# Point of View

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:03 AM GMT on August 23, 2012

Point of View: Models, Water, and Temperature (6)

This is a series of blogs on models, water, and temperature (see Intro). I am starting with models. In this series, I am trying to develop a way to build a foundation for nonscientists to feel comfortable about models and their use in scientific investigation. I expect to get some feedback on how to do this better from the comments. In order to keep a solid climate theme, I am going to have two sections to the entries. One section will be on models, and the other will be on a research result, new or old, that I think is of particular interest.

Doing Science with Models 1.3: In the previous entry of this series I used the example of balancing a monthly checking account to make the point that studying the Earth’s climate is very much like balancing a budget. Rather than money, we calculate a budget of energy.

Energy is one of the attributes used by scientists to describe the physical world, and it is a basic law of classical physics that energy is conserved. There are the laws of conservation of energy, conservation of mass, and conservation of momentum. Momentum describes how an object is moving: its mass, its speed, and its direction.

I introduced the concept of making a mathematical representation of the real world with this equation for money

Today’s Money = Yesterday’s Money + Money I Get – Money I Spend

and I came to point where I said we have a similar equation for energy

Earth’s Energy Today = Earth’s Energy Yesterday + Energy Gained – Energy Lost

These equations are the most basic models for the process that they describe. In fact, these equations could be said to be the perfect model for your personal budget of money or the Earth’s budget of energy. In the jargon of the scientist who builds models, this perfect model is often called the “analytic” model because it can be solved exactly, or analytically, by arithmetic.

The next idea I want to introduce is point of view. In the first instance, above, the equation represents a personal budget. In the second instance, the equation represents the energy budget of the whole Earth. Recall in the previous entry when I set up the problem of looking at the Earth’s energy, I said to imagine a person not on Earth, but who is observing the Earth. The observer, perhaps on Mars, sees the Earth as a small dot with energy coming in from the Sun, which the Earth then emits back to space from the Earth. If the Earth is in an energy balance, then the amount on energy coming back to space equals that coming in from the Sun.

That’s interesting to think about for a minute. Let’s assume that the Sun is constant. Then if the Earth is in an energy balance, the energy coming back to space is the same no matter the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So to the person on Mars, the Earth would look the same. But the conditions on Earth might be quite different if the atmosphere had 600 rather than 300 molecules of carbon dioxide per every million molecules of air. This is because the point of view that we are interested in is from the surface of the Earth.

In 2010 I had a series of blogs called Bumps and Wiggles (here, go back and give it some “likes”). In the third of that series, I introduced Simple Earth. Here is that figure, which is described more completely in the original blog.

Figure 1: Simple Earth 1: Some basic ingredients of the Earth’s climate.

The problem of climate and climate change is important because of our point of view. If we are to continue to build thriving economies in our societies, we need a stable climate. In this case, stable really means that we know what to expect. Therefore, the climate of the Earth that might be of interest to that person sitting on Mars is not especially relevant to the person sitting on the surface of the Earth. Therefore, we need to think of models that are from the point of view of the person on the surface of the Earth. Again, energy and the law of conservation of energy come to the forefront.

In the figure, if the stick man looks around there is energy everywhere. It comes as heat from the Sun. It comes as wind from the air. It comes as waves from the sea. It comes as food from the land. So the accounting problem becomes more complex. We need the budget of energy for the atmosphere, the oceans, the land, and the glaciers and ice sheets. This energy needs to be balanced with what comes in from the Sun and what goes back to space. It is the same simple-to-conceive classical physics, but since we are in the middle of it all, the problem becomes complex. Still though, it is only a matter of balancing the books.

Interesting Research: Warming and Cooling in Ice Sheets - I’m usually not the blogger reporting on the most recent papers and breaking research, but this week I am different. The paper is Recent Antarctic Peninsula warming relative to Holocene climate and ice-shelf history, which was published online on August 22, 2012 in Nature. Robert Mulvaney is the senior author. The press take on this paper is that ice-core data show that over the previous, approximately, 12,000 years (the Holocene), there have been a number of times when there has been warming on James Ross Island, an island off the Antarctic Peninsula. These periods of warming have been comparable to the warming observed in the last 50 years, and hence, there are examples of warming that are not caused by the recent increases in carbon dioxide. There are scientific and political consequences of this paper. I will try to think like a scientist.

What does this paper say about generalized warming of the planet due to green house gases? First, we have to look at the locality of the data. It is from a single small island, in a part of the world that is known to have substantial fluctuations of temperature. We then need to look at how this knowledge fits in with the body of evidence as a whole. For example, Mulvaney and coauthors found a prominent warming period about 600 years ago. Was this warming at James Ross Island accompanied by warming of the same global extent as the currently observed warming? Are there other existing data that suggest natural internal variability during these previous times of warming? Is there something different in the past 50 years that distinguishes the current warming from the previous times of warming? The list goes on. So this result needs to be placed in context of all of the data and knowledge, and the coherence of this new information with the existing information needs to be evaluated.

