What Can I Say about Heat Waves? Heat Waves (5)

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:27 AM GMT on November 28, 2013

Share this Blog
19
+

What Can I Say about Heat Waves? Heat Waves (5)

This blog is about a paper on extreme heat written by my student Evan Oswald and myself. I don’t usually write about my own research, but this paper poses some interesting challenges to think about heat, heat waves, climate change and public health. Or I might say, how do I explain this to my epidemiologist friends?

What we set out to do with this research was to quantify how observations from surface weather stations represent extreme heat events that are threats to human health. We started with the station observations because most often those responsible for heat warnings and those undertaking planning for climate change start with station observations in their locality. There are a lot of reasons for this choice. An important one is that these observations and any of their local peculiarities are usually well known. Hence, there is experience and the knowledge and trust that come from that experience. Once we described the behavior of all of the station observations, we had two planned paths. The first path was to see if the gridded datasets used in climate-change planning had the same behavior as the station observations. The second path was to compare the station observations to a high-resolution network of observations in a city and see how well, for example, the measurements at the airport or weather office represented the details of the city.

Of course, many researchers have looked at the station data and documented trends in heat. To earn a Ph.D., a student has to do original and independent research. There are a number of attributes that distinguish this research. Most notably, we have been working with a team of public health experts (meet Marie O’Neill), and we had a desire to use measures of environmental heat that have been found to be important in public health studies. To a meteorologist, heat might seem simple, but the human health impacts of heat are complicated. For example there is the impact of very high temperatures on those working or training outside. Another example is the threat of persistent heat, day and night, on the chronically ill who might be housebound. There is a link between heat and humidity, with many of us Southerners knowing that “it’s not the heat, but the humidity,” and not thinking about the effects of dehydration that are important in the desert Southwest. For this reason we started by looking only at temperature and not some measure of comfort such as a heat index. Then there’s a sort of obvious one, public health experts are most interested in heat effects during and around summertime, whereas to a climate scientist a “heat wave” in the winter can be as interesting and as important as a summer heat wave. There are many other complications, but I hope I have made my point, there is meaningful research to be done.

In the research reported in “A trend analysis of the1930-2010 extreme heat events in the continental U.S.”, we focused on the warm season, end of spring to the beginning of fall. We also focused on different types and characteristics of heat waves. We defined heat waves for daytime maxima and for nighttime minima. We looked at, for example, duration of heat waves, how many days did they last? Here I am going to only write about the trends that we reported in duration for three different time periods, 1930-1970, 1970-2010, and the combined time period of 1930-2010. Our study area was the continental United States.

Why these three time periods? Lot of reasons, we wanted to include the well known hot times during the 1930s, otherwise we would be accused of cheating. We did not go earlier than 1930, because we felt that the quality of the observations decreased substantially. When I was a student in the late 1970s, I remember getting excited when, say, the data for 1976 was released. Then 1977. I’d write papers about what the future would hold. Now low and behold, I have been fortunate enough to live long enough to have more than my own 30-year period. Thirty years of average temperatures is the traditional definition of “climate.” Hence, splitting things at 1970 we have two equal 40-year records, which allows us to investigate the sensitivity to which 30-year period, which “climate,” is chosen.

Lot of introduction here, so let’s get to a result. In Figure 1, I show the decadal trends at each station in the mean duration of EHEs during the 1930-1970 period. The top map shows heat events based on nighttime minimum temperatures. The bottom map shows heat events based on daytime maximum temperatures. The middle map shows events when both the maximum and minimum were elevated; that is, it did not cool off very much at night.





Figure 1: The decadal trends at each station in the mean duration of EHEs during the 1930-1970 period. The trend significance (alpha=0.10) is indicated by symbol shading. The graduated symbol groupings are based on standard deviations away from the zero value, and are different for each map. The trends in Tmin-based EHEs (top), Tmnx-based EHEs (middle) and Tmax-based EHEs (bottom) are all shown. Tmin is based on nighttime lows, Tmax on daytime highs and Tmnx require both highs and lows to be elevated.


The trends in the minimum temperature are generally positive. The exception is in the northern part of the Great Plains, right in the east-west center of the country. The largest red squares in the figure tell us that for every 2 decades we are seeing about 1 additional day of duration of very warm nighttime temperature. The bottom map for daytime minimum tells a different story. In the West there is, mostly, a warming trend in the daytime maximums. In the center of the country there is a pretty strong cooling trend. Some of my more skeptical readers and friends will go, “see there is no global warming.” In class, I would then make the assignment to describe what this figure does or does not tell us about global warming. Perhaps, I will distract a few people to carry on their arguments in the comments. It would be terribly pedantic for me to make such an assignment here, and pure hubris to expect responses.

In any case, we do see this big area of cooling of daytime maximums in the middle of the country. This was not a surprise to us, because there is growing documentation of the “Midwest Warming Hole.” This does, however, offer a challenge when discussing heat waves with my epidemiologist friends. It also might stand a little in conflict with reports such as “Heat in the Heartland,” a widely used document, for which I provided some review comments. In the next blog, I will breakdown the information in the figure a little bit, and then I will start to buildup a description that might be more usable by the public health planner.

r

Some earlier Hot Blogs

Russian Heat Wave

Heat Wave Series

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: 173 - 123

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

173. JohnLonergan
3:57 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
How do meteorologists fit into the 97% global warming consensus?
A new study examines meteorologists, the global warming consensus, political ideology, and climate expertise


Several surveys have found relatively low acceptance of human-caused global warming amongst meteorologists. For example, a 2009 survey found that among Earth scientists, only economic geologists (47 percent) had lower acceptance of human-caused global warming than meteorologists (64 percent). A new paper by social scientists from George Mason University, the American Meteorological Society (AMS), and Yale University reports results from a survey of members of the AMS to determine the factors associated with their views on climate change.

