive, so people have to work more than they would otherwise. From a labor perspective, global warming will bring about freedom from slavery.

Re:They don't NEED to. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024725)

And some people just shouldn't work... because they do more damage than good.

Re:They don't NEED to. (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024803)

A warmer climate means more food, simpler shelters, and lower energy costs. (Or they would be, without air conditioning, which is a luxury in all but the hottest places.) Where it snows, everything is more expensive, so people have to work more than they would otherwise. From a labor perspective, global warming will bring about freedom from slavery.

Oh you optimist! Just like computers would mean we only would be working four hours a day four days a week by the year 2000.

For me to be in a comedy club... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024631)

For me to be in a comedy club and flip out and say this crap, I'm deeply, deeply sorry.

CO2, it cools, it warms, it untied my shoes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024721)

1970's Global Cooling: Too much CO2 in the air is preventing the sun from getting through and if we don't stop it we'll be in an ice age by 2020
1990's Global Warming: Too much CO2 in the air is capturing the sun's energy and if we don't stop it by 2050 we will all sweat to death
2000's Climate Change: Predicted warming did not occur, lets stop measuring at all the cooler places, while we're at it, how about we stop using those words like warming and cooling, just call it climate change so when anything bad happens we can blame CO2
2010's Climate Change: Hey, we stuck with a title for ten years, lets see if anyone notices if we blame both cold weather AND warm weather on it? Heck, lets blame both flooding and drought on it. Northern ice caps melting, gotta be climate change. Southern ice caps growing, dammit we have to do something about climate change.

Global Warming causes (!gasp) UNIONS !!! (-1, Troll)

cbeaudry (706335) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024723)

In a report from the NOAA, it has been determined that Global Warming is the leading cause of Unionism.

This "Unionism" (an effect of Global Warming) is the leading cause of a 10% drop in human productivity.

Breed! (1)

Sperbels (1008585) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024729)

The answer is obvious. Let's throw more people at the probem. We just have to make up for each persons 10% cut in productivity by putting 10% more workers out there, and paying each one 10% less. Problem solved...or something.

Re:Breed! (1)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024983)

Breeding is unnecessary for this solution. We already have a whole bunch of unemployed people, supposedly because there's not enough jobs for them, making the market very competitive and weighted towards capital.

The punchline: this is an actual solution and not a joke, as you are treating it. In America, an eight hour day is still considered standard, and most people who manage to keep their jobs put in a great deal more work than that. This is unhealthy and exploitative, and causes the usual behavior of employers of using up their employees and replacing them when no more can be squeezed. There are many people struggling in abject, desperate poverty because they are basically waiting in a very long line for a job they're qualified for, and that line only exists because employers insist on sticking with the current standard of full-time-and-then-some employment.

If we switched from a three-shift day to a four-shift day, many more people could be employed to do the same work for very close to the same cost. The people who had full-time jobs before this switch would get less money, but they would need less since they'd avoid many of the ridiculously overblown health care costs that Americans currently rack up due to their backward, punitive work ethic. Meanwhile, the newly-employed people would have enough to at least avoid homelessness.

Of course, this will never, ever, ever happen. Large corporations will scream bloody murder if we try to make it happen, because they know the real benefit here is that labor will no longer be so hungry and fearful. When we no longer feel that slavery is necessary to avoid poverty, we will not allow capital to abuse us. What's more, with a six-hour day, we'd have the time and energy to do something about it when they do. And that would be just terrible.

"Political" Science (2)

drik00 (526104) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024741)

What ever happened to "correlation does not mean causality?" I mean, I get more and more tired as the day goes on, and... I think it's because the sun is in the sky.

Whole goal was less labor for man.... (2)

realsilly (186931) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024755)

I thought the whole goal of inventing machines was to make jobs easier for human beings.

Even if there is some valid conjecture behind this science, since the beginning of time, man has invented tools and machines to make jobs less difficult for man to do, thus decreasing the labor. And I know that when I don't have to work as hard, I enjoy lounging on a beach chair in a bikini soaking up the warmer weather and relaxing.

There is much more to all of this I would believe. The world's population has increased tremendously and now there are more people and less work to be done, and I'd gather that a majority of the world's population is located in warmer climate areas, this conclusion would appear to me to be conjecture. ...but this is just my take on it...just an observation.

