Archives par mot-clé : CO2

New Study: German Mid-Sized E-Cars Produce Less CO2 Than Diesel Autos…After 364,000 Miles!

by P. Gosselin, September 19, 2018 in ClimateChangeDispatch


The German ADAC association, the equivalent of America’s AAA, carried a CO2 comparison for a variety e-autos and combustion engine cars. The results were very surprising, says German magazine Autobild here.

Today’s electric cars are being pushed as a clean and environmentally friendly alternative, while diesel and gasoline burning engines are being villainized as polluters and climate killer …

Evolutions récentes du CO2 atmosphérique

by J.C. Maurin, 16 septembre 2018, in Science,Climate,Energie


Dans les années 80, la découverte dans les archives glaciaires d’une corrélation entre température et taux de CO2 permit de soupçonner une influence anthropique sur le climat: les taux mesurés depuis 1958 étaient supérieurs aux taux des archives glaciaires.
L’IPPC (GIEC) fut créé en 1988 par 2 organismes: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) et  World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Le GIEC attribue l’intégralité de la hausse du taux de CO2 depuis un siècle à l’influence humaine.  Pour les dernières décennies, nous examinerons ici les mesures disponibles, les corrélations CO2 / température, enfin le modèle anthropique GIEC sera confronté à un modèle concurrent.

Empirical Evidence Shows Temperature Increases Before CO2 Increase in ALL Records

by Tim Ball, September 9, 2018 in WUWT


The question is how does the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) determine that an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes an increase in global temperature? The answer is they assumed it was the case and confirmed it by increasing CO2 levels in their computer climate models and the temperature went up. Science must overlook the fact that they wrote the computer code that told the computer to increase temperature with a CO2 increase. Science must ask if that sequence is confirmed by empirical evidence? Some scientists did that and found the empirical evidence showed it was not true. Why isn’t this central to all debate about anthropogenic global warming?

Merkel s’oppose aux nouveaux objectifs climatiques de l’UE, Greenpeace ne décolère pas

by Claire Stam, 31 août 2018 in Euratciv/LaTribuneGenève


Alors qu’elle avoue la part de responsabilité de l’Allemagne dans le changement climatique, et carrément au passage, l’échec de la transition énergétique dans son pays, Angela Merkel s’est pourtant exprimée à la télé pour s’opposer aux objectifs climatiques plus ambitieux proposés par l’Union européenne qui cherche à trouver une solution face à un changement climatique de plus en plus rapide. Un article de notre partenaire Euractiv.

Scrutinizing the carbon cycle and CO2 residence time in the atmosphere

by H. Harde, May 2017 in GlobalPanetaryChange


Highlights
•  We present a carbon cycle with an uptake proportional to the COconcentration.
• Temperature dependent natural emission and absorption rates are considered.
• The average residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is found to be 4 years.
• Paleoclimatic CO2 variations and the actual CO2 growth rate are well reproduced.
• Human emissions only contribute 15 % to the CO2 increase over the Industrial Era.

Modulation of Ice Ages via Precession and Dust-Albedo Feedbacks

by Ralph Ellis, August 2018 in FriendsofScience


Why do ice ages occur? Surprisingly, even after many decades of paleoclimatic research we simply do not know for sure. Most scientists will agree that ice age cycles have something to do with precession: the slow wobble of the axis of the Earth. The ancient Egyptians and Greeks knew of precession and called it the Great Year, because it gives warm and cool seasons over its approximate 23,000-year cycle. But there is a problem with invoking the Great Year as the regulator of ice ages, because we should really get an interglacial warming every 23,000 years or so. And we don’t – they only happen every fourth or fifth Great Year.

But why should the global climate give a selective response to orbital warming and cooling? (Called ‘forcing’ in the climate trade.) This is one of the great unknowns of modern science.

Carbon emissions in African savannas triple previous estimates

by Edinburgh University, August 24, 2018 in ScienceDaily


The findings highlight the extent to which humans are impacting one of the world’s major ecosystems — the Miombo woodlands, which cover 2.5 million square kilometres, across countries including Angola, Zambia, Tanzania and Mozambique.

At the same time, however, the growing number of trees in remote parts of these woodlands is helping to offset the emissions, researchers say.

The study is the first to provide an in-depth analysis of areas gaining carbon while also losing it through degradation — a process where some, but not all, trees are removed, usually as a result of logging and fire.

See original article in Nature

Scientists discover that the world contains dramatically more trees than previously thought

by Chris Money, September 2, 2015 in TheWashingtonPost


In a blockbuster study released Wednesday in Nature, a team of 38 scientists finds that the planet is home to 3.04 trillion trees, blowing away the previously estimate of 400 billion. That means, the researchers say, that there are 422 trees for every person on Earth.

