Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 16 Jun 2018, 21:42:47

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases ... 052318.php


Earth’s climate to increase by 4 degrees by 2084
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 07:19:15

Global warming set to exceed 1.5°C [by 2040 or earlier]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-clim ... SKBN1JA1HD


OSLO (Reuters) -
Global warming is on course to exceed the most stringent goal set in the Paris agreement by around 2040, threatening economic growth, according to a draft report that is the U.N.’s starkest warning yet of the risks of climate change.

Governments can still cap temperatures below the strict 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7° Fahrenheit) ceiling agreed in 2015 only with “rapid and far-reaching” transitions in the world economy, according to the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)...

“Economic growth is projected to be lower at 2°C warming than at 1.5° for many developed and developing countries,” it said, drained by impacts such as floods or droughts that can undermine crop growth or an increase in human deaths from heatwaves.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 07:26:57

This goes with the Eurekalert article above:

Image

...most of the models projected an increase of 4°C as early as 2064...
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dissident » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 09:21:56

As a crude approximation, we are on a warming exponential curve. It took about 100 years to warm 1 C (from 1900). At the very most it will take 50 years to warm another 1C. The warming will be over 2 C by 2050. Given the accelerating nature of the warming due to various feedback effects (e.g. cryosphere CH4), the warming may well be close to 3 C by 2050.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 10:30:32

Good points, as usual.

There's also the delay between cause and effect.

We have emitted something like half of all the CO2 emissions from fossil-death-fuels ever produced in the last 40 years or so, and the full effects of that huge punch of emissions is just starting to kick in.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dissident » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 11:45:17

dohboi wrote:Good points, as usual.

There's also the delay between cause and effect.

We have emitted something like half of all the CO2 emissions from fossil-death-fuels ever produced in the last 40 years or so, and the full effects of that huge punch of emissions is just starting to kick in.


Indeed, the response lag is creating a false impression that warming is low and slow. We will be hammered by cumulative impacts and feedbacks in a progressing fashion in the coming decades.

The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet loss fits this pattern. Very little initial response, but rapid acceleration of the ice loss.

The mass media does a horrible job conveying these nuances. They just parade talking heads and focus on the clash of opinions.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby Sys1 » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 13:43:57

The climate simulator which predicts 4°C and more by 2064 doesn't even calculate :
- Lack of Albedo effect
- CH4 released from permafrost and oceans
- Global dimming
I'm not even sure that they calculate oceans role in trapping heat... Perhabs it's just about atmosphere and mankind CO2 injection. Worse, peak oil in itself will boost coal and wood extraction to meet energy demand.
User avatar
Sys1
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Fri 25 Feb 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dissident » Sun 17 Jun 2018, 14:36:24

The recent generation of climate models have coupled ocean models. The old ones had a "slab ocean" which approximated the exchange of heat between the atmosphere and the global ocean. But a detail that renders these old simulations valid is that warming results in stratification of the ocean with a warm surface "slab" that is both advectively and diffusively isolated from the deeper ocean. Of course, the exchange of heat is not zero, but there is self-throttling of this exchange under increased warming. This effect is a key factor in the spread of ocean anoxia and the attenuation of the global ocean as a CO2 sink.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby M_B_S » Mon 18 Jun 2018, 06:03:57

What will we all do when S(HE) IS GONE ?!

Image

A love song for our planet!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ST9TZBb9v8

Do YOU here the wake up call :idea: :arrow: :!: :?:
:!:
M_B_S
User avatar
M_B_S
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3561
Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 19 Jun 2018, 07:30:18


From Africa’s Baobabs To America’s Pines: Our Ancient Trees Are Dying.


Welcome to climate change.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tr ... b1712d8ea1
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dissident » Fri 22 Jun 2018, 17:15:45

dohboi wrote:
From Africa’s Baobabs To America’s Pines: Our Ancient Trees Are Dying.


Welcome to climate change.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tr ... b1712d8ea1


Even though we are at 1 C warming, the system is showing a die off pattern not consistent with any of the other interglacial periods. Not surprising since we are over 410 ppm of O3 unlike during any of these periods. The key must be the rate of warming. Warming during interglacials was much smaller than it is today since they were driven by slow orbital variation and not full bore industrial pollution emission of greenhouse gases (over 30 billion tons per year of CO2 alone).
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 07:15:21

So I’ve got a climate change denier buddy who sends me this WSJ article discounting all temperature rise. Unfortunately it’s behind a pay wall.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.co ... 1529623442

This link has some excerpts.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/06/22/ ... -stand-up/

Looking for a handy rebuttal.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10509
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby jawagord » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 08:13:13

Newfie wrote:So I’ve got a climate change denier buddy who sends me this WSJ article discounting all temperature rise. Unfortunately it’s behind a pay wall.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.co ... 1529623442

This link has some excerpts.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/06/22/ ... -stand-up/

Looking for a handy rebuttal.


You need RealClimate on your speed dial. Just keep in mind junk science can neither be proved or disproved because it's junk.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... more-21478
jawagord
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon 29 May 2017, 09:49:17

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 08:45:31

Thanks for that. I’m looking for something that takes aim at the article for journalistic sloopyness if not outright intentional twisting of the facts.

