Local conditions and personal reflections

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 11:09 PM GMT on May 31, 2013

Share this Blog
20
+

Local Conditions and Personal Reflections

I have disappeared for a while because of technological failures. Honestly, I embraced them for a couple of days, but it's hard for me to remain in denial for more than a day or two. So I have sought out the computer at the public library and remembered my WU login. Here is a personal reflection on how local weather conditions might impact how one thinks about climate change.

I am currently residing in Boulder, Colo., where I try to grow a pretty large garden. Last year, 2012, was exceedingly hot in the spring and very dry. The dryness continued into the winter of 2013.

Water is in short supply in the West. This is not news. In fact, when John Wesley Powell explored the West he was pessimistic about its habitability because of scarcity of water (an old NPR story). He laid out a vision of a West of small settlements anchored in reliable water sources. Earlier, when Stephen Long explored the Midwest and the Front Range of the Rockies, he labeled the area the "Great Desert." (some cool maps from University of Tulsa).

Of course, the Great Plains and the West have now been populated with large cities. Water is managed in a fragmented way on an enormous spatial scale. There is huge contention for water between cities, agricultural and conservation management, and energy production. This is one area of the country where there is concern shared amongst the governors about drought and climate change.

In March 2013 as the local drought persisted, I was downright depressed about the coming spring and summer. The snowpack in the mountains was low. In the previous year, the spring had been so warm that much of the snow melted well before the normal spring runoff. I remember in June 2012 putting pumpkins into soil that was well over 110 degrees F and dry down to the underlying clay bed. With the low humidity and heat, I could not water most of them enough to keep them alive. In March 2013, we seemed to be looking at even less water.

Spring 2013 was just plain odd in the U.S. Largely, it was cold, with many record cold temperatures. The cold waves were interspersed with sometimes record heat. The variability was enormous. In my part of Colorado during April, at just about exactly seven-day intervals, there was one record snow a week. On the flat lands east of the mountains, these snows were followed by extraordinary seasonal cold, then a rapid melt. Virtually all blossoming trees did not blossom; the bees are not happy. In the mountains, the snowpack built up to be higher than average. Some ski resorts reopened for Memorial Day because of fresh May snow.

Here at the end of May, I look at the mountains and there is a lot of snow. The farm irrigation ditches run full of water. The cities are reconsidering the water restrictions they imposed in February and March. The hay fields are green and tall. I look around, and I feel pretty good about the summer.

Those mountains that I see to the West supply the Platte River and the Colorado River. I look up to them and naively think of the Colorado River full of water. However, the truth is quite the contrary. 2013 is yet another year of the Colorado River being in extreme drought. Despite my seeing all of that snow in my little world 2013 is an intensification of the Southwest drought.

I remember when I was quite young there was a drought in my home state of North Carolina. I was only a bit more naive then, perhaps more prone to the mystical, and I worried about the weather being broken in some way. At that age, weather was itself a mystery. I had no idea how to describe the motion of air and how to turn humidity into rain. I imagined that there had been a divine intervention into how the weather worked--it was the opposite of the biblical flood. I was a young boy with a narrow view of the world, so I assumed the whole world was in drought. I am sure that a few hundred miles away, however, the weather was still working; it was raining. I probably even checked to make sure that was the case. As I now sit in a world with what looks like enough snow for a good season in the garden, that childhood comfort of the weather working comes back.

This little vision I have into the world, that my weather has been beneficent, really has little relevance to whether or not the climate is changing. My little vision is no different than that of all of the people who have looked at the cold U.S. spring of 2013 and stated that as evidence or proof that the Earth was not warming. You have to look at all of the Earth and look at what is happening in the oceans and look at all that is melting.

One of our best resources on drought and water is the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS). NIDIS followed from The 1998 National Drought Policy Act and The Western Governors' Association (some good policy history). This is climate policy; this is climate service. It is based on known vulnerabilities, ones that are expected to get worse because there is really nothing that suggests the vulnerabilities will lessen on their own. There is no looking at the facts and saying it will all be all right.

Rather than looking out your window and saying that the weather is working and that our climate is like it has always been, better to take a broader look--a global perspective. For a national perspective on drought, here is the outlook from NIDIS on May 15, 2013.

Hope to get my computer and files back early next week. Don't forget me.

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: 336 - 286

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9Blog Index

Quoting allahgore:



RSS is correct!

There's a first time for everything that happens...but I wonder if I could trouble you for an explanation of the process you used to arrive at your conclusion?
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Not all of it though...