This paper highlights the difficulty of extracting the contribution of warming due to carbon dioxide increase for any particular event. Ages ago, I had a blog on the breakup of the Larsen Ice Shelf. This new result makes the easy attribution of that ice-shelf collapse to human-caused warming difficult. As above, that attribution problem requires looking at the ice- shelf collapse in concert with other information. Was the event isolated? Is there evidence of other causes of variability? Is there something now that is different from the past? One attribution question that I can see – can the extra warming from carbon dioxide push the melting of the ice shelf over a tipping point?

Finally, I will bring us back to models, as models are ubiquitous in climate science and science in general. Within this paper, a glaciological model is used to determine the age scale. This model represents the flow of ice in the glacier, and that flow is assumed to remain constant over the time of the study. Another place that a model is used is determining the temperature based on the observations of isotopes of oxygen. This requires a melding of theory and application. Therefore, when you say, “but the observations show …” remember the role of models in making those observations.

r

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

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: 159 - 109

9:23 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting SteveDa1:Oh, in that case... Congrats pintada, you really had me! :)LOL No problem.Comedy is always done without a net. Sometimes the material just doesn't work. :-)Blame it on Xulonn, he's the one that got me started. :-) Comments 140 and 143 LOL
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 158. SteveDa1
7:41 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 157. Daisyworld
6:07 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting SteveDa1:Please 'pintada' and 'climateinfidel', take your nonsense elsewhere. This is a science blog, not some conspiracy-theorists board meeting.I think WU needs to implement a "sarcasm meter" so authors can better convey the intended sarcasm of their comments...
Member Since: January 11, 2012 Posts: 6 Comments: 927
##### 156. SteveDa1
5:30 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Please 'pintada' and 'climateinfidel', take your nonsense elsewhere. This is a science blog, not some conspiracy-theorists board meeting.
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 155. Some1Has2BtheRookie
5:24 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Deleted
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4997
4:47 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting ClimateInfidel:I do not care about the evidence. Those who hold power have too much to gain by convincing us that this temperature increase, unlike those that have come before, is our fault.I fear a global government with the power to control people to the extent it would take to control "greenhouse" gases much more than I fear global warming. Social engineering on that level would lead to a global dictatorship and unprecedented oppression. Environmentalism is just recycled communism!Too true brother, you have hit the nail on the head!These Eco Fascists (or as you would have it EcoCommies) trot out their "proof" and their "evidence" at every turn, but I know (and you've noticed it too) that all that "proof" is provided by scientists. Yes, incredibly, they believe the scientific "evidence" when you and I know the only real knowledge is provided by a good protestant pastor!Then they start with the guilt. The polar bear is going extinct - Boo Hoo. Red blooded americans like you and I don't care about a few bears. Anyhow, I hear that they are dangerous when not in a zoo anyway.If a few billion NON-americans die what do you and i care, right ClimateInfidel? You bet you're right. Heck, most of them aren't even pure blooded anyhow.According to the EcoFreaks, no new conventional oil has been found in the US since 1972, and the fracing now being done might pollute a little groundwater. The EcoCommies don't realize that - Drill, Baby Drill!! - is the answer. God will keep that oil flowing for us and make us enjoy the taste of fracing fluid to boot!Its just like our brothers at the GOP convention are saying. Pray, cut taxes for the wealthy (of course we both know they mean white when they say wealthy, Praise God), let corporations do anything and everything they want, and push the poor in front of a bus in lieu of medical care. We have the Supreme Court, if we can just get the Presidency and Congress too we can make some real progress!! Before you know it we'll be stoning gays and burning witches just like the bible demands!As white christian Americans, we have the God given right to our Hummers and our modest 3000 sq ft houses!Its so refreshing to see a post from a true American!! Keep it up, ClimateInfidel! America needs you!!
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 153. Neapolitan
3:00 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting ClimateInfidel:I do not care about the evidence.Thank you for so honestly and concisely summarizing the denialist point of view. Such candor is quite sad, but nevertheless refreshing.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14561
3:00 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting Xulonn:Oh damn - "The Onion" of climate change blogs - and I got suckered. Even when you face a great crisis, you've got to lighten up occasionally - or you'll go crazy or become seriously depressed.This segues wonderfully into something that i've been obsessing about as i work in the garden or on a project. The fact is that we can learn everything we need to know from popular media and - of course - the blogsphere.Knowledge Brings Fear - moto of Mars UniversityLeela - "Lets go skiing."Fry - "Skiing? So, global warming didn't happen after all."Leela - "Oh, it happened ... Thank God nuclear winter cancelled it out."And we must never ignore the life lessons offered by my heros Bill and Ted:While on their bogus journey, they were cast into the pit. On the way down, they of course screamed like little girls. Then, they looked at each other, took a deep breath and screamed some more. Finally, they could do nothing but make small talk.Party on, Dude!But ultimately, we must all admit our failings and come to the true faith. I found salvation at : Landover Babtist "If you don't find God at Landover Babtist find God elsewhere."( CAUTION: These true believers pull no punches)
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 150. cyclonebuster
12:11 PM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting ClimateInfidel:I do not care about the evidence. Those who hold power have too much to gain by convincing us that this temperature increase, unlike those that have come before, is our fault.I fear a global government with the power to control people to the extent it would take to control "greenhouse" gases much more than I fear global warming. Social engineering on that level would lead to a global dictatorship and unprecedented oppression. Environmentalism is just recycled communism!So when the end is near do you want to be disconnected from the life support system?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 135 Comments: 20855
##### 149. ClimateInfidel
11:56 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 I do not care about the evidence. Those who hold power have too much to gain by convincing us that this temperature increase, unlike those that have come before, is our fault.I fear a global government with the power to control people to the extent it would take to control "greenhouse" gases much more than I fear global warming. Social engineering on that level would lead to a global dictatorship and unprecedented oppression. Environmentalism is just recycled communism!
Member Since: August 31, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 0
##### 148. SteveDa1
5:59 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 .
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 147. SteveDa1
5:57 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Arctic Tipping Point: A North Pole Without IceScientists say this year's record declines in Arctic sea ice extent and volume are powerful evidence that the giant cap of ice at the top of the planet is on a trajectory to largely disappear in summer within a decade or two, with profound global consequences."Peter Wadhams, who heads the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge, [...] believes that the Arctic is likely to become ice-free before 2020 and possibly as early as 2015 or 2016 - decades ahead of projections made just a few years ago."
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 146. BobWallace
4:56 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting Xulonn:Oh damn - "The Onion" of climate change blogs - and I got suckered. Even when you face a great crisis, you've got to lighten up occasionally - or you'll go crazy or become seriously depressed.I had the same reaction the first time I stumbled on that site. It took some reading of back posts before things were clear.OT - from your blog it looks like you found a sweet spot to live. I totally understand what you mean by "looks good from a distance, but it's a little rough around the edges" or however you put it. Craftsmanship isn't common in some cultures. 'Course we're kind of loosing it here to factory edges.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 145. Xulonn
4:16 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Oh damn - "The Onion" of climate change blogs - and I got suckered. Even when you face a great crisis, you've got to lighten up occasionally - or you'll go crazy or become seriously depressed.
Member Since: June 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1775
##### 144. BobWallace
4:03 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting Xulonn:Bob Wallace - Unfortunately, the threshold for my snark-o-meter detection device is set way out there for the denier crowd. I can actually imagine one of them believing that. After a quick recalibration, I think you're correct.Read some of the other stuff on the site. You could start with the About..."Welcome to my climate science blog. I believe that one day all science will be done on blogs because we bloggers are natural skeptics, disbelieving the mainstream and accepting the possibility of any alternative idea. We stand unimpressed by "textbooks", "peer review journals" and so-called "facts". There are no facts, just dissenting opinion. We are infinitely small compared to nature and can't grasp anything as certain as a fact. Nothing is settled and we should question everything. The debate is NOT over Gore! When so-called "experts" in their "peer reviewed journals" say one thing, we dare the impossible and find imaginative ways to believe something else entirely. "
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 143. Xulonn
2:06 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Bob Wallace - Unfortunately, the threshold for my snark-o-meter detection device is set way out there for the denier crowd. I can actually imagine one of them believing that. After a quick recalibration, I think you're correct.
Member Since: June 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1775
##### 142. BobWallace
1:51 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting Xulonn:This comment below the Nazi parody had me shaking my head in amazament at the ignorance displayed...Perhaps you don't have your snark filter adjusted?Feel free to add your encouraging words to the comment section. I got some in....
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 141. SteveDa1
1:23 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 Quoting Xulonn:This comment below the Nazi parody had me shaking my head in amazament at the ignorance displayed...I must admit I've never heard that one before!And this is from someone who sometimes reads - for some reason - the absolutely absurd comments posted on Brett Anderson's climate change blog, among others.
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 140. Xulonn
12:25 AM GMT on August 31, 2012
 This comment below the Nazi parody had me shaking my head in amazament at the ignorance displayed...Quoting Endorphin monkey:By the way, there's less ice in the Arctic this year because there's more in the Antarctic. It balances out somehow. And if it's not in the Antarctic, it's on mountain-tops or in ice-cube trays or something. Whatever.
Member Since: June 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1775
