wattsupwiththat--2020-12-24--Aussie Doctor Urges a “Bipartisan” Response to Climate Change

According to gastroenterologist and chief editor of the Australian Medical Journal Professor Talley , politicians of all sides should do what they are told on climate policy , just as they follow the advice of doctors when dealing with the Covid-19 Pandemic .
But Talley appears to shy away from offering specific policy advice , other than demanding the government set up a new committee .
Climate change demands same leadership as COVID-19 , and Australia is failing A leading Australian medical clinician and researcher has called on the Federal Government and the health sector to commit to showing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown during the COVID-19 public health crisis .
Neurogastroenterologist and Editor-in-Chief of the said in an editorial , published today , that Australia ’ s response to COVID-19 had been “ strong and effective.
” “ Key to this success was the valuing by governments of science and data to guide decision making .
“ This bipartisan , science-based approach is a model for the future management of climate change , if implemented alongside an appropriate national plan.
” Professor Talley called on the Federal Government to establish a National Health and Climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health to develop a National Plan for Health and Climate Change with real-time monitoring .
Which scientists ’ advice should politicians follow ?
Because there is significant disagreement in the scientific community about how we should respond to the alleged climate crisis .
Dr. Ken Caldeira , Dr. Kerry Emanuel , Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Tom Wigley , arguably the most senior climate scientists in the world , say we should go all out building nuclear power plants .
Renewables alone they say are not enough to save the world from climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should follow their advice and build nuclear power plants ?
Or should we follow the advice of the Union of Concerned Scientists , and treat nuclear power as a “ false solution ” to the climate crisis ?
Consider the USGS ( United States Geographical Survey ) advice on climate models .
According to the USGS ( h/t Dr. Willie Soon ) ; … A climate scenario describes a plausible future outcome associated with a specific set of societal actions that captures the relationships between human choices , greenhouse gas and particulate matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ atmosphere , and consequent climate change as simulated by global climate models .
Because scenarios are developed n a risk-based framework with a high degree of uncertainty about future societal developments , the primary scenarios used in policymaking contexts are usually not assigned a formal likelihood of occurrence ( that is , each scenario is considered to be a “ plausible ” outcome without assuming the “ likelihood ” of the outcome ) .
In the near term ( years to one to two decades in the future ) , natural climate variability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate projections .
For time periods approximately 30 to 50 years out , scientific uncertainty about the climate system is the largest source of uncertainty in climate projections .
Beyond 50 years , human decisions that affect global greenhouse gas emissions are the largest source of uncertainty .
So policy makers should treat any climate model as if it could happen , but bear in mind that poorly quantified sources of natural variability could overwhelm projected warming up to 50 years into the future , and cause something completely different to happen .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not prepared to own are supposed to be the basis of policy decisions which could affect the lives of billions .
It is easy to demand in general terms that politicians should follow the advice of climate scientists , if you hold back from providing specific suggestions about which group of climate scientists politicians should actually listen to .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to gastroenterologist and chief editor of the Australian Medical Journal Professor Talley, politicians of all sides should do what they are told on climate policy, just as they follow the advice of doctors when dealing with the Covid-19 Pandemic. But Talley appears to shy away from offering specific policy advice, other than demanding the government set up a new committee.
Climate change demands same leadership as COVID-19, and Australia is failing by Medical Journal of Australia
DECEMBER 23, 2020 A leading Australian medical clinician and researcher has called on the Federal Government and the health sector to commit to showing the same leadership on climate change as was shown during the COVID-19 public health crisis. Neurogastroenterologist and Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Journal of Australia said in an editorial, published today, that Australia’s response to COVID-19 had been “strong and effective.” “Key to this success was the valuing by governments of science and data to guide decision making. “This bipartisan, science-based approach is a model for the future management of climate change, if implemented alongside an appropriate national plan.” … Professor Talley called on the Federal Government to establish a National Health and Climate Change Centre within the Australian Department of Health to develop a National Plan for Health and Climate Change with real-time monitoring. … Read more: https://phys.org/news/2020-12-climate-demands-leadership-covid-australia.html
Which scientists’ advice should politicians follow? Because there is significant disagreement in the scientific community about how we should respond to the alleged climate crisis.
Dr. Ken Caldeira, Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Tom Wigley, arguably the most senior climate scientists in the world, say we should go all out building nuclear power plants. Renewables alone they say are not enough to save the world from climate change.
Does Professor Talley mean we should follow their advice and build nuclear power plants?
Or should we follow the advice of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and treat nuclear power as a “false solution” to the climate crisis?
Consider the USGS (United States Geographical Survey) advice on climate models.
According to the USGS (h/t Dr. Willie Soon);
… A climate scenario describes a plausible future outcome associated with a specific set of societal actions that captures the relationships between human choices, greenhouse gas and particulate matter emissions, greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, and consequent climate change as simulated by global climate models. Because scenarios are developed n a risk-based framework with a high degree of uncertainty about future societal developments, the primary scenarios used in policymaking contexts are usually not assigned a formal likelihood of occurrence (that is, each scenario is considered to be a “plausible” outcome without assuming the “likelihood” of the outcome). … In the near term (years to one to two decades in the future), natural climate variability is the largest source of uncertainty in climate projections. For time periods approximately 30 to 50 years out, scientific uncertainty about the climate system is the largest source of uncertainty in climate projections. Beyond 50 years, human decisions that affect global greenhouse gas emissions are the largest source of uncertainty. … Read more: https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2020/1058/ofr20201058.pdf
So policy makers should treat any climate model as if it could happen, but bear in mind that poorly quantified sources of natural variability could overwhelm projected warming up to 50 years into the future, and cause something completely different to happen.
Yet these wild guesses which scientists are not prepared to own are supposed to be the basis of policy decisions which could affect the lives of billions.
It is easy to demand in general terms that politicians should follow the advice of climate scientists, if you hold back from providing specific suggestions about which group of climate scientists politicians should actually listen to.
4.6 13 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-25--New York can’t buy its way out of blackouts

New York City will soon be home to the world ’ s biggest utility-scale battery system , designed to back up its growing reliance on intermittent renewables .
At 400 MWh this batch of batteries will be more than triple the 129 MWh world leader in Australia .
The City of New York ’ s director of sustainability ( I am not making this title up ) , Mark Chambers , is ecstatic , bragging : “ Expanding battery storage is a critical part of how we advance momentum to confront the climate emergency while meeting the energy needs of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announcement demonstrates how we can deliver this need at significant scale .
” ( Emphasis added ) In reality the scale here is incredibly insignificant .
In the same nonsensical way , Tim Cawley , the president of Con Edison , New York ’ s power utility , gushes thus : “ Utility scale battery storage will play a vital role in New York s clean energy future , especially in New York City where it will help to maximize the benefit of the wind power being developed offshore .
” This puts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the reality when it comes to the scale needed to reliably back up intermittent renewables .
For simplicity let us suppose New York City is 100 % wind powered .
Including solar in the generating mix makes it more complicated but does not change the unhappy outcome very much .
NYC presently peaks at around 32,000 MW needed to keep the lights on .
If Mr. Biden makes all the cars and trucks electric it might be closer to 50,000 MW but let ’ s stick to reality .
This peak occurs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by stagnant high pressure systems called Bermuda highs .
These highs often last for a week and because they are stagnant there is no wind power generation .
Wind turbines require something like sustained winds of 10 mph to move the blades and more like a whistling 30 mph to generate full power .
During a Bermuda high folks are happy to get the occasional 5 mph breeze .
These huge highs cover many states so it is not like we can get the juice from next door .
So for reliability we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backup , which is 168 hours .
Here ’ s the math : 32,000 MW x 168 hours = 5,376,000 MWh of stored juice needed to just make it .
Mind you for normal reliability we usually add 20 % or so .
Did I mention electric cars ?
It is easy to see that a trivial 400 MWh is not “ significant scale.
” It is infinitesimal scale .
Nothing .
Nada .
Might as well not exist .
[ I estimate 45 seconds of backup power from the facility .
if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 5,376,000 divided by 400 = 13,440 so only 13,439 more to go .
On the other hand , this measly 400 MWh battery array may well cost half a billion dollars , which is significant , especially to the New Yorkers who will pay for it .
No cost figures are given because the system is privately owned , but EIA reports that the average utility scale battery system runs around $ 1.5 million a MWh of storage capacity .
That works out to $ 600 million for this insignificant toy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ back up wind power , at this MWh cost and NYC ’ s scale ?
Just over $ 8,000,000,000,000 or EIGHT TRILLION DOLLARS .
I have not seen this stupendous sum mentioned in the media .
Perhaps Con Ed has not mentioned it .
Then too , New York State has the same problem .
Only much bigger if New York City is included , which it often is .
But hey , maybe the cost will come down a few trillion .
Not if we create a seller ’ s market by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainly where we are headed .
After all , this is just New York City .
Imagine what backing up America with batteries might cost .
Don ’ t bother because it is impossible .
I should also add that we have no idea how to make 5 million MWh of batteries work together .
The tiny 400 will be a challenge .
It may not be possible .
Maybe fracked geothermal , the reliable renewable , is the answer .
Or how about coal , oil , gas and nuclear power ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fashion .
All of this battery backup hype is a scam , and not just in New York either .
The papers are full of this con , from coast to coast .
The utilities know perfectly well that these loudly touted battery buys are a hoax , but they are getting rich building the wind and solar systems the politicians are calling for .
The voters are oblivious to these impossible numbers , since they are told that intermittent wind and solar are cheaper than reliable coal , gas and nuclear .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wind blows hard , which is not all that often .
Reality is just sitting there , waiting .
It can ’ t work so it won ’ t work .
At this point it is just a question of how and when we find out the hard way

