Tag Archives: Global Warming
A New Climate State: Arctic Sea Ice 2012
A new video from Yale:
Obama v. Romney on Science: The most important thing you can read this election season
The Science Debate Project, co-founded by my friend Shawn Otto of Minnesota, has been trying to get candidates for the office of President to engage in a public debate about science. There has been resistance to that idea, but at least, Obama and Romney were willing to answer a set of questions related to science and science policy. The questions with the President’s and Romney’s answers are HERE. A press release regarding the project is here.
Romney wants to improve education by allowing parents to send their kids to charter and private schools, and he wants to fund that. He is not sure that Anthropogenic Climate Change is real or important, though he admits that the planet may actually be getting warmer. He wants to enhance innovation by reducing taxes for the rich and demanding more of lower paid workers. Obama’s position on the various issues is more well thought out, more likely to work, and more succinctly worded.
I am very disappointed that no one thought to ask the chair what it thought, but maybe later in the election season that can happen.
For all those who think, if there are any of you left, that the two main political parties in the US are the same, read this and report back.
The Melting of Earth's Northern Ice Cap: Update
We are becoming aware of two very important changes in the Arctic that you need to know about. These are separate thing but related, and both are almost certainly the outcome of anthropogenic global warming (AGW). They are:
- The sea ice that covers much of the Arctic Sea during the winter is normally reduced during the northern summer, but this year, the reduction has been dramatic. There is less sea ice in the Arctic Circle than recorded in recent history.
- The massive continental glacier on Greenland, the largest glacial mass in the Northern Hemisphere, has undergone more melting this summer than observed over recent years. A few weeks ago you may have heard about a great melt in Greenland. This is not that. The July Melting event was interesting and I’ll discuss it below, but the news story breaking today is about something else.
The Arctic Sea Ice
Every summer the large areas of the Arctic Sea’s ice melts away, then it refreezes each winter. The minimum extent of ice is typically reached in about mid September. The extent of ice at this minimum has been getting steadily less over time. Direct and accurate measurements don’t go back far enough to track the effects of AGW over the entire time this has been happening, but we can pretty easily look at the last few decades. Have a look at this graph:
Note that the total amount of sea ice in an average year in the 2000’s decade is about one third less than the total amount of ice in the 1980s, at the minimum period in September. Below the 2000’s line are plotted the three most ice-free years in the dataset; those are the extreme years. The present year, 2012, is tracked through mid-August on this graph.
The present year, 2012, is on track for breaking all records for the Arctic Sea ice minimum.
Here’s an interesting side story. Notice how the red line for 2012 is much straighter in a downward direction than the other lines for the same time period for the last several days of measurement. My understanding is that large storms in the Arctic appeared, covering the sea ice from observation for several days, and when the storms cleared a whole bunch of the ice was gone. This is not that unusual. Storms hasten the disappearance of sea ice. But this was a more dramatic than typical example of this event.
In case you were wondering if it was storminess and not AGW that is causing this year’s ice to be less than the other years, and I’m sure that climate change deniers will make this claim, keep in mind that a) this recent storminess does not explain more than a small amount of the ice reduction compared to overall melting and b) AGW has caused there to be more storminess in the Arctic and more warmth in the Arctic.
The Greenland Melt-off of July
Before getting to the really big news from Greenland, I want to first remind you of an interesting event that happened in July, reported by NASA (I mentioned it here). Every summer, some of the ice melts on the surface of Greenland’s massive glacier, then much of that refreezes. However, the melting is usually spotty…here and there and rarely everywhere. The highlands are too cold to melt at all in some years. But July was very warm and there were a few days when virtually the entire surface of greenland melted. There were slushy puddles everywhere. Then, much of it refroze. This happens now and then. We can assume that widespread melting like this is more common in a warmer world, and will be part of the process of glacial wasting as the Greenland Ice Sheet turns over time into seawater. But this particular event was in and of itself not entirely unheard of.
But there is a neat graph that shows why glacial melting is both more important than one might thing and also more complicated than one might think. Have a look:
Just as sea ice extent in the Arctic reduces every summer, the albedo of the Greenland Ice sheet reduces. The white fresh frozen snow that falls over the winter is highly reflective…has a high albedo…and as it melts and gets slushy and mixes with water is has lower albedo. Plain water has very low albedo compared to snow. This is important because high albedo surfaces reflect a lot of sunlight (which provides heat) back into space while low albedo surfaces absorb sunlight, converting it to heat that adds to the local and ultimately global temperature.
