Is this year what we can expect?

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:38 PM GMT on August 03, 2011

Share this Blog
11
+

Is this year what we can expect?

In recent weeks a question I have been asked often, “is this year, the last couple of years, like what we can expect in the future?” The question is often asked quietly, perhaps by a planner, say, someone worried about water in their city. The question follows from not only a perception that the weather is getting “weird,”, but also some small aspect of experience in their job. For example, a water manager recently said they were seeing their local river showing a distinct change to sporadically high flow in the winter, smaller spring flows, and extremely small flow late in the summer. Is this what I should expect in the future? The short answer is yes.

This question of expectation has rolled around in my head for years. I am a gardener with aspirations for small farmer. Over the last 30 years, I have definitely pushed my planting earlier in the year. When I was in Maryland, I felt wet, cool Mays were becoming the “norm,” with my tomatoes sitting in sodden soil. At the same time I would recall plots I had seen in some recent presentation that showed modeled shifts in the warm-cold patterns suggesting springtime cooling in northeastern North America. These are the sorts of casual correlations that lead people to think are we seeing a new “normal.”

In 2008 I wrote a blog about the changes in the hardiness zones that are reported on the back of seed packages. These are the maps that tell us the last frost date, and there were big changes between 1990 and 2006. These changes in the seed packets caught the attention of a lot of people. Recently, NOAA published the “new normal.” This normal relies on the definition of climate as a 30 year average. (AMS Glossary) What was done - at the completion of the decade NOAA recalculated a 30 year average. That is, 1981-2010 rather than 1971-2000. This average changed a lot, with notable warming of nighttime minima. There was some regional reduction of summertime maxima; that is, cooling. All in all, the average temperature went up, with most of the increase in nighttime minimum, a fact that is consistent with both model simulations and fundamental physics. This also came with another update of those hardiness zones.

When trying to interpret climate information and determining how has climate changed and how will it change, the combination of observations, fundamental physics, and models provide three sources of information. The combination of this information and the determination of the quality of that information is subject to interpretation. In the case of determining whether or not we are already experiencing the climate of warming world and how that change will be realized in the next decades it depends on how we use the models.

In my previous entry on heat waves, I implied how to use these pieces of information together. There are fundamental physics in the relationship between temperature and moisture in the air; hot air holds more water; warm water evaporates more quickly. The question of the model is - how well does the model represent the movement of that moisture? For the heat wave example, it is important how well do the models represent persistent high pressure systems over North America in the summer? Are these high pressure systems represented well by the models for the right reasons? The answer to the model question has a range of answers. The model does represent these systems, but if you are an expert in summertime persistent high pressure systems, then you can provide a long list of inadequacies. How can we glean information about the quality of the model? If we look at weather models, then we were able to predict the heat wave – even with the inadequacies that the expert or skeptic can list. Returning to the climate model, do we see like events in the current climate, and do these events change as the planet warms? The answer is yes. Then can we use this to guide our development of plans to adapt to climate change? The answer is yes, if we can connect the model back to data and the fundamental physics. This does become a matter of interpretation – how strong or weak is that connection?

The more I work with planners the more I hear the need for interpretive information, expert guidance, advisories about climate and climate change. People start with the notion that they want digital data from climate models that looks like current weather data. Once presented with 1) the logistical challenges of using that data, 2) the complex nature of the uncertainties associated with that data, and 3) the relative importance of climate to other parts of their decision package – once presented with these facts, they move to the need for advice. This makes sense - most of us want a narrative weather forecast, rather than model output. And the models play the same role in the use of weather forecasts as they do in climate projection. The models guide our thinking, with the ultimate forecast based on that guidance refined by observations and fundamental physics.

This entry started with the question I hear more and more – is this year what we can expect more of in the future? I have a mantra which is that on average the surface of the Earth will warm, ice will melt, sea level will rise, and the weather will change. What we are seeing here is weather changing in a warming, more energy laden, environment. The extraordinary extremes that we have seen in the last year and are seeing this year are quite solidly connected to both fundamental physics and the guidance from climate and weather models. Hence, my answer, as I walk around my garden, thinking how to get better tomatoes next year, thinking about my irrigation system in my doddering retirement, is yes, what we are seeing this year tells me about what to expect in a future that is relevant to me - not something far off.

r

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 1371 - 1321

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29Blog Index


Hello Jeff if my Tunnels can do this per Hugh Willoughby:

quote:
Yes, I have spoken with Patrick, and, yes, a scheme somewhat like the one he describes could weaken hurricanes threatening places like Miami that have strong western-margin currents just offshore. There are, however, numerous qualifications.