By David Wojick
New York City will soon be home to the world’s biggest utility-scale battery system, designed to back up its growing reliance on intermittent renewables. At 400 MWh this batch of batteries will be more than triple the 129 MWh world leader in Australia.
The City of New York’s director of sustainability (I am not making this title up), Mark Chambers, is ecstatic, bragging: “Expanding battery storage is a critical part of how we advance momentum to confront the climate emergency while meeting the energy needs of all New Yorkers. Today’s announcement demonstrates how we can deliver this need at significant scale.” (Emphasis added)
In reality the scale here is incredibly insignificant.
In the same nonsensical way, Tim Cawley, the president of Con Edison, New York’s power utility, gushes thus: “Utility scale battery storage will play a vital role in New York’s clean energy future, especially in New York City where it will help to maximize the benefit of the wind power being developed offshore.”
This puts the Con in Con Edison.
Here is the reality when it comes to the scale needed to reliably back up intermittent renewables. For simplicity let us suppose New York City is 100% wind powered. Including solar in the generating mix makes it more complicated but does not change the unhappy outcome very much.
NYC presently peaks at around 32,000 MW needed to keep the lights on. If Mr. Biden makes all the cars and trucks electric it might be closer to 50,000 MW but let’s stick to reality.
This peak occurs during summer heat waves which are caused by stagnant high pressure systems called Bermuda highs. These highs often last for a week and because they are stagnant there is no wind power generation. Wind turbines require something like sustained winds of 10 mph to move the blades and more like a whistling 30 mph to generate full power. During a Bermuda high folks are happy to get the occasional 5 mph breeze. These huge highs cover many states so it is not like we can get the juice from next door.
So for reliability we need, say, seven days of backup, which is 168 hours. Here’s the math:
32,000 MW x 168 hours = 5,376,000 MWh of stored juice needed to just make it. Mind you for normal reliability we usually add 20% or so. Did I mention electric cars?
It is easy to see that a trivial 400 MWh is not “significant scale.” It is infinitesimal scale. Nothing. Nada. Might as well not exist.
[I estimate 45 seconds of backup power from the facility. Someone correct me if I’m wrong~CR]
More specifically, 5,376,000 divided by 400 = 13,440 so only 13,439 more to go.
On the other hand, this measly 400 MWh battery array may well cost half a billion dollars, which is significant, especially to the New Yorkers who will pay for it. No cost figures are given because the system is privately owned, but EIA reports that the average utility scale battery system runs around $1.5 million a MWh of storage capacity. That works out to $600 million for this insignificant toy.
So what would it cost to reliably back up wind power, at this MWh cost and NYC’s scale? Just over $8,000,000,000,000 or EIGHT TRILLION DOLLARS. I have not seen this stupendous sum mentioned in the media. Perhaps Con Ed has not mentioned it.
Then too, New York State has the same problem. Only much bigger if New York City is included, which it often is.
But hey, maybe the cost will come down a few trillion. Not if we create a seller’s market by rushing into intermittent renewables, which is certainly where we are headed. After all, this is just New York City. Imagine what backing up America with batteries might cost. Don’t bother because it is impossible.
I should also add that we have no idea how to make 5 million MWh of batteries work together. The tiny 400 will be a challenge. It may not be possible.
Maybe fracked geothermal, the reliable renewable, is the answer. Or how about coal, oil, gas and nuclear power? Too bad they are all out of fashion.
All of this battery backup hype is a scam, and not just in New York either. The papers are full of this con, from coast to coast. The utilities know perfectly well that these loudly touted battery buys are a hoax, but they are getting rich building the wind and solar systems the politicians are calling for.
The voters are oblivious to these impossible numbers, since they are told that intermittent wind and solar are cheaper than reliable coal, gas and nuclear. Only when the sun shines bright and the wind blows hard, which is not all that often.
Reality is just sitting there, waiting. It can’t work so it won’t work. At this point it is just a question of how and when we find out the hard way
4.9 80 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-24--Contrast Between New York And Florida

Contrast Between New York And Florida

Of all the states , the one most comparable to New York by demographics is Florida .
These two states are close not only in overall population , but also in relative numbers of immigrants and of minority groups .
As to population , as recently as 2013 , New York had slightly more population than Florida ( both around 19.6 million ) , but since then Florida has been growing rapidly , while New York has been shrinking slowly .
Pending release of final 2020 Census numbers , estimates put Florida ’ s current population at about 21.8 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 19.4 million .
Despite being , at least for now , relatively close in population and other demographics , New York and Florida could not be more different in their approaches to public policy .
In Florida , Republicans have controlled the legislature ( both houses ) since 1997 , and the governorship since 1999 .
Florida exemplifies the low tax , low spend , low regulation approach to state government .
New York is firmly in control of the progressive left , and exemplifies high taxes , high spending , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different results .
For today I ’ ll focus mainly on the policy response to the Covid-19 virus .
On this subject , the differences in policy mostly concern regulation , rather than taxing and spending .
Yesterday , I had a roundup of the current onerous regulatory response to the virus in New York .
By contrast , Florida , led by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis , has been very much at the opposite end of the regulatory response spectrum .
As to results , here ’ s the bottom line : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline caused by intentional government suppression of the economy has been much , much less severe in Florida than New York ; but just as important , Florida has also experienced , and continues to experience , health results to New York .
In other words , Florida stands as a clear demonstration that all of New York ’ s behavioral mandates ( e.g.
, masks ) and intentional destruction of small business have had in decreasing spread of the virus or in improving health results .
As per my review yesterday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been severely restricted for months under fluctuating directives , and as of last week , by order of the Governor , all indoor restaurant dining has been shut down entirely , with no indication of when it may re-open .
Theaters , concerts and performance venues are all shuttered , and it appears they will remain so at least until the Spring .
Although not mentioned in yesterday ’ s post , since April 17 we have had a state-wide mandate for mask-wearing covering “ anyone over the age of 2 ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Florida at first imposed some substantial restrictions on restaurants and other indoor businesses , but began loosening them in early June , when , for example , bars and movie theaters were allowed to reopen .
On September 28 Governor DeSantis issued an executive order rescinding almost all of the remaining restrictions .
At a news briefing that day , DeSantis was quoted as saying “ Every business has the right to operate , ” and “ We ’ re not closing anything going forward.
” WebMD summarized Florida ’ s provisions going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have used remote work protocols can return to unrestricted staffing at their offices .
Employees can resume non-essential travel .
Theme parks can return to normal operations , and gyms can operate at full capacity .
Bars and clubs can operate at full capacity but with “ limited social distancing protocols.
” In Florida today , theaters are open , concerts are happening , and the iconic theme parks are accepting visitors ( if on a somewhat restricted basis ) .
As to masks , Florida never imposed a state-wide mandate , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make its own decision .
Twenty-two counties imposed mask mandates for at least some period of time , but 45 never did .
Townhall on December 21 has a long piece ( mostly based on a paywalled study of the data at Rational Ground ) giving the results .
Those results are totally devastating to any claim of effectiveness of mask mandates .
From Town Hall ( with internal quote from Rational Ground ) : If masks did even close to as advertised , one would expect to see the counties that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next to the counties that implemented mandates , right ?
At the very least , the numbers should favor the masked areas by more than a percentage point or two .
So , how did it go ?
Yep , it was the Mask Cult ’ s worse nightmare : “ When counties DID have a mandate in effect , there were 667,239 cases over 3,137 days with an average of 23 cases per 100,000 per day .
When counties DID NOT have a countywide order , there were 438,687 cases over 12,139 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per 100,000 per day.
” In short , the mask-free counties actually had health results than the counties with mask mandates .
As part of his September 28 directives , Governor DeSantis announced that he would not enforce any fines or penalties for failure to wear masks .
So let ’ s compare health and economic results as between Florida and New York .
First , health : • Florida .
Deaths per million population , pandemic inception to date ( figures from Worldometers.info as of December 22 ) : 966 .
Deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first , from Dec 21 back to Dec 12 : 106 , 86 , 69 , 108 , 102 , 112 , 89 , 137 , 81 , 71 — total of 961 over that 10 day period .
• New York .
Deaths per million population , pandemic inception to date : 1,886 ( almost double Florida ’ s rate — and Florida has far more elderly people ) .
Deaths within last 10 days , most recent first from Dec 21 to Dec 12 : 179 , 95 , 85 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 120 , 87 , 79 — total of 1160 over the ten days , or more than 20 % more than Florida , even though Florida has more than 10 % more population .
If New York ’ s elected leaders have anything to show for turning this city into a ghost town , you sure can ’ t find it in those statistics .
Now , as to economic statistics : • Florida .
Unemployment rate for November ( most recent available ) : 6.4 % ( versus national rate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Unemployment rate for New York State for November : 8.4 % ; for New York City , 12.1 % .
Clearly , New York City is bearing the brunt of the forced closures of the restaurant and entertainment industries .
For New York City , that extra almost 6 % people unemployed by forced government action , as compared to Florida , represents about 200,000 people , most of them from the lower end of the income distribution .
I suppose you could kind of , sort of justify intentionally putting all those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show some kind of health benefit from the decrees .
But there is no health benefit to be shown .
New York ’ s health results are demonstrably worse than those of Florida .
The virus does its own thing , despite our dictators ’ desperate need to show that they are “ doing something , ” however meaningless the “ something ” may be .
In other comparisons of public policy metrics between the two states , Florida ’ s annual state government budget is about $ 92 billion , while New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How could that possibly be , when Florida has 10 % more people ?
New York City spends almost $ 29,000 per student on K-12 education , while Florida spends less than $ 10,000 — and Florida gets somewhat on the NAEP national tests .
And of course , New York has some of the highest income tax rates in the country , and yet has a legislature desperate to raise more revenue by hiking rates even higher ; while Florida has no income tax at all and yet seems to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows us all what basic competent state government looks like .
The extreme lack of competence in New York is simply shocking .