There is a feedback mechanism at work here. Imagine that something happens to make for a late Canadian winter with a widespread heavy snow storms much later than usual. This could be caused by a combination of events happening just right in a given year. So, late in the spring there is a lot more snow cover than normal. This snow will reflect a lot of sunlight away so the beginning of the summer is cooler. If this effect lasts into fall, early snows may cause the subsequent winter to be even colder and snow to fall instead of rain, producing more Albedo. Etc. Conversely, something that reduces albedo in a given year may cause more melting of snow and ice, which means less albedo, and thus more melting. You get the picture.
In the days before we understood Orbital Geometry and before we had a very good ida of how air and sea currents really work, this feedback effect with albedo was considered as a candidate for what causes glacial periods to come on and go away. We now know that albedo related forcing and feedback is not the prime mover in climate change, but it is still an effect.
In the graph above, you see the line for the present year. Note that Greenland albedo is lower for the entire year than for any of the other years plotted. Then, in July, that melting event occurs. Then, the water freezes. Albedo is not like sea ice extent (compare to the two graphs). Sea ice extent is a slowly changing ponderous slow moving variable, while Albedo is al wiggly-wobbly and highly variable. A big snow storm, albedo goes up. A big rain storm, albedo goes down. So, the wobbliness of the line does not mean too much, but it is very cool to see the direct relationship between observed widespread melting and albedo. And, this effect will probably play a role as the Greenland Ice Sheet melts away.
And now, for the big news
The really big new that is coming out today is about greenland. From a press release covering the findings of Mardo Tedesco, professor of Earth and atmospheric sciences at The City College of New York:
Melting over the Greenland ice sheet shattered the seasonal record on August 8 – a full four weeks before the close of the melting season…
This year, cumulative melting in the first week in August had already exceeded the record of 2010, taken over a full season
“With more yet to come in August, this year’s overall melting will fall way above the old records. That’s a goliath year – the greatest melt since satellite recording began in 1979.” …
This spells a change for the face of southern Greenland, he added, with the ice sheet thinning at its edges and lakes on top of glaciers proliferating.
Professor Tedesco noted that these changes jibe with what most of the models predict – the difference is how quickly this seems to be happening.
To quantify the changes, he calculated the duration and extent of melting throughout the season across the whole ice sheet, using data collected by microwave satellite sensors.
This ‘cumulative melting index’ can be seen as a measure of the ‘strength’ of the melting season: the higher the index, the more melting has occurred.
…
This year, Greenland experienced extreme melting in nearly every region – the west, northwest and northeast of the continent – but especially at high elevations. In most years, the ice and snow at high elevations in southern Greenland melt for a few days at most. This year it has already gone on for two months.
Here’s the graph showing the relative amount of ice melt per year in Greenland for the last few decades.
Stay tuned. And buy knickers.
Professor Tedesco’s Web Site is here.
Source Material (other than the press release):
Arctic Sea Ice Monitor
Sea Level Rise and Ice Melt
Satellites see Unprecedented Greenland Ice Sheet Melt
Albedo update for 2012
What is the link between global warming and drought?
I’d like to give you a very small selection of references and discussions about the link between global warming and drought.
Global warming probably has two major effects. First, more moisture gets into the atmosphere because warmer air passing over the oceans can take in more water. This can cause more rain and possibly more severe storms and flooding. But the atmospheric system also changes in another way. The hydraulic cycle, as it is called, intensified in both directions, wet and dry. If you live on the East Coast of the US and you move to where I live in the upper Midwest, you’ll get a special appreciation of this. Rain on the East Coast comes in thunderstorms now and then, but a lot of the rain comes from big wet air masses linked to the ocean. In Boston it can rain for a few days off and on but mostly on, with an inch off rain falling over a long period of time. But here in the Midwest, that almost never happens. Instead, it’s not raining, then this big scary storm comes and dumps a whole pile of rain on you, then it moves on. In between storms it can be dry vor many days. The Midwestern storms come from warm air masses passing over the Gulf of Mexico and moving north (then turning “right” at some point) with contributions from elsewhere. It is more intensified hydrological system, with a lot of variation. That is a min-model (albeit a pretty inexact one) for shifting to a warmer planet. Keep in mind that between rain storms, warmer air takes moisture out of the local system (to dump it in a storm somewhere else). Climate experts generally agree that a warmer world will have more severe storms, though which storms will be more severe and in what way is not clear, and drought. Lots of that. Continue reading What is the link between global warming and drought?