The scheme that we discussed involved an array of several rows devices across the Gulfstream. Each device would be a rectangular duct 140 m long and 10 by 14 m in cross section. Normally the devices would be moored horizontally at a depth of 100m with their long axes aligned with the current flow. They would be nearly neutrally buoyant. When a hurricane approached, ballast at the downstream end of the channel would be released, allowing the device to float up to a 45 deg angle. Cold water entering the upstream end would flow up to the surface and mix with the warmer water there. Since the mixture would be negatively buoyant, it would sink. But mixing due to several (3-10) lines of these devices could cool the surface waters of the Gulfstream by 1-2C, enough to weaken an Andrew-like hurricane from category 5 to category 3. A rough calculation indicates that a device every 100 m on each line of moorings (~1000 devices per ~100 km line) and 3-10 lines of moorings would be required. My guess is that it would cost $250K to fabricate and deploy a single device, but there might be economies of scale. One might also be able to optimize the size and spacing of the devices.

Let's say that careful calculation told us that 4 lines of 1000 devices each would do the trick. At $0.25M per device, the cost works out to 4*1000*($0.25M) = $1000M. The actual cost might range from a few hundred million to a small multiple of a (US = 1000M) billion. One would want to do a detailed simulation before defining the scope of the project, but the basic notion is conversion of some of the kinetic energy of the Gulfstream into gravitational potential energy of the mixed water column. Again, I've not done that detailed simulation, only back-of-the-envelope calculations.

Activation of the array would require accurate forecasting since it would take several days for the effect to make its way from south of the Dry Tortugas (optimum location for protecting the maximum amount of shoreline) to the landfall point.

South Florida gets hit by a category 4 or 5 hurricane at every few years, but the really damaging ones like Andrew tend to be once-a-generation events, or less frequent. The array would need to be deployed and maintained for a long time between activations that actually safeguard property, although false alarms would not be particularly costly. Annual maintenance could easily exceed 10% of initial deployment cost. Bear in mind that Key West to Jacksonville is the only stretch of US coastline where this strategy would work. The other vulnerable sites, Houston-Galveston and New Orleans, lack the necessary strong offshore currents. While Georgia and the Carolinas also experience many hurricane landfalls and have the Gulfstream offshore, most of these cyclones are already weakening because of vertical shear of the horizontal wind so that a second installation north of Jacksonville would be much less useful.

There has been a lot of talk about using wave and current energy to cool the ocean ahead of hurricanes. My general conclusion is that while these ideas might be made to work, the proponents underestimate the scope of the required effort, as well as the political will and recurring cost necessary to keep the project going in the long intervals between really damaging hurricanes. Skeptic that I am, I think that wiser land-use policy and more rigorous building standards are much more cost-effective and more politically feasible. A proof-of-concept that might entail deploying a half dozen devices has some appeal, but I think that there are more promising ways to spend disaster-prevention money.

Best regards,

Hugh Willoughby


Link


Then I bet they can also restore the Arctic Ice if left in cooling phase for a longer time period. What say you? Ya'll want a cure so here it is!