Get used to killer heat waves, CDC warns

By Maggie Fox, Senior Writer, NBC News

Think last summer was bad? You better get used to it, federal health officials warned Thursday. Climate change means hotter summers and more intense storms that could knock power out for days -- and kill people.

New data on heat-related deaths suggest that public health officials have been underestimating them, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. It’s an especially important message as summers get longer and hotter due to climate change, and as storms that can cause widespread blackouts become more common and more intense.

More than 7,200 people died from excess heat from 1999 to 2009, Ethel Taylor and colleagues at the CDC found. The latest numbers, part of the CDC’s weekly report in death and illness, list non-residents for the first time, a group that includes illegal immigrants, tourists, migrant workers and others. These groups suffer especially when it gets hot, Taylor says.

“About 15 percent of the heat-related deaths we have seen over 10 years are occurring in non-US residents,” Taylor told NBC News. This adds up to about 1,000 people.

The CDC is now trying to find out just who these people are and why they’re being killed disproportionately by heat. Forty percent of the deaths over the 10 years were in just three states – California, Arizona and Texas. They are all border states in the south with plenty of desert and agriculture, so the victims could be illegal immigrants who died trying to cross the border, farm workers, or rural poor. Taylor says it’s important to get more information about them.

Awareness of the dangers is important because longer, hotter and more extreme weather is here to stay, the CDC’s George Luber says.

“The most serious hurricanes are increasing in frequency….and that is driven by climate change,” Luber says.

Story: Tropical storm Andrea drenches Florida, bound for East Coast

Weather experts stress that it’s impossible to say whether any individual storm or heat wave was caused by climate change. But the patterns are clearly changing and that can certainly be attributed to climate change, Luber says. “The sheer magnitude of these weather events are a challenge to public health,” Luber says.

The “derecho” that hit some eastern states last July is a great example of this. The storm blew in on June 29, knocking down trees with tornado-force winds that, as the name implies, blew straight across the land instead of in a twisting spiral.

Power was knocked out for days – eight days in some areas – just as a two-week-long heat wave moved in. Maryland, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia were the worst-hit, and CDC has documented 32 heat-related deaths during that time.That’s a rate of 1.1 per 100,000 people

That’s bad, but not nearly as bad as in similar events in years past, says Taylor. For example, a heat wave in Chicago in 1995 killed 514 people, a rate of 9.7 deaths per 100,000 people, and a 1993 heat wave in Philadelphia killed 118 people, or 7.5 per 100,000.

“We were very excited to see the number of deaths down,” Taylor says. All four states had plans to deal with the heat – from sending National Guardsmen door to door in West Virginia to using college students in the same way in Ohio. “They were encouraging people to get to cooling stations,’ Taylor says. “It seems like it really did help reduce the numebr of heat-related deaths. They did a really fabulous job of responding to this event.”

Still, people in cities and suburbs all over the country die from heatstroke and other heat-related illness every year, Taylor adds. “We have done quite a bit in trying to get the message out,” she says. “Heat is kind of an insidious killer and it easy for people not to realize they are at risk.”

Most were found in their homes, and often the victims either had no air conditioning or it was off. Fans alone are not enough to keep people healthy during extreme heat, CDC says on its new website on heat. Elderly people may not recognize they are at risk. Forty percent of those who die from heat are 65 or older.

Symptoms of heat illness can be subtle and people can be seriously ill before they even know they are in danger. Heat exhaustion is marked by heavy sweating and exhaustion – both symptoms that people may see as normal when it’s hot. Extra warning signs include cold, clammy skin and a fast, weak pulse, nausea or fainting.

Heatstroke is a more immediate emergency – body temperature soars to 103 degrees or higher, the pulse gets faster and the skin may turn red and dry. Heatstroke can cause deadly swelling of the brain, liver and kidney failure; people with these symptoms should call 911 right away, CDC advises.

Taylor says libraries, shopping malls and other public facilities often have generators and can be designated in advance to use to help people cool off in extreme heat – especially during power outages when their own air conditioning doesn’t work.

All communities should be thinking about taking similar measures, says Luber, because more extreme weather is coming. “Climate predictions and observations are suggesting that the magnitude of extreme weather events is increasing,” he says. “So we expect these more frequently.”

And individuals should have plans, also – where to go in case of floods, where cooling centers are if there’s a heat wave and they don’t have air conditioning. “If the air conditioning goes out, I need to understand where I can take my kids to cool off,” Luber says.

“We wants sports coaches to understand, a communities need to know where their most vulnerable populations are.” In cities, multistory brick buildings with no air conditioning can be death traps in a heat wave, for example.

