iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-03--Oh No! Greenland Melts in Virtual Reality “Experiments”

Phys.org sounds the alarm : Greenland ice sheet faces irreversible melting .
But as is usual with announcements from that source , discretion and critical intelligence is advised .
The back story is a study that takes outputs from climate models projecting incredible warming and feeds them into ice models that assume melting from higher temperatures .
Warning : The paper has 93 references to “ experiments ” and all of them are virtual reality manipulations in the computers they programmed .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
Professor Jonathan Gregory , Climate Scientist from the National Centre for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said : “ Our experiments underline the importance of mitigating global temperature rise .
To avoid partially irreversible loss of the ice sheet , climate change must be reversed—not just stabilized—before we reach the critical point where the ice sheet has declined too far.
” The paper is Large and irreversible future decline of the Greenland ice sheet .
And obviously , it is models all the way down .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
We run a set of 47 FiG experiments to study the SMB change ( ΔSMB ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steady state of the Greenland ice sheet using the three different choices of FAMOUS–ice snow-albedo parameters , with 20-year climatological monthly mean sea surface BCs taken from the four selected CMIP5 AOGCMs for five climate scenarios ( Table 2 ) .
These five are the late 20th century ( 1980–1999 , called “ historical ” ) , the end of the 21st century under three representative concentration pathway ( RCP ) scenarios ( as in the AR5 ; van Vuuren et al.
, 2011 ) and quadrupled pre-industrial CO2 ( abrupt4xCO2 , warmer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have steady-state climates .
This is unrealistic , but it simplifies the comparison and is reasonable since no-one can tell how climate will change over millennia into the future .
Our simulations should be regarded only as indicative rather than as projections .
Each experiment begins from the FiG spun-up state for MIROC5 historical climate with the appropriate albedo parameter .
Although in most cases there is a substantial instantaneous change in BCs when the experiment begins , the land and atmosphere require only a couple of years to adjust .
Under constant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20th century , the ice sheet loses mass , its surface elevation decreases , and its surface climate becomes warmer .
This gives a positive feedback on mass loss , but it is outweighed by the negative feedbacks due to declining ablation area and increasing cloudiness over the interior as the ice sheet contracts .
In the ice sheet area integral , snowfall decreases less than ablation because the precipitation on the margins is enhanced by the topographic gradient and moves inland as the ice sheet retreats .
Consequently , after many millennia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ice sheet reaches a reduced steady state .
Final GMSLR is less than 1.5 m in most late 21st-century RCP2.6 climates and more than 4 m in all late 21st-century RCP8.5 climates .
For warming exceeding 3 K , the ice sheet would be mostly lost , and its contribution to GMSLR would exceed 5 m. The reliability of our conclusions depends on the realism of our model .
There are systematic uncertainties arising from assumptions made in its formulation .
The atmosphere GCM has low resolution and comparatively simple parametrization schemes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ rapid ice sheet dynamics ; this certainly means that it underestimates the rate of ice sheet mass loss in coming decades , but we do not know what effect this has on the eventual steady states , which are our focus .
The SMB scheme uses a uniform air temperature lapse rate and omits the phase change in precipitation in the downscaling from GCM to ice sheet model .
The snow albedo is a particularly important uncertainty ; with our highest choice of albedo , removal of the ice sheet is reversible .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Previous post : Greenland Ice Varies , Don ’ t Panic The scare du jour is about Greenland Ice Sheet ( GIS ) and how it will melt out and flood us all .
It ’ s declared that GIS has passed its tipping point , and we are doomed .
Typical is the Phys.org hysteria : Sea level rise quickens as Greenland ice sheet sheds record amount : “ Greenland ’ s massive ice sheet saw a record net loss of 532 billion tonnes last year , raising red flags about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new findings.
” Panic is warranted only if you treat this as proof of an alarmist narrative and ignore the facts and context in which natural variation occurs .
For starters , consider the last four years of GIS fluctuations reported by DMI and summarized in the eight graphs above .
Note the noisy blue lines showing how the surface mass balance ( SMB ) changes its daily weight by 8 or 10 gigatonnes ( Gt ) around the baseline mean from 1981 to 2010 .
Note also the summer decrease between May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ match or exceed the mean .
The other four graphs show the accumulation of SMB for each of the last four years including 2020 .
Tipping Point ?
Note that in both 2017 and 2018 , SMB ended about 500 Gt higher than the year began , and way higher than 2012 , which added nothing .
Then came 2019 dropping below the mean , but still above 2012 .
Lastly , this year is matching the 30-year average .
Note also that the charts do not integrate from previous years ; i.e @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows the accumulation only for that year .
Thus the gains from 2017 and 2018 do not result in 2019 starting the year up 1000 Gt , but from zero .
Researchers know that the small flows of water from surface melting are not the main way GIS loses ice in the summer .
Neil Humphrey explains in this article from last year Nate Maier and Neil Humphrey Lead Team Discovering Ice is Sliding Toward Edges Off Greenland Ice Sheet Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
While they may appear solid , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movement : ice flows downslope either through the process of deformation or sliding .
The latest results suggest that the movement of the ice on the GIS is dominated by sliding , not deformation .
This process is moving ice to the marginal zones of the sheet , where melting occurs , at a much faster rate .
“ The study was motivated by a major unknown in how the ice of Greenland moves from the cold interior , to the melting regions on the margins , ” Neil Humphrey , a professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and author of the study , told Newsweek .
“ The ice is known to move both by sliding over the bedrock under the ice , and by oozing ( deforming ) like slowly flowing honey or molasses .
What was unknown was the ratio between these two modes of motion—sliding or deforming .
“ This lack of understanding makes predicting the future difficult , since we know how to calculate the flowing , but do not know much about sliding , ” he said .
“ Although melt can occur anywhere in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ melt can occur is in the low altitude margins .
The center ( high altitude ) of the ice is too cold for the melt to contribute significant water to the oceans ; that only occurs at the margins .
Therefore ice has to get from where it snows in the interior to the margins .
“ The implications for having high sliding along the margin of the ice sheet means that thinning or thickening along the margins due to changes in ice speed can occur much more rapidly than previously thought , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really important ; as when the ice sheet thins or thickens it will either increase the rate of melting or alternatively become more resilient in a changing climate.
“ “ There has been some debate as to whether ice flow along the edges of Greenland should be considered mostly deformation or mostly sliding , ” Maier says .
“ This has to do with uncertainty of trying to calculate deformation motion using surface measurements alone .
Our direct measurements of sliding- dominated motion , along with sliding measurements made by other research teams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument that no matter where you go along the edges of Greenland , you are likely to have a lot of sliding.
” The sliding ice does two things , Humphrey says .
First , it allows the ice to slide into the ocean and make icebergs , which then float away .
Two , the ice slides into lower , warmer climate , where it can melt faster .
While it may sound dire , Humphrey notes the entire Greenland Ice Sheet is 5,000 to 10,000 feet thick .
“ In a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sheet might melt a few feet .
It means Greenland is going to be there another 10,000 years , ” Humphrey says .
“ So , it ’ s not the catastrophe the media is overhyping.
” Humphrey has been working in Greenland for the past 30 years and says the Greenland Ice Sheet has only melted 10 feet during that time span .
The Greenland ice sheet is more than 1.2 miles thick in most regions .
If all of its ice was to melt , global sea levels could be expected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , this would take more than 10,000 years at the current rates of melting .
The modern pattern of environmental scares started with Rachel Carson ’ s Silent Spring claiming chemicals are killing birds , only today it is windmills doing the carnage .
That was followed by ever expanding doomsday scenarios , from DDT , to SST , to CFC , and now the most glorious of them all , CO2 .
In all cases the menace was placed in remote areas difficult for objective observers to verify or contradict .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ scares are now hiding in the stratosphere and more recently in the Arctic and Antarctic polar deserts .
See Progressively Scaring the World ( Lewin book synopsis ) The advantage of course is that no one can challenge the claims with facts on the ground , or on the ice .
Correction : Scratch “ no one ” , because the climate faithful are the exception .
Highly motivated to go to the ends of the earth , they will look through their alarmist glasses and bring back the news that we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A recent example is a team of researchers from Dubai ( the hot and sandy petro kingdom ) going to Greenland to report on the melting of Helheim glacier there .
The article is NYUAD team finds reasons behind Greenland ’ s glacier melt .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
First the study and findings : For the first time , warm waters that originate in the tropics have been found at uniform depth , displacing the cold polar water at the Helheim calving front , causing an unusually high melt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the terminus of an outlet glacier like Helheim are at the freezing point and cause little melting .
NYUAD researchers , led by Professor of Mathematics at NYU ’ s Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Principal Investigator for NYU Abu Dhabi ’ s Centre for Sea Level Change David Holland , on August 5 , deployed a helicopter-borne ocean temperature probe into a pond-like opening , created by warm ocean waters , in the usually thick and frozen melange in front of the glacier terminus .
Normally , warm , salty waters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gulf Stream , where at Greenland they meet with cold , fresh water coming from the polar region .
Because the tropical waters are so salty , they normally sink beneath the polar waters .
But Holland and his team discovered that the temperature of the ocean water at the base of the glacier was a uniform 4 degrees Centigrade from top to bottom at depth to 800 metres .
The finding was also recently confirmed by Nasa ’ s OMG ( Oceans Melting Greenland ) project .
“ This is unsustainable from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balance as the warm waters are melting the glacier much faster than they can be replenished , ” said Holland .
Surface melt drains through the ice sheet and flows under the glacier and into the ocean .
Such fresh waters input at the calving front at depth have enormous buoyancy and want to reach the surface of the ocean at the calving front .
In doing so , they draw the deep warm tropical water up to the surface , as well .
All around Greenland , at depth , warm tropical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Their presence over time changes depending on the behaviour of the Gulf Stream .
Over the last two decades , the warm tropical waters at depth have been found in abundance .
Greenland outlet glaciers like Helheim have been melting rapidly and retreating since the arrival of these warm waters .
Then the Hysteria and Pledge of Alligiance to Global Warming “ We are surprised to learn that increased surface glacier melt due to warming atmosphere can trigger increased ocean melting of the glacier , ” added Holland .
“ Essentially , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are delivering a troubling ‘ one-two punch ’ that is rapidly accelerating glacier melt.
” My comment : Hold on.They studied effects from warmer ocean water gaining access underneath that glacier .
Oceans have roughly 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere , so the idea that the air is warming the water is far-fetched .
And remember also that long wave radiation of the sort that CO2 can emit can not penetrate beyond the first millimeter or so of the water surface .
So how did warmer ocean water get attributed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ask , don ’ t tell .
And the idea that air is melting Arctic glaciers is also unfounded .
Consider the basics of air parcels in the Arctic .
The central region of the Arctic is very dry .
Why ?
Firstly because the water is frozen and releases very little water vapour into the atmosphere .
And secondly because ( according to the laws of physics ) cold air can retain very little moisture .
Greenland has the only veritable polar ice cap in the Arctic , meaning that the climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than at the North Pole , except along the coast and in the southern part of the landmass where the Atlantic has a warming effect .
The marked stability of Greenland ’ s climate is due to a layer of very cold air just above ground level , air that is always heavier than the upper layers of the troposphere .
The result of this is a strong , gravity-driven air flow down the slopes ( i.e .
catabatic winds ) , generating gusts that can reach 200 kph at ground level .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ facts are needed to put these claims in context .
Let ’ s start with what is known about Helheim Glacier .
Helheim Glacier ranks among the fastest flowing and most ice discharging outlets of the Greenland Ice Sheet ( GrIS ) .
After undergoing rapid speed-up in the early 2000s , understanding its long-term mass balance and dynamic has become increasingly important .
Here , we present the first record of direct Holocene ice-marginal changes of the Helheim Glacier following the initial deglaciation .
By analysing cores from lakes adjacent to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of advance and retreat .
We target threshold lakes , which receive glacial meltwater only when the margin is at an advanced position , similar to the present .
We show that , during the period from 10.5 to 9.6 cal ka BP , the extent of Helheim Glacier was similar to that of todays , after which it remained retracted for most of the Holocene until a re-advance caused it to reach its present extent at c. 0.3 cal ka BP , during the Little Ice Age ( LIA ) .
Thus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the largest since the last deglaciation , and its Holocene history shows that it is capable of recovering after several millennia of warming and retreat .
Furthermore , the absence of advances beyond the present-day position during for example the 9.3 and 8.2 ka cold events as well as the early-Neoglacial suggest a substantial retreat during most of the Holocene .
Quaternary Science Reviews , Holocene history of the Helheim Glacier , southeast Greenland A.A.Bjørk et .
Al .
1 August 2018 The topography of Greenland shows why its ice cap has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is a bowl surrounded by ridges except for a few outlets , Helheim being a major one .
And then , what do we know about the recent history of glacier changes .
Two Decades of Changes in Helheim Glacier Helheim Glacier is the fastest flowing glacier along the eastern edge of Greenland Ice Sheet and one of the island ’ s largest ocean-terminating rivers of ice .
Named after the Vikings ’ world of the dead , Helheim has kept scientists on their toes for the past two decades .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ increased the rate at which it dumped ice to the sea , while also rapidly retreating inland- a behavior also seen in other glaciers around Greenland .
Since then , the ice loss has slowed down and the glacier ’ s front has partially recovered , readvancing by about 2 miles of the more than 4 miles it had initially retreated .
NASA has compiled a time series of airborne observations of Helheim ’ s changes into a new visualization that illustrates the complexity of studying Earth ’ s changing ice sheets .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ track variations in polar ice year after year to figure out what ’ s driving these changes and what impact they will have in the future on global concerns like sea level rise .
Since 1997 , NASA has collected data over Helheim Glacier almost every year during annual airborne surveys of the Greenland Ice Sheet using an airborne laser altimeter called the Airborne Topographic Mapper ( ATM ) .
Since 2009 these surveys have continued as part of Operation IceBridge , NASA ’ s ongoing airborne survey of polar ice and its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elevation of the glacier along a swath as the plane files along the middle of the glacier .
By comparing the changes in the height of the glacier surface from year to year , scientists estimate how much ice the glacier has lost .
The animation begins by showing the NASA P-3 plane collecting elevation data in 1998 .
The laser instrument maps the glacier ’ s surface in a circular scanning pattern , firing laser shots that reflect off the ice and are recorded by the laser ’ s detectors aboard the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it takes for the laser pulses to travel down to the ice and back to the aircraft , enabling scientists to measure the height of the ice surface .
In the animation , the laser data is combined with three-dimensional images created from IceBridge ’ s high-resolution camera system .
The animation then switches to data collected in 2013 , showing how the surface elevation and position of the calving front ( the edge of the glacier , from where it sheds ice ) have changed over those 15 years .
Helheim ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between 1998 and 2013 .
It also thinned by around 330 feet during that period , one of the fastest thinning rates in Greenland .
“ The calving front of the glacier most likely was perched on a ledge in the bedrock in 1998 and then something altered its equilibrium , ” said Joe MacGregor , IceBridge deputy project scientist .
“ One of the most likely culprits is a change in ocean circulation or temperature , such that slightly warmer water entered into the fjord , melted a bit more ice and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of forces.
” Prompted by comments from Gordon Walleville , let ’ s look at Greenland ice gains and losses in context .
The ongoing SMB ( surface mass balance ) estimates ice sheet mass net from melting and sublimation losses and precipitation gains .
Dynamic ice loss is a separate calculation of calving chunks of ice off the edges of the sheet , as discussed in the post above .
The two factors are combined in a paper Forty-six years of Greenland Ice Sheet mass balance from 1972 to 2018 by Mouginot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in italics .
( “ D ” refers to dynamic ice loss . )
Greenland ’ s SMB averaged 422 ± 10 Gt/y in 1961–1989 ( SI Appendix , Fig .
S1H ) .
It decreased from 506 ± 18 Gt/y in the 1970s to 410 ± 17 Gt/y in the 1980s and 1990s , 251 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018 , and a minimum at 145 ± 55 Gt/y in 2012 .
In 2018 , SMB was above equilibrium at 449 ± 55 Gt , but the ice sheet still lost 105 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well above equilibrium and 15 Gt higher than in 2017 .
In 1972–2000 , D averaged 456 ± 1 Gt/y , near balance , to peak at 555 ± 12 Gt/y in 2018 .
In total , the mass loss increased to 286 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018 due to an 18 ± 1 % increase in D and a 48 ± 9 % decrease in SMB .
The ice sheet gained 47 ± 21 Gt/y in 1972–1980 , and lost 50 ± 17 Gt/y in the 1980s , 41 ± 17 Gt/y @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gt/y in the 2000s , and 286 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018 ( Fig .
2 ) .
Since 1972 , the ice sheet lost 4,976 ± 400 Gt , or 13.7 ± 1.1 mm SLR .
Doing the numbers : Greenland area 2.1 10^6 km2 80 % ice cover , 1500 m thick in average- That is 2.5 Million Gton .
Simplified to 1 km3 = 1 Gton The estimated loss since 1972 is 5000 Gt ( rounded off ) , which is 110 Gt a year .
The more recent estimates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ range .
200 Gton is 0.008 % of the Greenland ice sheet mass .
Annual snowfall : From the Lost Squadron , we know at that particular spot , the ice increase since 1942 – 1990 was 1.5 m/year ( Planes were found 75 m below surface ) Assume that yearly precipitation is 100 mm / year over the entire surface .
That is 168000 Gton .
Yes , Greenland is Big !
Inflow = 168,000Gton .
Outflow is 168,200 Gton .
So if that 200 Gton rate continued , ( assuming as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fluctuations ) , that ice loss would result in a 1 % loss of Greenland ice in 800 years .
( H/t Bengt Abelsson ) Once again , history is a better guide than hysteria .
Over time glaciers advance and retreat , and incursions of warm water are a key factor .
Greenland ice cap and glaciers are part of the Arctic self-oscillating climate system operating on a quasi-60 year cycle .