Arctic sea ice poised to undergo record decline in mid-August
A strong high pressure system with a central pressure of 1035 mb has developed over the Arctic north of Alaska, and will bring clear skies and warm southerly winds to northeast Siberia and the Arctic during the coming week, accelerating Arctic sea ice loss. Widespread areas of northeastern Siberia are expected to see air temperatures 4 - 12°C (7 - 22°F) above average during the coming week, and the clockwise flow of air around the high pressure system centered north of Alaska will pump this warm air into the Arctic. Arctic sea ice extent, currently slightly higher than the record low values set in 2007, should fall to to its lowest extent for the date by the third week of August as the clear skies and warm southerly winds melt ice and push it away from the coast of Siberia. This weather pattern, known as the Arctic Dipole, was also responsible for the record sea ice loss in 2007, but was stronger that year. The weather conditions that led to the 2007 record were quite extreme--one 2008 study led by Jennifer Kay of the National Center for Atmospheric Research showed that 2007's combination of high pressure and sunny skies in the Arctic occur, on average, only once every 10 - 20 years. The 2011 summer weather pattern in the Arctic has not been nearly as extreme as in 2007, but the total sea ice volume has declined significantly since 2007, leading to much loss of old, thick, multi-year ice, making it easier to set a new low extent record with less extreme weather conditions. The GFS model is predicting that the Arctic Dipole will weaken by 8 - 15 days from now, with cloudier weather and weaker high pressure over the Arctic. This should slow down the rate of Arctic sea ice loss to very near the record low values observed in 2007. It remains to be seen if 2011 Arctic sea ice extent will surpass the all-time low set in September 2007; it will be close, and will depend on the weather conditions of late August and early September, which are not predictable at this time. It is already possible to sail completely around the North Pole in ice-free waters through the Northeast Passage and Northwest Passage, according to sea ice maps maintained by the UIUC Cryosphere Today website. This marks the fourth consecutive year--and the fourth time in recorded history--both of these Arctic shipping routes have melted free. Mariners have been attempting to sail these passages since 1497. This year, the Northeast Passage along the north coast of Russia melted free several weeks earlier than its previous record early opening.

Next post
I'll have a new post by 1pm Saturday.

Jeff Masters
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20459
Funny but true!LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Scientists Trace Heat Wave To Massive Star At Center Of Solar System
August 8, 2011



PASADENA, CA—Groundbreaking new findings announced Monday suggest the record-setting heat wave plaguing much of the United States may be due to radiation emitted from an enormous star located in the center of the solar system.

Scientists believe the star, which they have named G2V65, may in fact be the same bright yellow orb seen arcing over the sky day after day, and given its extreme heat and proximity to Earth, it is likely not only to have caused the heat wave, but to be responsible for every warm day in human history.

"Our measurements indicate the massive amount of energy this thing gives off is able to travel 93 million miles and reach our planet is as little as eight and a half minutes," said Professor Mitch Kivens, an astronomer at the California Institute of Technology. "While we can't see them, we're fairly certain these infrared rays strike Earth's surface, become trapped by the atmosphere, and just heat everything up like a great big oven."

"We originally thought that if this star was producing temperatures of 100-plus in the South and Midwest, it must be at least 100 degrees itself," Kivens added. "But it turns out it's far, far hotter than that, with a surface temperature of nearly 10,900 degrees Fahrenheit."

Kivens and his CalTech colleagues said this intense radiation, which results from constant nuclear reactions converting hydrogen to helium in the star's core, could also account for why the orb in the sky is extremely bright and difficult to stare at directly.

While scientists initially assumed the heat and luminescence of the star must make it the largest in the universe—a theory lent credence by the star appearing much bigger than other objects in the sky—they said the data actually appear to refute such a notion.

"Apparently it's gigantic simply because it's closer to us than any other star," Kivens said. "Which would also account for why we feel this particular star's heat during the day but are not warmed by the tiny blinking stars we see at night."

"It's interesting stuff," he added.

According to Kivens, the discovery has prompted researchers to explore the possibility that a variety of phenomena accompanying the heat wave could also be linked to the star, including taller grass, hot car seats, red skin burns, and sweating "even when one has just been standing there and hasn't been running around or anything."

An additional study is reportedly being conducted to determine if the unexplained shrinking of puddles until they disappear may be caused by star-hotness soaking up all the loose water. Moreover, scientists reportedly believe the heat emitted from the glowing orb could potentially be the reason why it is uncomfortable to walk on asphalt barefoot.

When asked if anything could be done to prevent or counteract the star's heat production, Kivens expressed skepticism.

"No, for the foreseeable future, I think we're locked into orbit with this thing," he said. "Although the star seems to disappear every night, 24-hour reports from around the world seem to indicate the star never leaves Earth entirely."

Residents of heat- and drought-stricken regions welcomed the findings, thankful to finally have an explanation for the high temperatures, if no relief from them.

"That makes sense, because it's usually hotter when that [star] is up in the air," said Stillwater, OK resident Asher Arps, 31, speaking to reporters as temperature rose to 110 degrees over the weekend. "I knew it lit things up, of course, but I didn't realize it could make things hot."

"The big star heats the earth, and the moon cools it—I get it," he added.

As to potential applications of the new discovery, experts acknowledge the possibilities could be limitless.