##### 139. BobWallace
11:34 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 The extreme Russian heatwave of 2010 was made three times more likely because of man-made climate change, according to a study led by climate scientists and number-crunched by home PC users. But the size of the event was mostly within natural limits, said the scientists, laying to rest a controversy last year over whether the extreme weather was natural or human-induced.The 2010 heatwave broke all records for Russia – temperatures in the central region of the country, including Moscow, were around 10C above what they should have been for the time of year. More than 50,000 people died from respiratory illnesses and heat stress during that time. The temperatures also had a substantial impact on that year's Russian wheat harvest, leading to economic losses of more than \$15bn.Two studies published in 2011 looked at the causes of the extreme weather, but they disagreed on whether it was a natural event or whether it was a result of anthropogenic climate change.An American team led by Randy Dole of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) suggested that the heatwave was mostly natural in origin. "They based that on the fact that there was no basis for anticipating the heatwave given the conditions which applied at that time in Russia," said Myles Allen, a climate scientist at Oxford University. "Heatwaves of that nature had happened in the past on a 100-year timescale and there wasn't an obvious significant trend in temperatures in that region or in the statistics of hot temperatures in that region. They came to the conclusion this was an event that was mostly natural in origin. There was no need to induce climate change to explain this event."A separate study by Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research near Berlin suggested otherwise . "What they [said] was that the risk of the heatwave occurring had gone up by a substantial factor, the odds of it occurring were 80% due to the large-scale warming trend and, of course, most of that large-scale warming is attributed to human influences on climate," said Allen.Link
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 138. OldLeatherneck
11:24 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting BobWallace:Do we really want to try to predict future methane releases using CO2 levels?In past warmings CO2 followed warming caused by non-CO2 forcings. A shift in Earth orbit, for example.This time, thanks to us, increased CO2 is coming first and heat increase is happening second. Seems like we've got a somewhat different process playing out.I'm not using my laptop right now, so I don't have access to all of my files and links regarding methane.However, Dr. Yurganov regularly posts the monthly AIRS satellite measurements, of the CH4 concentrations in the upper troposphere, for both hemispheres, dating back to late 2002.AIRS CH4 Northern HemisphereSince 2008, the IASI satellite has been measuring the CH4 concentrations in the lower troposphere. Dr. Yurganov posts these concentration maps in ~10 day samples for each month. Although, all of the maps for every month since 2008 are not available on-line.IASI CH4 Northern HemisphereOn August 20th, Dr. Yurganov released a letter, with many charts/graphs, discussing the capabilities and limitations of the current satellite measurement systems. It is obvious from some of the graphs, that the upper latitudes have the highest concentrations and emissions sources of methane. The entire pdf. file and individual charts/graphs are downloadable. I believe I posted some of them in Dr. Roods last post (Models #5).Methane Emission From The Arctic Ocean?Ice core samples going back ~400,000 years show that methane levels fluctuated between 400 & 800 ppb during the interglacials. Now since the dawn of the industrial age, methane levels are exceeding 1900 ppb. The 'hockey stick' is almost a mirror image of the CO2 'hockey stick'.One thing to remember is that some of that CO2 in the atmosphere today, started it's journey in life as methane. That could be why most in-situ measurements of CO2 in the Arctic Regions are exceeding 400ppm, while globally they are still around 395ppm.
Member Since: May 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 235
##### 137. BobWallace
11:13 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting pintada:Well ... i dunno about the Sudan. Its tough for me to pin that situation on AGW.Though as I recall drought had a role, i always thought the grinding poverty coupled with religion was the cause. Plus, the drought could have been just normal weather - especially back in '03.If i give you the Sudan, the only thing i need to change in my prediction is the word "first" to "next". :-)Its interesting to me, now that you point it out, that both France and Russia were simple weather events. No need to get complicated there.The conflict in Darfur has been driven by climate change and environmental degradation, which threaten to trigger a succession of new wars across Africa unless more is done to contain the damage, according to a UN report published yesterday."Darfur ... holds grim lessons for other countries at risk," an 18-month study of Sudan by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) concludes.LinkIn an analysis of the French episode of heat wave in 2003, this article highlights how heat wavedangers result from the intricate association of natural and social factors. Unusually high temperatures, as well as socioeconomic vulnerability, along with social attenuation of hazards, ina general context where the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is becoming moreplausible, led to an excess of 14,947 deaths in France, between August 4 and 18, 2003. Thegreatest increase in mortality was due to causes directly attributable to heat: dehydration,hyperthermia, heat stroke. In addition to age and gender, combinatorial factors included preexisting disease, medication, urban residence, isolation, poverty, and, probably, air pollution.Although diversely impacted or reported, many parts of Europe suffered human and otherlosses, such as farming and forestry through drought and ﬁres. Summer 2003 was the hottestin Europe since 1500, very likely due in part to anthropogenic climate change. The Frenchexperience conﬁrms research establishing that heat waves are a major mortal risk, number oneamong so-called natural hazards in postindustrial societies. Yet France had no policy in place,as if dangerous climate were restricted to a distant or uncertain future of climate change, orto preindustrial countries. We analyze the heat wave’s proﬁle as a strongly attenuated risk inthe French context, as well as the causes and the effects of its sudden shift into ampliﬁcation.Research and preparedness needs are highlighted. LinkNow, I haven't done a proper literature review to see if the climate community continues to support these as climate change driven events, but you could use them as a starting point.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