Climate Scientists and Meteorologists, Apples and Oranges

Predictably, many climate contrarians have already misrepresented this paper. In fact, the Heartland Institute (of Unabomber billboard infamy) misrepresented the study so badly (and arguably impersonated the AMS in a mass emailing), the AMS executive director (who is a co-author of the paper) took the unusual step of issuing a public reprimand against their behavior.

The misrepresentations of the study have claimed that it contradicts the 97 percent expert consensus on human-caused global warming. The prior studies that have found this high level of consensus were based specifically on climate experts – namely asking what those who do climate science research think, or what their peer-reviewed papers say about the causes of global warming.

Read More at The Guardian ....
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
172. Birthmark
3:26 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 166. PensacolaDoug:

Really, Doug. You have your own blog for political discussions. The topic here is Global Warming, not municipal (or party) politics.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5184
171. pcola57
3:10 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Forget it..
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6641
170. JohnLonergan
2:54 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
169. JohnLonergan
2:43 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
David Appell answers Judith Curry: No, Climate Science Hasn't Lost It's Way

Judith Curry writes:



by linking to an LA Times article about medical science (which, let's stipulate, is not a physical science; see below).

In my opinion (and as I commented on Curry's blog), any scientist who has to ask “has science lost its way?” has just admitted that their ideas can’t compete in the arena of ideas. They are looking to win the argument by other (unscientific) means.

There is a simple way to win the scientific debate: produce better science. Period.

That has never, ever failed to win the day.

Ever.


Emphasis added, and that is the only way.

Read More at Quark Soup ...
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
168. pcola57
2:01 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Image credit : World Resources Institute Full article HERE

Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6641
167. PensacolaDoug
1:53 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Shhh... Detroit too....
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
166. PensacolaDoug
1:53 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 156. schwankmoe:


of course not. chicago is a wonderful town. if it weren't for the weather it'd be the best city in america. however, since the president hails from chicago it has unfortunately become the bogeyman of the right.

hence such moronic chain emails talking about how illinois 'has no republicans'. Just about the dumbest thing ever written. half the state might as well be Kentucky.


The gubment is and has been for a while dem dominated.
Not the gen pop..
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
165. JohnLonergan
1:40 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
From Victor Venema at Variable Variarbility:

On the importance of changes in weather variability for changes in extremes

This is part 2 of the series on weather variability.

A more extreme climate is often interpreted in terms of weather variability. In the media weather variability and extreme weather are typically even used as synonyms. However, extremes may also change due to changes in the mean state of the atmosphere (Rhines and Huybers, 2013) and it is in general difficult to decipher the true cause.

Katz and Brown theorem

Changes in mean and variability are dislike quantities. Thus comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. Still Katz and Brown (1992) found one interesting general result: the more extreme the event, the more important a change in the variability is relative to the mean (Figure 1). Thus if there is a change in variability, it is most important for the most extreme events. If the change is small, these extreme events may have to be extremely extreme.



Read more ...
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
164. JohnLonergan
1:16 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
From John Mashey comes this description of agnontology:

Agnotology was coined by Stanford‘s Robert N. Proctor [PRO2008] to describe the deliberate production of ignorance and doubt. When applied to scientific topics, it might be called anti-science, employed especially when research results threaten strong economic or ideological interests. It is rarely intended to convince field professionals, but to confuse the public and especially decision-makers in government and business. Many modern anti-science PR tactics were created for tobacco companies and then used thereafter, often by the same people and organizations, especially in fighting environmental. Many scientists are unused to dealing with such tactics, since most scientific fields face no organized anti-science.

The Internet offers new opportunities for anti-science amplification, using networks of media, websites, blogs, and public helpers. The practitioners are very experienced.


And our resident deniers have bought it hook, line and sinker.


Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
163. JohnLonergan
12:38 PM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 150. RevElvis:



This is last paragraph from the Arstechnica story:

this is not the first time this region has experienced warmer temperatures. During some of the warm periods between past ice ages, it has been as warm as, or warmer than, it is today. No sudden spike in atmospheric methane shows up in climate records from those times, however. That tells us that, fortunately, it takes a pretty strong kick to awaken a methane giant.


Cite to the paper(paywalled)

Nature Geoscience, 2013.
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2007


Discussion at RealClimate:

Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
162. PensacolaDoug
11:46 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 145. Creideiki:


No. But I wouldn't expect a bunch of people who don't have a background in the upper Midwest to understand that.

The worst fallacy is when the author claims that the President proposes a budget. That's not actually true. The President may propose a budget. According to the Constitution, spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Many Presidents have helped to fuel the uselessness of the House of Representatives or have noted that the House is dysfunctional and they offer some advice. However, the President "proposing" a "budget" is the same thing as you or I "proposing" a "budget". It doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Now, is Chicago all puppy dogs and butterflies? Nope. But the problems are mostly endemic nepotism and crony capitalism. Pretty much the same problems elsewhere, but because "Chicago" is some scary word for conservatives, all of a sudden, it's something about "Democrats". I'd roll my eyes, but I'd give myself a concussion.