WTF? (2, Interesting)

gravis777 (123605) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024775)

Maybe the amount of work actually done in the past 60 years has gone down because of union regulations (amount of time you are able to work a day, number of breaks required to give workers), regulations against child labor, regulation of minors in the workforce, and the possibility that a lot of jobs in the past 60 years (not all mind you) have turned from factories and physical labor to offices. Many occupations have also modernized and mechanized, increasing production and decreasing the need for physical labor.

While a 1-3 degree difference in temperatures (or even 5-10 degrees if you want to get drastic) is enough to cause global enviornmental issues, I doubt that anyone is going to say "Shoot, its 73 today whereas 60 years ago it was 70, Oh, its just too hot, I can't work today". "Oh, its summer in Phoenix, its 110 today instead of 107 it was 60 years ago on this day, oh, I just can't do anything".

Really really stupid corrolation.

That is like saying the number of viewers of the Today Show has increaded substantially over the past 60 years, so we are going to say that The Today Show has got to be the most awesome show on television, and take into no account the number of households who have bought televisions in the past 60 years, the population growth, or even comparing it to the actual percentage of total viewers now versus then.

In mediterranean countries they mitigate (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024787)

In mediterranean countries they mitigate against this by working in the early morning, sleeping for the hottest part of the day, and working until very late evening. Two four-hour sleeps suits hot climates much better than one eight hour one. I wouldn't be surprised if in a much hotter climate an 8-hour sleep in daylight and working through the night made more sense

that's idiotic (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024805)

Work slowed down quite a bit here today because there's a snow storm. So if it was 40 degrees out instead, our productivity and workload would go up. In fact, this is a landscaping company so it would go way up. So hotter places that are so hot and swampy and miserable and unbearable that nobody should be living there right now (aka Mexico, Florida, Georgia, etc) will go down in productivity but places like this will go up.

Re:that's idiotic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025083)

Not staying the study is accurate, and while it says increased temps, remember global warming doesn't always mean warmer temperatures.

Global warming also accounts for colder temps and just general bad weather. That could have also been why the study found what it did.

I can't wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024817)

"oops, Global Warming is a red herring."

We're all just lazy fucks. And we're dying. Because we were so busy arguing about Global Warming, we forgot to do anything about the causes of, what we mistakenly thought, was Global Warming but instead are pollutants just plain killing us.

Oh, but the deniers will orgasm and mod this up and the Chicken Littles will mod this down as they screech, "Denier!" Meanwhile, I can't eat tuna because of the ever increasing levels of mercury.

Propaganda (1)

demon driver (1046738) | about a year and a half ago | (#43024849)

Even if the study's figures themselves may somehow be "correct", there's still the continued productivity increase per person through advance of technology - even though "labor capacity" might have dropped and might continue to drop.

Seems to be a study to give bespoke rationale for those in power to further increase work time or invent new socially detrimental measures to fight the impending shortage of workforce. While, in long term reality, increasing unemployment is the only thing to be expected.

Anyone who says there is no global warming... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43024967)

... is a denier. So we don't need to listen to them.

It's obvious that Global Warming is going to kill us all. In a few years. Always in a few years. If it ever happens, god forbid that we should move to higher latitudes. As I recall, the projections (which aren't happening at all at the moment, are for around 2degC in a century. That would mean an average move northwards of about 150 miles per century if you wanted to keep the same temperature.

I wonder why we don't cut the money going to global warming and spend it on meteor watching. The recent 500kton hit in Russia would have wiped out a town if it had hit it, and we didn't see it coming. That's a real threat...

Cracked Article FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43025001)

Quite a coincidence that I read this after I just finished reading a cracked article about BS stories, being one of the topics was the "doom by set date".

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-easy-ways-to-spot-b.s.-news-story-internet/

Or it could be... (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025041)

That too many people have become lazy, narcissistic and generally so full of themselves that they think they're worth more than they really are. Add to that a group of people who blow smoke up the collective asses of these self-absorbed folk by promising them anything and everything in order to obtain and maintain power and influence.

Attention: Ship B is leaving and you need to get on board now before the Earth blows up.

Climate change vs latitude (1)

Freddybear (1805256) | about a year and a half ago | (#43025145)

World temperature gradient vs latitude is ~ +1 degree C per 145 km latitude toward the equator. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/File:Temperature_versus_Latitude_png [globalwarmingart.com]

World temperature change since 1910 is ~ .7 degree C. http://www.csiro.au/en/Outcomes/Climate/Understanding/Climate-change-is-real.aspx [csiro.au] '

Ohio is ~370km north-to-south, so that's about 3.6 times the temperature difference from 1910 to now.

Are people in southern Ohio 30-40% less productive than people in northern Ohio?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...