"This is a watershed moment," renewable energy specialist Dr. Martin Flint said. "Who knows where this could lead? Perhaps we could develop a method of harnessing these big star rays and transforming them into some sort of ecologically friendly power source."

"Wait, what am I saying?" he said, laughing. "I'm getting ahead of myself. We still don't understand how it's possible for that thing to be up in the sky in January when it's freezing outside."

Member Since: July 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 814
1368. Ossqss


I hope this works, its done via phone :-)
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Proposed Solar Project Sparks Fear of Desert Tortoise Wipeout

By Stephen Clark

Published August 12, 2011
| FoxNews.com



A proposed massive solar project in the California desert that is part of President Obama’s commitment to clean energy has sparked fears that rare tortoises in the area will be pushed to brink of extinction even though the Interior Department is forcing the developer to purchase habitat elsewhere.

But environmental activists say it remains to be seen whether the tortoises will ultimately survive the changes.

“Only time will tell,” said Donna Charpied, executive director of Citizens for the Chuckwalla Valley, who openly opposes the project but has worked with the developer on mitigation measures.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar approved the 550-megawatt project this week. The Desert Sunlight Solar Farm will be built in the desert east of Palm Springs on 4,100 acres of public lands.Federal officials say the solar project will generate enough energy to power over 165,000 homes, create more than 630 jobs and infuse $336 million into the local economy.

The company, Desert Sunlight Holdings, LLC, a subsidiary of First Solar Inc, is paying $1.37 million per year for 30 years to rent the public lands, which amounts to $41 million for taxpayers.

First Solar will purchase an additional 7,500 acres of habitat for the desert tortoise.

“The BLM is committed to supporting a clean energy future for America by responsibly developing renewable energy on our country’s public lands,” BLM Director Bob Abbey said in a statement. “And part of that responsibility lies in mitigating the potential impacts of energy development on our wildlife and our lands.”

A BLM spokeswoman told FoxNews.com that the agency identified some area of private lands that it would prefer First Solar to acquire as part of the mitigation for the project. But it is up to the company to find willing sellers and negotiate a price.

First Solar did not respond to a request for comment.

The private lands “would provide connectivity for desert tortoise, allowing them to move from the Chuckwalla Bench area to Joshua Tree and areas north,” BLM spokeswoman Erin Curtis said.

She said the project will be built on “already disturbed lands that are considered marginal habitat for desert tortoise.” The area has already been used heavily by industry, including Kaiser mine and the Colorado River Aqueduct.

If tortoises are encountered during construction, they will be translocated, Curtis said.

During initial surveys, only a two or three tortoises were found in the project area, she said.

But Charpied said she has seen many more than that over the past 30 years that she has lived on her farm that is 600 feet away from the project. She noted that tortoises are shy creatures that may not have revealed themselves during the count.

Charpied said she has cooperated with the company after raising concerns because she realized “the project is going to happen.”

“So just to ignore it and not have anything in place would be sheer murder,” she said.

She said by engaging with the company, “we were able to forge the best mitigation that will provide extra levels of protection for our home, farm and community.”

Curtis noted that BLM reduced First Solar’s proposed total footprint from 19,000 acres down to 4,144 during a year-and-half review and came up with additional mitigation measures after hearing concerns about a number of issues.

“We have a multiple-use mission and part of that is protecting natural resources and part of multiple use is considering the use of land,” Curtis told FoxNews.com. “It’s certainly part of our multiple-use mission, conducted throughout our analysis, to come up with a project that is a win for all.”

Charpied said the BLM is doing its job and just following orders from the president. But she took issue with the president’s energy plan.

I believe that President Obama’s energy plan is misguided,” she said. “It would be nice to have solar panels on rooftops, parking lots, next to transmission lines. But a lot of these projects targeting this area are the complete opposite of what the energy plan should be.”
Member Since: July 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 814
Quoting Xandra:

The oceans are still warming as predicted! Link
Temperature wise or total heat content?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1365. Xandra
Quoting overwash12:
Link What the heck is a going on around here ya'll!

The oceans are still warming as predicted! Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Take me out to the climate blog,

Take me out to the show.

Sell me some theories and unproven facts..I don't care if the scientists are hacks.

So its root,root,root for the green team,

Call names and say its denialist fog,

'Cause its one..two..three decades of info..