Below is my response to Dave, it’s a bit hard to understand without reading the WSJ commentary. It’s not helpful to hear him over the head with scientific papers because one denier paper “shields” him from a hundred others. I’m trying to persuade him, I think, I hope, he respects my opinion as a colleague. So it’s about pointing out the weakness of WSJ piece more than actual science. Maybe.

..................

Dave,

I did not quickly find a more professional rebuttal to that piece but I’ll take a stab at it.

First there is some truth, hurricanes are not statistically a much bigger threat.

The temp graph leaves out certain years. The temp graph does not match other graphs I find. So someone somewhere is monkeying with the data.

To say that the GIS is not melting is simply not true. There is quite striking photographic evidence of the glacial retreat, miles of retreat. They conveniently omit comment about the AntArctic ice sheets deteriorating, for which we have conclusive photographic evidence. Also Hansen’s predictions were for 100 years, not 30, and the melting is not projected to be linear but rapidly increasing as the temperature rises. I think his projections were high, but that just delays the flooding.

Their veiled reference to aerosols is troubling. Indeed this effect does occur as they say, it was proven in the days after the 911 attack when so many aircraft were grounded. It’s call GLOBAL DIMMING. So the aerosols shield us from some of the warming, about an additional 1° C at this point. That shielded warming influence is not going away, it will reappear should we ever reduce the aerosol level by moving to clean energy or if there is a significant economic slowdown.

More troubling is that this piece makes only one very weak reference to any scientific papers to support its assertions. It, like so many others on both sides of the aisle, consists of a lot of hand waving and accusation. It’s interesting that Forbes printed a almost opposite opinion, with the same lack of clarity, both worthless.

There is a lot of piss poor hyperbole in the media, swinging both ways. I find this trend away from critical thinking very troubling. The facts are what they are and we should not let politics or economics get in the way. The media is more about jacking people up than disseminating information. But it’s always been that way. Think PT Barnum.

BTW, at this point I’m finding Trump and Obama about on a par, very different people and styles but about similar worth.

And finally I do have my opinions. I read a lot of old books and some about the North many years ago. It was typical, about 1900, that you had to wait until late June to be able to make it through the ice pack in the Straits of Bell Isle. I have sailed that area a few times and sometimes I’ll see a berg, sometimes not.

Up that way the local folks bitch that they used to get their wood from the mainland on the ice over the winter but now have to float it out in the summer because the ice is no good. I hear these stories from folks all the time. Elsewhere it was about cutting building stones and carting them across the ice, but now the Harbor is ice free. My home town had an ice house, now the lake seldom freezes.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10509
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dissident » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 09:31:48

Image

I guess this is supposed to be the "murder weapon" evidence of Hansen's thought crimes. Scenarios are not forecasts, they are scenarios. Duh! It looks like the case C is an outlier from reality. But, you know, science advances and the last two IPCC rounds indicate that the observations are tracking the high warming case.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/contar ... urate.html

Nice article debunking this denier meme.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 10:44:05

Duh! It looks like the case C is an outlier from reality. But, you know, science advances and the last two IPCC rounds indicate that the observations are tracking the high warming case.


Rather than seek out the opinions of skepticalscience why not look at the actual IPCC data which says the exact opposite of what you are claiming. The scenarios of Hansen are no longer referenced by IPCC but of the representative concentration pathways RCP 8.5 probably is closest to the high warming case and RCP 4.5 – 2.5 are closer to the low warming case.

Here is a plot of CMIP5 models versus reality (updated with temperatures since AR5):

Image

IT is pretty obvious that temperatures have been tracking the low side which corresponds to RCP 2.5 and RCP 4.5 and a long ways from the high case RCP 8.5

What does that look like going forward?

Temperature projections to 2100 for the various RCP assumptions

Image

Sea level projections to 2100 for the various RCP assumptions

Image
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5957
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 12:06:20

If the warming so far is modest it should NOT be comforting given that
"
Climate Change Is Happening Faster Than Expected, and It’s More Extreme

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/2612 ... re-extreme
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9294
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby ralfy » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 21:13:06

Also, consider ocean heat content.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4821
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby dohboi » Sun 24 Jun 2018, 23:05:13

More on GW's effects on border issues: resultant climate change on subsistance farming families.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/climate-c ... ion-crisis
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17429
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 19

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 25 Jun 2018, 01:30:18

New study shows that the loss of Arctic Sea Ice produces rapid and extreme warming in the Pacific Ocean

how-arctic-sea-ice-loss-could-make-the-hot-pacific-blob-permanent

The blobs of warm water in the NE Paciific Ocean associated with hot dry conditions on the west coast from Alaska to Mexico and with the California drought are just the beginning. When the sea ice goes in the Arctic Ocean it will cause the whole north Pacific to warm up and will have rapid and large climatic effects on land areas in the mid-latitudes.

Image
Imagine a blob of warm water that gets bigger and bigger and never goes away. Now imagine you live on the land next to the blob of warm water. Do you think the blob will make the land dryer and hotter?

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21263
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests