iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-19--Modelling Catastrophe In A Climate Of Fear

“ Our house is on fire .
I am here to say , our house is on fire.
” “ We are facing a disaster of unspoken sufferings for enormous amounts of people .
And now is not the time for speaking politely or focusing on what we can or can not say .
Now is the time to speak clearly.
” Adults keep saying : “ We owe it to the young people to give them hope.
” But I don ’ t want your hope .
I don ’ t want you to be hopeful .
I want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to feel the fear I feel every day .
And then I want you to act .
I want you to act as you would in a crisis .
I want you to act as if our house is on fire .
Because it is .
So said Greta , at Davos , 3 months ago , even as another crisis was rapidly emerging , a new , real , more imminent crisis which would grip the world and force governments to act – largely , in retrospect , out of fear , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not hope .
At first , UK scientists said don ’ t panic , then they said PANIC in big , bold capital letters .
They got it wrong – twice .
They got it wrong the first time because they didn ’ t know enough about the Wuhan Virus to casually float the idea of ‘ herd immunity ’ .
The now thoroughly discredited WHO was telling us that the fatality rate was 3.4 % and R0 ( the average number of people one person infects ) was a lot higher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if left unchecked , the disease would rip through communities and very rapidly overwhelm hospitals , meaning that the death rate would rise even higher .
This appeared to be happening in Italy , though not in Germany , not in Japan , not in South Korea and not in a few other countries besides .
It ’ s still not happening .
The UK has been hard hit , even in lockdown , but it ’ s not happening here either .
Nightingale in empty .
But at the time , public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and amplified by ‘ new ’ modelling data , dictated that the government act to save lives and save the NHS .
They got it wrong the second time because they relied upon an epidemiological model ( adapted from an old ‘ flu model ) which predicted 510,000 deaths from a virus which we knew virtually nothing about .
Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College , London said ‘ DO SOMETHING OR PEOPLE WILL DIE !
’ So the government did something and people still died , not in their hundreds of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in numbers probably irrespective of a lockdown which was initiated too late in the day and was nowhere near strict enough to have a measurable effect on what is probably an exceptionally contagious virus .
American IMHE modellers got it wrong a third time , predicting loads more deaths in the UK and the US , even in lockdown , than actually occurred .
Climate change modellers never get it wrong , simply because even when their models don ’ t agree with reality , this is either because the observations are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do a reasonable job ’ of modelling past and present climate change ( especially when inconvenient ‘ blips ’ are ironed out by retrospective adjustments to the data ) , but principally because the subject of their claimed modelling expertise lies many years off in the future – climate change to be expected in 2050 or 2100 , when the real impacts will begin to be felt .
Imperial ’ s and IMHE ’ s worst case scenarios look way off , just weeks after they were proposed and after governments acted on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assumptions are being rapidly challenged by new data and research .
Nothing similar happens in climate change land .
Their worst case scenario ( RCP8.5 ) , though comprehensively debunked , still lives on and is still being defended by Met Office scientists on the basis that ‘ carbon feedbacks ( however unlikely ) can not be ruled out ’ .
People are still scared by Covid-19 ; they ’ re scared of dying , naturally , not in many years ’ time because of bad weather , but next week , due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a lab in Wuhan , China .
The government and the Medicine Men currently in control of control of government decision-making , use that fear to control us and to convince us of the legitimacy of their policy .
Thus , mostly , we have obediently stayed at home , and acted responsibly whilst out , but that ’ s not enough for the police who ’ ve taken great pleasure in making up their own list of # CovidCrimes and harrassing and fining innocent members of the public guilty of committing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , the data keeps rolling in and the research keeps piling up , even as we sit on the sofa and watch our economy go down the tubes and our civil liberties disappear in the haze of ‘ the new normal ’ .
Covid-19 is not the disease we thought it was 2 months ago and the unintended consequences of lockdown ( given hardly a moment ’ s thought by epidemiologists and politicians singularly intent on saving lives and saving ‘ our NHS ’ ) look set to be even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
It ’ s all very odd , because a few months ago , adults at Davos nodded approvingly whilst Greta reprimanded them for giving her generation false hope , saying that she wanted everyone to panic and take action .
Little Greta believed that such action based upon fear , based in turn upon the scary output of climate models , would save the world and restore the God given right of her generation to inherit a ‘ habitable planet ’ .
Today , we have adults panicked into taking action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and aspirations of the younger generation , wrecked their education and who are busy bequeathing to them an austere future where their parents are out of work and their prospects for their own futures look bleak .
This is basically the same as # netzero or the Green New Deal of course , but a global depression won ’ t save the planet in the process .
Hence why sme climate fanatics are OK with lockdown and economic ruin as long as it morphs long term into Green austerity .
There are signs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , things might start to change and the government may be reconsidering its obsessive lockdown strategy , but I ’ m not that hopeful as yet , having witnessed the Minister for Suicide Prevetion , Nadine Dorries , state on Twitter that lockdown will continue until a vaccine is developed , Grant Shapps telling us not to book a summer holiday , Dominic Raab telling us that an ‘ equally distributed ’ vaccine is our only hope , No .
10 telling us to stay at home and bake a cake , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown which can never be met .
Gove is said to be setting up a panel which will be examining the potential negative impacts of lockdown .
In this respect , we read in the Telegraph today the following : The exit strategy is very much on academic minds .
For this part of the process , we should definitely not rely solely on the mathematical modellers , says Robert Dingwall , Professor of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University , and an advisor to one of the SAGE sub committees .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making that might be occupied by a combination of sociologists , political scientists and historians who have worked on previous pandemics…you could argue there is a gap in the system of expert advice for that kind of input .
“ Modellers are smart people but they ’ re mathematicians primarily and that ’ s why you need to set their advice into a social and economic context .
That ’ s why you need to have an understanding of the real world .
“ Ferguson for example keeps talking about social distancing as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Whereas if we ’ re going to talk about an exit strategy , there isn ’ t going to be a VE day where we declare it ’ s all over.
” One problem , he says , is that “ the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it ’ s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘ this is the way out ’ .
” He describes the lockdown on parks , for instance , as “ cruel and unjust.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like me who live in houses with big gardens .
“ If the politicians are trying to follow the science , and the science is only giving them a limited range of input , then it might be quite difficult for some of these everyday considerations to get taken more seriously.
” Prof Sullivan echoes some of those points : “ I think the fear out there is extraordinary .
Now , it ’ s our view that the fear is out of all proportion to the threat and the risk .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here .
“ I keep saying to people we have as many if not more people dying of pneumonia and loads of other conditions .
I think life has to start renormalizing again with sufficient care and attention to the vulnerable.
” One problem , he says , is that “ the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it ’ s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘ this is the way out ’ .
” He describes the lockdown on parks , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Waiting for a mandatory Bill Gates funded vaccine to be developed before lifting lockdown is an insane and very sinister proposal .
That Raab and Dorries would even mention it is extremely concerning .
Meanwhile , in the real world ( hopefully ) , perhaps herd immunity is about to make a comeback in the light of what we now know about this virus and its lethality ( which looks to be somewhat more comparable to seasonal ‘ flu than the Black Death ) .
Prof Sullivan says that , even after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adequate personal protection equipment , “ I ’ m afraid it comes down to this problem of , are we going to wait for two years for a vaccine which may never happen ?
“ Of course not .
The British economy and society will be finished by then .
So , your only option here is about building up herd immunity.
” After all this , herd immunity ?

“Our house is on fire. I am here to say, our house is on fire.”
“We are facing a disaster of unspoken sufferings for enormous amounts of people. And now is not the time for speaking politely or focusing on what we can or cannot say. Now is the time to speak clearly.”
Adults keep saying: “We owe it to the young people to give them hope.” But I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act.
I want you to act as you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if our house is on fire. Because it is.
So said Greta, at Davos, 3 months ago, even as another crisis was rapidly emerging, a new, real, more imminent crisis which would grip the world and force governments to act – largely, in retrospect, out of fear, not knowledge, not masses of data, not hope.
At first, UK scientists said don’t panic, then they said PANIC in big, bold capital letters. They got it wrong – twice. They got it wrong the first time because they didn’t know enough about the Wuhan Virus to casually float the idea of ‘herd immunity’. The now thoroughly discredited WHO was telling us that the fatality rate was 3.4% and R0 (the average number of people one person infects) was a lot higher than ‘flu, meaning that, if left unchecked, the disease would rip through communities and very rapidly overwhelm hospitals, meaning that the death rate would rise even higher. This appeared to be happening in Italy, though not in Germany, not in Japan, not in South Korea and not in a few other countries besides. It’s still not happening. The UK has been hard hit, even in lockdown, but it’s not happening here either. Nightingale in empty. But at the time, public fear, whipped up by the media, and amplified by ‘new’ modelling data, dictated that the government act to save lives and save the NHS.
They got it wrong the second time because they relied upon an epidemiological model (adapted from an old ‘flu model) which predicted 510,000 deaths from a virus which we knew virtually nothing about. Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College, London said ‘DO SOMETHING OR PEOPLE WILL DIE!’ So the government did something and people still died, not in their hundreds of thousands, but, it would seem, in numbers probably irrespective of a lockdown which was initiated too late in the day and was nowhere near strict enough to have a measurable effect on what is probably an exceptionally contagious virus. American IMHE modellers got it wrong a third time, predicting loads more deaths in the UK and the US, even in lockdown, than actually occurred.
Climate change modellers never get it wrong, simply because even when their models don’t agree with reality, this is either because the observations are wrong, or because they still ‘do a reasonable job’ of modelling past and present climate change (especially when inconvenient ‘blips’ are ironed out by retrospective adjustments to the data), but principally because the subject of their claimed modelling expertise lies many years off in the future – climate change to be expected in 2050 or 2100, when the real impacts will begin to be felt. Imperial’s and IMHE’s worst case scenarios look way off, just weeks after they were proposed and after governments acted on the modeller’s advice. Their assumptions are being rapidly challenged by new data and research. Nothing similar happens in climate change land. Their worst case scenario (RCP8.5), though comprehensively debunked, still lives on and is still being defended by Met Office scientists on the basis that ‘carbon feedbacks (however unlikely) cannot be ruled out’.
People are still scared by Covid-19; they’re scared of dying, naturally, not in many years’ time because of bad weather, but next week, due to some horrible illness which probably escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China. The government and the Medicine Men currently in control of control of government decision-making, use that fear to control us and to convince us of the legitimacy of their policy. Thus, mostly, we have obediently stayed at home, and acted responsibly whilst out, but that’s not enough for the police who’ve taken great pleasure in making up their own list of #CovidCrimes and harrassing and fining innocent members of the public guilty of committing mass murder by not staying at home. However, the data keeps rolling in and the research keeps piling up, even as we sit on the sofa and watch our economy go down the tubes and our civil liberties disappear in the haze of ‘the new normal’. Covid-19 is not the disease we thought it was 2 months ago and the unintended consequences of lockdown (given hardly a moment’s thought by epidemiologists and politicians singularly intent on saving lives and saving ‘our NHS’) look set to be even more severe than the consequences of the disease itself.
It’s all very odd, because a few months ago, adults at Davos nodded approvingly whilst Greta reprimanded them for giving her generation false hope, saying that she wanted everyone to panic and take action. Little Greta believed that such action based upon fear, based in turn upon the scary output of climate models, would save the world and restore the God given right of her generation to inherit a ‘habitable planet’. Today, we have adults panicked into taking action on Covid-19 who have destroyed the hopes and aspirations of the younger generation, wrecked their education and who are busy bequeathing to them an austere future where their parents are out of work and their prospects for their own futures look bleak. This is basically the same as #netzero or the Green New Deal of course, but a global depression won’t save the planet in the process. Hence why sme climate fanatics are OK with lockdown and economic ruin as long as it morphs long term into Green austerity.
There are signs that now Boris is on the mend, things might start to change and the government may be reconsidering its obsessive lockdown strategy, but I’m not that hopeful as yet, having witnessed the Minister for Suicide Prevetion, Nadine Dorries, state on Twitter that lockdown will continue until a vaccine is developed, Grant Shapps telling us not to book a summer holiday, Dominic Raab telling us that an ‘equally distributed’ vaccine is our only hope, No. 10 telling us to stay at home and bake a cake, and five government ‘tests’ for ending lockdown which can never be met.
Gove is said to be setting up a panel which will be examining the potential negative impacts of lockdown. In this respect, we read in the Telegraph today the following:
The exit strategy is very much on academic minds. For this part of the process, we should definitely not rely solely on the mathematical modellers, says Robert Dingwall, Professor of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University, and an advisor to one of the SAGE sub committees. “There is a space in the policy making that might be occupied by a combination of sociologists, political scientists and historians who have worked on previous pandemics…you could argue there is a gap in the system of expert advice for that kind of input. “Modellers are smart people but they’re mathematicians primarily and that’s why you need to set their advice into a social and economic context. That’s why you need to have an understanding of the real world. “Ferguson for example keeps talking about social distancing as a kind of all or nothing thing. Whereas if we’re going to talk about an exit strategy, there isn’t going to be a VE day where we declare it’s all over.” One problem, he says, is that “the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it’s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘this is the way out’.” He describes the lockdown on parks, for instance, as “cruel and unjust.” “It’s a policy by people like me who live in houses with big gardens. “If the politicians are trying to follow the science, and the science is only giving them a limited range of input, then it might be quite difficult for some of these everyday considerations to get taken more seriously.” Prof Sullivan echoes some of those points: “I think the fear out there is extraordinary. Now, it’s our view that the fear is out of all proportion to the threat and the risk. There’s been a real perspective loss here. “I keep saying to people we have as many if not more people dying of pneumonia and loads of other conditions. I think life has to start renormalizing again with sufficient care and attention to the vulnerable.” One problem, he says, is that “the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it’s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘this is the way out’.” He describes the lockdown on parks, for instance, as “cruel and unjust.”
Waiting for a mandatory Bill Gates funded vaccine to be developed before lifting lockdown is an insane and very sinister proposal. That Raab and Dorries would even mention it is extremely concerning. Meanwhile, in the real world (hopefully), perhaps herd immunity is about to make a comeback in the light of what we now know about this virus and its lethality (which looks to be somewhat more comparable to seasonal ‘flu than the Black Death).
Prof Sullivan says that, even after sorting out testing and the provision of adequate personal protection equipment, “I’m afraid it comes down to this problem of, are we going to wait for two years for a vaccine which may never happen?
“Of course not. The British economy and society will be finished by then. So, your only option here is about building up herd immunity.”
After all this, herd immunity?


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--British Gas Installer Recommends Working From Home- Latest Climate Assembly News

LONDON , April 19 ( Thomson Reuters Foundation ) – Working from home and other measures to help stem the spread of the coronavirus outbreak in Britain show how quickly the country could change its ways to address climate change too , participants in the Climate Assembly UK said on Sunday .
“ With coronavirus , ( the government ) has had to act because they had no choice in the matter .
With climate change , they need to act in the same way , ” said Marc Robson , 46 , a British Gas installer and one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assembly .
As with the response to the COVID-19 respiratory disease , “ people will die if we don ’ t do it ” , the Newcastle resident warned in a video interview .
“ And we all need to buy into this as well .
It needs to be explained to the public that if we don ’ t change what we ’ re doing , it ’ s going to cost us , big time.
” The assembly , chosen to reflect Britain ’ s diverse geographic and demographic makeup , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change , has met once a month in Birmingham since January to hear from experts on climate science and policy .
It is expected to submit over the summer its recommendations to the government on how Britain should meet a legally binding goal to cut its climate-heating emissions to net zero by 2050 .
But with coronavirus restrictions now in place on public gatherings , the assembly this weekend was held for the first time online – a change some assembly members saw as a “ test run ” for potential climate-smart shifts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has opened up my mind that we can make these changes , like working at home , ” Robson told the Thomson Reuters Foundation .
Sarah Allan , the head of engagement at Involve UK , a charity helping run the assembly , said some members of the group had asked to discuss coronavirus during this weekend ’ s event and reflect on “ how it makes them feel about what they ’ ve heard ” .
Ibrahim Wali , 42 , a physician based in Surrey , said he had been conducting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outbreak began and realised “ it ’ s doable ” .
“ People could stay home more , work remotely .
Sometimes in life you just need a challenge to change the way you live and operate , ” he said .
What he had learned more generally at the assembly sessions also had led him to install LED lightbulbs at home , look at switching to a hybrid or electric car and reconsider how often he eats meat , which has a large carbon footprint .
“ If you can do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s where it starts .
Then it ’ s friends , family , society , ” he said in a video interview .
Reducing emissions “ is not just something for the government to do .
I thought in the past the government would sort it all out with laws and legislation .
But it makes a huge difference if everyone looks at themselves and makes a change , ” he added .
Ellie , a 21-year-old assembly member and new university graduate from North London , who did not want her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had started taking part in the gatherings confident “ technology will solve all the problems ” .
“ I ’ ve been made aware of how actually it ’ s acceptance there ’ s going to be a change in our lifestyles and we will have to compromise , ” she said .
“ We can ’ t rely on tech and someone else doing it for us .
It has to be all of us working together ” .
The assembly ’ s meetings had given her a much better understanding not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deal with global warming , she said , but how they might affect people living very different lives from hers , including in rural areas .
“ If we ’ re going to make genuine progress , there needs to be a real awareness of what the options are , the impact they will have on different groups and what ’ s actually financially viable , ” she said .
The assembly participants said they wished everyone in Britain could have access to the information they had received from experts speaking at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been recorded and are available for public access online .
here “ There ’ s a real kind of segregation – between people who know a lot about climate change and people who don ’ t – and that ’ s creating problems and tensions , ” Ellie said .
`` If we can educate everyone to the same level , we can create a real consensus for progress , '' she added .
Heaven help us all if this lot are anything to go by !
First we have Marc Robson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems to think he can work from home .
( Mind , when the gas is turned off , he won ’ t have a job anyway ! )
.
Unsurprisingly , with gullibility like that , he has been convinced that “ people will die if we don ’ t do it ” .
Then we have a Dr Wali , who wants to work by video link in future .
And there ’ s also 21 year old Ellie , who does not appear to know what she thinks , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for everybody to be indoctrinated , just as she has been .
Currently she is concerned that those who have been brainwashed are not to keen on the harebrained plans to decimate the economy .
Nowhere at all is there any understanding amongst this lot that nothing the UK can do will make the slightest jot of difference to the world ’ s climate .
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood
h/t Dave Ward
News from the Climate Assembly:
LONDON, April 19 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – Working from home and other measures to help stem the spread of the coronavirus outbreak in Britain show how quickly the country could change its ways to address climate change too, participants in the Climate Assembly UK said on Sunday.
“With coronavirus, (the government) has had to act because they had no choice in the matter. With climate change, they need to act in the same way,” said Marc Robson, 46, a British Gas installer and one of the 110 members of the citizens’ assembly.
As with the response to the COVID-19 respiratory disease, “people will die if we don’t do it”, the Newcastle resident warned in a video interview.
“And we all need to buy into this as well. It needs to be explained to the public that if we don’t change what we’re doing, it’s going to cost us, big time.”
The assembly, chosen to reflect Britain’s diverse geographic and demographic makeup, as well as different viewpoints on climate change, has met once a month in Birmingham since January to hear from experts on climate science and policy.
It is expected to submit over the summer its recommendations to the government on how Britain should meet a legally binding goal to cut its climate-heating emissions to net zero by 2050.
But with coronavirus restrictions now in place on public gatherings, the assembly this weekend was held for the first time online – a change some assembly members saw as a “test run” for potential climate-smart shifts they had been discussing.