10:32 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting BobWallace:You mean like the 200,000 - 300,000 Sudanese deaths in 2003 when nomads moved from their drought stricken deserts and forced land away from farmers?France (70,000 deaths in 2003) and Russia (50,000 deaths in 2010) fell a bit short.Well ... i dunno about the Sudan. Its tough for me to pin that situation on AGW.Though as I recall drought had a role, i always thought the grinding poverty coupled with religion was the cause. Plus, the drought could have been just normal weather - especially back in '03.If i give you the Sudan, the only thing i need to change in my prediction is the word "first" to "next". :-)Its interesting to me, now that you point it out, that both France and Russia were simple weather events. No need to get complicated there.
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 135. BobWallace
9:48 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting pintada:Yeah, thats what i'm thinking about the data. No worries, when it comes out, someone will post it either here or on Nevin.And my guess about Slingo is that she has become more of a bureaucrat than a scientist lately and is being super conservative to maintain her position and the position of the British Met Office.I have been thinking about committing to a prediction about when the first 100,000 person event will happen, but my lack of knowledge was making me hesitate.Oh, well. I'm taking an easy day anyhow ...I think the first 100 Kiloperson event will happen by the end of June 2013.It will not be as simple as a single weather event, but it will be easily tied together with logic of the form:The arctic ice cap is nearly gone - melted away.As a result, the jet stream is meandering more and is changing locations more slowly.As a result, the midwest was very dry (and will continue to be so statistically frequently forever).As a result, the corn and soybean crops in the US were down by 30%.As a result, (and heres where it gets dicy)The price of food in Ethiopia went high enough that coupled with the power vacuum since their president-for-life recently died the new dictator decided to invade Somalia.Africa in general seems a safe bet for the location of the event.orThe price of food went up high enough in the Manipur state of India that the Hindus/Christians/Animists got pissed off and started killing muslims (Bangladeshi immigrants). (Actually this scenario could be the first gigaperson event given that Pakistan would love to have an excuse to use its Nukes.)In review, I predict the first 100 kiloperson event directly attributable to AGW will occur somewhere in the world before July 1, 2013.You mean like the 200,000 - 300,000 Sudanese deaths in 2003 when nomads moved from their drought stricken deserts and forced land away from farmers?France (70,000 deaths in 2003) and Russia (50,000 deaths in 2010) fell a bit short.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 134. JohnLonergan
9:45 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 PIOMASS is out today, another one bites the dust.Link
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 4341
##### 133. cyclonebuster
9:17 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting Neapolitan:Finally, a Hitler Downfall parody some of us here can appreciate. WARNING: some of the subtitle language is coarse, so I won't embed the video; I've chosen instead to link to it (Thanks, Denial Depot):http://denialdepot.blogspot.com/2012/08/arctic-se a-ice-downfall.html;-)I saw that on Dr.Manns Facebook.....and made a comment about it. WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE???
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 135 Comments: 20855
8:40 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting BobWallace:Are we adequately set up to measure methane reliably? Do we have good baseline data?I'm just asking, I don't know. But if there's a measurement problem, that could slow reports.It could also be that the data is being looked at within the discipline and outlets to the public aren't as well developed as are sea ice, temp and other data.Yeah, thats what i'm thinking about the data. No worries, when it comes out, someone will post it either here or on Nevin.And my guess about Slingo is that she has become more of a bureaucrat than a scientist lately and is being super conservative to maintain her position and the position of the British Met Office.I have been thinking about committing to a prediction about when the first 100,000 person event will happen, but my lack of knowledge was making me hesitate.Oh, well. I'm taking an easy day anyhow ...I think the first 100 Kiloperson event will happen by the end of June 2013.It will not be as simple as a single weather event, but it will be easily tied together with logic of the form:The arctic ice cap is nearly gone - melted away.As a result, the jet stream is meandering more and is changing locations more slowly.As a result, the midwest was very dry (and will continue to be so statistically frequently forever).As a result, the corn and soybean crops in the US were down by 30%.As a result, (and heres where it gets dicy)The price of food in Ethiopia went high enough that coupled with the power vacuum since their president-for-life recently died the new dictator decided to invade Somalia.Africa in general seems a safe bet for the location of the event.orThe price of food went up high enough in the Manipur state of India that the Hindus/Christians/Animists got pissed off and started killing muslims (Bangladeshi immigrants). (Actually this scenario could be the first gigaperson event given that Pakistan would love to have an excuse to use its Nukes.)In review, I predict the first 100 kiloperson event directly attributable to AGW will occur somewhere in the world before July 1, 2013.
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 130. Neapolitan