Which of those points are wrong? Besides there now being one Republican?
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
161. Birthmark
9:58 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 158. GTstormChaserCaleb:
A paper I wished I would have finished :(. Tell me what you guys think, should I finish it? And I am glad to be back hope you fine folks had a wonderful Thanksgiving.

I don't know if my Thanksgiving was wonderful, but it was sufficient. :)

I answered your question via Wu-mail.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5184
160. Daisyworld
7:01 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 158. GTstormChaserCaleb:
A paper I wished I would have finished :(. Tell me what you guys think, should I finish it? And I am glad to be back hope you fine folks had a wonderful Thanksgiving. [...]


What kind of feedback are you looking for, Caleb? Will you accept constructive criticism? If someone here takes the time to give you honest and frank advice, how will you react?

Also: What kind of report is this? What is the intended audience?
Member Since: January 11, 2012 Posts: 6 Comments: 786
159. BaltimoreBrian
5:25 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
A fair start Caleb. You can post it on my blog too if you want. Try reading some of the articles I have listed in my blog comments--just pick some with titles that catch your eye.
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8018
158. GTstormChaserCaleb
5:23 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
A paper I wished I would have finished :(. Tell me what you guys think, should I finish it? And I am glad to be back hope you fine folks had a wonderful Thanksgiving.

Carbon Dioxide Increases and Polar Ice Melt Results in Anthropogenic Global Warming


Caleb Bhagwandin

St. Petersburg College


Today a popular topic for debate is whether or not humans are the cause for Global Warming. Along with Climatologist and Meteorologist, Political Scientists state the Earth is warming at a rapid pace through a process called Global Warming. They state many reasons for this warming: increases in the Carbon Dioxide levels caused from the excessive burning of fossil fuels and the melting of polar ice caps as a result of the Greenhouse gases being trapped. On the other hand they are some scientists called denialists who claim that Global Warming is not caused by humans nor are the polar ice caps melting and that this is all just part of the Earth’s natural process.

One of the primary components that contribute to Global Warming is the Greenhouse Gas called Carbon Dioxide. Excessive amounts of Carbon Dioxide have been released into the atmosphere since the turn of the Industrial Revolution from the burning of fossil fuels that provide energy for homes, factories, and transportation. This build-up of Carbon Dioxide has exceeded the normal levels of Carbon Dioxide produced simply by the Earth. What this causes is for Ultraviolet Radiation from the Sun or what warms the planet to stay trapped in our atmosphere and not be released back into space through the form of infrared radiation, meaning a warming planet. According to John W. Farley, data taken from Greenland and Antarctica show that the Carbon Dioxide levels remained stable (approximately 280 parts per million) during the time of the last Ice Age and have since risen to 38% higher from the turn of the Industrial Revolution.

Another aspect tied into Global Warming is the melting of the polar ice caps which may contribute to rising sea levels in the future.
When alluding to warming temperatures and how they might affect sea level rises, Woodard (2010) states the following:
According to an International Team of 300 scientists engaging in a 4 year study on the Arctic,

“Average winter temperatures in much of the region have increased by as much as four to seven degrees Fahrenheit in the past 50 years, and they are expected to warm by another seven to thirteen degrees by the end of the century. During that time, the scientists predict that half of the Arctic's summer sea ice will melt, along with much of the Greenland Ice Sheet, which contains enough ice to raise sea level by some 23 feet.”

Most impacted by this are coastal communities who are now forced to seek higher ground. Another concern is the polar bears in this region as the climate is becoming too warm for them to live, thus putting them at risk of becoming endangered and quite possibly extinct as the food chain become disrupted.

On the other hand Climatologists against Anthropogenic Global Warming state that having more Carbon Dioxide is better for plant growth on Earth and allows for plants to even adapt to drought conditions and improves the photosynthesis of plants between the sun and water. According to Spencer (2010), a common fallacy among believers of Anthropogenic Global Warming is the belief that Carbon Dioxide lowers the pH of salt water claiming that water becomes more acidic, however research into this shows it takes a lot more Carbon Dioxide to lower the pH level of salt water which is about 8.1 to the level that would deem it acidic which is lower than 7. Increasing the output of Carbon Dioxide benefits the biosphere since before the Industrial Revolution marine animals and plants were starved from it due to a lack of Carbon Dioxide. Now with the over-abundance of Carbon Dioxide plants and marine animals have sufficient supply of Carbon Dioxide to grow healthier than before.

Finally one last thing going against the belief of Anthropogenic Global Warming is the time frame in which all of the Polar Ice will melt. Looking into the physics of Ice Melting and as it pertains to the Laws of Thermodynamics Ice does not melt so easily when the temperature is above the freezing part because the water has to go through a process of transferring heat to the ice. For example, an ice cube is dropped into a glass of water, the volume increases, but the density does not, however when that ice melts the volume returns to the original amount, but the ice does not melt instantly it takes some time.

When speaking about ice melt and sea level rise, Schmitt (2010) states the following:
“Even if sufficient heat is trapped in the atmosphere to raise it to the maximum value predicted by anthropogenic "global warming" alarmists (5°C) over the next 100 years, thirty times more heat energy must be imparted into the ice-caps to melt sufficient ice to raise sea-levels the catastrophic levels prophesied by Al Gore.”
So instead of 100 years as former Al Gore claims, it could be as much as 3000 years before all the ice is gone or longer.