Heat waves are often associated with stagnant air and air pollution, Luber adds. This puts people with respiratory conditions at higher risk – those with asthma or breathing problems, as well as people with heart conditions.




Link






...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting allahgore:



That shows cooling.


Where's the Blue dude?




Psssssst....Here's a little secret for you the heat has gone to melt more ice....

...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting Xandra:
Geo-Engineering: Playing God? | Interview with Clive Hamilton

Published on 6 Jun 2013

Abby Martin talks to Clive Hamilton, public ethics professor at Charles Sturt University, and author of 'Earthmasters', about the controversial practice of geo-engineering; the arguments for and against the artificial altering of the natural world.






Key word he used towards the end of the video...."Regulate it"...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Nice idea to investigate the stalagmites. (I would like to provide some more for investigation from my limescaled faucet as waters in my region are rich of chalk :)

Stalagmites Provide New View of Abrupt Climate Events Over 100,000 Years

June 6, 2013 — A new set of long-term climate records based on cave stalagmites collected from tropical Borneo shows that the western tropical Pacific responded very differently than other regions of the globe to abrupt climate change events. The 100,000-year climate record adds to data on past climate events, and may help scientists assess models designed to predict how Earth's climate will respond in the future. ...

"To my knowledge, this is the first record that so clearly shows sensitivity to one set of major abrupt climate change events and not another," said Cobb. "These two types of abrupt change events appear to have different degrees of tropical Pacific involvement, and because the tropical Pacific speaks with such a loud voice when it does speak, we think this is extremely important for understanding the mechanisms underlying these events."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

Reversing the problem the same way it was caused -eliminating CO2 emissions- will probably be useful, though that's not a sure thing at this point.

Engineering any other solution is rolling the dice, and probably loaded dice at that.


Not if you can regulate it something we can not do currently with fossil fuel GHG's......
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Posted by: Dr. Jeff Masters, 6:19 PM CDT on June 06, 2013


The Atlantic hurricane season is getting longer


Andrea's formation in June continues a pattern of an unusually large number of early-season Atlantic named storms we've seen in recent years. Climatologically, June is the second quietest month of the Atlantic hurricane season, behind November. During the period 1870 - 2012, we averaged one named storm every two years in June, and 0.7 named storms per year during May and June. In the nineteen years since the current active hurricane period began in 1995, there have been fifteen June named storms (if we include 2013's Tropical Storm Andrea.) June activity has nearly doubled since 1995, and May activity has more than doubled (there were seventeen May storms in the 75-year period 1870 - 1994, compared to 6 in the 19-year period 1995 - 2013.) Some of this difference can be attributed to observation gaps, due to the lack of satellite data before 1966. However, even during the satellite era, we have seen an increase in both early season (May - June) and late season (November - December) Atlantic tropical storms. Dr. Jim Kossin of the University of Wisconsin looked at the reasons for this in a 2008 paper titled, "Is the North Atlantic hurricane season getting longer?" He concluded that there is a "apparent tendency toward more common early- and late-season storms that correlates with warming Sea Surface Temperature but the uncertainty in these relationships is high." He found that hurricane season for both the period 1950-2007 and 1980-2007 got longer by 5 to 10 days per decade (see my blog post on the paper.)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xandra:
Geo-Engineering: Playing God? | Interview with Clive Hamilton

Thanks for that. Hamilton explains my concerns more clearly and in better detail than I could myself. Bookmarked the video.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting cyclonebuster:


No! Foolishness is not correcting a situation that Goeengineering has created with fossil fuel GHG's and we didn't even know it until about the 1950's with the Keeling Curve. Just because geoengineering caused the problem does not mean that geoengineering can not cure the problem especially if you can regulate it..

Reversing the problem the same way it was caused -eliminating CO2 emissions- will probably be useful, though that's not a sure thing at this point.

Engineering any other solution is rolling the dice, and probably loaded dice at that.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Geo-Engineering: Playing God? | Interview with Clive Hamilton

Published on 6 Jun 2013

Abby Martin talks to Clive Hamilton, public ethics professor at Charles Sturt University, and author of 'Earthmasters', about the controversial practice of geo-engineering; the arguments for and against the artificial altering of the natural world.



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

Geoengineering is foolishness that is highly likely to make more problems than it solves.