8:05 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Finally, a Hitler Downfall parody some of us here can appreciate. WARNING: some of the subtitle language is coarse, so I won't embed the video; I've chosen instead to link to it (Thanks, Denial Depot):http://denialdepot.blogspot.com/2012/08/arctic-se a-ice-downfall.html;-)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14561
##### 129. BobWallace
6:49 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting pintada:Yes, my confusion exactly.In the study, the natural process(es) didn't become dire until CO2 reached very high levels - 900ppm.But today, those who seem to know (i.e. AMEG) see massive discharges of methane at current and by comparison rather paltry CO2 levels. What gives?Also, the methane numbers are always delayed. I have not seen any methane numbers since the storm. Is there some data gathering difficulty? When will they be out?Also, whats the deal with Dr. Slingo? She seems to be an honorable person that doesn't agree with the PIOMAS data, but what data is she waiting for?Are we adequately set up to measure methane reliably? Do we have good baseline data?I'm just asking, I don't know. But if there's a measurement problem, that could slow reports.It could also be that the data is being looked at within the discipline and outlets to the public aren't as well developed as are sea ice, temp and other data.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 128. cyclonebuster
6:03 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 BOTH PASSAGES WIDE OPEN NOW......WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE......IS THIS THE NEW NORMAL NOW??????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 135 Comments: 20855
##### 127. cyclonebuster
5:53 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Sadly this graph will have to be rescaled downward to show ice melt below 2 million/SKM and sadly the denialist will take this to be the new normal. Where is the media in all of this. Who are the media Nazi's keeping their "Jack Boot" of oppression on the climate scientists throats and preventing them the prime time television shows to show what is really happening with Gods good Earth? WHERE IS THE FREAKING OUTRAGE?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 135 Comments: 20855
5:26 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting BobWallace:Do we really want to try to predict future methane releases using CO2 levels?In past warmings CO2 followed warming caused by non-CO2 forcings. A shift in Earth orbit, for example.This time, thanks to us, increased CO2 is coming first and heat increase is happening second. Seems like we've got a somewhat different process playing out.Yes, my confusion exactly.In the study, the natural process(es) didn't become dire until CO2 reached very high levels - 900ppm.But today, those who seem to know (i.e. AMEG) see massive discharges of methane at current and by comparison rather paltry CO2 levels. What gives?Also, the methane numbers are always delayed. I have not seen any methane numbers since the storm. Is there some data gathering difficulty? When will they be out?Also, whats the deal with Dr. Slingo? She seems to be an honorable person that doesn't agree with the PIOMAS data, but what data is she waiting for?
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
5:11 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting Neapolitan:If Mann loses, it would be disappointing, but not that huge a deal. Since he's the plaintiff, the status quo would simply be maintained; denialists would continue to publish utter garbage--including calumnious statements--out of a deepening sense of desperation. But if, OTOH, Mann prevails--and I believe he just might--professional denialists will be forced to attack climate science instead of climate scientists. And since there's no way for the denialist POV to ever win a head-to-head match with the overwhelming science, they will be handed their coats and hats, and ejected from the arena.I see your point.Actually, the jury did good in the Apple vs Samsung case, and by some accounts that case was very complex, so given Mann got the best attorney, it could turn out good.His victory would depend on his ability to find the kick butt lawyer and get tons of donations.The few dollars I could donate might just help.
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 124. BobWallace
3:55 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting pintada:Questions: any help would be appreciatedThe authors assume (? or perhaps they have data) that the really nasty methane releases didn't occur until the CO2 level hit 900ppm. How does that mesh with the AMEG claims?I'm thinking its a issue of scale, both temporal and in terms of the effects. At 900ppm and over the course of 10000 years, all of the methane in permafrost is released in their model. Are the people at AMEG thinking that small releases like those documented in comment 117 above will push the planet toward 900ppm? Or are they saying that our current levels of CO2 are sufficient given other factors (i.e. atmospheric chemistry, position of continents, etc.) to push the planet to release all of the methane now (within ~100yrs)?Do we really want to try to predict future methane releases using CO2 levels?In past warmings CO2 followed warming caused by non-CO2 forcings. A shift in Earth orbit, for example.This time, thanks to us, increased CO2 is coming first and heat increase is happening second. Seems like we've got a somewhat different process playing out.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 123. BobWallace