Peter Gleick Reinstated
Peter Gleick has been reinstated in his position as president of the Pacific Institute.
The Pacific Institute is pleased to welcome Dr. Peter Gleick back to his position as president of the Institute. An independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of the Institute has supported what Dr. Gleick has stated publicly regarding his interaction with the Heartland Institute. This independent investigation has further confirmed and the Pacific Institute is satisfied that none of its staff knew of or was involved in any way.
Dr. Gleick has apologized publicly for his actions, which are not condoned by the Pacific Institute and run counter to the Institute’s policies and standard of ethics over its 25-year history. The Board of Directors accepts Dr. Gleick’s apology for his lapse in judgment. We look forward to his continuing in the Pacific Institute’s ongoing and vital mission to advance environmental protection, economic development, and social equity.
“I am glad to be back and thank everyone for continuing their important work at the Pacific Institute during my absence,” said Dr. Gleick in a statement. “I am returning with a renewed focus and dedication to the science and research that remain at the core of the Pacific Institute’s mission.”
An important revelation regarding Heartland Gate (global warming denialism)
Peter Gleick has been cleared of faking a key memo. Who is Peter Gleick, and what is this memo of which we speak? Here is a refresher of events over the last 3 1/2 months:
You will recall that last February 14th, we were all given an interesting Valentine’s Day present: A cache of documents had been acquired from the Heartland Institute, and these documents revealed important details about Heartland’s effort to interfere with science education and otherwise agitate and lobby to promote climate science denialism. The documents were released to the public by an as then unknown activist, and then redistributed by numerous bloggers including this one.
Heartland is the organization that made itself famous by working for the tobacco lobby in their effort to prove that smoking cigarettes was not really harmful. Over recent years, Heartland has received funds from a wide range of organizations and individuals to support climate denialism. Most recently, Heartland gained considerable notoriety (the bad kind) with their noxious and ill-conceived billboard campaign that equated “believing in global warming” with being a deranged serial killer (Tool Time: Heartland, Ted Kaczynski, and Education).
Continue reading An important revelation regarding Heartland Gate (global warming denialism)
The Heartland Unibomber Anti-Science Hate Billboard
Here it is on film in case you wanted to see it:
Americans on Energy: New UT Study
Another poll shows increasing and strong interest among Americans in developing Green Technology and related technologies, as well as reduced interest in anti-environmental extremism and petrolatum-related efforts.
Previously, we discussed the new poll by the Science Debate people, and now we have new information from the UT Energy Poll.
The results are mixed, but interesting. In order of decreasing preference expressed by a voter to support a candidate for president based on their position, voters like expanded natural gas development1, incentives for renewable tech companies, increased energy research, requiring utilities to offer “renewable.” Those are all in the above 50% range.
Approval of a president who, in turn, would approve of the Keystone XL Pipeline sits at the 50% mark. Expanded Gulf drilling, oil exploration in the Arctic are below 50%. Loan guarantees for nuclear companies is at a dismal 28% and, happily, support for a theoretical presidential candidate who proposed to eliminate the EPA (remember Michele Bachmann?) is at 20% according to the poll.
The UT study is reported by Sheril Kirschenbaum, here.
Interestingly, 65% of poll respondents say global climate change is occurring and 22% that it is not. I believe that over the medium or short term, that is an increase in percentage of people who get that right, but it is still dismal.
1I think many people believe “Natural Gas” to be good, more or less uncritically. Probably has something to do with this.
An Excellent Book on Energy: Before the Lights Go Out…
On Sunday, I interviewed Maggie Koerth-Baker, the author of Before the Lights Go Out: Conquering the Energy Crisis Before It Conquers Us
Maggie is the science editor at Boing Boing, a journalist, and has had an interest in energy and the related science and engineering for some time. Her book is an overview, historical account, and detailed description of the energy systems that we use in the United States, outlining the flow of watts, CO2 emissions, methods of making more watts, what we use it all for, and more. Maggie focuses on the electrical power grid, which is actually responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than internal combustion powered transport (cars, trucks, etc.), but she does touch on the latter. She focuses on the US but she draws from overseas examples in discussing what is normally done, what is not normally done, and what we might do in the future. She develops compelling and sometimes startling imagery and provides interesting and lively metaphors useful in describing and understanding sometimes very abstract problems related to making, delivering, and using energy.
