4 ms·
Altitude not latitude. Alaska would be a somewhat bad spot to live if AMOC slows way down. You want places where the local climate is not driven by the ocean or
by galangalalgol 3y ago
Altitude not latitude. Alaska would be a somewhat bad spot to live if AMOC slows way down. You want places where the local climate is not driven by the ocean or air currents, meaning there is very little air above them. Think Bogota, Quito, Addis Ababa etc.
- pengaru 3y ago> Due to its altitude, Quito receives some of the greatest solar radiation in the world, sometimes reaching a UV Index of 24 by solar noon. [0] High altitude isn't exactly a panacea... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quito#Climate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quito#Climate
- redavni 3y agoEvery local climate is driven by air currents, by which I assume you mean jet stream changes driving pressure changes...aka cold/warm fronts. The jet stream is significantly controlled by the heights of the Alps and the Rocky mountain ranges in the northern hemisphere and the air currents are driven by the Earth's rotation. The Earth is not going to stop rotating and the mountains are not shrinking. This is why weather scientists have been consistent that noticeable changes from global warming will be more extreme weather not massive changes.
- galangalalgol 3y agoI agree the air currents matter. But at those altitudes the sun has a much larger impact than at lower ones. The models that rate places by impact consistently list high altitude cities with lower impacts.