3:37 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Yes We AreTwo recently-issued federal studies underscore the dramatic growth in electrical generation from geothermal, solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources during the first three and one-half years of the Obama Administration.According to the latest issue of EIA's "Electric Power Monthly " with data through to June 30, 2012, non-hydro renewable sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) provided 5.76% of net electrical generation for the first half of 2012. This represents an increase of 10.97% compared to the same period in 2011. Solar increased by 97.2% while wind grew 16.3% and geothermal by 0.2%. However, biomass dipped by 0.8%. For the first six months of 2012, wind contributed 3.84% of net electrical generation followed by biomass (1.40%), geothermal (0.43%), and solar ** (0.09%).LinkThe average gas mileage of new cars and trucks will have to nearly double by 2025 under regulations that were finalized Tuesday by the Obama administration.The new rules would require the fleet of new cars and trucks to average 54.5 miles per gallon in 13 years, up from 28.6 mpg at the end of last year.The regulations will change the cars and trucks in U.S. showrooms and drive automakers to introduce new technology to make vehicles cleaner and more efficient.The administration says the regulations will save families more than \$1.7 trillion in fuel costs and bring an average savings of \$8,000 over the lifetime of a new vehicle sold in 2025. The standards also will halve the greenhouse gas pollution coming from cars and light truck tailpipes by 2025, the White House said in a statement.LinkNow, how do we make even more progress from 2013 on? Might we need to get even more of the good kind of people in Congress so that PBO can accomplish even more? There's only so much he can do without help from Congress.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 122. BobWallace
3:28 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Rapid melting of Arctic sea ice possibly explained.Colder, saltier meltwater could be forcing warmer water to surface.Arctic researchers have discovered a clue as to why sea ice in the North is melting so much faster than anyone thought it would.Scientists have long puzzled over why Arctic sea ice is retreating at up to three times the rate that climate models say it should.In an effort to answer that question, a group of U.K-based explorers walked more than 500 kilometres of sea ice in the High Arctic, taking temperature readings of the ocean below them.They found a layer of cold, salty water about 200 metres down that they suspect has come from the melting of first-year ice.That meltwater has forced the relatively warmer water to the surface, where it's speeding up the decay of more ice."We're trying to understand why the ice is melting so fast," said Simon Boxall of the Catlin Arctic Survey. "It's not just down to simple warming. There are more complicated processes."The speed at which sea ice is disappearing in the Arctic has far exceeded almost all predictions and alarmed climate scientists.A 2007 paper from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., found that the projections of the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were already obsolete three years after they were published.LinkIf is the case look for melt seasons to lengthen, it might be colder above the ice but bottom melt will continue. With each new piece of bad news my personal odds of next year being "it" rises. At this point the only hope I see for the sea ice is a very unusually cold winter.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 121. Neapolitan
3:12 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting pintada:As the resident Negative Nelly, I've got to point out a doubt.The result of a trial, especially a jury trial, is linked as much to the competence of the attorneys involved than the actual evidence. If Dr. Mann can get a Clarence Darrow clone to represent him great ...butWhat if he looses?A loss would set things back a decade? More?If Mann loses, it would be disappointing, but not that huge a deal. Since he's the plaintiff, the status quo would simply be maintained; denialists would continue to publish utter garbage--including calumnious statements--out of a deepening sense of desperation. But if, OTOH, Mann prevails--and I believe he just might--professional denialists will be forced to attack climate science instead of climate scientists. And since there's no way for the denialist POV to ever win a head-to-head match with the overwhelming science, they will be handed their coats and hats, and ejected from the arena.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14561
1:37 PM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting spbloom:Here's the trifecta, SteveDa1.Questions: any help would be appreciatedThe authors assume (? or perhaps they have data) that the really nasty methane releases didn't occur until the CO2 level hit 900ppm. How does that mesh with the AMEG claims?I'm thinking its a issue of scale, both temporal and in terms of the effects. At 900ppm and over the course of 10000 years, all of the methane in permafrost is released in their model. Are the people at AMEG thinking that small releases like those documented in comment 117 above will push the planet toward 900ppm? Or are they saying that our current levels of CO2 are sufficient given other factors (i.e. atmospheric chemistry, position of continents, etc.) to push the planet to release all of the methane now (within ~100yrs)?
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 119. spbloom
7:51 AM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Here's the trifecta, SteveDa1.
Member Since: May 12, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 450
##### 118. SteveDa1
6:38 AM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting RevElvis:Thawing permafrost frees millions of tons of carbon: studyAgence France-PresseThe carbon, a potential source of Earth-warming CO2, has lain frozen along the 7,000-kilometre (4,400-mile) northeast Siberian coastline since the last Ice Age.But atmospheric warming and coastal erosion are gnawing at the icy seal, releasing about 40 million tonnes of carbon a year -- 10 times more than previously thought, said a study in the journal Nature.The region covered by the Nature study, called Yedoma, is twice the size of Sweden but has been poorly researched because it is so remote.The finding touches on a vicious circle, or positive feedback in climate parlance.That is simply frightening, to say the least...Thanks for the continuous article posts.
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1312
##### 117. RevElvis
4:45 AM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Thawing permafrost frees millions of tons of carbon: studyAgence France-PresseThe carbon, a potential source of Earth-warming CO2, has lain frozen along the 7,000-kilometre (4,400-mile) northeast Siberian coastline since the last Ice Age.But atmospheric warming and coastal erosion are gnawing at the icy seal, releasing about 40 million tonnes of carbon a year -- 10 times more than previously thought, said a study in the journal Nature.The region covered by the Nature study, called Yedoma, is twice the size of Sweden but has been poorly researched because it is so remote.The finding touches on a vicious circle, or positive feedback in climate parlance.