They are some scientist who claim humans are the cause for Global Warming, while other scientists believe humans are not the cause. Whichever side you take in this ongoing debate there is evidence to support both claims. Carbon Dioxide levels have increased and the Polar Ice Caps are melting. The problem to resolve is whether humans have an influence over the Global Warming or is this just part of the Earth’s ongoing Climate Change.

References

Farley, J. W. (2006). Human-Produced Carbon Dioxide Contributes to Global Warming. In C. A. Bily (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. Global Warming. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Monthly Review, 2008, 60, 69-75) Retrieved from: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsP age/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?query=&prodId=OVIC&dis playGroupName=Viewpoints&limiter=&source=&disableH ighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&zid=&searc h_within_results=&action=2&catId=&activityType=&do cumentId=GALE%7CEJ3010222268&userGroupName=linccli n_spjc&jsid=27d1a366f51fb90cae20f82409d84947

Schmitt, J. J. (2010). The Polar Ice Melt Will Not Cause Ocean Levels to Rise Rapidly. In D. A. Henningfeld (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. The North and South Poles. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Will the Ice Caps Melt?, American Thinker, 2008) Retrieved from: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsP age/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?query=&prodId=OVIC&dis playGroupName=Viewpoints&limiter=&source=&disableH ighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&zid=&searc h_within_results=&action=2&catId=&activityType=&do cumentId=GALE%7CEJ3010664215&userGroupName=linccli n_spjc&jsid=6769795829dbd72c401cdec771959505

Spencer, R. (2006). Human-Produced Carbon Dioxide Does Not Contribute Significantly to Global Warming. In C. A. Bily (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. Global Warming. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from More Carbon Dioxide, Please: Raising a Scientific Question, National Review Online, 2008) Retrieved from http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsP age/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?query=&prodId=OVIC&dis playGroupName=Viewpoints&limiter=&source=&disableH ighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&zid=&searc h_within_results=&action=2&catId=&activityType=&do cumentId=GALE%7CEJ3010222269&userGroupName=linccli n_spjc&jsid=b72a92cdc1cb2c1b05ecabeb2d892dc8

Woodard, C. (2010). The Polar Ice Melt Will Cause Ocean Levels to Rise Rapidly. In D. A. Henningfeld (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. The North and South Poles. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from E/The Environmental Magazine, 2005, March-April, 19-21) Retrieved from: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsP age/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?query=&prodId=OVIC&dis playGroupName=Viewpoints&limiter=&source=&disableH ighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&zid=&searc h_within_results=&action=2&catId=&activityType=&do cumentId=GALE%7CEJ3010664214&userGroupName=linccli n_spjc&jsid=050f430746bb054910d5512d7b5e40ff

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6686
157. schwankmoe
5:13 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
I will admit George Ryan's corruption as governor sure made the democrats look bad. oh wait, Ryan was a republican. never mind.
Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 578
156. schwankmoe
4:59 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 144. pcola57:


Is Chicago really that screwed up?


of course not. chicago is a wonderful town. if it weren't for the weather it'd be the best city in america. however, since the president hails from chicago it has unfortunately become the bogeyman of the right.

hence such moronic chain emails talking about how illinois 'has no republicans'. Just about the dumbest thing ever written. half the state might as well be Kentucky.
Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 578
155. BaltimoreBrian
4:31 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 147. yoboi:


Sal would be proud........
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8018
154. FLwolverine
3:56 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 151. RevElvis:
149

I second the motion!
Agreed.

And let us remember the - and ! Buttons for such off-topic posts.
Member Since: January 6, 2013 Posts: 3 Comments: 1896
153. JohnLonergan
2:40 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Quoting 151. RevElvis:
149

I second the motion!


+2
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
152. JohnLonergan
2:40 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
Eli Rabbet presents more evidence of an anthropogenic fingerprint of climate change:

The other Keeling curve

...The answer of course is Ralph Keeling who took over the family business, adding a new line in the last quarter century of oxygen molecule concentrations. Eli's argument is really simple. If combustion is the reason for increase in CO2 mixing ratio then the concentration of oxygen should decrease. If Salby is right, not so much.

So let us go to the tape.

The loss roughly matches the amount of fossil fuels that have be burned when one takes into account the amount of water vapor produced by combustion from hydrogen in the fuel. The seasonal variation reflects the growth and decay of plants. The differences can be related to fluxes into and out of the land and oceans. ...

Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
151. RevElvis
2:29 AM GMT on December 02, 2013
149

I second the motion!
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
Off Siberia’s Arctic coast, the seafloor belches methane

And it's belching more than we had thought it was.


Omulyakhskaya and Khromskaya Bays on Siberia's Arctic coast.

Thawing permafrost gets a lot of attention as a positive feedback that could amplify global warming by releasing carbon dioxide and methane, both of which are greenhouse gases. Because of this, a lot of effort goes into studying Arctic permafrost. An international group of researchers led by Natalia Shakhova at the University of Alaska Fairbanks has been plying the remote waters of the Siberian Shelf for about a decade to find out how much methane was coming up from the thawing permafrost. They didn’t expect to find it bubbling.

The researchers have discovered a number of these bubbling plumes, but it’s difficult to figure out just how important they are to the total amount of methane escaping from the Siberian Shelf. To make progress toward that end, their latest work involved surveys around the Lena River Delta to measure methane in and above the water and learn more about the bubble plumes in the area by measuring them using sonar.