Copyright Notice
Material on this website is copyright © 2006-2022, by Anthony Watts, and may not be stored or archived separately, rebroadcast, or republished without written permission. (Miriam O’Brien aka slandering “Sou” from Hotwhopper, that means you.)
For permission, contact us. See the About>Contact menu under the header.
All rights reserved worldwide.
Some material from contributors may contain additional copyrights of their respective company or organization.


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-24--Iced Covered Wind Turbines Hamper China’s Efforts to Retire Coal

As China struggles with a surge in energy demand brought on by their economic recovery and a cold snap , the reputation of wind power has suffered a blow , as freezing temperatures covered wind turbines in Hunan with ice .
BEIJING/YIWU , CHINA ( REUTERS ) – China ’ s harsh winter and stunning manufacturing recovery this year have pushed up electricity demand across the country ’ s industrial belt , complicating Beijing ’ s drive to cut businesses ’ power usage and their reliance on polluting coal-fired energy .
The surge in demand also comes as the cold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fill the gap left by a severe coal shortage , raising doubts about the reliability of cleaner sources to power the world ’ s second-largest economy during critical periods .
Coal supplies , meanwhile , are tight despite record domestic output in November as a runaway economic recovery sucks up power .
To address localised power shortages , Beijing has urged coal miners to ramp up output and energy firms to diversify gas sources .
It has also allowed customs to clear imported coal that had built up at ports during the summer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporting local producers .
While Australian coal has reportedly been excluded from customs clearances , it accounts for less than 3 per cent of China ’ s total thermal coal usage .
In the southern provinces of Jiangxi and Hunan , which rely heavily on hydro and renewables , demand this season overwhelmed supply , with coal plants unable to fill the gap after local miners were shut due to environmental and safety reasons and national curbs on output earlier this year , crimping supply .
by an early cold snap this month @ @ @ @ @ @

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
As China struggles with a surge in energy demand brought on by their economic recovery and a cold snap, the reputation of wind power has suffered a blow, as freezing temperatures covered wind turbines in Hunan with ice.
China’s winter chills clean energy transition as factories fire up
PUBLISHED 4 HOURS AGO
BEIJING/YIWU, CHINA (REUTERS) – China’s harsh winter and stunning manufacturing recovery this year have pushed up electricity demand across the country’s industrial belt, complicating Beijing’s drive to cut businesses’ power usage and their reliance on polluting coal-fired energy.
The surge in demand also comes as the cold hampers the ability of renewable energy to fill the gap left by a severe coal shortage, raising doubts about the reliability of cleaner sources to power the world’s second-largest economy during critical periods.
…
Coal supplies, meanwhile, are tight despite record domestic output in November as a runaway economic recovery sucks up power.
…
To address localised power shortages, Beijing has urged coal miners to ramp up output and energy firms to diversify gas sources. It has also allowed customs to clear imported coal that had built up at ports during the summer due to unofficial import quotas aimed at supporting local producers.
While Australian coal has reportedly been excluded from customs clearances, it accounts for less than 3 per cent of China’s total thermal coal usage.
…
In the southern provinces of Jiangxi and Hunan, which rely heavily on hydro and renewables, demand this season overwhelmed supply, with coal plants unable to fill the gap after local miners were shut due to environmental and safety reasons and national curbs on output earlier this year, crimping supply.
In Hunan, wind turbines were frozen by an early cold snap this month that brought ice and snow.
…


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-23--Ocean Temperatures, what do we really know?

This is the last in my current series of posts on ocean temperatures .
In our previous posts we compared land-based measurements to sea-surface temperatures ( SSTs ) and discussed problems and contradictions in the land-based measurements ( see here ) .
This first post was overly long and complicated , but I needed to lay a foundation before getting to the interesting stuff .
Next , we covered the basic thermal structure of the ocean and how it circulates its enormous heat content around the world ( see here ) .
This was followed by a description of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here .
The ocean skin is where evaporation takes place and it is where many solar radiation wavelengths , especially the longer infrared wavelengths emitted by CO , are absorbed , then evaporated away , or reflected .
The next post covered the mixed layer , which is a layer of uniform temperature just under the skin layer .
The mixed layer sits above the thermocline where water temperature begins to drop rapidly .
The next post discussed the differences between various estimates of SST , the data used and the problems with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emphasis was on the two main datasets , HadSST and NOAA ’ s ERSST .
The most recent post discusses SST anomalies , the logic was , if all the measurements are from just below the ocean surface , why are anomalies needed ?
Why can ’ t we simply use the measurements , corrected to a useful depth , like 20 cm ?
The theme of all the posts is to keep the analysis as close to the measurements as possible .
Too many corrections and data manipulations confuse the interpretation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homogenize the measurements to such an extent that we get a false sense of confidence in the result .
This illusion of accuracy , due to over-processing data , is discussed by William Brigg ’ s here .
His post is on smoothing data , but the arguments apply to homogenizing temperatures , creating anomalies from the mean , of bias correcting measurements utilizing statistical techniques .
All these processes make “ the data look better ” and give us a false sense of confidence .
We come away not knowing how much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to the corrections and data manipulation and how much are due to the underlying measurements .
We progressed step-by-step though all the processing we could and examined what the temperatures looked like at every step .
We are trying to pull back the wizard ’ s curtain , as much as possible , but probably not as well as Toto .
The data used in all these posts , except the earliest posts on the land measurements in CONUS ( the conterminous United States , or the “ lower 48 ” ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grids .
Gridding the measurements is needed globally because the measurements are mostly concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere , and very sparse elsewhere and in both polar regions .
As we ’ ve previously shown , Northern Hemisphere temperatures are anomalous , the rest of world is much less variable in its surface temperature .
See here for a discussion of this and some graphs .
See this post by Renee Hannon and this one by the same author , for more detail on hemispheric variations in temperature trends .
While gridding is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misleading , in areas like the United States , that are well covered with good weather stations , to produce a global average SST , we need to grid the available data .
This is not to say that gridding replaces good measurements or improves the measurements , just that with the data we have it is necessary .
Each grid cell represents a different area of the ocean .
The difference is a function only of latitude .
Each degree of latitude is 111 km .
A degree of longitude at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decreases to zero at the poles .
So , to compute the area of each grid cell we only need to know the latitude of the cell and size of the grid cells in latitude and longitude .
The solution is provided and derived by Dr .
Math ( National Council of Teachers of Mathematics ) , here .
I won ’ t interrupt the narrative with an equation , but the R code linked at the bottom of the post shows the equation and how it was used .
It might seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the data last , but I honestly wanted to see if it made much difference .
It turns out to make a substantial difference in the computed average temperature , but little difference in the trends .
Below in Figure 1 is the original figure from the mixed-layer post , comparing various estimates of SST and the mixed layer global average temperature .
Normally , especially at night , the mixed layer and the SST are very close to one another , so plotting them all together is valid .
Figure 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SST global temperature estimates from the mixed layer post .
For an explanation of the plot see the post here .
The curves in Figure 1 are all corrected to a depth between 20 cm .
to one meter .
They are grid averages , that is averages of gridded values , but they are not corrected for the area represented by each grid value .
Figure 2 is the same graph but constructed with area-weighted grid cell values .
We ’ ve also added one new curve , the NOAA ERSST curve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to null values in the HadSST dataset .
That way we are comparing ERSST and HadSST over the same global ocean areas .
The normal ERSST dataset ( the lower green line in Figure 1 and the lower brown line in Figure 2 ) uses interpolation and extrapolation to populate grid cells that have insufficient data , these cells are null in HadSST .
At first glance the two graphs look very similar but notice the vertical scale has changed .
Everything is shift up two to four degrees since the polar regions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NOAA ICOADS SST line is in the same place since it was already area corrected .
It is also the line that is closest to the measurements , the processes used to make this line are much simpler and less complicated than those used by HadSST and ERSST .
The difference between HadSST and ERSST is still there , but smaller .
These two temperature records use similar data , but , as described above , their gridding is different and they cover different areas .
Once the ERSST grid is “ masked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pops up to 22 degrees , from 18.2 .
Figure 2 .
This is the same plot as in Figure 1 , except all the grid values in the records are weighted by the grid cell areas they represent .
Notice the vertical scale has changed .
The NOAA MIMOC and University of Hamburg multiyear grid averages plot on top of the NOAA ERSST record in both plots , but are warmer by about 4.5°C after applying the area weighting algorithm .
NOAA MIMOC and the University of Hamburg create their grids using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so they populate much more of their grid than the single year datasets .
They also weight Argo and buoy data heavily , just like NOAA ERSST .
As we saw with the unweighted data in the last post , The HadSST measured temperatures trend downward .
When the ERSST grid is masked with the HadSST nulls , it also trends downward .
This is seen in Figure 3 .
Figure 3 .
Declining SSTs over the HadSST covered area are apparent in both the HadSST and ERSST datasets .
The HadSST dataset @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exist to compute one , they do not extrapolate data into adjoining grid cells like ERSST .
Thus , the HadSST data represents the portion of the ocean with the best data , and this area is clearly declining in temperature , when only the measurements are used .
The ERSST suggests a decline of 2.5 degrees/century .
The HadSST decline is 1.6 degrees/century .
The ERSST line , with no mask applied ( Figure 2 ) , has an increasing trend of 1.6 degrees/century .
Thus , the interpolated and extrapolated areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the cells with the best data .
As we saw in the last post and show again in this post as Figure 4 , the HadSST and ERSST anomalies show none of the complexity it took six posts to cover .
They show a joint trend of warming , of about 1.7 degrees/century .
The best way to analyze data is to use the absolute minimum statistical manipulation required present it in usable form .
Every correction , every computation , all smoothing operations , every gridding step must be fully justified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientific and engineering life today that our colleagues are forever coming up with “ this must be corrected for , ” that must be corrected for , ” and so on .
Little thought is given to how the corrections affect our perception of the resulting graphs and maps .
With enough corrections one can turn a pile of manure into a castle but is it really a castle ?
I had a boss once who was very smart , he eventually became the CEO and chairman of the board of the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ younger then and I was one of the scientists in the peanut gallery who kept asking “ What about this ?
” “ What about that , have you corrected for these things ?
” My boss would say , “ Let ’ s not out-science ourselves .
What does the data say , as it is ?
” After he became CEO , he sold the company for five times the average strike price of my accumulated stock options .
I was still a scientist , albeit a wealthy one .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Briggs .
Study the raw data , keep it close to you , don ’ t “ out-science ” yourself .
I reprocessed a lot of data to make this post , I think I did it correctly , but I do make mistakes .
For those that want to check my work , you can find my new area-weighting R code here .
None of this is in my new book but buy it anyway .