Phys.org sounds the alarm: Greenland ice sheet faces irreversible melting. But as is usual with announcements from that source, discretion and critical intelligence is advised. The back story is a study that takes outputs from climate models projecting incredible warming and feeds them into ice models that assume melting from higher temperatures. Warning: The paper has 93 references to “experiments” and all of them are virtual reality manipulations in the computers they programmed. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.
Professor Jonathan Gregory, Climate Scientist from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science and University of Reading, said: “Our experiments underline the importance of mitigating global temperature rise. To avoid partially irreversible loss of the ice sheet, climate change must be reversed—not just stabilized—before we reach the critical point where the ice sheet has declined too far.”
The paper is Large and irreversible future decline of the Greenland ice sheet. And obviously, it is models all the way down. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.
We run a set of 47 FiG experiments to study the SMB change (ΔSMB), rate of mass loss and eventual steady state of the Greenland ice sheet using the three different choices of FAMOUS–ice snow-albedo parameters, with 20-year climatological monthly mean sea surface BCs taken from the four selected CMIP5 AOGCMs for five climate scenarios (Table 2). These five are the late 20th century (1980–1999, called “historical”), the end of the 21st century under three representative concentration pathway (RCP) scenarios (as in the AR5; van Vuuren et al., 2011) and quadrupled pre-industrial CO2 (abrupt4xCO2, warmer than any RCP). The experiments have steady-state climates. This is unrealistic, but it simplifies the comparison and is reasonable since no-one can tell how climate will change over millennia into the future. Our simulations should be regarded only as indicative rather than as projections. Each experiment begins from the FiG spun-up state for MIROC5 historical climate with the appropriate albedo parameter. Although in most cases there is a substantial instantaneous change in BCs when the experiment begins, the land and atmosphere require only a couple of years to adjust.
Under constant climates that are warmer than the late 20th century, the ice sheet loses mass, its surface elevation decreases, and its surface climate becomes warmer. This gives a positive feedback on mass loss, but it is outweighed by the negative feedbacks due to declining ablation area and increasing cloudiness over the interior as the ice sheet contracts. In the ice sheet area integral, snowfall decreases less than ablation because the precipitation on the margins is enhanced by the topographic gradient and moves inland as the ice sheet retreats. Consequently, after many millennia under a constant warm climate, the ice sheet reaches a reduced steady state. Final GMSLR is less than 1.5 m in most late 21st-century RCP2.6 climates and more than 4 m in all late 21st-century RCP8.5 climates. For warming exceeding 3 K, the ice sheet would be mostly lost, and its contribution to GMSLR would exceed 5 m.
The reliability of our conclusions depends on the realism of our model. There are systematic uncertainties arising from assumptions made in its formulation. The atmosphere GCM has low resolution and comparatively simple parametrization schemes. The ice sheet model does not simulate rapid ice sheet dynamics; this certainly means that it underestimates the rate of ice sheet mass loss in coming decades, but we do not know what effect this has on the eventual steady states, which are our focus. The SMB scheme uses a uniform air temperature lapse rate and omits the phase change in precipitation in the downscaling from GCM to ice sheet model. The snow albedo is a particularly important uncertainty; with our highest choice of albedo, removal of the ice sheet is reversible.
What about observations instead of imaginary projections? Previous post: Greenland Ice Varies, Don’t Panic
The scare du jour is about Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) and how it will melt out and flood us all. It’s declared that GIS has passed its tipping point, and we are doomed. Typical is the Phys.org hysteria: Sea level rise quickens as Greenland ice sheet sheds record amount: “Greenland’s massive ice sheet saw a record net loss of 532 billion tonnes last year, raising red flags about accelerating sea level rise, according to new findings.”
Panic is warranted only if you treat this as proof of an alarmist narrative and ignore the facts and context in which natural variation occurs. For starters, consider the last four years of GIS fluctuations reported by DMI and summarized in the eight graphs above. Note the noisy blue lines showing how the surface mass balance (SMB) changes its daily weight by 8 or 10 gigatonnes (Gt) around the baseline mean from 1981 to 2010. Note also the summer decrease between May and August each year before recovering to match or exceed the mean.
The other four graphs show the accumulation of SMB for each of the last four years including 2020. Tipping Point? Note that in both 2017 and 2018, SMB ended about 500 Gt higher than the year began, and way higher than 2012, which added nothing. Then came 2019 dropping below the mean, but still above 2012. Lastly, this year is matching the 30-year average. Note also that the charts do not integrate from previous years; i.e. each year starts at zero and shows the accumulation only for that year. Thus the gains from 2017 and 2018 do not result in 2019 starting the year up 1000 Gt, but from zero.
The Truth about Sliding Greenland Ice
Researchers know that the small flows of water from surface melting are not the main way GIS loses ice in the summer. Neil Humphrey explains in this article from last year Nate Maier and Neil Humphrey Lead Team Discovering Ice is Sliding Toward Edges Off Greenland Ice Sheet Excerpts in italics with my bolds.
While they may appear solid, all ice sheets—which are essentially giant glaciers—experience movement: ice flows downslope either through the process of deformation or sliding. The latest results suggest that the movement of the ice on the GIS is dominated by sliding, not deformation. This process is moving ice to the marginal zones of the sheet, where melting occurs, at a much faster rate.
“The study was motivated by a major unknown in how the ice of Greenland moves from the cold interior, to the melting regions on the margins,” Neil Humphrey, a professor of geology from the University of Wyoming and author of the study, told Newsweek. “The ice is known to move both by sliding over the bedrock under the ice, and by oozing (deforming) like slowly flowing honey or molasses. What was unknown was the ratio between these two modes of motion—sliding or deforming.
“This lack of understanding makes predicting the future difficult, since we know how to calculate the flowing, but do not know much about sliding,” he said. “Although melt can occur anywhere in Greenland, the only place that significant melt can occur is in the low altitude margins. The center (high altitude) of the ice is too cold for the melt to contribute significant water to the oceans; that only occurs at the margins. Therefore ice has to get from where it snows in the interior to the margins.
“The implications for having high sliding along the margin of the ice sheet means that thinning or thickening along the margins due to changes in ice speed can occur much more rapidly than previously thought,” Maier said. “This is really important; as when the ice sheet thins or thickens it will either increase the rate of melting or alternatively become more resilient in a changing climate.“
“There has been some debate as to whether ice flow along the edges of Greenland should be considered mostly deformation or mostly sliding,” Maier says. “This has to do with uncertainty of trying to calculate deformation motion using surface measurements alone. Our direct measurements of sliding- dominated motion, along with sliding measurements made by other research teams in Greenland, make a pretty compelling argument that no matter where you go along the edges of Greenland, you are likely to have a lot of sliding.”
The sliding ice does two things, Humphrey says. First, it allows the ice to slide into the ocean and make icebergs, which then float away. Two, the ice slides into lower, warmer climate, where it can melt faster.
While it may sound dire, Humphrey notes the entire Greenland Ice Sheet is 5,000 to 10,000 feet thick.
“In a really big melt year, the ice sheet might melt a few feet. It means Greenland is going to be there another 10,000 years,” Humphrey says. “So, it’s not the catastrophe the media is overhyping.”
Humphrey has been working in Greenland for the past 30 years and says the Greenland Ice Sheet has only melted 10 feet during that time span.
Summary
The Greenland ice sheet is more than 1.2 miles thick in most regions. If all of its ice was to melt, global sea levels could be expected to rise by about 25 feet. However, this would take more than 10,000 years at the current rates of melting.
Background from Previous Post: Greenland Glaciers: History vs. Hysteria
The modern pattern of environmental scares started with Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring claiming chemicals are killing birds, only today it is windmills doing the carnage. That was followed by ever expanding doomsday scenarios, from DDT, to SST, to CFC, and now the most glorious of them all, CO2. In all cases the menace was placed in remote areas difficult for objective observers to verify or contradict. From the wilderness bird sanctuaries, the scares are now hiding in the stratosphere and more recently in the Arctic and Antarctic polar deserts. See Progressively Scaring the World (Lewin book synopsis)
The advantage of course is that no one can challenge the claims with facts on the ground, or on the ice. Correction: Scratch “no one”, because the climate faithful are the exception. Highly motivated to go to the ends of the earth, they will look through their alarmist glasses and bring back the news that we are indeed doomed for using fossil fuels.
A recent example is a team of researchers from Dubai (the hot and sandy petro kingdom) going to Greenland to report on the melting of Helheim glacier there. The article is NYUAD team finds reasons behind Greenland’s glacier melt. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.
First the study and findings:
For the first time, warm waters that originate in the tropics have been found at uniform depth, displacing the cold polar water at the Helheim calving front, causing an unusually high melt rate. Typically, ocean waters near the terminus of an outlet glacier like Helheim are at the freezing point and cause little melting.
NYUAD researchers, led by Professor of Mathematics at NYU’s Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Principal Investigator for NYU Abu Dhabi’s Centre for Sea Level Change David Holland, on August 5, deployed a helicopter-borne ocean temperature probe into a pond-like opening, created by warm ocean waters, in the usually thick and frozen melange in front of the glacier terminus.