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 30 Comments: 1085
##### 116. BobWallace
4:03 AM GMT on August 30, 2012
 Quoting Doxienan:Bob Wallace,There is the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund Linkwhich defends scientists like Michael Mann. NanThanks. Small donation sent. If Mann takes his case to court I'll chip in a larger amount.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
##### 115. cyclonebuster
1:04 AM GMT on August 30, 2012
 UNACCEPTABLE!!!! Do you want to restore this or not?????? Tunnels can do this in 10 years.... Model them......
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 135 Comments: 20855
11:42 PM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Quoting OldLeatherneck:For Climate Change, a Possible Trial Could Echo the Scopes Monkey CaseNow the climate scientist Michael E. Mann may be laying the groundwork for his own version of that trial, threatening to sue National Review for defamation. The offending piece was a blog post by Mark Steyn, which described Dr. Mann as "the man behind the fraudulent climate-change 'hockey-stick' graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus."Full NYT Article HereIt's about time we fight back against the Denialist Industry in the courts. I hope that Dr. Mann pursues litigation against the National Review for an inflammatory article written by Mark Steyn, whose claim to fame is being a regular substitute for Rush Limbaugh.I also hope that Dr. Mann sets up a website to solicit funds for his legal proceedings. He will be fighting against a well-funded legal team.As the resident Negative Nelly, I've got to point out a doubt.The result of a trial, especially a jury trial, is linked as much to the competence of the attorneys involved than the actual evidence. If Dr. Mann can get a Clarence Darrow clone to represent him great ...butWhat if he looses?A loss would set things back a decade? More?
Member Since: July 15, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 234
##### 113. RevElvis
9:12 PM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Large Methane Reservoirs Beneath Antarctic Ice Sheet, Study SuggestsScienceDaily.com"It is easy to forget that before 35 million years ago, when the current period of Antarctic glaciations started, this continent was teeming with life," Tulaczyk said. "Some of the organic material produced by this life became trapped in sediments, which then were cut off from the rest of the world when the ice sheet grew. Our modeling shows that over millions of years, microbes may have turned this old organic carbon into methane."The science team estimated that 50 percent of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (1 million square kilometers) and 25 percent of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (2.5 million square kilometers) overlies pre-glacial sedimentary basins containing about 21,000 billion metric tons of organic carbon.
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 30 Comments: 1085
##### 112. RevElvis
7:43 PM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Hurricane Isaac 2012: Wave Glider Robot ‘Alex’ Helps Forecast Path, Track and Trajectory of StormIBTimes.comTropical Storm Isaac, which became a Category 1 hurricane as it marched across the Gulf of Mexico Tuesday, is threatening a long stretch of the coast from Louisiana through the Florida Panhandle. Residents of those states are anxiously following the path of the storm, but beyond Google and Weather.gov, how will we know the trajectory of this particular hurricane?The Wave Glider, which was built and introduced by Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Liquid Robotics in 2008, is an autonomous ocean vehicle designed to measure everything from wave movements to air pressure, which is completely powered by the waves and the sun."This allows it to run for long periods of time, because it never runs out of fuel," said Roger Hine, founder and CTO of Liquid Robotics.
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 30 Comments: 1085
##### 111. greentortuloni
12:10 PM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Quoting Daisyworld:OL: Thanks for posting this. I was very heartened to read it. I sincerely hope this goes to trial. A very public and high-profile trial. It would be nice for climate scientists to get their day on the witness stand with the data.Anche io. Also me. I'll contribute. I'd love to see this thing come to trial.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
##### 110. Daisyworld
2:31 AM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Quoting OldLeatherneck:For Climate Change, a Possible Trial Could Echo the Scopes Monkey CaseNow the climate scientist Michael E. Mann may be laying the groundwork for his own version of that trial, threatening to sue National Review for defamation. The offending piece was a blog post by Mark Steyn, which described Dr. Mann as "the man behind the fraudulent climate-change 'hockey-stick' graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus."Full NYT Article HereIt's about time we fight back against the Denialist Industry in the courts. I hope that Dr. Mann pursues litigation against the National Review for an inflammatory article written by Mark Steyn, whose claim to fame is being a regular substitute for Rush Limbaugh.I also hope that Dr. Mann sets up a website to solicit funds for his legal proceedings. He will be fighting against a well-funded legal team.OL: Thanks for posting this. I was very heartened to read it. I sincerely hope this goes to trial. A very public and high-profile trial. It would be nice for climate scientists to get their day on the witness stand with the data.
Member Since: January 11, 2012 Posts: 6 Comments: 927
##### 109. Doxienan
1:27 AM GMT on August 29, 2012
 Bob Wallace,There is the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund Linkwhich defends scientists like Michael Mann. Nan
Member Since: April 28, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 54

Viewing: 159 - 109

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.

### Local Weather

 Ann Arbor, Michigan 67 °F Partly Cloudy