“This has opened up my mind that we can make these changes, like working at home,” Robson told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
Sarah Allan, the head of engagement at Involve UK, a charity helping run the assembly, said some members of the group had asked to discuss coronavirus during this weekend’s event and reflect on “how it makes them feel about what they’ve heard”.
Ibrahim Wali, 42, a physician based in Surrey, said he had been conducting COVID-19 assessments via telephone and video-link since the outbreak began and realised “it’s doable”.
“People could stay home more, work remotely. Sometimes in life you just need a challenge to change the way you live and operate,” he said.
What he had learned more generally at the assembly sessions also had led him to install LED lightbulbs at home, look at switching to a hybrid or electric car and reconsider how often he eats meat, which has a large carbon footprint.
“If you can do that on an individual level, that’s where it starts. Then it’s friends, family, society,” he said in a video interview.
Reducing emissions “is not just something for the government to do. I thought in the past the government would sort it all out with laws and legislation. But it makes a huge difference if everyone looks at themselves and makes a change,” he added.
KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL
Ellie, a 21-year-old assembly member and new university graduate from North London, who did not want her surname to be used, said she had started taking part in the gatherings confident “technology will solve all the problems”.
“I’ve been made aware of how actually it’s acceptance there’s going to be a change in our lifestyles and we will have to compromise,” she said. “We can’t rely on tech and someone else doing it for us. It has to be all of us working together”.
The assembly’s meetings had given her a much better understanding not just of the range of options available to deal with global warming, she said, but how they might affect people living very different lives from hers, including in rural areas.
“If we’re going to make genuine progress, there needs to be a real awareness of what the options are, the impact they will have on different groups and what’s actually financially viable,” she said.
The assembly participants said they wished everyone in Britain could have access to the information they had received from experts speaking at the gatherings.
Organisers noted the sessions had been recorded and are available for public access online. here
“There’s a real kind of segregation – between people who know a lot about climate change and people who don’t – and that’s creating problems and tensions,” Ellie said.
"If we can educate everyone to the same level, we can create a real consensus for progress," she added.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/climate-change-britain-politics/uk-citizens-assembly-calls-coronavirus-a-test-run-for-greener-lifestyles-idUKL8N2C70EZ
Heaven help us all if this lot are anything to go by!
First we have Marc Robson, a British Gas installer, who seems to think he can work from home. (Mind, when the gas is turned off, he won’t have a job anyway!). Unsurprisingly, with gullibility like that, he has been convinced that “people will die if we don’t do it”.
Then we have a Dr Wali, who wants to work by video link in future.
And there’s also 21 year old Ellie, who does not appear to know what she thinks, but says it’s a good idea for everybody to be indoctrinated, just as she has been. Currently she is concerned that those who have been brainwashed are not to keen on the harebrained plans to decimate the economy.
Nowhere at all is there any understanding amongst this lot that nothing the UK can do will make the slightest jot of difference to the world’s climate.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://ift.tt/2VnT1Fe
April 20, 2020 at 06:15AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Solar power plants get help from satellites to predict cloud cover

At least they don ’ t need any help predicting hours of darkness .
– – – The output of solar energy systems is highly dependent on cloud cover , says Science Daily .
While weather forecasting can be used to predict the amount of sunlight reaching ground-based solar collectors , cloud cover is often characterized in simple terms , such as cloudy , partly cloudy or clear .
This does not provide accurate information for estimating the amount of sunlight available for solar power plants .
In this week ’ s Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported for estimating cloud optical properties using data from recently launched satellites .
This new technique is known as Spectral Cloud Optical Property Estimation , or SCOPE .
In 2016 , NASA began launching a new generation of Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites , the GOES-R series .
These satellites occupy fixed positions above the Earth ’ s surface .
Each is equipped with several sophisticated instruments , including the Advanced Baseline Imager , or ABI , which can detect radiation upwelling from the Earth at specific wavelengths .
The SCOPE method estimates three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sunlight reaching the Earth ’ s surface .
The first , cloud top height , is the altitude corresponding to the top of each cloud .
The second , cloud thickness , is simply the difference in altitude between a cloud ’ s top and bottom .
The third property is the cloud optical depth , a measure of how a cloud modifies light passing through it .
Clouds are , essentially , floating masses of condensed water .
The water takes multiple forms as liquid droplets or ice crystals of varying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absorb light in different amounts , affecting a cloud ’ s optical depth .
The amount of light absorbed also depends on the light ’ s wavelength .
Absorption is especially variable for light in the wider infrared range of the spectrum but not so much for light in the narrower visible range .
The SCOPE method simultaneously estimates cloud thickness , top height and optical depth by coupling ABI sensor data from GOES-R satellites to an atmospheric model .
Two other inputs to the model come from ground-based weather stations : ambient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
These are used to adjust temperature and gas concentration vertical profiles in the model .

At least they don’t need any help predicting hours of darkness.
– – –
The output of solar energy systems is highly dependent on cloud cover, says Science Daily.
While weather forecasting can be used to predict the amount of sunlight reaching ground-based solar collectors, cloud cover is often characterized in simple terms, such as cloudy, partly cloudy or clear.
This does not provide accurate information for estimating the amount of sunlight available for solar power plants.
In this week’s Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, from AIP Publishing, a new method is reported for estimating cloud optical properties using data from recently launched satellites.
This new technique is known as Spectral Cloud Optical Property Estimation, or SCOPE.
In 2016, NASA began launching a new generation of Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites, the GOES-R series.
These satellites occupy fixed positions above the Earth’s surface. Each is equipped with several sophisticated instruments, including the Advanced Baseline Imager, or ABI, which can detect radiation upwelling from the Earth at specific wavelengths.
The SCOPE method estimates three properties of clouds that determine the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface.
The first, cloud top height, is the altitude corresponding to the top of each cloud. The second, cloud thickness, is simply the difference in altitude between a cloud’s top and bottom. The third property is the cloud optical depth, a measure of how a cloud modifies light passing through it.
Clouds are, essentially, floating masses of condensed water. The water takes multiple forms as liquid droplets or ice crystals of varying sizes. These different forms of water absorb light in different amounts, affecting a cloud’s optical depth.
The amount of light absorbed also depends on the light’s wavelength. Absorption is especially variable for light in the wider infrared range of the spectrum but not so much for light in the narrower visible range.
The SCOPE method simultaneously estimates cloud thickness, top height and optical depth by coupling ABI sensor data from GOES-R satellites to an atmospheric model.
Two other inputs to the model come from ground-based weather stations: ambient temperature and relative humidity at the ground. These are used to adjust temperature and gas concentration vertical profiles in the model.
Full article here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/34WSfSI
April 20, 2020 at 04:30AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--New Studies Show Cloud Cover Changes Have Driven Greenland Warming And Ice Melt Trends Since The 199

New Studies Show Cloud Cover Changes Have Driven Greenland Warming And Ice Melt Trends Since The 1990s

Scientists now acknowledge cloud cover changes “ control the Earth ’ s hydrological cycle ” , “ regulate the Earth ’ s climate ” , and “ dominate the melt signal ” for the Greenland ice sheet via modulation of absorbed shortwave radiation .
CO2 goes unmentioned as a contributing factor .
Climate modeling of factors influencing Greenland warming , surface melt have been 100 % wrong A few years ago scientists acknowledged “ a major disparity in trends between models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 ( CMIP5 ) and observations for the last 20-30 years ” ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All 36 climate models simulating blocking over Greenland were wrong .
None of the models were correct .
The abysmal performance of the modeling relative to observations has been ongoing for the last 20 to 30 years – effectively for the entire time the CMIP5 models have been in existence .
In all other scientific fields , a one hundred percent failure rate ongoing for decades would have long ago resulted in a reassessment of modeling parameters .
Climate science is apparently in a realm of its own .
Within a matter of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clouds can vary by ±40 W/m² in the Arctic .
From one year to the next , cloud radiative effects can vary by 70 W/m² and overall cloud radiative effects can reach 360 W/m² ( Ebell et al.
, 2020 ) .
In contrast , the total accumulated change in net impact from CO2 forcing is only 1.82 W/m² since 1750 ( Feldman et al.
, 2015 ) .
Simply put , cloud forcing radiatively dominates in the Arctic .
CO2 is a bit player , at most .
According to a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , clouds “ control the Earth ’ s hydrological cycle ” , “ regulate the Earth ’ s climate ” , and drive polar ice melt .
Further , “ the surface melt climate is strongly dependent on the representation of clouds and related radiation fluxes “ .
Models of cloud effects over Greenland are biased – or wrong – by 25-50 W/m² .
Cloud cover decline from 1994-2017 “ dominates ” the warming and ice melt trend Another new study ( Hahn et al.
, 2020 ) finds reduced cloud cover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( +7.3 W/m² ) and drove the warming from the 1990s to mid-2000s .
This shortwave cloud forcing trend is what “ dominates ” the melt signal for Greenland .
Greenland ’ s warming trend is shown to taper off into a pause or a slight cooling trend since ~2005 .
Likewise , the ice melt trend spiked in 2012 but has been flat ( or declining ) overall since about 2005 too .
There is thus no clear indication in the scientific literature that atmospheric CO2 concentration changes can even remotely compete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate trends over Greenland .

Scientists now acknowledge cloud cover changes “control the Earth’s hydrological cycle”, “regulate the Earth’s climate”, and “dominate the melt signal” for the Greenland ice sheet via modulation of absorbed shortwave radiation. CO2 goes unmentioned as a contributing factor.
Climate modeling of factors influencing Greenland warming, surface melt have been 100% wrong
A few years ago scientists acknowledged “a major disparity in trends between models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) and observations for the last 20-30 years” (Hanna et al., 2018).
All 36 climate models simulating blocking over Greenland were wrong. None of the models were correct.
The abysmal performance of the modeling relative to observations has been ongoing for the last 20 to 30 years – effectively for the entire time the CMIP5 models have been in existence.
In all other scientific fields, a one hundred percent failure rate ongoing for decades would have long ago resulted in a reassessment of modeling parameters. Climate science is apparently in a realm of its own.
Cloud forcing dominates in the Arctic
Within a matter of hours, the radiative forcing effects from clouds can vary by ±40 W/m² in the Arctic. From one year to the next, cloud radiative effects can vary by 70 W/m² and overall cloud radiative effects can reach 360 W/m² (Ebell et al., 2020).
In contrast, the total accumulated change in net impact from CO2 forcing is only 1.82 W/m² since 1750 (Feldman et al., 2015).
Simply put, cloud forcing radiatively dominates in the Arctic. CO2 is a bit player, at most.
Clouds regulate Greenland’s climate…and models grossly fail to simulate this
According to a new study (Lenaerts et al., 2020), clouds “control the Earth’s hydrological cycle”, “regulate the Earth’s climate”, and drive polar ice melt.
Further, “the surface melt climate is strongly dependent on the representation of clouds and related radiation fluxes“.
Models of cloud effects over Greenland are biased – or wrong – by 25-50 W/m².
Cloud cover decline from 1994-2017 “dominates” the warming and ice melt trend
Another new study (Hahn et al., 2020) finds reduced cloud cover from 1994-2017 led to enhanced shortwave radiation (+7.3 W/m²) and drove the warming from the 1990s to mid-2000s.
This shortwave cloud forcing trend is what “dominates” the melt signal for Greenland.
Greenland’s warming trend is shown to taper off into a pause or a slight cooling trend since ~2005.
Likewise, the ice melt trend spiked in 2012 but has been flat (or declining) overall since about 2005 too.
There is thus no clear indication in the scientific literature that atmospheric CO2 concentration changes can even remotely compete with cloud radiative effects as drivers of climate trends over Greenland.
via NoTricksZone
https://ift.tt/2XOuHha
April 20, 2020 at 04:19AM