Debated at the old climate blog
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Link What the heck is a going on around here ya'll!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xandra:

Nice picture! Yes the water vapor in the global atmosphere has increased by about 5% over the 20th century, and 4% since 1970 due to a warming world. This extra moisture in the air will tend to produce heavier snowstorms. ;)

An amazing, though clearly little-known, scientific fact: We get more snow storms in warm years! Link
I knew that,I was trying to get a cool image to take the heat off the mind!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1361. Xandra
Quoting overwash12:
I needed a little help last year with the driveway,good neighbors I have!LOL

Nice picture! Yes the water vapor in the global atmosphere has increased by about 5% over the 20th century, and 4% since 1970 due to a warming world. This extra moisture in the air will tend to produce heavier snowstorms. ;)

An amazing, though clearly little-known, scientific fact: We get more snow storms in warm years! Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I needed a little help last year with the driveway,good neighbors I have!LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Yes, let's. Such extrapolations are called "trendlines" by statisticians. That's because they indicate, you know, trends. Follow the trends, and voila! Simple, no?
Yes, simple. Like weather and climate. Extrapolation always works perfectly as a prediction in those subjects...
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
Quoting atmoaggie:
Oh, yes, let's extrapolate!

Yes, let's. Such extrapolations are called "trendlines" by statisticians. That's because they indicate, you know, trends. Follow the trends, and voila! Simple, no?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Quoting JBastardi:
Global temps from Jan-Jul 2011 were second coldest this century. This global warming is going to freeze us to death eventually:

Link

From the blog's tagline: "THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENTS IN OUR AND YOUR SUPERSTRINGY UNIVERSE AS SEEN FROM A CONSERVATIVE PHYSICIST'S VIEWPOINT"
So, "conservative" first, "physicist" second. Yeah, I'd definitely trust his take on things. (And the "Pray for Japan" anime kittens only enhance his credibility.) ;-)

The fact is, as even he points out, while 2011 won't be the warmest ever, it'll be warmer than all but eight or nine of the past 130 or so.--and those others have all come in the last decade.

Silly denialist...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Quoting Neapolitan:

You tell us:

Uh-oh
Oh, yes, let's extrapolate!
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
1355. Xandra
Can Bastardi Learn? Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Global temps from Jan-Jul 2011 were second coldest this century (so far). This global warming is going to freeze us to death eventually:

Link
Member Since: July 5, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 403
Here's what the greenies really want: America back in the Dark Ages.

Link
Member Since: July 5, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 403
Quoting Ossqss:
Here is some reading for you. It's weather and weather never stays the same for long :)

That's very true. But when that weather clearly trends one way overall for years and decades, chalking it up to just "weather" is disingenuous at best, IMO.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
1350. Ossqss
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


What is your best guess as to why the patterns are changing?


Here is some reading for you. It's weather and weather never stays the same for long :)


From 2007

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/q uikscat-20071001.html

New

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/755/2011/ tcd-5-755-2011.pdf

and

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/1311/2011 /tcd-5-1311-2011.pdf

Back to work ~ L8R
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Quoting Ossqss:


Perhaps he will admit the weather pattern, not temperature, is responsible for the majority of the ice loss. That pattern has been in place for nearly a decade and is changing. Once the ice stops blowing out of the straits and melting in warm water, it will build rapidly. That just does not get much visibility for it does not pay the same dividends of attribution.


What is your best guess as to why the patterns are changing?
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4764
1348. Ossqss
Quoting overwash12:
"Arctic Sea ice will be gone entirely by as early as September of 2016, and no later than 2020.
" That is a pretty bold prediction there Nea, The winters can get pretty brutal above the arctic circle,I hear they have 6 mos. of darkness with sub-zero temps the norm.


Perhaps he will admit the weather pattern, not temperature, is responsible for the majority of the ice loss. That pattern has been in place for nearly a decade and is changing. Once the ice stops blowing out of the straits and melting in warm water, it will build rapidly. That just does not get much visibility for it does not pay the same dividends of attribution.
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Quoting overwash12:
"Arctic Sea ice will be gone entirely by as early as September of 2016, and no later than 2020." That is a pretty bold prediction there Nea, The winters can get pretty brutal above the arctic circle,I hear they have 6 mos. of darkness with sub-zero temps the norm.