No! Foolishness is not correcting a situation that Goeengineering has created with fossil fuel GHG's and we didn't even know it until about the 1950's with the Keeling Curve. Just because geoengineering caused the problem does not mean that geoengineering can not cure the problem especially if you can regulate it..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting CEastwood:
Maybe the "science" is completely wrong. Perhaps CO2 causes cooling and the first prognostications by climate scientists in the 1970s were actually correct:

Link

Just to give you a little substantive insight into why your link is a cartoon: Item "2" in the article claims, " Obviously, over the last dozen years, or so, the global warming trend has morphed into a global cooling trend...robustly and significantly different than the anti-CO2 IPCC's projected 2-6°C global warming increase forecast."

Let's test that against five global data sets, shall we?



Soooo...where is this "cooling" the article asserts?

Epic (and predictable) fail.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Geoengineering is our only hope...

Geoengineering is foolishness that is highly likely to make more problems than it solves.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting CEastwood:
Maybe the "science" is completely wrong. Perhaps CO2 causes cooling and the first prognostications by climate scientists in the 1970s were actually correct:

Link

I'm sure that that cartoon, with its second order fit, will overturn physics. Happens all the time.

Yet the warming continues. That's probably because physics describes external reality while cartoons appeal to internal realities. ;)
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting CEastwood:


Looks as if AGW has already reversed and CO2 might actually be the culprit. What will the warmists do?

They'll pretty much sit around and laugh at the contortions denialists go through to make believe "it's not CO2" or "it's not warming" or "the Ice is recovering" (every winter).

Denialists iz teh funny!
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting Xandra:
[...] While the Pentagon "weaponeer" and geoengineering enthusiast Lowell Wood, an astrophysicist, has proclaimed, "We’ve engineered every other environment we live in — why not the planet?"[...]



Because there is no Planet B!!!

The hubris and arrogance of technocrats like Lowell Wood is mind numbing.
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2754
Quoting cyclonebuster:



I can reverse agw and make money....


Looks as if AGW has already reversed and CO2 might actually be the culprit. What will the warmists do?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Maybe the "science" is completely wrong. Perhaps CO2 causes cooling and the first prognostications by climate scientists in the 1970s were actually correct:

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Climate Change.... It's gonna get you....

img src="">
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
WOW!!! Andrea turned North now......Run the loop....You can see the eye on the real time radar.....

Link




....
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting Xandra:
Geoengineering: Our Last Hope, or a False Promise?

[...] Engineering the climate is intuitively appealing to a powerful strand of Western technological thought that sees no ethical or other obstacle to total domination of nature. And that is why some conservative think tanks that have for years denied or downplayed the science of climate change suddenly support geoengineering, the solution to a problem they once said did not exist.

All of which points to perhaps the greatest risk of research into geoengineering %u2014 it will erode the incentive to curb emissions. Think about it: no need to take on powerful fossil-fuel companies, no need to tax gasoline or electricity, no need to change our lifestyles.

In the end, how we think about geoengineering depends on how we understand climate disruption. If our failure to cut emissions is a result of the power of corporate interests, the fetish for economic growth and the comfortable conservatism of a consumer society, then resorting to climate engineering allows us to avoid facing up to social dysfunction, at least for as long as it works.

So the battle lines are being drawn over the future of the planet. While the Pentagon "weaponeer" and geoengineering enthusiast Lowell Wood, an astrophysicist, has proclaimed, "We%u2019ve engineered every other environment we live in %u2014 why not the planet?" a more humble climate scientist, Ronald G. Prinn of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has asked, "How can you engineer a system you don%u2019t understand?"


Complete article >>



Geoengineering is our only hope...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Geoengineering: Our Last Hope, or a False Promise?

[...] Engineering the climate is intuitively appealing to a powerful strand of Western technological thought that sees no ethical or other obstacle to total domination of nature. And that is why some conservative think tanks that have for years denied or downplayed the science of climate change suddenly support geoengineering, the solution to a problem they once said did not exist.

All of which points to perhaps the greatest risk of research into geoengineering — it will erode the incentive to curb emissions. Think about it: no need to take on powerful fossil-fuel companies, no need to tax gasoline or electricity, no need to change our lifestyles.

In the end, how we think about geoengineering depends on how we understand climate disruption. If our failure to cut emissions is a result of the power of corporate interests, the fetish for economic growth and the comfortable conservatism of a consumer society, then resorting to climate engineering allows us to avoid facing up to social dysfunction, at least for as long as it works.

So the battle lines are being drawn over the future of the planet. While the Pentagon "weaponeer" and geoengineering enthusiast Lowell Wood, an astrophysicist, has proclaimed, "We’ve engineered every other environment we live in — why not the planet?" a more humble climate scientist, Ronald G. Prinn of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has asked, "How can you engineer a system you don’t understand?"


Complete article >>

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



wow you will become rich...when will this happen???