However, in no way do the researchers consider this good news. The study also finds that there are 46 percent fewer trees on Earth than there were before humans started the lengthy, but recently accelerating, process of deforestation.

“We can now say that there’s less trees than at any point in human civilization,” says Thomas Crowther, a postdoctoral researcher at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies who is the lead author on the research. “Since the spread of human influence, we’ve reduced the number almost by half, which is an astronomical thing.”

Climate4you update July 2018

by Ole Humlum, August 20, 2018 in Climate4You


 

.pdf (49pages)

CONTENTS

July 2018 global surface air temperature overview

Comments to the July 2018 global surface air temperature overview Temperature quality class 1: Lower troposphere temperature from satellites Temperature quality class 2: HadCRUT global surface air temperature Temperature quality class 3: GISS and NCDC global surface air temperature Comparing global surface air temperature and satellite-based temperatures Global air temperature linear trends
Global temperatures: All in one, Quality Class 1, 2 and 3
Global sea surface temperature
Ocean temperature in uppermost 100 m
North Atlantic heat content uppermost 700 m
North Atlantic temperatures 0-800 m depth along 59N, 30-0W
Global ocean temperature 0-1900 m depth summary
Global ocean net temperature change since 2004 at different depths
La Niña and El Niño episodes
Troposphere and stratosphere temperatures from satellites
Zonal lower troposphere temperatures from satellites
Arctic and Antarctic lower troposphere temperatures from satellites Temperature over land versus over oceans
Arctic and Antarctic surface air temperatures
Arctic and Antarctic sea ice
Sea level in general
Global sea level from satellite altimetry
Global sea level from tide gauges
Northern Hemisphere weekly and seasonal snow cover
Atmospheric specific humidity
Atmospheric CO2
The phase relation between atmospheric CO2 and global temperature
Global air temperature and atmospheric CO2
Latest 20-year QC1 global monthly air temperature change
Sunspot activity and QC1 average satellite global air temperature
Climate and history: 1728: Vitus Bering and the non-discovery of Bering Strait

 

 

Why does climate sensitivity increase over time in models? A look at two possibilities

by A. Zaragoza Comendador, August 16, 2018 in WUWT


Note: if the terms used in this article seem confusing, check out the previous one.

Introduction

It’s well known that climate models show increasing sensitivity over time: for a given forcing, the true long-term temperature increase (ECS) is higher than what you’d estimate if you simply extrapolated from the past (ECS_hist). In other words, the ECS-to-ECS_hist ratio is above 1. This article tries to work out why climate models behave like that; that is to say, the variable I’m trying to explain is the ECS-to-ECS_hist ratio.

Now, there’s probably too many hyphens and underscores in the text. So it will be more readable if I clarify that, every time I talk simply about ‘correlation’, I mean the correlation of thing X with the ECS-to-ECS_hist ratio. If other kind of correlation is mentioned, I’ll say so explicitly.

Trees and climate change: Faster growth, lighter wood

by Technical University of Munich (TUM), August 14, 2018


Wood density of European trees decreasing continuously since 1870

Trees are growing more rapidly due to climate change. This sounds like good news. After all, this means that trees are storing more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in their wood and hence taking away the key ingredient in global warming. But is it that simple? A team analyzed wood samples from the oldest existing experimental areas spanning a period of 150 years — and reached a surprising conclusion.

But the most important finding for practical and political aspects is that the current climate-relevant carbon sequestration of the forests is being overestimated as long as it is calculated with established but outdated wood densities. “The accelerated growth is still resulting in surplus carbon sequestration,” says Pretzsch. “But scaling up for the forests of central Europe, the traditional estimate would be to high by about ten million metric tons of carbon per year.”

The Major Change in the Global Warming Groupthink Between 1990 and 1995

byTim Ball, August 12, 2018 in WUWT


Somebody said economists try to predict the tide by measuring one wave. This puts them in the same league as climate scientists trying to predict the climate by measuring one variable, CO2. It is no surprise that an amalgam of the two, climate and economics, produces even worse results, but that is what happened early in the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) deception.

(…)

Ice sheets of the last ice age seeded the ocean with essential nutrient silica

by University of Bristol, August 10, 2018 in ScienceDaily


Silica is needed by a group of marine algae (the microscopic plants of the oceans) called diatoms, who use it to build their glassy cell walls (known as frustules).

These plankton take up globally significant amounts of carbon — they remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere via photosynthesis, and act as a natural carbon sink when they die and fall to the bottom of the ocean — and form the base of the marine food chain.

The researchers are also planning to use more complex and realistic computer models to delve deeper into the potential changes in the global silica cycle since the last glacial maximum. These might include more accurate representations of ocean currents, recycling of silica in the water column, and potential changes to the marine algal community.