Correct. But note that I didn't say it was going away for good by then; I said it would be gone in September, the annual low point for Arctic Sea ice extent. In fact, I've heard no one--not even the most over-reaching forecaster--predict that Arctic Sea ice will disappear for the entire year. That would simply require far more heat than GW alone would be able to produce.


But they also have many months of daylight in summer, and various positive feedbacks being observed, so I feel safe in making that statement, which, after all, isn't that bold.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
"Arctic Sea ice will be gone entirely by as early as September of 2016, and no later than 2020." That is a pretty bold prediction there Nea, The winters can get pretty brutal above the arctic circle,I hear they have 6 mos. of darkness with sub-zero temps the norm.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1345. rod2635
If Arctic Sea Ice indeed may be gone as early as 2016, as per one prediction, there may oddly enough be a market for collectors who would wish to preserve a portion in a freezer of something that may not reappear for decades if the worst trend predictions come true. Will need to establish various grades of ice, much like diamonds, based on either age, purity, or other factors. Nothing else seems to be selling in this economy.
Member Since: January 27, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 373
Quoting Neapolitan:

I thought I remembered something like this before, so I went searching through my archives, and look what I found:

"Dr. Brinkhuis and many other veteran Arctic researchers caution that there is something of a paradox in Arctic trends: while the long-term fate of the region may be mostly sealed, no one should presume that the recent sharp warming and seasonal ice retreats that have caught the world's attention will continue smoothly into the future.

"The same Arctic feedbacks that are amplifying human-induced climate changes are amplifying natural variability," explained Asgeir Sorteberg, a climate modeler at the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research in Bergen, Norway.

"Indeed, experts say, there could easily be periods in the next few decades when the region cools and ice grows."


That was from October 25, 2005.

So, yes, Arctic Sea ice may temporarily stabilize or even increase--but it hasn't happened yet, and there's no guarantee at all that it will.


Not according to this it won't and isn't!






..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20459
Looks like Dimaggio's streak of 56 will stand again this summer. hooray!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
An update to #1335:

--Wichita Falls did officially make it to 100 degrees today, so the 100-or-hotter streak is extended to 51 days (previous record: 42). Just two to go to reach the record of 79 total in one year.

--Dallas officially made it to "only" 97, so the 100-or-hotter streak is indeed ended at 40.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Quoting JBastardi:
Looks like the Arctic ice "death spiral" is "temporarily" on hold. Of course, according to the "experts," it will continue again sometime in the not-to-distant future. My guess is that they don't want to look like fools for another failed prediction and they possibly see impending cooling:

Link

I thought I remembered something like this before, so I went searching through my archives, and look what I found:

"Dr. Brinkhuis and many other veteran Arctic researchers caution that there is something of a paradox in Arctic trends: while the long-term fate of the region may be mostly sealed, no one should presume that the recent sharp warming and seasonal ice retreats that have caught the world's attention will continue smoothly into the future.

"The same Arctic feedbacks that are amplifying human-induced climate changes are amplifying natural variability," explained Asgeir Sorteberg, a climate modeler at the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research in Bergen, Norway.

"Indeed, experts say, there could easily be periods in the next few decades when the region cools and ice grows."


That was from October 25, 2005.

So, yes, Arctic Sea ice may temporarily stabilize or even increase--but it hasn't happened yet, and there's no guarantee at all that it will.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
1340. Xandra
Quoting Neapolitan:

Congratulations! You have managed to take a WUWT headline and article--itself already distorting the NCAR issue--and distorting it even further. That's quite a trick indeed! Now, let's see if we can follow your line of, er, "logic":

1) NCAR says their computer models show that, under certain unknown climate conditions, Arctic sea ice could stabilize or even increase in extent (though not thickness). The report also goes on to note that, regardless of any temporary stabilization or increase, ice will be gone entirely in summer not so many years down the road. NOTE: such a stabilization or increase has not happened; it is merely theoretically possible according to the models they used. (And, in fact, an MIT study to be published next month says that Arctic Sea ice is melting four times faster than predicted.)

2) WUWT ("We Use Wishful Thinking") picks up the story, but rather than state the obvious--that is, that the ice is disappearing sooner or later--it instead trumpets the possibility that the ice could stabilize or increase in extent.

3) WU's own "JB" takes that, and states unequivocally, "Looks like the Arctic ice 'death spiral' is 'temporarily' on hold".