Normally, warm, salty waters from the tropics travel north with the Gulf Stream, where at Greenland they meet with cold, fresh water coming from the polar region. Because the tropical waters are so salty, they normally sink beneath the polar waters. But Holland and his team discovered that the temperature of the ocean water at the base of the glacier was a uniform 4 degrees Centigrade from top to bottom at depth to 800 metres. The finding was also recently confirmed by Nasa’s OMG (Oceans Melting Greenland) project.
“This is unsustainable from the point of view of glacier mass balance as the warm waters are melting the glacier much faster than they can be replenished,” said Holland.
Surface melt drains through the ice sheet and flows under the glacier and into the ocean. Such fresh waters input at the calving front at depth have enormous buoyancy and want to reach the surface of the ocean at the calving front. In doing so, they draw the deep warm tropical water up to the surface, as well.
All around Greenland, at depth, warm tropical waters can be found at many locations. Their presence over time changes depending on the behaviour of the Gulf Stream. Over the last two decades, the warm tropical waters at depth have been found in abundance. Greenland outlet glaciers like Helheim have been melting rapidly and retreating since the arrival of these warm waters.
Then the Hysteria and Pledge of Alligiance to Global Warming
“We are surprised to learn that increased surface glacier melt due to warming atmosphere can trigger increased ocean melting of the glacier,” added Holland. “Essentially, the warming air and warming ocean water are delivering a troubling ‘one-two punch’ that is rapidly accelerating glacier melt.”
My comment: Hold on.They studied effects from warmer ocean water gaining access underneath that glacier. Oceans have roughly 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere, so the idea that the air is warming the water is far-fetched. And remember also that long wave radiation of the sort that CO2 can emit can not penetrate beyond the first millimeter or so of the water surface. So how did warmer ocean water get attributed to rising CO2? Don’t ask, don’t tell. And the idea that air is melting Arctic glaciers is also unfounded.
Consider the basics of air parcels in the Arctic.
The central region of the Arctic is very dry. Why? Firstly because the water is frozen and releases very little water vapour into the atmosphere. And secondly because (according to the laws of physics) cold air can retain very little moisture.
Greenland has the only veritable polar ice cap in the Arctic, meaning that the climate is even harsher (10°C colder) than at the North Pole, except along the coast and in the southern part of the landmass where the Atlantic has a warming effect. The marked stability of Greenland’s climate is due to a layer of very cold air just above ground level, air that is always heavier than the upper layers of the troposphere. The result of this is a strong, gravity-driven air flow down the slopes (i.e. catabatic winds), generating gusts that can reach 200 kph at ground level.
Arctic air temperatures
Some history and scientific facts are needed to put these claims in context. Let’s start with what is known about Helheim Glacier.
Holocene history of the Helheim Glacier, southeast Greenland
Helheim Glacier ranks among the fastest flowing and most ice discharging outlets of the Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS). After undergoing rapid speed-up in the early 2000s, understanding its long-term mass balance and dynamic has become increasingly important. Here, we present the first record of direct Holocene ice-marginal changes of the Helheim Glacier following the initial deglaciation. By analysing cores from lakes adjacent to the present ice margin, we pinpoint periods of advance and retreat. We target threshold lakes, which receive glacial meltwater only when the margin is at an advanced position, similar to the present. We show that, during the period from 10.5 to 9.6 cal ka BP, the extent of Helheim Glacier was similar to that of todays, after which it remained retracted for most of the Holocene until a re-advance caused it to reach its present extent at c. 0.3 cal ka BP, during the Little Ice Age (LIA). Thus, Helheim Glacier’s present extent is the largest since the last deglaciation, and its Holocene history shows that it is capable of recovering after several millennia of warming and retreat. Furthermore, the absence of advances beyond the present-day position during for example the 9.3 and 8.2 ka cold events as well as the early-Neoglacial suggest a substantial retreat during most of the Holocene.
Quaternary Science Reviews, Holocene history of the Helheim Glacier, southeast Greenland
A.A.Bjørk et. Al. 1 August 2018
The topography of Greenland shows why its ice cap has persisted for millenia despite its southerly location. It is a bowl surrounded by ridges except for a few outlets, Helheim being a major one.
And then, what do we know about the recent history of glacier changes. Two Decades of Changes in Helheim Glacier
Helheim Glacier is the fastest flowing glacier along the eastern edge of Greenland Ice Sheet and one of the island’s largest ocean-terminating rivers of ice. Named after the Vikings’ world of the dead, Helheim has kept scientists on their toes for the past two decades. Between 2000 and 2005, Helheim quickly increased the rate at which it dumped ice to the sea, while also rapidly retreating inland- a behavior also seen in other glaciers around Greenland. Since then, the ice loss has slowed down and the glacier’s front has partially recovered, readvancing by about 2 miles of the more than 4 miles it had initially retreated.
NASA has compiled a time series of airborne observations of Helheim’s changes into a new visualization that illustrates the complexity of studying Earth’s changing ice sheets. NASA uses satellites and airborne sensors to track variations in polar ice year after year to figure out what’s driving these changes and what impact they will have in the future on global concerns like sea level rise.
Since 1997, NASA has collected data over Helheim Glacier almost every year during annual airborne surveys of the Greenland Ice Sheet using an airborne laser altimeter called the Airborne Topographic Mapper (ATM). Since 2009 these surveys have continued as part of Operation IceBridge, NASA’s ongoing airborne survey of polar ice and its longest-running airborne mission. ATM measures the elevation of the glacier along a swath as the plane files along the middle of the glacier. By comparing the changes in the height of the glacier surface from year to year, scientists estimate how much ice the glacier has lost.
The animation begins by showing the NASA P-3 plane collecting elevation data in 1998. The laser instrument maps the glacier’s surface in a circular scanning pattern, firing laser shots that reflect off the ice and are recorded by the laser’s detectors aboard the airplane. The instrument measures the time it takes for the laser pulses to travel down to the ice and back to the aircraft, enabling scientists to measure the height of the ice surface. In the animation, the laser data is combined with three-dimensional images created from IceBridge’s high-resolution camera system. The animation then switches to data collected in 2013, showing how the surface elevation and position of the calving front (the edge of the glacier, from where it sheds ice) have changed over those 15 years.
Helheim’s calving front retreated about 2.5 miles between 1998 and 2013. It also thinned by around 330 feet during that period, one of the fastest thinning rates in Greenland.
“The calving front of the glacier most likely was perched on a ledge in the bedrock in 1998 and then something altered its equilibrium,” said Joe MacGregor, IceBridge deputy project scientist. “One of the most likely culprits is a change in ocean circulation or temperature, such that slightly warmer water entered into the fjord, melted a bit more ice and disturbed the glacier’s delicate balance of forces.”
Update September 1, 2020 Greenland Ice Math
Prompted by comments from Gordon Walleville, let’s look at Greenland ice gains and losses in context. The ongoing SMB (surface mass balance) estimates ice sheet mass net from melting and sublimation losses and precipitation gains. Dynamic ice loss is a separate calculation of calving chunks of ice off the edges of the sheet, as discussed in the post above. The two factors are combined in a paper Forty-six years of Greenland Ice Sheet mass balance from 1972 to 2018 by Mouginot et al. (2019) Excerpt in italics. (“D” refers to dynamic ice loss.)
Greenland’s SMB averaged 422 ± 10 Gt/y in 1961–1989 (SI Appendix, Fig. S1H). It decreased from 506 ± 18 Gt/y in the 1970s to 410 ± 17 Gt/y in the 1980s and 1990s, 251 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018, and a minimum at 145 ± 55 Gt/y in 2012. In 2018, SMB was above equilibrium at 449 ± 55 Gt, but the ice sheet still lost 105 ± 55 Gt, because D is well above equilibrium and 15 Gt higher than in 2017. In 1972–2000, D averaged 456 ± 1 Gt/y, near balance, to peak at 555 ± 12 Gt/y in 2018. In total, the mass loss increased to 286 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018 due to an 18 ± 1% increase in D and a 48 ± 9% decrease in SMB. The ice sheet gained 47 ± 21 Gt/y in 1972–1980, and lost 50 ± 17 Gt/y in the 1980s, 41 ± 17 Gt/y in the 1990s, 187 ± 17 Gt/y in the 2000s, and 286 ± 20 Gt/y in 2010–2018 (Fig. 2). Since 1972, the ice sheet lost 4,976 ± 400 Gt, or 13.7 ± 1.1 mm SLR.
Doing the numbers: Greenland area 2.1 10^6 km2 80% ice cover, 1500 m thick in average- That is 2.5 Million Gton. Simplified to 1 km3 = 1 Gton
The estimated loss since 1972 is 5000 Gt (rounded off), which is 110 Gt a year. The more recent estimates are higher, in the 200 Gt range.
200 Gton is 0.008 % of the Greenland ice sheet mass.
Annual snowfall: From the Lost Squadron, we know at that particular spot, the ice increase since 1942 – 1990 was 1.5 m/year ( Planes were found 75 m below surface)
Assume that yearly precipitation is 100 mm / year over the entire surface.
That is 168000 Gton. Yes, Greenland is Big!
Inflow = 168,000Gton. Outflow is 168,200 Gton.
So if that 200 Gton rate continued, (assuming as models do, despite air photos showing fluctuations), that ice loss would result in a 1% loss of Greenland ice in 800 years. (H/t Bengt Abelsson)
Comment:
Once again, history is a better guide than hysteria. Over time glaciers advance and retreat, and incursions of warm water are a key factor. Greenland ice cap and glaciers are part of the Arctic self-oscillating climate system operating on a quasi-60 year cycle.
via Science Matters
https://ift.tt/33AtcFC
December 2, 2020 at 06:27PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Covid & the U.S. Stock Markets – Update

Covid & the U.S. Stock Markets – Update

In March of this year , 2020 , U.S. markets took a tremendous hit as confidence in the ecomomy was badly shaken by predictions of millions of U.S. deaths .
So , while it is true that stock markets took an initial heavy hit – all things in the stock markets are relative .
Of course , there has been an “ economic downturn ” – the economy has been literally turned down by edict from national and state governments – millions have been put out of work as their employers have been ordered to stop doing business by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economies in the [ misguided ] belief that doing so will “ save lives ” .
But the predictions that the Worldwide Covid Lockdown would crash U.S. stock markets simply turned out not to be true .
Here is the data , from Yahoo Finance , as of the close of trading in New York on 1 December 2020 .
[ You can see the full sized , near-real-time originals from this page clicking on the three indexes at the top bring up individual pages with graphs .
You can select “ Max @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the versions of the images used below – kh ] As we can see in each chart that there was a shock response to ordered lockdowns visible in each of the four indexes – but these sharp drops only took markets back down to the levels seem in late 2017 or early 2018 – two years of unconstrained gains were temporarily lost .
This most obvious on the chart of the Dow Jones .
As of close of markets today ( 1600 hrs EST ) all four major U.S. stock indexes are at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no stockmarket crash in response to the pandemic – on the contrary , the four major U.S. markets are at their highest levels ever seen .
How can this be given that we know that the U.S. economy has taken a serious hit with lockdowns and business restrictions literally destroying some industries , such as the hospitality and travel sectors , and particluarly small and very small – Mom and Pop — businesses ?
The simpliest explanation is that old saw : “ The Markets are not the Economy.
” And that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflect the confidence that investors have in the future – and despite the pandemic and the disastrous misguided governmental responses to it , investor confidence is extremely high and their optimism is driving market indexes to new heights .
What does this mean for you and me ?
If you have a pension fund or personal well-diversified investments , you are doing very well as your pension fund prospers and your personal investments increase in value .
Not all stocks are winners under present circumstances .
This chart is Carnival Cruise Lines – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well , despite the gains of the general markets .
Cruiseship lines have been slammed by the negative news surrounding the Diamond Princess debacle ( and other Covid stricken cruiseliners ) and have not recovered as yet .
Saavy investors spread their investments over a wide variety of industries and individual companies – following the mantra : “ Diversify , Diversify , Diverify ” .
Thus their results mirror the major stock indexes .
And they have been winning , and winning , and winning .
Do not listen to the Doomsayers !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is bright and everything will work out .
Tell your kids .
.
.
they are prone to listening to the wrong voices , the negative twittering mob .
Assure them that it will all work out in the end .
Honest .
Many of us “ older citizens ” have our life savings invested in various ways – some have pension funds , some have personal nest eggs – that depend on the health of the stock and bond markets .
And we derive most of our annual income from these sources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advice – the basics of which have not changed in my lifetime — be it on our own or via our financal professionals – we have thankfully weathered the storm rather handily , despite ill-advised actions by our governments in response to the Covid pandemic .