By Andy May
This is the last in my current series of posts on ocean temperatures. In our previous posts we compared land-based measurements to sea-surface temperatures (SSTs) and discussed problems and contradictions in the land-based measurements (see here). This first post was overly long and complicated, but I needed to lay a foundation before getting to the interesting stuff. Next, we covered the basic thermal structure of the ocean and how it circulates its enormous heat content around the world (see here). This was followed by a description of the ocean surface or “skin” layer here. The ocean skin is where evaporation takes place and it is where many solar radiation wavelengths, especially the longer infrared wavelengths emitted by CO 2 , are absorbed, then evaporated away, or reflected.
The next post covered the mixed layer, which is a layer of uniform temperature just under the skin layer. The mixed layer sits above the thermocline where water temperature begins to drop rapidly. The next post discussed the differences between various estimates of SST, the data used and the problems with the measurements and the corrections. The emphasis was on the two main datasets, HadSST and NOAA’s ERSST. The most recent post discusses SST anomalies, the logic was, if all the measurements are from just below the ocean surface, why are anomalies needed? Why can’t we simply use the measurements, corrected to a useful depth, like 20 cm?
The theme of all the posts is to keep the analysis as close to the measurements as possible. Too many corrections and data manipulations confuse the interpretation, remove us from the measurements, and homogenize the measurements to such an extent that we get a false sense of confidence in the result. This illusion of accuracy, due to over-processing data, is discussed by William Brigg’s here. His post is on smoothing data, but the arguments apply to homogenizing temperatures, creating anomalies from the mean, of bias correcting measurements utilizing statistical techniques. All these processes make “the data look better” and give us a false sense of confidence. We come away not knowing how much of the resulting graphs and maps are due to the corrections and data manipulation and how much are due to the underlying measurements. We progressed step-by-step though all the processing we could and examined what the temperatures looked like at every step. We are trying to pull back the wizard’s curtain, as much as possible, but probably not as well as Toto.
Area-Weighting
The data used in all these posts, except the earliest posts on the land measurements in CONUS (the conterminous United States, or the “lower 48”), were all from latitude and longitude grids. Gridding the measurements is needed globally because the measurements are mostly concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere, and very sparse elsewhere and in both polar regions. As we’ve previously shown, Northern Hemisphere temperatures are anomalous, the rest of world is much less variable in its surface temperature. See here for a discussion of this and some graphs. See this post by Renee Hannon and this one by the same author, for more detail on hemispheric variations in temperature trends.
While gridding is probably not necessary, and may be misleading, in areas like the United States, that are well covered with good weather stations, to produce a global average SST, we need to grid the available data. This is not to say that gridding replaces good measurements or improves the measurements, just that with the data we have it is necessary.
Each grid cell represents a different area of the ocean. The difference is a function only of latitude. Each degree of latitude is 111 km. A degree of longitude at the equator is also 111 km. but decreases to zero at the poles. So, to compute the area of each grid cell we only need to know the latitude of the cell and size of the grid cells in latitude and longitude. The solution is provided and derived by Dr. Math (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics), here. I won’t interrupt the narrative with an equation, but the R code linked at the bottom of the post shows the equation and how it was used.
It might seem odd to do such an obvious correction to the data last, but I honestly wanted to see if it made much difference. It turns out to make a substantial difference in the computed average temperature, but little difference in the trends. Below in Figure 1 is the original figure from the mixed-layer post, comparing various estimates of SST and the mixed layer global average temperature. Normally, especially at night, the mixed layer and the SST are very close to one another, so plotting them all together is valid.
Figure 1. The comparison of mixed layer and SST global temperature estimates from the mixed layer post. For an explanation of the plot see the post here.
The curves in Figure 1 are all corrected to a depth between 20 cm. to one meter. They are grid averages, that is averages of gridded values, but they are not corrected for the area represented by each grid value. Figure 2 is the same graph but constructed with area-weighted grid cell values. We’ve also added one new curve, the NOAA ERSST curve, after nulling the ERSST values corresponding to null values in the HadSST dataset. That way we are comparing ERSST and HadSST over the same global ocean areas. The normal ERSST dataset (the lower green line in Figure 1 and the lower brown line in Figure 2) uses interpolation and extrapolation to populate grid cells that have insufficient data, these cells are null in HadSST.
At first glance the two graphs look very similar but notice the vertical scale has changed. Everything is shift up two to four degrees since the polar regions have cells with smaller areas. The NOAA ICOADS SST line is in the same place since it was already area corrected. It is also the line that is closest to the measurements, the processes used to make this line are much simpler and less complicated than those used by HadSST and ERSST. The difference between HadSST and ERSST is still there, but smaller. These two temperature records use similar data, but, as described above, their gridding is different and they cover different areas. Once the ERSST grid is “masked” to conform with HadSST, it pops up to 22 degrees, from 18.2.
Figure 2. This is the same plot as in Figure 1, except all the grid values in the records are weighted by the grid cell areas they represent. Notice the vertical scale has changed.
The NOAA MIMOC and University of Hamburg multiyear grid averages plot on top of the NOAA ERSST record in both plots, but are warmer by about 4.5°C after applying the area weighting algorithm. NOAA MIMOC and the University of Hamburg create their grids using more than 12 years of data, so they populate much more of their grid than the single year datasets. They also weight Argo and buoy data heavily, just like NOAA ERSST.
As we saw with the unweighted data in the last post, The HadSST measured temperatures trend downward. When the ERSST grid is masked with the HadSST nulls, it also trends downward. This is seen in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Declining SSTs over the HadSST covered area are apparent in both the HadSST and ERSST datasets.
The HadSST dataset only has grid values where sufficient measurements exist to compute one, they do not extrapolate data into adjoining grid cells like ERSST. Thus, the HadSST data represents the portion of the ocean with the best data, and this area is clearly declining in temperature, when only the measurements are used. The ERSST suggests a decline of 2.5 degrees/century. The HadSST decline is 1.6 degrees/century.
The ERSST line, with no mask applied (Figure 2), has an increasing trend of 1.6 degrees/century. Thus, the interpolated and extrapolated areas show warming that does not show up in the cells with the best data. As we saw in the last post and show again in this post as Figure 4, the HadSST and ERSST anomalies show none of the complexity it took six posts to cover. They show a joint trend of warming, of about 1.7 degrees/century.
Figure 4. The HadSST and ERSST anomalies.
Conclusions
The best way to analyze data is to use the absolute minimum statistical manipulation required present it in usable form. Every correction, every computation, all smoothing operations, every gridding step must be fully justified. It is an unfortunate fact of scientific and engineering life today that our colleagues are forever coming up with “this must be corrected for,” that must be corrected for,” and so on. Little thought is given to how the corrections affect our perception of the resulting graphs and maps. With enough corrections one can turn a pile of manure into a castle but is it really a castle?
I had a boss once who was very smart, he eventually became the CEO and chairman of the board of the company we worked for. I was much younger then and I was one of the scientists in the peanut gallery who kept asking “What about this?” “What about that, have you corrected for these things?” My boss would say, “Let’s not out-science ourselves. What does the data say, as it is?” After he became CEO, he sold the company for five times the average strike price of my accumulated stock options. I was still a scientist, albeit a wealthy one. He was right, so is Dr. William Briggs. Study the raw data, keep it close to you, don’t “out-science” yourself.
I reprocessed a lot of data to make this post, I think I did it correctly, but I do make mistakes. For those that want to check my work, you can find my new area-weighting R code here.
None of this is in my new book Politics and Climate Change: A History but buy it anyway.
4.5 13 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-25--Merry Christmas to all, did you get coal…or?