Apart from being unusual, the bubbles are actually an important phenomenon. Some of the methane doesn't form large bubbles. This moves slowly through the sediment and water and is oxidized by microbes, becoming CO2, which is less potent as a greenhouse gas, molecule-for-molecule, than methane. Large, buoyant bubbles take the express route, heading straight for the atmosphere.

The methane that ends up dissolved in the bottom waters can also build up, trapped beneath the warmer surface water. By churning up the water, the storms help ventilate the deeper water, effectively emptying this methane bucket and allowing it to start refilling. However, when the team rushed out after several storms to take water samples, they found that most of that methane was already gone.

ARStechnica.com
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
Quoting 147. yoboi:

Why don't you take the political garbage over to the blog where it apparently is appreciated? IOW, somewhere other than this blog, which is devoted to climate science.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5184
141

"How will this effect sea life?"

(sea life drew the short straw - again!)

article below says they're going to use hydrolysis and incineration - to break down the agents, and that it's too dangerous to transport, or do it on land???

More info -


ReaderSupportedNews.org
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
147. yoboi
Quoting 135. PensacolaDoug:



Good try back LT. I post a well -written article that succinctly details how dems have thoroughly trashed Chicago and the best you can do is shoot the messenger and accuse me of plagiarism. Change the subject and demonize. Straight out of the LT playbook. Good try. SA would be proud.


Sal would be proud........
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
Quoting 145. Creideiki:


No. But I wouldn't expect a bunch of people who don't have a background in the upper Midwest to understand that.

The worst fallacy is when the author claims that the President proposes a budget. That's not actually true. The President may propose a budget. According to the Constitution, spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Many Presidents have helped to fuel the uselessness of the House of Representatives or have noted that the House is dysfunctional and they offer some advice. However, the President "proposing" a "budget" is the same thing as you or I "proposing" a "budget". It doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Now, is Chicago all puppy dogs and butterflies? Nope. But the problems are mostly endemic nepotism and crony capitalism. Pretty much the same problems elsewhere, but because "Chicago" is some scary word for conservatives, all of a sudden, it's something about "Democrats". I'd roll my eyes, but I'd give myself a concussion.


Hmm..
Ok Creideiki..
Thank you..
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6641
Quoting 143. pcola57:


Is Chicago really that screwed up?


No. But I wouldn't expect a bunch of people who don't have a background in the upper Midwest to understand that.

The worst fallacy is when the author claims that the President proposes a budget. That's not actually true. The President may propose a budget. According to the Constitution, spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Many Presidents have helped to fuel the uselessness of the House of Representatives or have noted that the House is dysfunctional and they offer some advice. However, the President "proposing" a "budget" is the same thing as you or I "proposing" a "budget". It doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Now, is Chicago all puppy dogs and butterflies? Nope. But the problems are mostly endemic nepotism and crony capitalism. Pretty much the same problems elsewhere, but because "Chicago" is some scary word for conservatives, all of a sudden, it's something about "Democrats". I'd roll my eyes, but I'd give myself a concussion.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 114. PensacolaDoug:
A STATE WITH NO REPUBLICANS


A State with No
Republicans, Very interesting...

A wonderful state
with zero Republicans ...The State of Illinois.

Some interesting
data on the 'state' of Illinois:

There are more
people on welfare in Illinois than there are people working.

Chicago pays the
highest wages to teachers than anywhere else in the US, averaging $110,000/year.

Their pensions
average 80-90% of their income.

Wow, are Illinois
and Chicago great or what?

Be sure to read
till the end. I've never heard it
explained better.

Perhaps the US
should pull out of Chicago ?

Body count: In the last six months, 292 killed
(murdered) in Chicago.

221 killed in
Iraq, AND Chicago has one of the
strictest gun laws in the entire US.

Here's the Chicago
chain of command:


President: Barack Obama

Senator: Dick Durbin

House
Representative: Jesse Jackson Jr.

Governor: Pat Quinn

House leader: Mike Madigan

Atty. Gen.: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)

Mayor: Rahm Emanuel

The leadership
in Illinois - all Democrats.

Thank you for the
combat zone in Chicago.

Of course, they're
all blaming each other.
Can't blame
Republicans; there aren't any!

Chicago school
system rated one of the worst in the country. From CNN report: Nearly 80% of eighth-graders in Chicago
public schools are not proficient in reading or math, according to the US
Department of Education. The
Chicago school system was a failure.
Half of Chicago's 64 public high schools scored in the bottom 1% of
schools on the ACT, an old metric used by many colleges for admissions. ''Forty-six percent of Chicago
teachers send their children to private schools,'' I noted then, too. ''The
people who know the product best,
send their children elsewhere.''

Can't blame
Republicans; there aren't any!

State pension fund
$78 Billion in debt, worst in country.

Can't blame
Republicans; there aren't any!

Cook County (
Chicago ) sales tax 10.25% highest in country. Can't blame Republicans; there
aren't any!

This is the
political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois. And he is going to 'fix' Washington
politics for us?

George Ryan is no
longer Governor, he is in prison.

He was replaced by
Rob Blagojevitch who is, that's right, also in the prison.

And Representative
Jesse Jackson Jr. resigned a couple of weeks ago, because he is fighting to not
be sent to...that's right, to prison.

The Land of Lincoln, where our governors make our license plates.

But you know what?

As long as they
keep providing entitlements to the population of Chicago, nothing is going to
change, except the state will go broke before the country does.