Guest News Brief by Kip Hansen — 1 December 2020
In March of this year, 2020, U.S. markets took a tremendous hit as confidence in the ecomomy was badly shaken by predictions of millions of U.S. deaths.
So, while it is true that stock markets took an initial heavy hit – all things in the stock markets are relative. Of course, there has been an “economic downturn” – the economy has been literally turned down by edict from national and state governments – millions have been put out of work as their employers have been ordered to stop doing business by the multitude of nations that have sacrificed their economies in the [misguided] belief that doing so will “save lives”.
But the predictions that the Worldwide Covid Lockdown would crash U.S. stock markets simply turned out not to be true.
Here is the data, from Yahoo Finance, as of the close of trading in New York on 1 December 2020.
[You can see the full sized, near-real-time originals from this page clicking on the three indexes at the top bring up individual pages with graphs. You can select “Max” for the time period to see the versions of the images used below – kh ]
As we can see in each chart that there was a shock response to ordered lockdowns visible in each of the four indexes – but these sharp drops only took markets back down to the levels seem in late 2017 or early 2018 – two years of unconstrained gains were temporarily lost. This most obvious on the chart of the Dow Jones.
As of close of markets today (1600 hrs EST) all four major U.S. stock indexes are at All Time Highs.
There has been no stockmarket crash in response to the pandemic – on the contrary, the four major U.S. markets are at their highest levels ever seen.
How can this be given that we know that the U.S. economy has taken a serious hit with lockdowns and business restrictions literally destroying some industries, such as the hospitality and travel sectors, and particluarly small and very small – Mom and Pop — businesses?
The simpliest explanation is that old saw: “The Markets are not the Economy.” And that is so true. But the markets do reflect the confidence that investors have in the future – and despite the pandemic and the disastrous misguided governmental responses to it, investor confidence is extremely high and their optimism is driving market indexes to new heights.
What does this mean for you and me? If you have a pension fund or personal well-diversified investments, you are doing very well as your pension fund prospers and your personal investments increase in value.
Not all stocks are winners under present circumstances. This chart is Carnival Cruise Lines – your investment in CCL has not done well, despite the gains of the general markets. Cruiseship lines have been slammed by the negative news surrounding the Diamond Princess debacle (and other Covid stricken cruiseliners) and have not recovered as yet.
Saavy investors spread their investments over a wide variety of industries and individual companies – following the mantra: “Diversify, Diversify, Diverify”. Thus their results mirror the major stock indexes. And they have been winning, and winning, and winning.
Do not listen to the Doomsayers! Despite our current troubles, the future is bright and everything will work out.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
Tell your kids . . . they are prone to listening to the wrong voices, the negative twittering mob. Assure them that it will all work out in the end. Honest.
Many of us “older citizens” have our life savings invested in various ways – some have pension funds, some have personal nest eggs – that depend on the health of the stock and bond markets. And we derive most of our annual income from these sources. If we have followed good investing advice – the basics of which have not changed in my lifetime — be it on our own or via our financal professionals – we have thankfully weathered the storm rather handily, despite ill-advised actions by our governments in response to the Covid pandemic.
# # # # #
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Porsche and Siemens plan to build the world’s first industrial-scale e-fuel plant

Basically they will extract CO2 from the air and mix it with manufactured hydrogen .
Whether the economics stack up remains to be seen .
If not , it could end up as another pseudo-green attempt to curry favour with global climate miserablists .
Or as an expensive way to keep a few old cars on the road .
– – – Porsche and Siemens Energy have announced plans to link arms for a new e-fuel factory , says CNET Road Show .
The German companies say the pilot project will result in the world ’ s first industrial-scale plant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be located in Southern Chile in a bid to capitalize on the country ’ s strong wind energy , which will be used to power the plant sustainably .
The plan calls for an initial pilot production phase to produce around 130,000 liters of fuel — over 34,000 gallons — as early as 2022 .
Additional phases call for a dramatic ramp to 55 million liters by 2024 ( over 14.5 million gallons ) by 2024 and 550 million liters ( 145 million gallons ) by 2026 .
Wind energy will power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and oxygen .
CO2 will then be filtered out of the air and processed with the aforementioned hydrogen to create synthetic methanol .
A proprietary methanol-to-gasoline process provided under license by Exxon Mobil results in e-gas .
Porsche says the liquid fuel will be safe without modification for all of its cars , including classic models .
Porsche , which is initially investing around 20 million euros ( roughly $ 24 million , £18 million or AU $ 33 million ) in the project , sees the creation of carbon-neutral gasoline as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drive toward electrification , not as competition with it .

Basically they will extract CO2 from the air and mix it with manufactured hydrogen. Whether the economics stack up remains to be seen. If not, it could end up as another pseudo-green attempt to curry favour with global climate miserablists. Or as an expensive way to keep a few old cars on the road.
– – –
Porsche and Siemens Energy have announced plans to link arms for a new e-fuel factory, says CNET Road Show.
The German companies say the pilot project will result in the world’s first industrial-scale plant for carbon-neutral synthetic fuel.
The facility will be located in Southern Chile in a bid to capitalize on the country’s strong wind energy, which will be used to power the plant sustainably.
The plan calls for an initial pilot production phase to produce around 130,000 liters of fuel — over 34,000 gallons — as early as 2022. Additional phases call for a dramatic ramp to 55 million liters by 2024 (over 14.5 million gallons) by 2024 and 550 million liters (145 million gallons) by 2026.
Wind energy will power the electrolyzers to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. CO2 will then be filtered out of the air and processed with the aforementioned hydrogen to create synthetic methanol. A proprietary methanol-to-gasoline process provided under license by Exxon Mobil results in e-gas.
Porsche says the liquid fuel will be safe without modification for all of its cars, including classic models.
Porsche, which is initially investing around 20 million euros (roughly $24 million, £18 million or AU$33 million) in the project, sees the creation of carbon-neutral gasoline as a complement to the auto industry’s drive toward electrification, not as competition with it.
Full article here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/36BSRzH
December 2, 2020 at 01:54PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Prince Harry Weighs In On COVID-19

Prince Harry Weighs In On COVID-19

In 1988 , his grandfather Prince Philip said : “ In the event that I am reincarnated , I would @ @ @ @ @ deadly virus , to contribute something to solving overpopulation .
”

In 1988, his grandfather Prince Philip said :
“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation.”


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--New Zealand PM has just given permission for climate zealots to break laws: “it’s an emergency”!

Jacida Ardern declared that New Zealand faces a climate emergency .
She may think it ’ s just symbolic but there are prices , aside from making the word “ emergency ” just that much more useless .
Ardern has stepped into a psychology trap like a public Chastity Vow .
She and everyone who voted for it will be measured against this in everything they do .
She ’ s been captured just that bit tighter .
What ?
!
say the eternally indignant , How can you fund a new Port / Frigate / Hospital / insert idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency , right here , right now and for the next billion years !
This will be used against her and the party and she will have less room to maneuver .
But the real price is what irresponsible people might do next Declaring a fake emergency also provides the perfect excuse for activists to break the law then say “ I ’ m just saving the Earth , your honor !
” Perpetrators of civil disobedience have been using this in the US and UK to stay out of jail for things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a form of industrial sabotage that risks explosions .
Alleged law breakers don ’ t have to prove there is [ … ]

Jacida Ardern declared that New Zealand faces a climate emergency. She may think it’s just symbolic but there are prices, aside from making the word “emergency” just that much more useless. Ardern has stepped into a psychology trap like a public Chastity Vow. She and everyone who voted for it will be measured against this in everything they do. She’s been captured just that bit tighter. What?! say the eternally indignant, How can you fund a new Port / Frigate / Hospital / insert idea here – when we face a climate emergency, right here, right now and for the next billion years! This will be used against her and the party and she will have less room to maneuver.
But the real price is what irresponsible people might do next
Declaring a fake emergency also provides the perfect excuse for activists to break the law then say “I’m just saving the Earth, your honor!” Perpetrators of civil disobedience have been using this in the US and UK to stay out of jail for things like shutting high pressure gas pipelines — a form of industrial sabotage that risks explosions. Alleged law breakers don’t have to prove there is […]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/37wR6me
December 2, 2020 at 12:52PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--We’re Saved! New Zealand just Declared a Climate Emergency

While nobody expects the elimination of New Zealand ’ s carbon footprint to have a significant direct impact on global @ @ @ @ @ the world will surely be inspired by New Zealand ’ s moral example .
Jacinda @ @ @ @ @ one of the greatest challenges of our time ’ and pledges carbon-neutral government by 2025 @ @ @ @ @ climate change emergency and committed to a carbon-neutral government by 2025 , in what the @ @ @ @ @ “ one of the greatest challenges of our time ” .
Speaking in parliament after @ @ @ @ @ the country must “ act with urgency ” .Climate emergency : New Zealand must match @ @ @ @ @ This declaration is an acknowledgement of the next generation .
An acknowledgement of the burden @ @ @ @ @ we do not get this right and do not take action now , ” she @ @ @ @ @ up to us to make sure we demonstrate a plan for action , and a @ @ @ @ @