No you will become rich....Or richer.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
311. yoboi
Quoting cyclonebuster:



I can reverse agw and make money....



wow you will become rich...when will this happen???
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



you can solve agw and save money???



I can reverse agw and make money....
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
309. yoboi
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Hundreds of billions...



you can solve agw and save money???
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



how much cheaper?????


Hundreds of billions...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
307. yoboi
Quoting cyclonebuster:



Gulfstream Kinetic Energy is cheaper than storage and prevents the use of Co2 24/7/365....



how much cheaper?????
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xulonn:
What are you talking about!

I did contribute - I'm trying to help! I showed you how to find NOAA info on hurricane "translation speed."

If you ask questions on a public forum, you can expect answers from anyone.

Use WU mail if you are looking for private conversations.


Your comparisons of me to a 3rd grader is not my idea of being a contributor. You do not need to reference my idea to get your point across it is not relevant to my question. Your reference to me as being a wiseacre is not helpful to this forum in fact it is hurtful towards it..Furthermore, I used Google to come up with my plan. So would you kindly butt out of the conversation?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting cyclonebuster:


If you can't contribute... Then don't contribute...Otherwise butt out..
What are you talking about!

I did contribute - I'm trying to help! I showed you how to find NOAA info on hurricane "translation speed."

If you ask questions on a public forum, you can expect answers from anyone.

Use WU mail if you are looking for private conversations.
Member Since: June 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1139
Quoting Xulonn:
A rather short and ambiguous phrase, CB. NOAA "does this" in many places and that is easy to find with Google - in fact it's so simple a 3rd grader could do it.

This is a factor that should be understood by those who are interested in designing geo-engineering systems to harvest Gulf Stream energy for electricity and mitigation of global warming.

If you really want to read discussions by NOAA personnel and affiliates on translation speeds with respect to hurricanes, here's how you can do it yourself. Unless you are simply being a wiseacre, harping on your "NOAA data is perfect" meme, please use Google to search for:

noaa "translation speed" hurricane

and you'll get nearly 12,000 hits. The first page contains many that match your request for information on the subject.

Learn to use Google effectively and you will save yourself a lot of effort - and look much better in your role as the man with a plan to defeat AGW/CC.


If you can't contribute... Then don't contribute...Otherwise butt out..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting cyclonebuster:
I would like to read where NOAA does this..
A rather short and ambiguous phrase, CB. NOAA "does this" in many places and that is easy to find with Google - in fact it's so simple a 3rd grader could do it.

This is a factor that should be understood by those who are interested in designing geo-engineering systems to harvest Gulf Stream energy for electricity and mitigation of global warming.

If you really want to read discussions by NOAA personnel and affiliates on translation speeds with respect to hurricanes, here's how you can do it yourself. Unless you are simply being a wiseacre, harping on your "NOAA data is perfect" meme, please use Google to search for:

noaa "translation speed" hurricane

and you'll get nearly 12,000 hits. The first page contains many that match your request for information on the subject.

Learn to use Google effectively and you will save yourself a lot of effort - and look much better in your role as the man with a plan to defeat AGW/CC.
Member Since: June 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1139
Quoting georgevandenberghe:

yes


I would like to read where NOAA does this..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219

Quoting cyclonebuster:



Is translation speed forward speed?
yes
Member Since: February 1, 2012 Posts: 17 Comments: 1374
Quoting georgevandenberghe:





Is translation speed forward speed?
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219

Quoting cyclonebuster:
Tropical Storm ANDREA


4:00 AM CDT Thu Jun 6
Location: 27.0°N 85.9°W
Moving: NNE at 13 mph
Min pressure: 997 mb
Max sustained: 60 mph


One thing I think the hurricane center should do with Hurricanes and Tropical Storms is add the forward speed of storm to the total wind speed of the storm so in the case with ANDREA
with 60 mph winds already it would make it very close to a hurricane already... This should have been done with Sandy also.....


Link







The translation speed is already a part of the wind speed.  Winds for Andrea are stronger to the east of the center where translation + perturbation speeds add and weaker to the west where they subtract.   This is why the right front semicircle of the storm is usually the most dangerous..

Member Since: February 1, 2012 Posts: 17 Comments: 1374
Quoting JohnLonergan:
Op-Ed in today's Carbon Brief:

"Using CCS to cut emissions is a good idea, but we need to find out if it works first

Forget wind turbines and nuclear power stations - the world could cut greenhouse gas emissions just using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. At least that's what Myles Allen, a prominent climate scientist, suggests. But how realistic is the prospect of cutting emissions using CCS? We ask the experts.