"Anybody who thinks he can be happy and
prosperous by letting the Government taking care of him; better take a closer look
at the American Indian."


Is Chicago really that screwed up?
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6641
Grist..How to talk to a Climate Skeptic
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6641
Quoting 138. RevElvis:
The OPCW is now claiming they have a “technically feasible” plan to dump chemical weapons into the Mediterranean Sea (what could possibly go wrong?)

"The organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has proposed destroying at least 1000 tones of the confiscated Syrian chemical weapon stockpile out at sea, which some fear will destroy delicate eco systems vital to sea and human life alike. The OPCW claims the plan is 'technically feasible' and is apparently willing to risk ecological disaster to destroy the toxic contents of the weaponry in or above the sea. Members of the press were told, the 'group is considering whether to destroy the chemical weapons in the ocean, either on a ship or by loading them onto an offshore rig.'"

SlashDot.org

Intellihub.org


How will this effect sea life?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
From Carbon Brief

World drought frequency, duration, and severity for 1951-2010
A overview of drought hotspots over the second half of the 20th century. The biggest increases in frequency, duration and intensity are in Africa, Eastern Asia, the Mediterranean and southern Australia - but a global trend is less clear.


International Journal of Climatology
ABSTRACT
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
Energy balance in a warm world without the ocean conveyor belt and sea ice

Abstract
[1] Under a strong global warming scenario, the global mean temperature could rise up to 10oC, causing the global ocean conveyor belt to collapse and the summer sea ice to disappear. This will lead to profound changes in our climate system and to impact drastically the living conditions of the globe. Here we study how the global heat redistribution and regional heat balance will respond to these changes using the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Climate System Model version 4. Results show that the collapsed ocean conveyor belt reduces the oceanic northward meridional heat transport (MHT) by nearly 60% with a minor increase in the atmospheric MHT. The polar amplified warming is primarily caused by the increased absorption of longwave radiation due to the increased greenhouse gases and cloudiness, and by the increased absorption of shortwave radiation due to a lower albedo associated with the disappeared summer sea ice.
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
The OPCW is now claiming they have a “technically feasible” plan to dump chemical weapons into the Mediterranean Sea (what could possibly go wrong?)

"The organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has proposed destroying at least 1000 tones of the confiscated Syrian chemical weapon stockpile out at sea, which some fear will destroy delicate eco systems vital to sea and human life alike. The OPCW claims the plan is 'technically feasible' and is apparently willing to risk ecological disaster to destroy the toxic contents of the weaponry in or above the sea. Members of the press were told, the 'group is considering whether to destroy the chemical weapons in the ocean, either on a ship or by loading them onto an offshore rig.'"

SlashDot.org

Intellihub.org
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
Quoting 135. PensacolaDoug:



Good try back LT. I post a well -written article that succinctly details how dems have thoroughly trashed Chicago and the best you can do is shoot the messenger and accuse me of plagiarism. Change the subject and demonize. Straight out of the LT playbook. Good try. SA would be proud.
First, it's pretty obvious that your definition of well-written is something that conforms to your brand of right wing ideology and not something that is actually well-written in the conventional sense. Second, the very premise of that article is false. You asked for a rebuttal and I pointed out that there are indeed Republicans in government in Illinois. Third, your claim that the article was from before Mark Kirk took office in the US Senate is an obvious lie since that article also mentions the resignation of Jessie Jackson, Jr., which came two years after Mark Kirk entered the US Senate.

I understand your desire to avoid the issue of plagiarism -- most folks these days don't seem to understand what is acceptable when borrowing the words of others -- but I'd suggest a simple mea culpa might be a good route for you to take.

Finally, LT? I assume it's some cutesy insult towards me. You're a real class act, aren't you Doug?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Lordy,

Try the Oyster Rockefeller,

I'm willing to show you how the linkie thing works.

I charge for my time.

$100 per Hr.

But fer you

$75

Kashmir

Oh, let the sun beat down upon my face, stars fill my dreams
I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been
To sit with elders of the gentle race, this world has seldom seen
They talk of days for which they sit and wait, all will be revealed





Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 414 Comments: 125572
Quoting 131. TheDevilsAdvocate:

pla-gia-rism [pley-juh-riz-uhm, -jee-uh-riz-] noun

1. an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author: It is said that he plagiarized Thoreau's plagiarism of a line written by Montaigne. Synonyms: appropriation, infringement, piracy, counterfeiting; theft, borrowing, cribbing, passing off. -- dictionary.com



Plagiarism doesn't have to include an overt attempt to take credit for the work of others -- merely copying the work of others without attribution is sufficient. Good try though, Doug.




Good try back LT. I post a well -written article that succinctly details how dems have thoroughly trashed Chicago and the best you can do is shoot the messenger and accuse me of plagiarism. Change the subject and demonize. Straight out of the LT playbook. Good try. SA would be proud.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
Quoting 133. JohnLonergan:
From Climate News Network:

Geo-engineering ‘could upset rainfall’

Geo-engineering may be able to lower global temperatures but could be damaging to seasonal rainfall patterns, a study says.

LONDON, December 1 – Geo-engineering – the confident technocrat’s last resort solution to catastrophic climate change – could create damaging conditions of its own, according to new research.

Simone Tilmes of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, in the US and an international team of colleagues report in Geophysical Research Letters: Atmospheres that at least one deliberate technological strategy to limit global warming could reduce seasonal rainfall, including the monsoons of Asia that provide a lifeline to hundreds of millions.