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
While nobody expects the elimination of New Zealand’s carbon footprint to have a significant direct impact on global warming, the rest of the world will surely be inspired by New Zealand’s moral example.
New Zealand declares a climate change emergency
Phil Taylor in Auckland
Wed 2 Dec 2020 13.42 AEDT
Jacinda Ardern calls climate change ‘one of the greatest challenges of our time’ and pledges carbon-neutral government by 2025
New Zealand has declared a climate change emergency and committed to a carbon-neutral government by 2025, in what the prime minister Jacinda Ardern called “one of the greatest challenges of our time”.
…
Speaking in parliament after its introduction, Ardern said the country must “act with urgency”.Climate emergency: New Zealand must match words and actionsRead more
“This declaration is an acknowledgement of the next generation. An acknowledgement of the burden that they will carry if we do not get this right and do not take action now,” she said.
“It is up to us to make sure we demonstrate a plan for action, and a reason for hope.”
…


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Panic and hysteria completely unfounded

Panic and hysteria completely unfounded

Study reveals statistics showing COVID-19 has no measurable effect on deaths in the U.S. Says “ The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.
” _________ I find this highly interesting .
John Hopkins and the CDC published a study and then deleted it rather quickly .
The study revealed statistics showing COVID-19 has no measurable effect on deaths in the U.S .
This study was authored by Genevieve Briand who is the Assistant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s program at John Hopkins .
In her paper she notes that the death rate in the US this year shows almost no change compared to previous years despite the presence of COVID-19 , meaning , things are essentially the same !
She also notes that the reason older people have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths is because older people die in higher numbers than younger people .
Briand compiled and analyzed death rates among all age groups before and after the pandemic and she found that the death rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in previous years prior to 2020 .
She also found that the death rate from COVID-19 among younger people has not increased and , in fact , in every age category the death rate has remained the same before the dawn of the pandemic .
What this suggests is that all of the panic and hysteria is completely unfounded .
Briand also pointed out that what has changed in this year of 2020 is that ALL OTHER CAUSES OF DEATH have “ mysteriously declined ” as COVID-19 deaths have increased !
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t it ?
She concluded that what the statistics show is that ALL causes of death are now being categorized EXCLUSIVELY as deaths due to the virus and , meanwhile , very few people seem to being dying anymore from such things as heart disease , cancer , pneumonia , etc .
Again….ASTOUNDING !
Briand included several graphics in her study and they illustrate CLEARLY that the total decrease in deaths from other causes almost EXACTLY corresponds to the increased number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 .
ASTOUNDING !
!
In other words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to death by COVID-19 while virtually all other causes of death including the flu have MAGICALLY disappeared .
And we all know that is a load of absolute CRAP , right ?
People are dying from the same old diseases they ’ ve been dying from for eons long , long before the coronavirus arose .
The John Hopkins News Letter published by students of Hopkins since 1896 dated 2 December 2020 had also published Briand ’ s study but has since been removed ( see link below ) .
The study was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place is a note from the editor regarding Briand ’ s paper entitled “ COVID-19 : A Look at U.S. Data.
” The editor states the reason for the removal was that Briand ’ s data “ has been used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic.
” In other words Briand didn ’ t follow the approved political narrative .
HOW DARE SHE !
!
Check out the below links regarding Briand ’ s study and what the STATS really show .
It is very eye-opening to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19-related deaths climb , a sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes https : //notthebee.com/article/a-few-days-ago-johns-hopkins-published-a-study-saying-corona-is-nbd-they-then-deleted-it-read-it-here-in-its-entirety A closer look at U.S. deaths due to COVID-19 https : //www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19 “ The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.
” https : //web.archive.org/web/20201126223119/https : //www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19 The post Panic and hysteria completely unfounded appeared first on Ice Age Now .

Study reveals statistics showing COVID-19 has no measurable effect on deaths in the U.S. Says “The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.”
_________
Panic and hysteria completely unfounded
Benito Lorez
I find this highly interesting. John Hopkins and the CDC published a study and then deleted it rather quickly. The study revealed statistics showing COVID-19 has no measurable effect on deaths in the U.S.
This study was authored by Genevieve Briand who is the Assistant Program Director of the Applied Economics master’s program at John Hopkins. In her paper she notes that the death rate in the US this year shows almost no change compared to previous years despite the presence of COVID-19, meaning, things are essentially the same! She also notes that the reason older people have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths is because older people die in higher numbers than younger people.
Briand compiled and analyzed death rates among all age groups before and after the pandemic and she found that the death rate among older people remained the same as in previous years prior to 2020. She also found that the death rate from COVID-19 among younger people has not increased and, in fact, in every age category the death rate has remained the same before the dawn of the pandemic. What this suggests is that all of the panic and hysteria is completely unfounded.
Briand also pointed out that what has changed in this year of 2020 is that ALL OTHER CAUSES OF DEATH have “mysteriously declined” as COVID-19 deaths have increased! That’s nothing short of ASTOUNDING isn’t it? She concluded that what the statistics show is that ALL causes of death are now being categorized EXCLUSIVELY as deaths due to the virus and, meanwhile, very few people seem to being dying anymore from such things as heart disease, cancer, pneumonia, etc. Again….ASTOUNDING!
Briand included several graphics in her study and they illustrate CLEARLY that the total decrease in deaths from other causes almost EXACTLY corresponds to the increased number of deaths attributed to COVID-19. ASTOUNDING!! In other words, anything and everything is being attributed to death by COVID-19 while virtually all other causes of death including the flu have MAGICALLY disappeared. And we all know that is a load of absolute CRAP, right? People are dying from the same old diseases they’ve been dying from for eons long, long before the coronavirus arose.
The John Hopkins News Letter published by students of Hopkins since 1896 dated 2 December 2020 had also published Briand’s study but has since been removed (see link below). The study was published on November 22 and in its place is a note from the editor regarding Briand’s paper entitled “COVID-19: A Look at U.S. Data.” The editor states the reason for the removal was that Briand’s data “has been used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic.” In other words Briand didn’t follow the approved political narrative. HOW DARE SHE!!
Check out the below links regarding Briand’s study and what the STATS really show. It is very eye-opening to say the least.
Here’s a copy of the now-deleted Johns Hopkins Newsletter
https://pandemic.news/2020-12-01-johns-hopkins-published-deleted-covid19-study.html
As (supposed) COVID-19-related deaths climb, a sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes
https://notthebee.com/article/a-few-days-ago-johns-hopkins-published-a-study-saying-corona-is-nbd-they-then-deleted-it-read-it-here-in-its-entirety
A closer look at U.S. deaths due to COVID-19
https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19
“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20201126223119/https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19
The post Panic and hysteria completely unfounded appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/2JB7Lx0
December 2, 2020 at 11:53AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Democrats faked birthdays in Pennsylvania and are caught by statistics

Counties with suspicious birthdays also had When people picked fake dates for fake voters they didn ’ t spread them in a normal pattern through the year .
Instead of having more birthdays in the summer months ( which is normal in the US ) there were more births than expected in December and January .
There were also more birthdays on the nice round numbered days like the 10th , 20th and 30th days of the month .
In a layered and detailed study Carl Bell uncovers how wildly unlikely these birthdays are .
Not only are the days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then there is the red hot flag that the counties with the oddest birthday patterns are usually Biden supporters .
And furthermore , they are counties that differed the most from their past voting behaviour and also counties with higher votes for third parties too ( like the libertarians ) .
It ’ s almost like fake voters wanted Joe Biden to win , but not win by too much , so they had to add in some votes for “ others ” as well .
The “ birthday ” tool could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspicious counties in the first place , it was so detailed it could give an estimate of what votes [ … ]

Counties with suspicious birthdays also had
When people picked fake dates for fake voters they didn’t spread them in a normal pattern through the year. Instead of having more birthdays in the summer months (which is normal in the US) there were more births than expected in December and January. There were also more birthdays on the nice round numbered days like the 10th, 20th and 30th days of the month.
In a layered and detailed study Carl Bell uncovers how wildly unlikely these birthdays are. Not only are the days suspicious, the months are too, and then there is the red hot flag that the counties with the oddest birthday patterns are usually Biden supporters. And furthermore, they are counties that differed the most from their past voting behaviour and also counties with higher votes for third parties too (like the libertarians). It’s almost like fake voters wanted Joe Biden to win, but not win by too much, so they had to add in some votes for “others” as well.
The “birthday” tool could not only to be used to spot suspicious counties in the first place, it was so detailed it could give an estimate of what votes […]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/3mCwgIE
December 2, 2020 at 11:26AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-02--Experts finally admit they were wrong from the beginning – Video

But they kept lying about it .
Turns out that “ Covid-19 is generally a mild disease in children , including infants.
” Tucker Carlson calls out Dr. Fauci and other officials for misleading the public on school closures .
“ The experts were wrong , ” says Tucker .
“ They had no idea what they were doing.
” But the real headline is that “ they knew it when they did it .
But they kept lying about it.
” Parents have forced Bill de Blasio to admit this virus is not a threat to children .
Watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that schools should be kept open because , as he puts it , “ The spread among children and from children is not really very big at all.
” Tucker brings up studies published in reputable medical journals in in April and June that showed that “ Covid-19 is generally a mild disease in children , including infants.
” Check the death rates .
So far in New Jersey , one of the states hit hardest by the virus , says Tucker , “ not a single school-age child has died from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Many children have died in car accidents , fires , drug ODs , and suicide .
NONE from Covid-19.
” Nationwide , according to the latest numbers from the CDC , 123 Americans under the age of 18 have died of the coronavirus .
Schools have supposedly been closed to save the teachers .
But for teachers under the age of 50 , the vast majority of them , the odds of surviving Covid-19 are roughly 99.98 percent .
What was this really all about ?
Hurting Donald Trump .
The post Experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beginning – Video appeared first on Ice Age Now .