Material on this website is copyright © 2006-2021 , by Anthony Watts , and may not be stored or archived @ @ @ @ @ republished without written permission .
( Miriam O ’ Brien aka slandering “ Sou ” @ @ @ @ @ you . )
For permission , contact us .
See the About > Contact menu @ @ @ @ @ material from contributors may contain additional copyrights of their respective company or organization .


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-25--Climate Scientists to Request Political Representation on the Arctic Council

Climate scientists are planning to request political representation in the form of an “ Arctic Ambassador ” so they can remind other members of the council that the melting Arctic is not just a free for all resource opportunity .
According to the 2020 Arctic Report Card released by NOAA in December , things are pretty bad .
The report , an annual compilation of peer-reviewed science ( not Twitter or editorial opinions ) , is produced by over 120 scientists from 15 countries .
Key highlights ( or “ lowlights ” ) included : • The average annual land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second-warmest since the beginning of the record-keeping era in began in 1900 .
• 90 % of the past 10 years had air temperatures at least 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit greater the 1981-2010 mean .
• The second-lowest Arctic minimum sea ice extent in the satellite era .
• Warnings about extreme wildfires in the Arctic .
An open letter is being drafted by scientists calling for an Arctic Ambassador with a climate background to be appointed to the Arctic Council .
Dr. Twila Moon is a climate expert in the National Snow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Colorado .
In an email submitted to a listserve called Cryolist , she said , “ We believe this will raise the profile of Arctic research within the global climate change conversation , and generally increase U.S. engagement on international Arctic climate issues.
” According to Moon , the United States has not had senior level representation on the Council since Admiral Robert J. Papp departed at the end of Obama Administration at the end of the Obama Administration .
Moon also said , “ Appointing an Arctic Ambassador to the Arctic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Arctic is merely a region of future battles over resources in a world that has lost the battle against runaway global warming.
” While she acknowledged critics might be concerned about a political appointment that could lead to a bad apple or have challenges of maintaining longevity along with rank , she doesn ’ t think that it is a showstopper .
She also believes the May 2021 Arctic Council Ministerial is an early opportunity for the U.S. to signal both a renewed climate commitment , and reengagement with Arctic partners .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 193 U.S.-based scientists have already signed the letter .
The Arctic Council was set up so the representatives of large groups of people can settle their differences through dialog rather than military action .
There does not appear to be much genuine support for climate action on the Arctic Council .
For example Russia ’ s President Vladimir Putin seems to think western fears of global warming are a joke , except maybe when it suits him to look like he cares .
Many of Russia ’ s scientists think the world is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that , Russia might vote to add a climate ambassador , for the entertainment value of watching climate woke members of the council squirm .

Climate scientists are planning to request political representation in the form of an “Arctic Ambassador” so they can remind other members of the council that the melting Arctic is not just a free for all resource opportunity.
A Bold Request As Climate Change Ravages The Arctic Marshall Shepherd
Dec 23, 2020,09:47am EST According to the 2020 Arctic Report Card released by NOAA in December, things are pretty bad. The report, an annual compilation of peer-reviewed science (not Twitter or editorial opinions), is produced by over 120 scientists from 15 countries. Key highlights (or “lowlights”) included: The average annual land surface air temperature in the Arctic was the second-warmest since the beginning of the record-keeping era in began in 1900.
90% of the past 10 years had air temperatures at least 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit greater the 1981-2010 mean.
Record low June snow extent across the Eurasian Arctic.
The second-lowest Arctic minimum sea ice extent in the satellite era.
Warnings about extreme wildfires in the Arctic. … An open letter is being drafted by scientists calling for an Arctic Ambassador with a climate background to be appointed to the Arctic Council. Dr. Twila Moon is a climate expert in the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado. In an email submitted to a listserve called Cryolist, she said, “We believe this will raise the profile of Arctic research within the global climate change conversation, and generally increase U.S. engagement on international Arctic climate issues.” According to Moon, the United States has not had senior level representation on the Council since Admiral Robert J. Papp departed at the end of Obama Administration at the end of the Obama Administration. … Moon also said, “Appointing an Arctic Ambassador to the Arctic Council will counter a dangerous narrative that the Arctic is merely a region of future battles over resources in a world that has lost the battle against runaway global warming.” While she acknowledged critics might be concerned about a political appointment that could lead to a bad apple or have challenges of maintaining longevity along with rank, she doesn’t think that it is a showstopper. She also believes the May 2021 Arctic Council Ministerial is an early opportunity for the U.S. to signal both a renewed climate commitment, and reengagement with Arctic partners. According to a Tweet by Moon, 193 U.S.-based scientists have already signed the letter. … Read more: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2020/12/23/a-bold-request-as-climate-change-ravages-the-arctic/
The Arctic Council was set up so the representatives of large groups of people can settle their differences through dialog rather than military action.
There does not appear to be much genuine support for climate action on the Arctic Council. For example Russia’s President Vladimir Putin seems to think western fears of global warming are a joke, except maybe when it suits him to look like he cares. Many of Russia’s scientists think the world is not experiencing dangerous global warming. Having said that, Russia might vote to add a climate ambassador, for the entertainment value of watching climate woke members of the council squirm.
4.6 10 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