Here’s the bottom line. If you want to have an intelligent conversation about energy, especially related to current problems and needs in the US and especially related to the electrical grid, you have to either know all the stuff that is in Before the Lights Go Out
I’ve been engaged in conversations about energy at a significantly heightened pace over the last several months, for various reasons, and I’ve found that the stuff that comes out of people’s mouths (my own included) is very often either very out of date or was never very correct to begin with. Maggie’s book is a very engaging way of fixing that. If you read the book, you will be caught up.
I caution those of you who might listen to the podcast that we only touched on part of what is covered in the book! You can’t just listen to the interview and skip reading the source material! Having said that, I’m not going to go into great detail here either. Listen to the podcast, get the book, read it, and report back. You will probably have interesting questions and additions to add to the comment section.
Michael Mann on Climate Scientists and Smear Campaigns
Climate scientist Michael Mann is no stranger to smear campaigns. Man has the distinction of having made important contributions to climate science, for which he shared the Nobel Peace Prize. He is famous to many of you for having come up with the “hockey stick” metaphor.
Michael Mann is a good scientist who has done honest, important, and high quality work, but there are those who don’t want to hear about the results he and other climate scientists have come up with. So, they hate him. And by “hate” I don’t mean that they sit there not liking him. I mean, they actively hate him. They wake up every morning and try to think of things to do to ruin his life, and they conspire with each other to carry out these nefarious acts, and in some cases, they are paid by special interests to do these things.
We all get this hate, to one level or another. I was amused the other day when one of the haters, someone who had made death threats against me, had apparently pressed the button on his Linked In account to “find people to link to” and thus accidentally sent me an invitation to “Link In.” I get an email that says “I want to kill you” then I get an invitation to link up. Made me laugh.
But in reality this is no laughing matter. Even though we all take a certain amount of crap for either being a climate scientist or a person who teaches about climate change or a blogger or journalist who covers these issues honestly and critically, no one has taken the crap that Michael Mann has had to take. I don’t know how he does it.
Anyway, Michael has written a commentary for CNN that covers not so much the attacks on him, but rather, the attacks on climate science more generally. He talks about the theft of emails and subsequent dissemination and misuse of their contents and related events:
In the most infamous episode, somebody stole thousands of e-mails and documents from leading climate researchers, including me. They cherry picked key phrases from the e-mails and published them out of context, like a black-and-white political attack ad with ominous music. Fossil fuel industry-funded groups gleefully spread the e-mails online and badgered the mainstream media into covering the “controversy” they had manufactured.
It was no accident that this happened on the eve of a major international climate change meeting. … The dozen independent investigations that did follow — all of which exonerated the scientists — got much less media coverage than the original nonscandal.
Go read his essay. Also, please, please check out the comment section and say something not horrible there to help diffuse the crap that I’m sure is going to appear there over the next few days!
Michael Mann is the author of The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines
Michael Mann: Evil Mastermind or Distinguished Scientist?
Quite possibly Pete Sinclair’s best and most important videos yet.
Click here to get more background from Peter Sinclair’s site.
The post refers to this book: The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines
Climate Science Denial at Carleton University: A Detailed Take-Down
A report detailing an audit of a course called “Climate Change: An Earth Sciences Perspective” (ERTH 2402), taught at Carleton University, has been compiled by a team of concerned individuals and was released a few minutes ago. From the report:
Continue reading Climate Science Denial at Carleton University: A Detailed Take-Down
Is the truth really for sale?
Watch the whole thing:
Brilliant. Click here for the background on this nice video.
Zombie Bill Reawakens in Oklahoma
A bill in Oklahoma that would, if enacted, encourage teachers to present the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” of “controversial” topics such as “biological evolution” and “global warming” is back from the dead. Entitled the “Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act,” House Bill 1551 was introduced in the Oklahoma House of Representatives in 2011 by Sally Kern (R-District 84), a persistent sponsor of antievolution legislation in the Sooner State, and referred to the House Common Education Committee. It was rejected there on February 22, 2011, on a 7-9 vote. But, as The Oklahoman (February 23, 2011) reported, the vote was not final, since a sponsor “could ask the committee to bring it up again this session or next year.” And indeed, on February 20, 2012, Gus Blackwell (R-District 61) resurrected the bill in the House Common Education Committee.
Here is the bill