Senior scientists have in the last decade tentatively considered technological responses to climate change on the basis that economies, politicians and consumers show no sign of making the dramatic reductions in fossil fuel use that would cut the greenhouse gas emissions that fuel global warming.

Among these responses is a relatively simple one. If greenhouse gases go on increasing, then more solar heat will be trapped in the atmosphere. So, the world should think of a way to reduce solar radiation instead: spray sulphate particles into the stratosphere to block incoming sunlight, or even place arrays of mirrors into orbit to reflect a proportion of the sunlight away from the Earth.

So the scientists used 12 different climate models to simulate various possible futures, including one based on historical factors in which carbon dioxide did not just double, but reached four times the levels in the atmosphere during the American Revolution, and the Napoleonic wars that ravaged Europe at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

They found – not surprisingly – that a greenhouse world would be matched by a significant increase in rainfall in many places, along with prolonged droughts in others. That would happen because more warmth means more evaporation, greater saturation of the atmosphere and consequently more precipitation.

Harvests at risk
And then, still using the same climate models, they tested what would happen to rainfall if they artificially blocked some of the incoming sunlight, to lower the overall global temperatures. But they could not recreate the world as it had been before the alarming increase in carbon dioxide levels to the predictable climates on which agriculture and industry and different urban civilisations have come to depend.

The models predicted that instead of increasing with potentially disastrous outcomes, seasonal rains would diminish, with equally damaging consequences. A reduction in normal sunlight would mean less evaporation. Plants would on balance respond to increased carbon dioxide levels by closing their stomata, or pores, thus transpiring less water.

Monsoon rains in East Asia would fall by 6%, in South Africa by 5%, in North America by 7%, and in South America by 6%. These differences don’t sound huge – but many millions could starve as a result of the changes.

“Geo-engineering the planet doesn’t cure the problem. Even if one of these techniques could keep global temperatures approximately balanced, precipitation would not return to normal conditions,” said Dr Tilmes. “What we do know is that our climate is very complex, that human activity is making the planet warmer and that any technological fix we might try to shade the planet could have unforeseen consequences.” – Climate News Network


Doesn't fossil fuel GHG's geo-engineering upset rainfall?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
From Climate News Network:

Geo-engineering ‘could upset rainfall’

Geo-engineering may be able to lower global temperatures but could be damaging to seasonal rainfall patterns, a study says.

LONDON, December 1 – Geo-engineering – the confident technocrat’s last resort solution to catastrophic climate change – could create damaging conditions of its own, according to new research.

Simone Tilmes of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, in the US and an international team of colleagues report in Geophysical Research Letters: Atmospheres that at least one deliberate technological strategy to limit global warming could reduce seasonal rainfall, including the monsoons of Asia that provide a lifeline to hundreds of millions.

Senior scientists have in the last decade tentatively considered technological responses to climate change on the basis that economies, politicians and consumers show no sign of making the dramatic reductions in fossil fuel use that would cut the greenhouse gas emissions that fuel global warming.

Among these responses is a relatively simple one. If greenhouse gases go on increasing, then more solar heat will be trapped in the atmosphere. So, the world should think of a way to reduce solar radiation instead: spray sulphate particles into the stratosphere to block incoming sunlight, or even place arrays of mirrors into orbit to reflect a proportion of the sunlight away from the Earth.

So the scientists used 12 different climate models to simulate various possible futures, including one based on historical factors in which carbon dioxide did not just double, but reached four times the levels in the atmosphere during the American Revolution, and the Napoleonic wars that ravaged Europe at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

They found – not surprisingly – that a greenhouse world would be matched by a significant increase in rainfall in many places, along with prolonged droughts in others. That would happen because more warmth means more evaporation, greater saturation of the atmosphere and consequently more precipitation.

Harvests at risk
And then, still using the same climate models, they tested what would happen to rainfall if they artificially blocked some of the incoming sunlight, to lower the overall global temperatures. But they could not recreate the world as it had been before the alarming increase in carbon dioxide levels to the predictable climates on which agriculture and industry and different urban civilisations have come to depend.

The models predicted that instead of increasing with potentially disastrous outcomes, seasonal rains would diminish, with equally damaging consequences. A reduction in normal sunlight would mean less evaporation. Plants would on balance respond to increased carbon dioxide levels by closing their stomata, or pores, thus transpiring less water.

Monsoon rains in East Asia would fall by 6%, in South Africa by 5%, in North America by 7%, and in South America by 6%. These differences don’t sound huge – but many millions could starve as a result of the changes.

“Geo-engineering the planet doesn’t cure the problem. Even if one of these techniques could keep global temperatures approximately balanced, precipitation would not return to normal conditions,” said Dr Tilmes. “What we do know is that our climate is very complex, that human activity is making the planet warmer and that any technological fix we might try to shade the planet could have unforeseen consequences.” – Climate News Network
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2744
From Media Matters for America:

No, Daily Caller, A Meteorologist Survey Does Not Contradict Climate Consensus

The Daily Caller reported that a new survey of meteorologists contradicts the scientific consensus on climate change. But a simple opinion survey does not debunk that 97 percent of climate science papers found that human activities contribute to global warming -- rather, it only shows the stark differences between climate science research and meteorologists' beliefs.