"Writing in today's Guardian and last week's Mail on Sunday, Professor Myles Allen, head of climate dynamics at Oxford University, proposes that governments introduce a new regulation requiring companies that extract or import fossil fuels to sequester and store a fraction of the carbon dioxide they emit. Allen writes:

"...the only thing that really matters for long-term climate is that we deploy the technology - carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) - to bury carbon dioxide at the same rate we dig up fossil carbon before we release too much."

This would be far simpler than introducing a complex bundle of legislation aimed at shifting the country away from fossil fuels and toward renewables, he argues."...

...Allen's proposal would mean a significant shift in government policy - with a fairly radical top-down approach to cutting carbon emissions. But, that question aside, how effective could a CCS-only approach be in practice - and how close is it to being at least a technical possibility?...

...CCS presents some tantalising questions about energy policy - like whether the UK could make money by selling off its undersea resource to other countries as a carbon dioxide store. How much would full scale CCS cost?

Unfortunately, while CCS remains untested on a commercial scale, it's hard to get the answers to those questions. And that means that forcing companies to install CCS might not be a good idea at this stage. Professor Jim Watson tells Carbon Brief:

"..my concern...is that it is simply too early to mandate CCS...until we know whether CCS works at full scale, and how much this really costs, mandating could be counter-productive." "



Gulfstream Kinetic Energy is cheaper than storage and prevents the use of Co2 24/7/365....
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Dr. James Hansen's Testimony before the British House of Commons:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314 /cmselect/cmenvaud/uc60-i/uc6001.htm?utm_source=Da ily+Carbon+Briefing&utm_campaign=f2241106b8-DAILY_ BRIEFING&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-f2 241106b8-303421281

It is quite long so I'm only quoting a couple of questions and Dr. Hansen's responses:

"Q4 Chair: Thank you. Are there emerging areas of climate change science that could possibly alter our climate change goals?

Professor Hansen: Yes. I would say our understanding of the situation is improving as we get more precise data on the system-for example, beginning 10 years ago, with the satellite called GRACE that measures the gravitational field of the earth with very high precision, so you can measure the changes in the mass of the ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica. It shows that these ice sheets are shedding mass more and more rapidly, and that this last summer was the most extreme mass loss from Greenland, which was more than 500 cubic kilometres. That is averaged over the winter and summer.

Of course, in the winter we see the ice sheet gets heavier and then it loses mass in the melting season. Integrated over the entire season, it lost mass at more than 500 cubic kilometres per year. Antarctica is also losing mass. It is not as rapid, but it is an indication that our concern about the stability of these ice sheets is well justified. In fact, it is a more rapid loss of mass than would have been predicted by any ice sheet models. It is very difficult to model the disintegration of ice sheets. So that is one piece of evidence.

Another fundamental piece of evidence-which, again, is a recent measurement and a very valuable one-is that we can now measure the earth’s energy imbalance. What we expect is, as you add a gas like carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, it is like putting a blanket on the planet, because it absorbs heat radiation and that reduces the heat radiation to space. Therefore you get an imbalance, with more energy coming in from the sun than going out in heat radiation. That is very clear; from the physical processes we expect that.

We can now measure that because different nations of the world co-operated in sending out more than 3,000 Argo floats, which are distributed around the world’s ocean. The floats dive down into the ocean to a depth of two kilometres, take measurements and then come back up to the surface and radio the information to a satellite. That enables us to measure how the heat content of the ocean is changing, because that is where most of the excess energy must go. The atmosphere has a very small heat capacity but the ocean has a tremendous thermal inertia, a heat capacity, so that is where the energy goes.

We can now measure that the ocean is gaining energy at a rate of several tenths of a watt per metre squared, averaged over the planet’s surface. What that tells us is that there is almost as much warming that is in the pipeline. Because if you have more energy coming in than going out, then eventually you are going to warm up the planet further and we can now estimate how much more warming there is in the pipeline. It tells us that that additional warming, plus the eight-tenths of a degree that has already occurred, is getting us close to the boundaries of what we should allow if we want to avoid dangerous climate change.

Q5 Caroline Lucas: Thank you. Yesterday there were leaked papers-which I am sure you have probably seen-which appear to show that the UK is rejecting an EU proposal to classify oil from tar sands as highly polluting through the Fuel Quality Directive. That suggests that the UK is happy to see European countries import carbon-intensive tar sands oil from Canada, essentially by creating a market for it here. What are your views on that position, in terms of the extent to which it is compatible with a stated aim and a legal requirement in the UK to keep temperature warming to below 2°C?

Professor Hansen: I would like to make clear why this is extremely important. It is based on very fundamental physics of the climate system, which there is absolutely no dispute about. We understand what we call the carbon cycle very well. When we burn fossil fuels and put the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, that carbon dioxide will stay in the surface climate system for millennia. That is the problem.

We know, mainly from the history of the earth, how sensitive the climate system is to changes in the amount of carbon dioxide in the surface climate system. We have records over hundreds of millions of years of how the climate has changed over time and in response to changes in the boundary conditions, which include the atmospheric composition and the surface properties of the planet. That is our best measure of how sensitive the climate system is when you give it time to respond. That is where we come up with the limits on how much we can put into the atmosphere without guaranteeing huge impacts.

When we look at how much carbon there is in the conventional fossil fuels-that means oil, gas and coal-we realise that we cannot burn all those fossil fuels without going way beyond what we have agreed is a dangerous limit. In fact, if we burned all fossil fuels, we would head the planet back to the ice-free state, with sea levels 70 metres higher, 250 feet higher. We realised that we cannot do that.

When we dealt only with conventional fossil fuels, the problem was potentially solvable because, if we would leave most of the coal in the ground, or capture the CO2 when we burn the coal and put it back in the ground, then it was solvable because the conventional oil and gas is finite. There was some hope that, with international agreements, if we began to put a price on carbon, which would move the world toward alternative sources of electricity rather than coal, it was a solvable problem.

Here, however, in addition to these conventional fossil fuels, we have these unconventional oils-tar sands, tar shale, fracking for gas-and the potential amount of carbon in these unconventional oils is huge. If we introduce the tar shale and tar sands as a source and exploit those resources to a significant extent, then the problem becomes unsolvable. We know that you can get conventional oil, which is available in places like Saudi Arabia and Russia, out of the ground for several dollars a barrel. There is no way that we can tell Saudi Arabia, "Don’t sell that oil", or tell Russia, "You’re not allowed to sell that oil", so we know we are going to get more out of these conventional sources. If we also introduce the unconventional ones then there is no solution other than geo-engineering, which is a terrible fate to will to our children.

So we cannot pretend that we don’t know the consequences of digging into these unconventional fossil fuels that, frankly, I had always assumed the world would be smart enough to leave in the ground, because they are more carbon-intensive. The amount of energy you get per unit of carbon is less, and you get all these extra pollutants. It is a very dirty process getting those tar sands out of the ground. You are polluting that region tremendously.

All that has been asked for in this fuel standard is to at least label it and say that we are getting more carbon per unit of energy, and yet some countries are afraid to do that. They are putting a burden on their children and future generations for the sake of what, slightly better relations with a particular party in Canada? It is absolutely crazy, the dynamics that are going on here. It is hard to understand how we cannot get countries to understand what the consequences of that are and what they are trading off."

Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2754
Op-Ed in today's Carbon Brief:

"Using CCS to cut emissions is a good idea, but we need to find out if it works first

Forget wind turbines and nuclear power stations - the world could cut greenhouse gas emissions just using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. At least that's what Myles Allen, a prominent climate scientist, suggests. But how realistic is the prospect of cutting emissions using CCS? We ask the experts.

"Writing in today's Guardian and last week's Mail on Sunday, Professor Myles Allen, head of climate dynamics at Oxford University, proposes that governments introduce a new regulation requiring companies that extract or import fossil fuels to sequester and store a fraction of the carbon dioxide they emit. Allen writes:

"...the only thing that really matters for long-term climate is that we deploy the technology - carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) - to bury carbon dioxide at the same rate we dig up fossil carbon before we release too much."

This would be far simpler than introducing a complex bundle of legislation aimed at shifting the country away from fossil fuels and toward renewables, he argues."...

...Allen's proposal would mean a significant shift in government policy - with a fairly radical top-down approach to cutting carbon emissions. But, that question aside, how effective could a CCS-only approach be in practice - and how close is it to being at least a technical possibility?...

...CCS presents some tantalising questions about energy policy - like whether the UK could make money by selling off its undersea resource to other countries as a carbon dioxide store. How much would full scale CCS cost?

Unfortunately, while CCS remains untested on a commercial scale, it's hard to get the answers to those questions. And that means that forcing companies to install CCS might not be a good idea at this stage. Professor Jim Watson tells Carbon Brief:

"..my concern...is that it is simply too early to mandate CCS...until we know whether CCS works at full scale, and how much this really costs, mandating could be counter-productive." "
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2754
Basically tornadoes today for most of Eastern Texas and all of the S.E..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting Birthmark:
You know, I truly hope that this doesn't happen, or anything approaching this.