But they kept lying about it.
Turns out that “Covid-19 is generally a mild disease in children, including infants.”
Tucker Carlson calls out Dr. Fauci and other officials for misleading the public on school closures.
“The experts were wrong,” says Tucker. “They had no idea what they were doing.”
But the real headline is that “they knew it when they did it. But they kept lying about it.”
Parents have forced Bill de Blasio to admit this virus is not a threat to children.
Watch Corona Czar Anthony Fauci as he admits that schools should be kept open because, as he puts it, “The spread among children and from children is not really very big at all.”
Tucker brings up studies published in reputable medical journals in in April and June that showed that “Covid-19 is generally a mild disease in children, including infants.”
Check the death rates. So far in New Jersey, one of the states hit hardest by the virus, says Tucker, “not a single school-age child has died from the corona virus. Not one.”
“Many children have died in car accidents, fires, drug ODs, and suicide. NONE from Covid-19.”
That’s in New Jersey.
Nationwide, according to the latest numbers from the CDC, 123 Americans under the age of 18 have died of the coronavirus.
Schools have supposedly been closed to save the teachers.
But for teachers under the age of 50, the vast majority of them, the odds of surviving Covid-19 are roughly 99.98 percent.
What was this really all about? Hurting Donald Trump.
The post Experts finally admit they were wrong from the beginning – Video appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/2JmHBOO
December 2, 2020 at 11:03AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-03--Study reveals IPCC’s worst-case climate scenarios are already off-track

This new research adds to a growing literature that argues that economic growth and energy use are currently over-projected for this century .
Under the worst-case scenarios laid out in the United Nations ’ climate change projections , global temperatures could increase as much as 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit ( more than 4 degrees Celsius ) by 2100 , leading to as much as 3 feet ( 0.98 meters ) in global sea level rise and an array of disastrous consequences for people and planet .
But new research from CU Boulder finds that these high-emissions scenarios , used as baseline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) global assessments , have not accurately reflected the slowing rate of growth in the global economy and we are unlikely to catch up to them anytime soon .
The new study , published today in Environmental Research Letters , is the most rigorous evaluation of how projected climate scenarios established by the IPCC have evolved since they were established in 2005 .
The good news : Emissions are not growing nearly as fast as IPCC assessments have indicated , according to the study ’ s authors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not using the most accurate and up-to-date climate scenarios in its planning and policy recommendations .
“ If we ’ re making policy based on anticipating future possibilities , then we should be using the most realistic scenarios possible , ” said Matt Burgess , lead author on the study and a fellow at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences ( CIRES ) at CU Boulder .
“ We ’ ll have better policies as a result.
” The IPCC was established in 1988 and provides policymakers around the globe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and projected impacts of climate change .
Its reports , the sixth of which is due out in 2022 , play an instrumental role in shaping global climate policy .
To see if IPCC scenarios are on track , the researchers compared projections from the latest report , published in 2014 , and data used to prepare the upcoming report , to data gathered from 2005 to 2017 on country-level gross domestic product ( GDP ) , fossil-fuel carbon dioxide emissions , likely energy use and population trends during this century .
Burgess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic , due to slower-than-projected per-capita GDP growth , as well a declining global use of coal , these high-emissions scenarios were already well off-track in 2020 , and look likely to continue to diverge from reality over the coming decades and beyond .
The COVID-19 pandemic ’ s dampening effect on the global economy only accentuates their findings , they said .
As a result , they contend that these high-emissions scenarios should not be used as the baseline scenarios in global climate assessments , which aim to represent where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy .
When it comes to climate change scenarios , some scientists and climate experts fear that economic growth will be higher than the projected scenarios , and we ’ ll be taken by surprise by climate changes .
But that is unlikely to happen , according to Burgess , assistant professor in environmental studies and faculty affiliate in economics .
This new research adds to a growing literature that argues that economic growth and energy use are currently over-projected for this century .
The research also points out that the high-emissions scenarios @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fully account for economic damages from climate change .
The researchers recommend that these policy-relevant scenarios should be frequently recalibrated to reflect economic crashes , technological discoveries , or other real-time changes in society and Earth ’ s climate .
Anticipating the future is difficult and updates are to be expected , according to Roger Pielke Jr. , co-author on the paper and professor of environmental studies .
Their study does not mean that people can let their guard down when it comes to addressing climate change , the authors stress .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get to net zero emissions as a society is to dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions from our energy sources .
“ We ’ re still affecting the climate and the challenge of reducing emissions is as hard as ever , ” said Pielke Jr. “ Just because it ’ s not the worst-case scenario doesn ’ t mean that the problem goes away.
” The full study is available online at Environmental Research Letters .
The post Study reveals IPCC ’ s worst-case climate scenarios are already off-track appeared first on The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

This new research adds to a growing literature that argues that economic growth and energy use are currently over-projected for this century.
Under the worst-case scenarios laid out in the United Nations’ climate change projections, global temperatures could increase as much as 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit (more than 4 degrees Celsius) by 2100, leading to as much as 3 feet (0.98 meters) in global sea level rise and an array of disastrous consequences for people and planet. But new research from CU Boulder finds that these high-emissions scenarios, used as baseline projections in the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) global assessments, have not accurately reflected the slowing rate of growth in the global economy and we are unlikely to catch up to them anytime soon.
The new study, published today in Environmental Research Letters, is the most rigorous evaluation of how projected climate scenarios established by the IPCC have evolved since they were established in 2005.
The good news: Emissions are not growing nearly as fast as IPCC assessments have indicated, according to the study’s authors. The bad news: The IPCC is not using the most accurate and up-to-date climate scenarios in its planning and policy recommendations.
“If we’re making policy based on anticipating future possibilities, then we should be using the most realistic scenarios possible,” said Matt Burgess, lead author on the study and a fellow at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at CU Boulder. “We’ll have better policies as a result.”
The IPCC was established in 1988 and provides policymakers around the globe with regular research-based assessments on the current and projected impacts of climate change. Its reports, the sixth of which is due out in 2022, play an instrumental role in shaping global climate policy.
To see if IPCC scenarios are on track, the researchers compared projections from the latest report, published in 2014, and data used to prepare the upcoming report, to data gathered from 2005 to 2017 on country-level gross domestic product (GDP), fossil-fuel carbon dioxide emissions, likely energy use and population trends during this century. Burgess and his co-authors show that even before the pandemic, due to slower-than-projected per-capita GDP growth, as well a declining global use of coal, these high-emissions scenarios were already well off-track in 2020, and look likely to continue to diverge from reality over the coming decades and beyond. The COVID-19 pandemic’s dampening effect on the global economy only accentuates their findings, they said.
As a result, they contend that these high-emissions scenarios should not be used as the baseline scenarios in global climate assessments, which aim to represent where the world is headed without additional climate mitigation policy.
When it comes to climate change scenarios, some scientists and climate experts fear that economic growth will be higher than the projected scenarios, and we’ll be taken by surprise by climate changes. But that is unlikely to happen, according to Burgess, assistant professor in environmental studies and faculty affiliate in economics.
This new research adds to a growing literature that argues that economic growth and energy use are currently over-projected for this century. The research also points out that the high-emissions scenarios used by the IPCC don’t fully account for economic damages from climate change.
The researchers recommend that these policy-relevant scenarios should be frequently recalibrated to reflect economic crashes, technological discoveries, or other real-time changes in society and Earth’s climate. Anticipating the future is difficult and updates are to be expected, according to Roger Pielke Jr., co-author on the paper and professor of environmental studies.
Their study does not mean that people can let their guard down when it comes to addressing climate change, the authors stress. No matter the scenario, the only way to get to net zero emissions as a society is to dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions from our energy sources.
“We’re still affecting the climate and the challenge of reducing emissions is as hard as ever,” said Pielke Jr. “Just because it’s not the worst-case scenario doesn’t mean that the problem goes away.”
The full study is available online at Environmental Research Letters.
The post Study reveals IPCC’s worst-case climate scenarios are already off-track appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3g2Ywle
December 3, 2020 at 05:32AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-03--Strange Antarctic Weather Extends to the Edge of Space

Dec. 2 , 2020 : Consider it the tip of the iceberg .
Noctilucent clouds ( NLCs ) over the @ @ @ @ @ “ Normally we see the first NLCs of the southern season around Nov. 21st , @ @ @ @ @ the University of Colorado ’ s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics ( LASP ) @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s already December and we ’ re still waiting.
” Missing NLCs @ @ @ @ @ curious weather patterns currently underway at the southern end of our planet .
Making a @ @ @ @ @ Earth ’ s southern ozone hole is not only open , but also the biggest @ @ @ @ @ in December .
( 2 ) The air above Antarctica is currently at record cold @ @ @ @ @ year–the result of an icy polar vortex that refuses to break…

Spaceweather.com
Dec. 2, 2020: Consider it the tip of the iceberg. Noctilucent clouds (NLCs) over the south pole are AWOL.
“Normally we see the first NLCs of the southern season around Nov. 21st,” says Cora Randall of the University of Colorado’s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP). “But this year, it’s already December and we’re still waiting.”
Above: What a different one year makes. NASA’s AIM spacecraft took these pictures of NLCs over Antarctica on Nov. 29, 2019 (left) and Nov. 29, 2020 (right)
Missing NLCs is just one of the curious weather patterns currently underway at the southern end of our planet.
Making a list: (1) Earth’s southern ozone hole is not only open, but also the biggest it’s ever been in December. (2) The air above Antarctica is currently at record cold levels for this time of year–the result of an icy polar vortex that refuses to break…


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-03--Top Ten US States: Renewable Electricity Generation