China recolonizes Africa

Western policies damage Africa and the planet , kill millions , and open doors to China Joe Biden has pledged that one of his first acts as President will be rejoining the Paris Climate Treaty – which until at least 2030 .
Even Biden ’ s designated “ climate envoy , ” former Secretary of State John Kerry , says the existing treaty “ has to be stronger , ” but then claims China will somehow become an active partner , instead of the competitor and adversary it clearly is .
His rationale : “ Climate is imperative , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is for us.
” As to China employing more Green technology and abiding by ( much less strengthening ) the Paris agreement , the evidence is at best spotty , at worst completely the opposite .
President Trump pulled the United States out of Paris , but between January 2017 and May 2019 the US had shuttered 50 coal-fired power plants , with 51 more shutdowns announced , bringing the total shutdowns to 289 ( 330 once announced shutdowns also take place ) since 2010 , soon leaving under 200 still operating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China had 2,363 active coal-fired power plants and was building another 1,171 in the Middle Kingdom – plus hundreds more in Africa , Asia and elsewhere .
A CO2 Coalition white paper by Kathleen Hartnett White and Caleb Rossiter reveals that China now has modern pollutant-scrubbing technology on over 80 % of its coal-fired power plants , but no scrubbers at any Chinese-built coal-fired power plants in Africa ( or likely anywhere else ) – and none anywhere that remove carbon dioxide .
Harvard University China specialist Edward Cunningham says China is building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coal plants , in places as widespread as Turkey , Egypt , Vietnam , Indonesia , Bangladesh and the Philippines .
India , South Korea , Japan , South Africa and even Germany are also building hundreds of coal-fired power plants .
No matter how many the USA closes down , it won ’ t make any global difference .
Boston University data indicate that China has invested over in building new coal plants overseas in recent years , and over a quarter of new coal plants outside the Middle Kingdom have some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial institutions .
“ Why is China placing a global bet on coal ?
” NPR wonders .
That ’ s a 40 or even 50-year commitment , the life span of coal-fired units .
The NPR authors even quote the Stinson Center think tank ’ s Southeast Asia analyst , who says “ it ’ s not clear when you look at the actual projects China is funding that they are truly Green.
” They ’ re obviously green , and more is obviously going on than their poor eyesight can perceive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will need oil , natural gas and coal for decades to come .
It sees “ green ” as the color of money and is happy to extend credit under terms very favorable to China .
Communist Party leaders seek global military and economic power – and global control of electricity generation , raw materials extraction , and manufacturing of wind turbines , solar panels and battery modules they will sell to address the West ’ s obsession with the “ manmade climate crisis ” and “ renewable , sustainable ” energy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ green ” technologies is a good smokescreen for all this coal power – and few Western governments will dare to criticize China sharply over this or Covid .
A recent Global Warming Policy Foundation report lambasts environmentalists ( like John Kerry ) as “ useful idiots ” who “ praise the scale of Chinese ambition on climate change , while paying lip service in criticizing China ’ s massive coal expansion.
” It notes that China rarely honors its international agreements and has no intention of reducing fossil fuel consumption .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do ?
The West will not fund even clean coal projects that would eliminate pollution from dung and wood fires , while providing reliable , affordable electricity for lights , refrigerators , schools , shops , hospitals , factories and much more .
China – and despite the heavy price , their demand for energy requires that they get electricity by any means necessary .
With 1.1 billion people , Sub-Saharan Africa remains the world ’ s poorest region , despite massive mineral resources and a young , energetic population with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Naudé says Africa industrialize , which means it have affordable , reliable electricity , if it is to overcome poverty and disease , create jobs and discourage terrorism .
Unfortunately , outrageously , US , EU , UN and World Bank policies have stymied African energy resource development .
As White and Rossiter note , US policies since the Obama era oppose Africans using the continent ’ s abundant coal and gas to fuel power plants , on the ground that carbon dioxide from fossil fuels might exacerbate climate change .
African Energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the United Kingdom has also decided it will stop funding new oil , gas and coal projects as of November 4 , 2021 , the fifth anniversary of the Paris treaty .
The decision kowtows to Green opposition to UK Export Finance support for a Mozambique terminal to export low-CO2 emissions liquefied natural gas .
Ayuk had been touting natural gas as an increasing option for African power plants , boasting that Africa is home to four of the world ’ s top 20 crude oil producers ( Nigeria , Angola , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nigeria are among the top 20 natural gas producers ; and Mozambique also has huge gas reserves .
It is troubling , ” Ayuk said , “ that an aggressive foreign-funded anti-African energy campaign continues to undermine the potential of making Mozambique an oasis for gas monetization and meeting our increasing energy demands.
” Despite this setback , he continued , “ we must continue to be unwavering in our commitment to stand up for Africa ’ s energy sector , its workers , reducing energy poverty , and those free-market values that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy investors.
” In much of Africa , electricity demand far outstrips supply .
“ In factories , businesses , government buildings and wealthy neighborhoods in every African country , ” White and Rossiter observe , a cacophonous symphony of soot-spewing backup diesel engines erupts when the grid goes down , which is usually every day.
” In fact , says the World Bank ’ s International Finance Corporation , many African countries spend more on dirty backup power than on electricity for the grid itself ; in West Africa , backup kilowatts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Sudan , which gets 30 % of its energy from dams on the Nile River , diesel-based pumps run constantly to lift river water for irrigation , even at the confluence of the Blue and White Niles .
In Nigeria , hotels ban guests from jogging because of health dangers from breathing soot from their diesel backup generators , which kick in repeatedly as neighborhoods go dark .
In Southern Africa , construction sites simply run generators all day , filling nearby streets with noxious clouds .
Universities rely on diesels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ units .
White and Rossiter note that American clean coal technology , exemplified by the Turk power plant in Arkansas , virtually eliminates health hazards from sulfur dioxide , nitrogen oxides and particulates .
They urge the U.S. to support proposals by African governments to import this technology , noting that electricity is “ the central nervous system of a modern economy and modern life expectancy .
Africa ’ s electricity deficit translates directly into its .
” Millions die needlessly every year , from countless diseases of energy and economic poverty .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Kerry at the forefront , there is little hope that these African and other pleas will be heard .
With European allies in myopic puritanical lockstep , China will continue to get a total pass on complying with Green demands – and will have free rein to turn sub-Saharan Africa into a giant Chinese colony , despite the environmental damage , monstrous debt , slave and child labor under horrific workplace conditions , and likely modest benefits to Africans .
It is eco-imperialism and eco-manslaughter at its worst .
Where are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Duggan Flanakin is Director of Policy Research at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow ( www.CFACT.org )

Western policies damage Africa and the planet, kill millions, and open doors to China
Duggan Flanakin
Joe Biden has pledged that one of his first acts as President will be rejoining the Paris Climate Treaty – which gives China a complete pass on reducing emissions until at least 2030. Even Biden’s designated “climate envoy,” former Secretary of State John Kerry, says the existing treaty “has to be stronger,” but then claims China will somehow become an active partner, instead of the competitor and adversary it clearly is. His rationale: “Climate is imperative, it’s as imperative for China as it is for us.”
As to China employing more Green technology and abiding by (much less strengthening) the Paris agreement, the evidence is at best spotty, at worst completely the opposite. President Trump pulled the United States out of Paris, but between January 2017 and May 2019 the US had shuttered 50 coal-fired power plants, with 51 more shutdowns announced, bringing the total shutdowns to 289 (330 once announced shutdowns also take place) since 2010, soon leaving under 200 still operating.
Meanwhile, as of 2019, China had 2,363 active coal-fired power plants and was building another 1,171 in the Middle Kingdom – plus hundreds more in Africa, Asia and elsewhere. A CO2 Coalition white paper by Kathleen Hartnett White and Caleb Rossiter reveals that China now has modern pollutant-scrubbing technology on over 80% of its coal-fired power plants, but no scrubbers at any Chinese-built coal-fired power plants in Africa (or likely anywhere else) – and none anywhere that remove carbon dioxide.
Harvard University China specialist Edward Cunningham says China is building, planning or financing more than 300 coal plants, in places as widespread as Turkey, Egypt, Vietnam, Indonesia, Bangladesh and the Philippines. India, South Korea, Japan, South Africa and even Germany are also building hundreds of coal-fired power plants. No matter how many the USA closes down, it won’t make any global difference.
Boston University data indicate that China has invested over $50 billion in building new coal plants overseas in recent years, and over a quarter of new coal plants outside the Middle Kingdom have some commitment or offer of funds from Chinese financial institutions.
“Why is China placing a global bet on coal?” NPR wonders. That’s a 40 or even 50-year commitment, the life span of coal-fired units. The NPR authors even quote the Stinson Center think tank’s Southeast Asia analyst, who says “it’s not clear when you look at the actual projects China is funding that they are truly Green.” They’re obviously not green, and more is obviously going on than their poor eyesight can perceive.
China knows it and the world will need oil, natural gas and coal for decades to come. It sees “green” as the color of money and is happy to extend credit under terms very favorable to China. Communist Party leaders seek global military and economic power – and global control of electricity generation, raw materials extraction, and manufacturing of wind turbines, solar panels and battery modules they will sell to address the West’s obsession with the “manmade climate crisis” and “renewable, sustainable” energy.
Party leaders also know its production of “green” technologies is a good smokescreen for all this coal power – and few Western governments will dare to criticize China sharply over this or Covid.
A recent Global Warming Policy Foundation report lambasts environmentalists (like John Kerry) as “useful idiots” who “praise the scale of Chinese ambition on climate change, while paying lip service in criticizing China’s massive coal expansion.” It notes that China rarely honors its international agreements and has no intention of reducing fossil fuel consumption.
But what are Africa and other developing nations to do? The West will not fund even clean coal projects that would eliminate pollution from dung and wood fires, while providing reliable, affordable electricity for lights, refrigerators, schools, shops, hospitals, factories and much more. China will – and despite the heavy price, their demand for energy requires that they get electricity by any means necessary.
With 1.1 billion people, Sub-Saharan Africa remains the world’s poorest region, despite massive mineral resources and a young, energetic population with an affinity for entrepreneurship. Dutch economist Wim Naudé says Africa must industrialize, which means it must have affordable, reliable electricity, if it is to overcome poverty and disease, create jobs and discourage terrorism.
Unfortunately, outrageously, US, EU, UN and World Bank policies have stymied African energy resource development. As White and Rossiter note, US policies since the Obama era oppose Africans using the continent’s abundant coal and gas to fuel power plants, on the ground that carbon dioxide from fossil fuels might exacerbate climate change.
African Energy Chamber executive chairman NJ Ayuk recently reported that the United Kingdom has also decided it will stop funding new oil, gas and coal projects as of November 4, 2021, the fifth anniversary of the Paris treaty. The decision kowtows to Green opposition to UK Export Finance support for a Mozambique terminal to export low-CO2 emissions liquefied natural gas.
Ayuk had been touting natural gas as an increasing option for African power plants, boasting that Africa is home to four of the world’s top 20 crude oil producers (Nigeria, Angola, Algeria and Libya); Algeria and Nigeria are among the top 20 natural gas producers; and Mozambique also has huge gas reserves.
“It is troubling,” Ayuk said, “that an aggressive foreign-funded anti-African energy campaign continues to undermine the potential of making Mozambique an oasis for gas monetization and meeting our increasing energy demands.” Despite this setback, he continued, “we must continue to be unwavering in our commitment to stand up for Africa’s energy sector, its workers, reducing energy poverty, and those free-market values that will make our continent attractive to committed energy investors.”
In much of Africa, electricity demand far outstrips supply. “In factories, businesses, government buildings and wealthy neighborhoods in every African country,” White and Rossiter observe, a cacophonous symphony of soot-spewing backup diesel engines erupts when the grid goes down, which is usually every day.” In fact, says the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation, many African countries spend more on dirty backup power than on electricity for the grid itself; in West Africa, backup kilowatts equal 40% of total grid kilowatts.
In Sudan, which gets 30% of its energy from dams on the Nile River, diesel-based pumps run constantly to lift river water for irrigation, even at the confluence of the Blue and White Niles. In Nigeria, hotels ban guests from jogging because of health dangers from breathing soot from their diesel backup generators, which kick in repeatedly as neighborhoods go dark. In Southern Africa, construction sites simply run generators all day, filling nearby streets with noxious clouds. Universities rely on diesels to run old, inefficient air conditioning units.
White and Rossiter note that American clean coal technology, exemplified by the Turk power plant in Arkansas, virtually eliminates health hazards from sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates. They urge the U.S. to support proposals by African governments to import this technology, noting that electricity is “the central nervous system of a modern economy and modern life expectancy. Africa’s electricity deficit translates directly into its life-expectancy deficit of 15 years per person.”
Millions die needlessly every year, from countless diseases of energy and economic poverty.
But under a Biden-Harris Administration, with John Kerry at the forefront, there is little hope that these African and other pleas will be heard. With European allies in myopic puritanical lockstep, China will continue to get a total pass on complying with Green demands – and will have free rein to turn sub-Saharan Africa into a giant Chinese colony, despite the environmental damage, monstrous debt, slave and child labor under horrific workplace conditions, and likely modest benefits to Africans.
It is eco-imperialism and eco-manslaughter at its worst. Where are the vaunted guardians of climate and environmental justice?
Duggan Flanakin is Director of Policy Research at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org)
4.7 19 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-25--Christmas in Florida: Chilly forecast, falling iguanas