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that you spent a lot of time playing that children's game called "telephone" when you were younger. ;-)

Anyway, my bet still stands: barring some cataclysmic event such as a mega-volcano eruption, Arctic Sea ice will be gone entirely by as early as September of 2016, and no later than 2020.

4) Anthony Watts forgot this: ”an anthropogenic influence on the most extreme observed 1979-2010 negative trends is now evident for all trend lengths examined (2-54 years)”

Inter-annual to multi-decadal Arctic sea ice extent trends in a warming world Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JBastardi:
Is there really any danger of an ice-free Arctic?

You tell us:

Uh-oh
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Quoting JupiterKen:
And from this information you draw what conclusion?

I'm not sure what others would read into that, but the conclusion I'd draw would be that several near-record, record-setting, or record-tying consecutive day heat streaks are over.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Is there really any danger of an ice-free Arctic?

Link
Member Since: July 5, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 403
Quoting Neapolitan:

Yeah, it looks like the end of the line for several consecutive-day hot streaks:

--Wichita Falls' 100-or-hotter streak will end at 50 (the previous record was 42). The 90-or-hotter streak will continue, however; today was #77. The city needs just three more 100-or-hotter days to tie the annual record of 79. (AFTER-EDIT: Wichita Falls shot up to 97 as of 4PM CDT, so it still has a chance of continuing the 100-or-hotter streak after all.)

--Oklahoma Cty's 90-or-hotter streak will end at 71, tying the old record. The city needs just four more 100-or-hotter days to tie the annual record of 50.

--Amarillo's 90-or-higher record will end at 50. The town has seen 39 100-or-hotter days this year, completely obliterating the previous annual total of 26.

--Ft. Smith, Arkansas' 100-or-hotter streak ended a few days ago at 35.

(Note: some heat over the next few hours could change some of what I just wrote, but I doubt it'll happen.)


And from this information you draw what conclusion?

edit: fixed typpoo
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sullivanweather:
11 13:53 E 7 10.00 Mostly Cloudy FEW050 SCT200 BKN250 96 69 29.88 1010.7
11 12:53 SE 12 G 17 10.00 Mostly Cloudy FEW040 SCT200 BKN300 95 72 95 83 29.88 1010.7
11 11:53 SE 10 G 18 10.00 Mostly Cloudy FEW040 SCT200 BKN300 92 73 29.89 1010.9
11 10:53 S 14 10.00 Mostly Cloudy FEW150 BKN250 90 73 29.88 1010.6
11 09:53 S 12 10.00 Fair CLR 87 73 29.87 1010.3

Looks like the streak will end today for DFW at 40. Outflow boundary currently passing through and should drop temps into the 80's.


Addendum: I mention this because I had been paying attention to this record in particular (family in Dallas, so I keep an eye on their weather).

Yeah, it looks like the end of the line for several consecutive-day hot streaks:

--Wichita Falls' 100-or-hotter streak will end at 50 (the previous record was 42). The 90-or-hotter streak will continue, however; today was #77. The city needs just three more 100-or-hotter days to tie the annual record of 79. (AFTER-EDIT: Wichita Falls shot up to 97 as of 4PM CDT, so it still has a chance of continuing the 100-or-hotter streak after all.)

--Oklahoma Cty's 90-or-hotter streak will end at 71, tying the old record. The city needs just four more 100-or-hotter days to tie the annual record of 50.

--Amarillo's 90-or-higher record will end at 50. The town has seen 39 100-or-hotter days this year, completely obliterating the previous annual total of 26.

--Ft. Smith, Arkansas' 100-or-hotter streak ended a few days ago at 35.

(Note: some heat over the next few hours could change some of what I just wrote, but I doubt it'll happen.)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
1334. Ossqss
Great googly moogly!

And I thought there was something new and exciting going on to load up so many posts.

Nope, just a computer glitch and the same old same :)



Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Quoting JBastardi:
Looks like the Arctic ice "death spiral" is "temporarily" on hold. Of course, according to the "experts," it will continue again sometime in the not-to-distant future. My guess is that they don't want to look like fools for another failed prediction and they possibly see impending cooling:

Link

Congratulations! You have managed to take a WUWT headline and article--itself already distorting the NCAR issue--and distorting it even further. That's quite a trick indeed! Now, let's see if we can follow your line of, er, "logic":

1) NCAR says their computer models show that, under certain unknown climate conditions, Arctic sea ice could stabilize or even increase in extent (though not thickness). The report also goes on to note that, regardless of any temporary stabilization or increase, ice will be gone entirely in summer not so many years down the road. NOTE: such a stabilization or increase has not happened; it is merely theoretically possible according to the models they used. (And, in fact, an MIT study to be published next month says that Arctic Sea ice is melting four times faster than predicted.)