Too late most of it has and the rest of it will....
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
You know, I truly hope that this doesn't happen, or anything approaching this.

Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting Xandra:
Atmospheric CO2 for May 2013




It will be very interesting to see what the average CO2 increase for 2013 will be. It looks like the record of 2.9 ppm in the record El Nino year of 1998 will go, and that's without an El Nino.

If this comes to pass, it may be a sign that we may have reached the tipping point where positive feedbacks start to kick in.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xulonn:
I live in Boquete, Panama, home of some of the finest coffee in the world [LINK]. I have a number of friends who own small coffee farms, (cafe fincas), and they are located all around this highland paradise. The growers, large and small, are spending a fortune in time and money try to save their plants and crops.

Along stretches of the loop road I live on, it is coffee farm after coffee farm - almost like corn in Iowa, but on a much smaller scale and with far more rugged terrain.

The strong and steady winds of our dry season (December through March) spread the spores readily, as do the boots and clothes of the local indigenous workers who toil in the fields. The chemicals to control it must be applied carefully - to the tops and bottoms of the leaves.

I live in a cluster of three small houses in a clearing of about four acres on an old coffee farm. As I look out my window, I see the deserted coffee field 50 meters away full of coffee bushes looking really ragged with few leaves. These deserted fincas are reservoirs for the diseases, and there is no program or funding to control or clear them. Below is a photo I took earlier this year at Finca Lerida, a high-end coffee farm and private nature reserve on the slopes of Volcan Baru a few miles from where I live. It's at 5,500' elevation and has a hotel and a tourist program.



It's a tough battle to control the coffee rust, which is deadlier to arabica, the really good coffee cultivar, as compared to the robusta variety, an inferior type used mostly for crap instant coffee. This is not the first major encounter with coffee rust - read this if you want to learn more about coffee rust.

Coffee and chocolate (from the cacao bean) are two of my favorite legal substances, and the future of both as commercial crops is under threat from the negative consequences of monoculture, a lack of genetic variety, pest predation, etc. And while AGW/CC is probably exacerbating the problem by changing the weather and climate where they are traditionally grown, it may not be the major factor in these problems.


You can have all the coffee, but a world without chocolate will reduce the population by half in the first week... I can think of several men I would bump off.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Tropical Storm ANDREA


4:00 AM CDT Thu Jun 6
Location: 27.0°N 85.9°W
Moving: NNE at 13 mph
Min pressure: 997 mb
Max sustained: 60 mph


One thing I think the hurricane center should do with Hurricanes and Tropical Storms is add the forward speed of storm to the total wind speed of the storm so in the case with ANDREA
with 60 mph winds already it would make it very close to a hurricane already... This should have been done with Sandy also.....


Link







..
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Atmospheric CO2 for May 2013


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Naga5000:


Gotta love graphical representations that don't include the actual confidence ranges. I lol'd, and then wondered why there haven't been bans issued for continuous trolling. By the way, send me a message about coffee so I can pass on the brand name if you're interested. Party on, Wayne.

It's worse than that. The "observations" used are complete bull. The claim is that "observations" show maybe a 0.25%uFFFDC rise from 1979 through 2012. However, the actual observations from RSS and UAH show about twice that, making the models pretty damn good --especially when taking into account confidence, as you rightly point out.



Now, their justification probably is that their cartoon is for 20N to 20S. Perhaps. But unless those model runs were for the same latitudes (and they're not), then Christy is simply being deceptive...again. It is intended to fool the ignorant and the feeble. IOW, it is typical denialist "science."

ETA: That graph of RSS and UAH trends allows one to tell simply by eyeballing that the observed trend is pretty close to what models predicted.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206
Quoting Birthmark:

Your life must be made easier considerably by allowing yourself (or others on your behalf) to make up whatever "facts" you need to support the fantasy you prefer to reality.

Party on, Garth!


Gotta love graphical representations that don't include the actual confidence ranges. I lol'd, and then wondered why there haven't been bans issued for continuous trolling. By the way, send me a message about coffee so I can pass on the brand name if you're interested. Party on, Wayne.
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2691
Quoting CEastwood:
Climate models have a 100% failure rate. My own somewhat amusing observational comparison is that neither climate models nor grocery store scanners ever err in favor of the general public:

Link

Your life must be made easier considerably by allowing yourself (or others on your behalf) to make up whatever "facts" you need to support the fantasy you prefer to reality.

Party on, Garth!
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5206

Viewing: 336 - 286

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9Blog 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.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
45 °F
Mostly Cloudy