A recent study conducted by the American Meteorological Society (AMS) surveyed its "professional members" to test how political ideologies and climate expertise influence opinions on manmade global warming. The study found that only 52 percent of its members believe global warming is happening and is caused mostly by humans. However, this study merely shows that the average opinions of meteorologists are at odds with the majority of scientific research on climate change, and does not, as the Daily Caller claimed, show that "there is much more disagreement among climate scientists than previously thought":

[...]

This is not the first time that meteorologists and climate scientists have been at odds. A previous survey of TV weather forecasters found that 27 percent of respondents believed that "global warming is a scam," and more recent survey found that over half of TV forecasters don't believe in manmade climate change.

There are vast differences between meteorologists and climate change scientists, not limited to that their models are different and they ask different questions. Kerry Emanuel, an atmospheric scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explained in an email to Media Matters why a weather forecaster like Joe Bastardi should not be featured in the media to discuss climate change:



The AMS itself has criticized broadcasters for offering "nonscientific" opinions on climate change:



The antagonism between climate scientists and meteorologists is illustrated within the AMS survey itself; of the survey respondents with expertise in climate science and who actively publish on climate-related issues, 88 percent believe that humans play a major role in perpetuating global warming, and only 1 percent believe that global warming is not happening.

[...]

The AMS study is just the latest opinion survey that has surfaced and been seized on by the right wing media to cast doubt global warming. Hopefully, mainstream media will hesitate before further amplifying this meteorologist opinion survey to attempt to contradict the overwhelming consensus on climate change.

Complete article >>
Member Since: November 22, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1225
Quoting 130. PensacolaDoug:
I'm not taking credit for authoring either post. Good try LT.

pla-gia-rism [pley-juh-riz-uhm, -jee-uh-riz-] noun

1. an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author: It is said that he plagiarized Thoreau's plagiarism of a line written by Montaigne. Synonyms: appropriation, infringement, piracy, counterfeiting; theft, borrowing, cribbing, passing off. -- dictionary.com



Plagiarism doesn't have to include an overt attempt to take credit for the work of others -- merely copying the work of others without attribution is sufficient. Good try though, Doug.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I'm not taking credit for authoring either post. Good try LT.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
Sunday reading

Fukushima Floating Offshore Wind Project Seeks to Halve Cost

Centuries-Old Italian Olive Trees Die as Scientists Track Killer


Solar Data Trove Cutting Power Use in Threat to Utilities

What if Christmas Trees Had a Holiday?



Protective measures are a 'death sentence' for rare dolphin say campaigners

Indian probe begins journey to Mars


China space: 'Jade Rabbit' lunar mission blasts off


*** US taxpayers foot bill for climate inaction


Deep ocean offers hints of warming


Crows Are No Bird-Brains: Neurobiologists Investigate Neuronal Basis of Crows' Intelligence

Fast, Furious, Refined: Smaller Black Holes Can Eat Plenty (thinks of Astro at Thanksgiving)

!!! Even If Emissions Stop, Carbon Dioxide Could Warm Earth for Centuries

!!! Elucidating Heavy Precipitation Events

*** Paleotempestology and 2011's Hurricane Irene

* Glaciers Sizzle as They Disappear Into Warmer Water

* Lakes Discovered Beneath Greenland Ice Sheet

* Subarctic Lakes Are Drying Up at a Rate Not Seen in 200 Years

!!! Ocean Rip Currents Claim More Lives Than Other Natural Hazards (for aussiestorms)

A Brooding Marine Worm Found in Antarctica


Warsaw climate change talks end on a blurry note


* Eagle deaths: Unprecedented $1 million fine for Wyoming wind farms


*** Are gassy cattle a bigger problem than US government thought?

'Climate Casino': An Overview of Global Warming (book review)

The Vaccination Effect: 100 Million Cases of Contagious Disease Prevented

*** Junking the idea of junk: A newly recognised class of genes really does matter

Oil and natural gas reported near Puerto Rico

Green sea turtles make a comeback in Florida

Amazing ice circle found spinning on North Dakota river

*** Warming oceans, not air, may be critical to melting ice sheets
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8018
Quoting 127. PensacolaDoug:
It's all the 1 Republicans fault!!!!
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Chicago is still a mess! That makes it current enough.
It really is a reading comprehension issue, isn't it?

BTW - In polite circles, plagiarism is generally considered to be a no-no.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
It's all the 1 Republicans fault!!!!
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Chicago is still a mess! That makes it current enough.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
Quoting 124. PensacolaDoug:


That piece pre-dates 2010



But Mark...He's Jim Kirks brother right?
Yet you still posted it, knowing that it is outdated and incorrect? Gotta love you guys -- never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 121. PensacolaDoug:
Why don't cha dispute the Illinois post point by point. Chicago is a wreck. Would you live there?
I read an article the other day about big cities. They really serve no purpose. Unless crime is a productive,positive way to raise "youths"!
Member Since: June 24, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 1437
Quoting 123. TheDevilsAdvocate:
Guess you've never heard of Mark Kirk. Or, I guess I should say, whoever you lifted this from -- without attribution -- has never heard of Mark Kirk.


That piece pre-dates 2010



But Mark...He's Jim Kirks brother right?
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 519
Quoting 121. PensacolaDoug:
Why don't cha dispute the Illinois post point by point. Chicago is a wreck. Would you live there?
Guess you've never heard of Mark Kirk. Or, I guess I should say, whoever you lifted this from -- without attribution -- has never heard of Mark Kirk.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 173 - 123

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