ORLANDO , Fla. ( AP ) — With unexpectedly cold weather in the forecast and pandemic-related curfews in some places , Florida is about to have a Christmas unlike any other in recent memory , and it may involve falling iguanas .
The National Weather Service earlier this week warned that South Florida could experience the coldest Christmas Day in 21 years .
Morning lows on Saturday could drop into the low 30s and 40s degrees Fahrenheit , the weather service said .
“ Brrr !
Much colder temps expected for Christmas , ” the National Weather Service in Miami @ @ @ @ @ @ @ iguanas are possible.
” Because they are cold-blooded reptiles , iguanas living in South Florida trees often become immobile in chilly weather , causing them to drop to the ground when the thermometer plummets , though they are still alive .
In Jacksonville , the temperature was expected to drop 50 degrees , from about 80 degrees Fahrenheit on Thursday to around 30 degrees Fahrenheit on Friday , putting it on the path to being one of the five coldest Christmas Days on record , according to the National Weather Service in Jacksonville @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and fast-moving winds also was headed for north Florida on Christmas Eve .

From the AP
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — With unexpectedly cold weather in the forecast and pandemic-related curfews in some places, Florida is about to have a Christmas unlike any other in recent memory, and it may involve falling iguanas.
The National Weather Service earlier this week warned that South Florida could experience the coldest Christmas Day in 21 years. Morning lows on Saturday could drop into the low 30s and 40s degrees Fahrenheit, the weather service said.
“ Brrr! Much colder temps expected for Christmas,” the National Weather Service in Miami tweeted earlier this week. “Falling iguanas are possible.”
Because they are cold-blooded reptiles, iguanas living in South Florida trees often become immobile in chilly weather, causing them to drop to the ground when the thermometer plummets, though they are still alive.
In Jacksonville, the temperature was expected to drop 50 degrees, from about 80 degrees Fahrenheit on Thursday to around 30 degrees Fahrenheit on Friday, putting it on the path to being one of the five coldest Christmas Days on record, according to the National Weather Service in Jacksonville.
A squall line with severe storms and fast-moving winds also was headed for north Florida on Christmas Eve.
Full report here
HT/Willis E
5 7 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-12-26--Study: Dangerous Global Warming Could Occur by 2027

