Heat Wave Blisters Southern California

(AP)  A blistering heat wave blanketing much of the California coast over the past week showed no signs of letting up Saturday as temperatures headed back toward triple digits.

Power was restored Saturday to almost all the 8,000 customers that were blacked out the day before when electrical demand skyrocketed because of the heat, said Terry Schneider, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

Energy demand was expected to remain at peak levels into the weekend and the department had about 50 crews standing by to handle any overload problems, Schneider said.

"The system is under tremendous strain to meet the energy demand," he said.

Temperatures hit record highs up and down the state Friday, including 103 degrees at San Jose, 105 at Escondido, 106 at Burbank and 108 at San Luis Obispo.

The heat wave has been caused by northeasterly wind preventing sea breezes from penetrating a high-pressure system that has settled over the West.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger directed the state Office of Emergency Services to be on standby through the weekend.

One death has been linked to the heat, a 77-year-old woman who apparently left her car near the California-Arizona line south of Lake Havasu, Ariz., on Monday in search of her elderly husband, who was hospitalized for treatment of burns. Temperatures hit 116 in the area Monday.

[noloyalisti]

Better get used to this. Just a few years ago scientists who were evaluating the facts were afraid to try to scare people with their predictions of doom. They were being muzzled by the fascist US corporate government machine. Now it looks like those scientists estimated were too conservative. The best thing that could happen is gas to go up, up, up. As long as you didn''t believe the fascist bushies and bought a sensible car, you will be fine.

[nycprof]

TO Posted by dmw1167:
Yipes, here we go again with a person who listens to Rush, "sometimes". The US is the ONLY developed country that still has a debate about climate change. We are the only developed country has has over 40% of the population that believes in creationism. In fact, we have more in common in terms of science literacy with Saudi Arabia and the Taliban than with the countries of wstern Europe. You are a perfect example of the willful ignorance and reality challenged populace that is blinded by their myopic views. Please stop listening to the Rush''s view of the world and be a bit more humble and listen to people who have studied climate change for decades and who also publish in peer reviewed journals. Not the quacks that have never published in respected journals who often show up on the right wing (e.g., fox Tv, etc.) medial.

[nycprof]

TO Posted by dmw1167:
Yipes, here we go again with a person who listens to Rush, "sometimes". The US is the ONLY developed country that still has a debate about climate change. We are the only developed country has has over 40% of the population that believes in creationism. In fact, we have more in common in terms of science literacy with Saudi Arabia and the Taliban than with the countries of wstern Europe. You are a perfect example of the willful ignorance and reality challenged populace that is blinded by their myopic views. Please stop listening to the Rush''s view of the world and be a bit more humble and listen to people who have studied climate change for decades and who also publish in peer reviewed journals. Not the quacks that have never published in respected journals who often show up on the right wing (e.g., fox Tv, etc.) medial.

[ubrew12]

dmw1167 said: "I have never seen concrete proof of any of this...Greenland and Antarctica are actually growing by snow/ice deposition"

Which is it? If you''ve never seen concrete proof, then how do you know they are growing? The data I''ve seen (and posted to you) is that they are shrinking.

"a great amount of this is guess work and could go either way"

Again, why take the chance if the solutions are so benign? ''go either way'' may bring you comfort. It doesn''t for me. Actually, it sounds pretty ominous.

[ubrew12]

dmw1167 said: "it looks like we are going to destroy this planet trying to save. "
Destroy the planet? We''re talking about your right to drive a Hummer to get from A to B instead of a Prius. We''re talking about whether we should put solar water heaters on our roofs (you know, the ones that use 19th century technology to lower our home oil usage by 20-40%). We''re talking about whether the technological edge in wave power will come from Australia, Scandanavia, and Scotland (as seems currently to be our fate: they are DEPLOYING these MATURE technologies now ALL OVER THE WORLD) or the U.S.

Who has ever been talking about destroying the planet?? Have you been drinking the Limbaugh Kool-Aid again??

[ubrew12]

dmw1167 said: "Sea levels will only rise at a significant rate when land ice melts "
Hence the focus on Antarctica, Greenland, and Alaska. Easily checked by examining the GNC records (guidance/navigation/and control records) of polar satellites flying overhead for the last few years (if ice is melting, the redistribution of mass away from these land areas will show up in the gravitational impact earth has on these satellites trajectories). Result: 100s of thousands of tons of LAND ice is melting from each of these continents every year (although the middle of Greenland and Antarctica are actually growing by snow/ice deposition its MORE than made up for by losses near the coastlines).
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/02/0216_060216_warming.html
What scares me is that for ten years scientists have continually UNDERESTIMATED the extent of melting ice at the poles, they are constantly revising their projections of ice melt UPWARD.

[denn034]

Relief is an ocean away.

[idnnsg]

dmw1167 said, "I don''t how old you are, I am 78 yrs. old and I have heard all my life that Florida was going to sink into the ocean. I don''t think they have lost an inch of elevation."

Your time frame is too small to be significant. You might as well be saying, "In my 78 years, everywhere I''ve been the earth is flat!" But the knowledge gained through science always trumps the limited experience of the yokels.

BTW, the water IS RISING in FL, which is the same as saying FL is "sinking". Here''s the truth: (Look it up on the Big Trivia Machine if you don''t believe me.)

The sea that receded from Florida''s shores thousands of years ago was beginning to come back, naturally and slowly, until the Industrial Revolution began filling the atmosphere with greenhouse gases, warming the oceans and speeding up the process. Prior to the 1800s, the rates are fairly constant, varying from about 1 1/2 to 3 inches a century. But now, thanks to the warming of the planet, sea level is increasing by a rate of 15 to nearly 20 inches per century along the Ten Thousand Islands area of Everglades National Park.

If you''d been paying attention, dmw1167, you should have noticed that much "sinking" even in your limited timeframe!

[ubrew12]

Thermodynamics says the ice atop a mountain belongs in the valley, but kinetics says ''wait for it''. Truth: thermodynamics always bats last. The avalanche happens, you just don''t know when.

You don''t want to be near sea level when the ice shelves give way. I know that snow levels are rising in the centers of these bodies, but that''s not where the ice is perched over the ocean. THere, its melting.

[ubrew12]

As far as the practical consequences of Global Warming are concerned, and their impact to our lives today: I wouldn''t buy real-estate in Southern Florida, or ANYWHERE just a few feet above sea level. I think there''s growing evidence they will get inundated, no matter what we do in the near future. The battle now is to prevent worse effects from happening, many of them unpredictable.