NOVEMBER 23 , 2020 New York generated the fourth most electricity from renewable sources of any state in 2019 In 2019 , more electricity was generated from renewable sources in New York than in all but three states , according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration ’ s ( EIA ) Electric Power Monthly .
New York ’ s 39.4 million megawatthours ( MWh ) of renewable electricity generation was more than any other state east of the Mississippi River and accounted for 30 % of the state ’ s total electricity generation in 2019 .
Hydroelectricity is the primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nearly 31 million MWh of hydroelectric power was generated in New York in 2019 , which accounted for 78 % of the state ’ s renewable electricity generation and 23 % of the state ’ s total electricity generation .
The Robert Moses Niagara hydroelectricity plant , located downstream from Niagara Falls , has a capacity of 2.4 gigawatts and is the second-largest conventional hydroelectric power plant in the country in terms of electric generating capacity , behind only Washington ’ s Grand Coulee dam .
Wind has been the second-largest source @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with 4.5 million MWh generated in 2019 .
Wind generation in New York during 2019 accounted for 11 % of the state ’ s renewable generation and 3 % of the state ’ s total electricity generation .
At the end of 2019 , New York had 1,132 wind turbines at 27 power plants , according to EIA ’ s Annual Electric Generator Inventory .
Solar energy generated nearly 2.4 million MWh of electricity in New York during 2019 .
Small-scale solar installations , such as those found on residential and commercial rooftops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ’ s solar electricity generation .
Biomass , at 1.9 million MWh , accounted for the remainder of New York ’ s renewable electricity generation in 2019 .
In 2019 , New York generated 29 % of its electricity from “ renewable ” sources , the vast majority coming from hydroelectric… The article goes on to note the following : In the United States , the sources of electricity generation have been shifting from coal to natural gas and renewables since the mid-2000s .
Changes in New York ’ s electricity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Coal ’ s share of New York ’ s electricity generation fell from 14 % in 2005 to less than 1 % in 2019 , and natural gas-fired electricity grew from 22 % to 36 % .
Electricity generation from renewable energy technologies collectively grew from 19 % to 29 % in the same period .
New York adopted a renewable portfolio standard in 2004 and the Clean Energy Standard ( CES ) in 2015 .
The CES currently requires New York to generate 100 % carbon-free electricity by 2040 and attain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The increase in so-called “ renewables ” generation is really funny .
Biomass and hydroelectric barely changed ; while wind and solar grew from nonexistent to trivial .
It appears that about half of the growth in so-called “ renewables ” from 19 % to 29 % was due to New Yorkers using less electricity , with a precipitous decline since 2015 .
I guess people are turning out the lights when they leave .
More than one-third of New York ’ s 62 counties failed to record a population increase in any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported nine years of successive decreases , all upstate , census data showed .
Included in the population decline are all but two counties stretching along New York ’ s Southern Tier , where the the combined loss was nearly 32,000 people .
After showing consistent , if relatively small gains from 2010 through 2015 , the state ’ s population posted successive losses from 2016 through 2019 , according to Census estimates .
That means it has fallen further behind the three states with the largest population , California , Texas and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population in 2014 , and out of the 1.4 million residents who left for other states between 2011 and 2018 , 21 % of them went to the Sunshine State , census data earlier this year showed .
New York has lost more people than any other state in the nation for two years in a row .

Guest “Now that’s funny right there!” by David Middleton
NOVEMBER 23, 2020
New York generated the fourth most electricity from renewable sources of any state in 2019 In 2019, more electricity was generated from renewable sources in New York than in all but three states, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Electric Power Monthly. New York’s 39.4 million megawatthours (MWh) of renewable electricity generation was more than any other state east of the Mississippi River and accounted for 30% of the state’s total electricity generation in 2019. Hydroelectricity is the primary source of renewable generation in New York. Nearly 31 million MWh of hydroelectric power was generated in New York in 2019, which accounted for 78% of the state’s renewable electricity generation and 23% of the state’s total electricity generation. The Robert Moses Niagara hydroelectricity plant, located downstream from Niagara Falls, has a capacity of 2.4 gigawatts and is the second-largest conventional hydroelectric power plant in the country in terms of electric generating capacity, behind only Washington’s Grand Coulee dam. Wind has been the second-largest source of renewable electricity in New York, with 4.5 million MWh generated in 2019. Wind generation in New York during 2019 accounted for 11% of the state’s renewable generation and 3% of the state’s total electricity generation. At the end of 2019, New York had 1,132 wind turbines at 27 power plants, according to EIA’s Annual Electric Generator Inventory. Solar energy generated nearly 2.4 million MWh of electricity in New York during 2019. Small-scale solar installations, such as those found on residential and commercial rooftops, accounted for nearly 80% of the state’s solar electricity generation. Biomass, at 1.9 million MWh, accounted for the remainder of New York’s renewable electricity generation in 2019. […] EIA
The Top Ten
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly
In 2019, New York generated 29% of its electricity from “renewable” sources, the vast majority coming from hydroelectric…
Source Million MWh Hydroelectric 30.6 78% Wind 4.5 11% Solar 2.4 6% Biomass 1.9 5% Renewables 39.4 100%
The article goes on to note the following:
[…] In the United States, the sources of electricity generation have been shifting from coal to natural gas and renewables since the mid-2000s. Changes in New York’s electricity generating mix have contributed to this trend. Coal’s share of New York’s electricity generation fell from 14% in 2005 to less than 1% in 2019, and natural gas-fired electricity grew from 22% to 36%. Electricity generation from renewable energy technologies collectively grew from 19% to 29% in the same period. New York adopted a renewable portfolio standard in 2004 and the Clean Energy Standard (CES) in 2015. The CES currently requires New York to generate 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040 and attain economy-wide net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. […] EIA
The increase in so-called “renewables” generation is really funny. Biomass and hydroelectric barely changed; while wind and solar grew from nonexistent to trivial.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly
It appears that about half of the growth in so-called “renewables” from 19% to 29% was due to New Yorkers using less electricity, with a precipitous decline since 2015. I guess people are turning out the lights when they leave.
New York’s population continues to decline By Jeff Platsky / Gannett New York
Posted Apr 29, 2020 More than one-third of New York’s 62 counties failed to record a population increase in any year in the past decade — 25 reported nine years of successive decreases, all upstate, census data showed. Included in the population decline are all but two counties stretching along New York’s Southern Tier, where the the combined loss was nearly 32,000 people. […] After showing consistent, if relatively small gains from 2010 through 2015, the state’s population posted successive losses from 2016 through 2019, according to Census estimates. That means it has fallen further behind the three states with the largest population, California, Texas and Florida. Florida passed New York in population in 2014, and out of the 1.4 million residents who left for other states between 2011 and 2018, 21% of them went to the Sunshine State, census data earlier this year showed. New York has lost more people than any other state in the nation for two years in a row. […] Times Telegram
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


Provocation

This post consists mainly of tweets with , for me , some interesting connections .
Firstly , ‘ gender critical ’ feminist Linda Bellos at Westminster Magistrates Court in September 2018 , my tweet using the words of climate sceptic Clive James in support of Linda and friends , followed by climate sceptic Piers Corbyn at the same court yesterday .
While we ’ re on the subject of courts , here ’ s a much younger person who ’ s won a tremendous victory in the High Court this week : And some of the difficult detail on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And now a couple of concerned , left-of-centre men : Ah , Nick Cohen .
And now his stablemate in calling climate sceptics ‘ deniers ’ in days gone by , and making the foolish and repugnant analogy with Holocaust deniers absolutely explicit : Graham Lineham .
My hero Graham Linehan , who wrote yesterday What a day !
in praise of Leila , her legal team and supporters Confused ?
Don ’ t be .
Things they are a-changing .
Here ’ s another case in point .
Maybe .
Here are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Brexiteers ) is recent days : Well I think Carswell is a climate sceptic .
Or was once : Details courtesy of Leo Hickman in The Guardian in the heady days of Climategate .
Meanwhile Steve McIntyre has been retweeting on the fascinating backstory of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine : and making this point about the reasons for delay in the United States : Might have been .
And James Delingpole , probably not the biggest Joe Biden supporter , might have been disagreeing with his fellow-sceptic on this one .
I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this point .
But sometimes I think it ’ s best to lay out the complexity and allow the intelligent denizens of Cliscep make of it what they will .

This post consists mainly of tweets with, for me, some interesting connections.
Firstly, ‘gender critical’ feminist Linda Bellos at Westminster Magistrates Court in September 2018, my tweet using the words of climate sceptic Clive James in support of Linda and friends, followed by climate sceptic Piers Corbyn at the same court yesterday.
While we’re on the subject of courts, here’s a much younger person who’s won a tremendous victory in the High Court this week:
And some of the difficult detail on the landmark judgment, first from women:
And now a couple of concerned, left-of-centre men:
Ah, Nick Cohen. And now his stablemate in calling climate sceptics ‘deniers’ in days gone by, and making the foolish and repugnant analogy with Holocaust deniers absolutely explicit: Graham Lineham. My hero Graham Linehan, who wrote yesterday What a day! in praise of Leila, her legal team and supporters
Confused? Don’t be. Things they are a-changing. Here’s another case in point. Maybe.
The vaccine
Here are two more well-known UK climate sceptics (and Brexiteers) is recent days:
Well I think Carswell is a climate sceptic. Or was once:
When I was a member of Friends of the Earth, I did believe human CO2 emissions were responsible for global warming. It’s just that the facts seem to have changed. And so I’ve changed my mind.
Details courtesy of Leo Hickman in The Guardian in the heady days of Climategate.
Meanwhile Steve McIntyre has been retweeting on the fascinating backstory of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine:
and making this point about the reasons for delay in the United States:
Might have been. And James Delingpole, probably not the biggest Joe Biden supporter, might have been disagreeing with his fellow-sceptic on this one.
I was thinking I was going to editorialise at this point. But sometimes I think it’s best to lay out the complexity and allow the intelligent denizens of Cliscep make of it what they will.