We laughed when Alexandria Occasio Cortez claimed that the world would end in 12 years .
According to a new climate study , AOC is an optimist ; we might only have seven years .
But the authors appear to make some fairly pessimistic assumptions to achieve that prognosis .
Climate change : Threshold for dangerous warming will likely be crossed between 2027-2042 Scientists introduce a new way to predict global warming , reducing uncertainties considerably The threshold for dangerous global warming will likely be crossed between 2027 and 2042 — a much narrower window than the Intergovernmental Panel on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now and 2052 .
In a study published in , researchers from McGill University introduce a new and more precise way to project the Earth ’ s temperature .
Based on historical data , it considerably reduces uncertainties compared to previous approaches .
“ Climate skeptics have argued that global warming projections are unreliable because they depend on faulty supercomputer models .
While these criticisms are unwarranted , they underscore the need for independent and different approaches to predicting future warming , ” says co-author Bruno Tremblay , a professor in the Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University .
Until now , wide ranges in overall temperature projections have made it difficult to pinpoint outcomes in different mitigation scenarios .
For instance , if atmospheric CO2 concentrations are doubled , the General Circulation Models ( GCMs ) used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) , predict a very likely global average temperature increase between 1.9 and 4.5C — a vast range covering moderate climate changes on the lower end , and catastrophic ones on the other .
“ Our new approach to projecting the Earth ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data , rather than the theoretical relationships that are imperfectly captured by the GCMs .
Our approach allows climate sensitivity and its uncertainty to be estimated from direct observations with few assumptions , ” says co-author Raphael Hebert , a former graduate researcher at McGill University , now working at the Alfred-Wegener-Institut in Potsdam , Germany .
The abstract of the study ; An observation-based scaling model for climate sensitivity estimates and global projections to 2100 We directly exploit the stochasticity of the internal variability , and the linearity of the forced response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historical data and a Green ’ s function , or Climate Response Function ( CRF ) .
To make the problem tractable , we take advantage of the temporal scaling symmetry to define a scaling CRF characterized by the scaling exponent , which controls the long-range memory of the climate , i.e .
how fast the system tends toward a steady-state , and an inner scale 𝜏≈2τ≈2 years below which the higher-frequency response is smoothed out .
An aerosol scaling factor and a non-linear volcanic damping exponent were introduced to account for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimate the model and forcing parameters by Bayesian inference which allows us to analytically calculate the transient climate response and the equilibrium climate sensitivity as : 1.7+0.3−0.21.7−0.2+0.3 K and 2.4+1.3−0.62.4−0.6+1.3 K respectively ( likely range ) .
Projections to 2100 according to the RCP 2.6 , 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios yield warmings with respect to 1880–1910 of : 1.5+0.4−0.2𝐾1.5−0.2+0.4K , 2.3+0.7−0.52.3−0.5+0.7 K and 4.2+1.3−0.94.2−0.9+1.3 K. These projection estimates are lower than the ones based on a Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 multi-model ensemble ; more importantly , their uncertainties are smaller and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series .
The key uncertainty is due to aerosol forcings ; we find a modern ( 2005 ) forcing value of [ −1.0 , −0.3 ] Wm−2 [ −1.0 , −0.3 ] Wm−2 ( 90 % confidence interval ) with median at −0.7Wm−2−0.7Wm−2 .
Projecting to 2100 , we find that to keep the warming below 1.5 K , future emissions must undergo cuts similar to RCP 2.6 for which the probability to remain under 1.5 K is 48 % .
RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5-like futures overshoot with very high probability .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , all methods show a high probability of a warming exceeding 2 K before 2100 .
According to the SCRF , the risk of overshooting 1.5 K is negligible before 2024 ( or 2028 ) , but extremely likely after 2036 ( or 2047 ) , similarly to the CMIP5 MME which reaches the 95 % probability of overshooting 1.5 K in 2038 .
The 2 K threshold is also extremely likely to be crossed about 15 years later in 2055 for both the SCRF and CMIP5 MME ( or 2068 ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ above The study authors appear to estimate a fairly low transient climate response , but a potentially high end equilibrium climate sensitivity .
… Our analysis supports better constrained TCR and ECS likely range than the IPCC AR5 .
When using 𝐹𝐴𝑒𝑟𝑅𝐶𝑃FAerRCP ( or 𝐹𝐴𝑒𝑟𝑄𝑎FAerQa ) , the range shrinks from [ 1.0 , 2.5 ] K to [ 1.4 , 2.0 ] K for the TCR ( or [ 1.2 , 1.5 ] K ) and from [ 1.5,4.5 ] 𝐾 [ 1.5,4.5 ] K to [ 1.8,3.7 ] 𝐾 [ 1.8,3.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ 1.5 , 2.7 ] K ) ; the median estimates also decrease from 1.8 K to 1.7 K ( or 1.4 K ) for the TCR and from 3.0 K to 2.4 K ( or 1.8 K ) for the ECS .
This agrees with other recent observation-based studies ( Otto et al .
2013 ; Skeie et al .
2014 , and Johansson et al .
2015 ) which also support a downward revision of the ECS upper 17 % bound by at least half a degree .
In addition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smaller , 2.2+0.6−0.5𝐾2.2−0.5+0.6K ( or 1.7+0.4−0.2𝐾1.7−0.2+0.4K ) , than the ECS .
This implies that if the ECS is on the higher end of the CI , then a large fraction of the warming would be experienced hundreds of years after a potential stabilization of anthropogenic forcing .
An important and rather conservative claim supported by this evidence is therefore that the upper 5 % ECS bound and median of AR5 can be safely revised downward to 4.0 K and 2.5 K. The lower 5 % bound of 1.5 K , on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Read more : Same link as above Interestingly the TCR ( Transient Climate Response ) estimated by the authors appears to be fairly close to the ECS ( Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity ) estimated by Lord Monckton in his corrected feedback study .
The authors of this study justify this difference between TCR and ECS by raising the possibility that the climate will take a long time to stabilise ( “ hundreds of years ” ) even if anthropogenic CO2 emissions were halted today , so a lot hinges on how much warming is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we get an estimate to constrain the ECS , without waiting for centuries for the climate to finish responding to anthropogenic CO2 emissions ?
One option is to consider past geological periods such as the Jurassic ( 1950ppm CO2 , +3C global warming ) .
If 1950ppm CO2 can only raise global temperature by 3C , even when the paleo-climate had millions of years to respond to elevated CO2 levels , this implies that ECS is small , and there is very little if any additional warming waiting in the pipeline .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warming likely to occur as a result of our burning of fossil fuel is a total non event – we will run out of fossil fuel long before we reach 1950ppm .
But this viewpoint does not appear to be popular with most government funded climate scientists .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
We laughed when Alexandria Occasio Cortez claimed that the world would end in 12 years. According to a new climate study, AOC is an optimist; we might only have seven years. But the authors appear to make some fairly pessimistic assumptions to achieve that prognosis.
Climate change: Threshold for dangerous warming will likely be crossed between 2027-2042 Scientists introduce a new way to predict global warming, reducing uncertainties considerably Date: December 21, 2020
Source: McGill University The threshold for dangerous global warming will likely be crossed between 2027 and 2042 — a much narrower window than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s estimate of between now and 2052. In a study published in Climate Dynamics, researchers from McGill University introduce a new and more precise way to project the Earth’s temperature. Based on historical data, it considerably reduces uncertainties compared to previous approaches. … “Climate skeptics have argued that global warming projections are unreliable because they depend on faulty supercomputer models. While these criticisms are unwarranted, they underscore the need for independent and different approaches to predicting future warming,” says co-author Bruno Tremblay, a professor in the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at McGill University. Until now, wide ranges in overall temperature projections have made it difficult to pinpoint outcomes in different mitigation scenarios. For instance, if atmospheric CO2 concentrations are doubled, the General Circulation Models (GCMs) used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), predict a very likely global average temperature increase between 1.9 and 4.5C — a vast range covering moderate climate changes on the lower end, and catastrophic ones on the other. A new approach “Our new approach to projecting the Earth’s temperature is based on historical climate data, rather than the theoretical relationships that are imperfectly captured by the GCMs. Our approach allows climate sensitivity and its uncertainty to be estimated from direct observations with few assumptions,” says co-author Raphael Hebert, a former graduate researcher at McGill University, now working at the Alfred-Wegener-Institut in Potsdam, Germany. … Read more: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/12/201221160425.htm
The abstract of the study;
An observation-based scaling model for climate sensitivity estimates and global projections to 2100 Raphaël Hébert, Shaun Lovejoy & Bruno Tremblay Climate Dynamics (2020) Abstract We directly exploit the stochasticity of the internal variability, and the linearity of the forced response to make global temperature projections based on historical data and a Green’s function, or Climate Response Function (CRF). To make the problem tractable, we take advantage of the temporal scaling symmetry to define a scaling CRF characterized by the scaling exponent H, which controls the long-range memory of the climate, i.e. how fast the system tends toward a steady-state, and an inner scale 𝜏≈2τ≈2 years below which the higher-frequency response is smoothed out. An aerosol scaling factor and a non-linear volcanic damping exponent were introduced to account for the large uncertainty in these forcings. We estimate the model and forcing parameters by Bayesian inference which allows us to analytically calculate the transient climate response and the equilibrium climate sensitivity as: 1.7+0.3−0.21.7−0.2+0.3 K and 2.4+1.3−0.62.4−0.6+1.3 K respectively (likely range). Projections to 2100 according to the RCP 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios yield warmings with respect to 1880–1910 of: 1.5+0.4−0.2𝐾1.5−0.2+0.4K, 2.3+0.7−0.52.3−0.5+0.7 K and 4.2+1.3−0.94.2−0.9+1.3 K. These projection estimates are lower than the ones based on a Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 multi-model ensemble; more importantly, their uncertainties are smaller and only depend on historical temperature and forcing series. The key uncertainty is due to aerosol forcings; we find a modern (2005) forcing value of [−1.0,−0.3]Wm−2[−1.0,−0.3]Wm−2 (90 % confidence interval) with median at −0.7Wm−2−0.7Wm−2. Projecting to 2100, we find that to keep the warming below 1.5 K, future emissions must undergo cuts similar to RCP 2.6 for which the probability to remain under 1.5 K is 48 %. RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5-like futures overshoot with very high probability. Read more: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-020-05521-x
From the study;
… For the high-emission scenario RCP 8.5, all methods show a high probability of a warming exceeding 2 K before 2100. According to the SCRF, the risk of overshooting 1.5 K is negligible before 2024 (or 2028), but extremely likely after 2036 (or 2047), similarly to the CMIP5 MME which reaches the 95% probability of overshooting 1.5 K in 2038. The 2 K threshold is also extremely likely to be crossed about 15 years later in 2055 for both the SCRF and CMIP5 MME (or 2068). … Read more: Same link as above
The study authors appear to estimate a fairly low transient climate response, but a potentially high end equilibrium climate sensitivity.
… Our analysis supports better constrained TCR and ECS likely range than the IPCC AR5. When using 𝐹𝐴𝑒𝑟𝑅𝐶𝑃FAerRCP (or 𝐹𝐴𝑒𝑟𝑄𝑎FAerQa), the range shrinks from [1.0, 2.5] K to [1.4, 2.0] K for the TCR (or [1.2, 1.5] K) and from [1.5,4.5]𝐾[1.5,4.5]K to [1.8,3.7]𝐾[1.8,3.7]K for the ECS (or [1.5, 2.7] K); the median estimates also decrease from 1.8 K to 1.7 K (or 1.4 K) for the TCR and from 3.0 K to 2.4 K (or 1.8 K) for the ECS. This agrees with other recent observation-based studies (Otto et al. 2013; Skeie et al. 2014, and Johansson et al. 2015) which also support a downward revision of the ECS upper 17% bound by at least half a degree. In addition, the ECS500500 was found to be significantly smaller, 2.2+0.6−0.5𝐾2.2−0.5+0.6K (or 1.7+0.4−0.2𝐾1.7−0.2+0.4K), than the ECS. This implies that if the ECS is on the higher end of the CI, then a large fraction of the warming would be experienced hundreds of years after a potential stabilization of anthropogenic forcing. An important and rather conservative claim supported by this evidence is therefore that the upper 5% ECS bound and median of AR5 can be safely revised downward to 4.0 K and 2.5 K. The lower 5% bound of 1.5 K, on the other hand, remains reliable. … Read more: Same link as above
Interestingly the TCR (Transient Climate Response) estimated by the authors appears to be fairly close to the ECS (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity) estimated by Lord Monckton in his corrected feedback study. The authors of this study justify this difference between TCR and ECS by raising the possibility that the climate will take a long time to stabilise (“hundreds of years”) even if anthropogenic CO2 emissions were halted today, so a lot hinges on how much warming is still in the pipeline.
How can we get an estimate to constrain the ECS, without waiting for centuries for the climate to finish responding to anthropogenic CO2 emissions? One option is to consider past geological periods such as the Jurassic (1950ppm CO2, +3C global warming). If 1950ppm CO2 can only raise global temperature by 3C, even when the paleo-climate had millions of years to respond to elevated CO2 levels, this implies that ECS is small, and there is very little if any additional warming waiting in the pipeline. A low ECS implies that any anthropogenic global warming likely to occur as a result of our burning of fossil fuel is a total non event – we will run out of fossil fuel long before we reach 1950ppm. But this viewpoint does not appear to be popular with most government funded climate scientists.
4.6 15 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...