2) WUWT ("We Use Wishful Thinking") picks up the story, but rather than state the obvious--that is, that the ice is disappearing sooner or later--it instead trumpets the possibility that the ice could stabilize or increase in extent.

3) WU's own "JB" takes that, and states unequivocally, "Looks like the Arctic ice 'death spiral' is 'temporarily' on hold".

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that you spent a lot of time playing that children's game called "telephone" when you were younger. ;-)

Anyway, my bet still stands: barring some cataclysmic event such as a mega-volcano eruption, Arctic Sea ice will be gone entirely by as early as September of 2016, and no later than 2020.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Quoting Neapolitan:

On the plus side, he's only been a member since yesterday and has nearly 1,000 comments. Don't tell Taz... ;-)


LMAO!
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4764
Quoting petewxwatcher:
Purple that would be confidential business info I think. I don't know how aqua would know but if aquak9 found out I bet they wouldn't like that info being released and aquak9 would have the handle yanked.

Even if the spammer isn't telling others how to do this other trolls know it can be done now. This will be bad.

Are you serious? Advertising rates aren't confidential and proprietary; if they were, no one would buy time or space. "Sorry, Mr. Advertiser. We can't tell you how much it will cost your for us to run your commercials; that's classified information. Just send us a signed, blank check." ;-)

Speaking of membership: I re-upped today.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13721
Looks like the Arctic ice "death spiral" is "temporarily" on hold. Of course, according to the "experts," it will continue again sometime in the not-to-distant future. My guess is that they don't want to look like fools for another failed prediction and they possibly see impending cooling:

Link
Member Since: July 5, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 403
no problemo, aqua. thank you for the input
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1328. aquak9
no you did not come off as mean, you came off as sarcastic. Sorry if I mis-interpreted.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1327. aquak9
its not important anyway. I just wanted a ballpark number.

They don't make public thier advertising costs, and I probably should not, either. They deal with businesses, one on one.

My POINT IS, we bloggers and our silly membership fees MEAN NOTHING.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
wow. you people need to get a grip. did I come across as a mean guy? sorry I asked, aqua.

sheesh
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting petewxwatcher:
Purple that would be confidential business info I think. I don't know how aqua would know but if aquak9 found out I bet they wouldn't like that info being released and aquak9 would have the handle yanked.

Even if the spammer isn't telling others how to do this other trolls know it can be done now. This will be bad.


what? I'm just asking how much it costs to advertise. I'm not asking for a copy of their balance sheet.

its not important anyway. I just wanted a ballpark number.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1324. aquak9
Are you taking me to task, Drank? (geez I see folks using two different log-ons to talk to themselves these days)

Here's the link to the beginning of contacting advertising for WU. Link
Wanna talk postage stamp size, a few hours a day, for a month? Do you own a small business? Know someone who does? Have them check it out.

Go do your own investigating, Drank. I don't ask anyone to do mine.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Purple that would be confidential business info I think. I don't know how aqua would know but if aquak9 found out I bet they wouldn't like that info being released and aquak9 would have the handle yanked.

Even if the spammer isn't telling others how to do this other trolls know it can be done now. This will be bad.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aquak9:
900 comments in 6 minutes? If someone can spam like this, it will ruin all the blogs. It looks like a test for a DNS to see if it will work.

And this is EXACTLY why Admin needs to have a real live human monitoring the blog. But in all honesty? WU makes only a fraction of a fraction of it's profits from any of us on the blogs. Membership fees mean nothing when hundreds of thousands of dollars are being brought in from advertising, every month.

Don't believe me? Check into the cost of advertising on WU. I already have.


tell us how much it costs to advertise on wu please
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1319. PurpleDrank 3:44 PM EDT on August 11, 2011 +1
you mean like a blog flash mob?


exactly.
Member Since: July 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 814

Viewing: 1371 - 1321

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.