There is a report in Nature for June 15 on a draft document produced by the United States Global Change Research Program which outlines the possible effects of global warming on the country and its resources. This programme was initiated by the US Congress 10 years ago, to assemble the available findings of federal departments and agencies, and also outside organisations studying the problems.
It is predicted that if the average temperature of the US rises by 5-10F over the next century, the Great Lakes and the deserts of the south-west will shrink significantly and the thawing of Alaska will accelerate. The details of how these changes would occur are not discussed, but only the overall probability is estimated.
The potential impact of such changes would be dramatic, but there are enough differences in regional, as contrasted with global, climate changes to enable critics to attack the scientific arguments as unconvincing. The sheer complexity of the various environments and their interactions with climate itself render any predictions uncertain.
Certain natural ecosystems, such as alpine meadows in the Rockies, would be particularly vulnerable to global warming effects. Many natural features of the landscape would deteriorate. In the face of such suggestions, the industrial establishment in the US has been quick to cling to the belief that the Global Change Research report is overall too pessimistic, and takes comfort in the claim that some computer models of the situation produce contradictory findings. In particular, industry has been quick to stress the unreliable nature of the regional predictions of climate change.
Nevertheless, it is becoming evident that most people are beginning to take serious notice of the potential effects on society of global warming. This contrasts with the situation a couple of decades ago, when, as I recollect, any mention of the phenomenon was dismissed out of hand as nonsensical claptrap.