Archives par mot-clé : Fun?/Discussion

Will Climate Change Drive a Million Species Extinct?

by Vijay Jayaraj, June 3, 2019 Townhall


A million species threatened by “climate change”? Well, climate change as defined by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (“a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”) isn’t likely to bring about any warming exceeding that of the warm periods mentioned above.

Which of course means it’s not likely to drive millions of species extinct. In fact, it will be a miracle if the gradual change in climate causes any alarming extinctions at all.

Only illegal hunting and habitat destruction (despite protection by governments) continue to threaten endangered species. Even in the worst case, they won’t cause species extinctions in the millions.

Vijay Jayaraj (M.Sc., Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, England), Research Associate for Developing Countries for the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, lives in Bangalore, India.

Extremes

by Judith Curry, June14, 2019 in WUWT


Politics versus science in attributing extreme weather events to manmade global warming.

If you follow me on twitter, you may have noticed that I was scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on Jun 12 [link].  The subject of the Hearing is Contending with Natural Disasters in the Wake of Climate Change.

Late on Jun 10, I received an email telling me that the Hearing is postponed (as yet unscheduled).  Apparently the Committee finds it more urgent to have a Hearing related to holding the Attorney General and Secretary of Commerce in contempt of Congress [link].  Interesting to ponder that Congressional procedural issues are deemed to be more important than Climate Change.

So I spent all last week working on my testimony (which is why there have been no new blog posts).  I hope the Hearing will eventually happen (Michael Mann is also scheduled to testify).

Hurricanes and climate change constitute a major portion of my testimony.  You may recall my recent series  on Hurricanes & climate change [link].  Specifically with regards to detection and attribution, my bottom line conclusion was:

“In summary, the trend signal in hurricane activity has not yet had time to rise above the background variability of natural processes. Manmade climate change may have caused changes in hurricane activity that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of these changes compared to estimated natural variability, or due to observational limitations. But at this point, there is no convincing evidence that manmade global warming has caused a change in hurricane activity.”

A Second Look At Radiation Versus Temperature

by Willis Eschenbach, June 14, 2019 in WUWT


I kept going back and looking at the graphic from my previous post on radiation and temperature. It kept niggling at me. It shows the change in surface temperature compared to the contemporaneous change in how much energy the surface is absorbing. Here’s that graphic again:

 

Figure 1. From my previous post. It is a scatterplot showing the dependence of temperature on the total downwelling radiation (longwave plus shortwave) absorbed by the surface.

What I found botheracious were the outliers at the top of the diagram. I knew what they were from, which was the El Nino/La Nina of 2015-2016.

After thinking about that, I realized I’d left one factor out of the calculations above. What the El Nino phenomenon does is to periodically pump billions of cubic meters of the warmest Pacific equatorial water towards the poles. And I’d left that advected energy transfer out of the equation in Figure 1. (Horizontal transfer of energy from one place on earth to another is called “advection”).

And it’s not just advection of energy caused by El Nino. In general, heat is advected from the tropics towards the poles by the action of the ocean and the atmosphere. Figure 2 shows the average amount of energy exported (plus) or imported (minus) around the globe.

Study: Cattle Methane is a moooot point in global climate

by Anthony Watts, June 12, 2019 in WUWT


Via No Tricks Zone: Agrobiologist and scientific researcher Dr. Albrecht Glatzle, author of over 100 scientific papers and two textbooks, has published research that shows:

“…there is no scientific evidence, whatsoever, that domestic livestock could represent a risk for the Earth’s climate” and the “warming potential of anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions has been exaggerated.”

Glatzle, 2018

Domestic Livestock and ItsAlleged Role in Climate Change

Abstract:

“Our key conclusion is there is no need for anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and even less so for livestock-born emissions, to explain climate change. Climate has always been changing, and even the present warming is most likely driven by natural factors.

The warming potential of anthropogenic GHG emissions has been exaggerated, and the beneficial impacts of manmade CO2 emissions for nature, agriculture, and global food security have been systematically suppressed, ignored, or at least downplayed by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and other UN (United Nations) agencies.

Furthermore, we expose important methodological deficiencies in IPCC and FAO (Food Agriculture Organization) instructions and applications for the quantification of the manmade part of non-CO2-GHG emissions from agro-ecosystems.

However, so far, these fatal errors inexorably propagated through the scientific literature.

Finally, we could not find a clear domestic livestock fingerprint, neither in the geographical methane distribution nor in the historical evolution of mean atmospheric methane concentration.”

Ending Fossil Fuels Would Bring The World Back To The Dark Ages

by Washington Times, June11, 2019 in ClimateChange Dispatch


German engineering, as good as it is, has not been able to eliminate the effect of “green” politics, which would replace fossil and nuclear power with renewables. The result is 172,000 localized blackouts in Germany in 2017.

Poverty was a constant companion of humanity until modern times. The proportion of people worldwide living in poverty was cut in half between 1990 and 2010, according to the World Bank, an achievement unprecedented in human history.

It was the result of a rapid boost in global energy production — up 43 percent during that period, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Nearly 81 percent of that power was generated by fossil fuels, such as oil and gas.

A billion people around the globe still suffer extreme energy poverty, with no access to electricity. Everyone gets a hint of what that means when storms knock out the power, and everything in the house stops.

Fumbling occasionally for candles is a mere inconvenience, but life beyond carbon — entirely dependent on sunshine and a breeze — would be insanity.

Why Climate Models Can’t Predict The Future (And Never Have)

by Jay Lehr, June 11, 2019 in Climate ChangeDispatch


SEE ALSO: Climate Models Of Incompetence

Consider the following: we do not know all the variables that control our climate, but we are quite sure they are likely in the hundreds.

Just take a quick look at ten obviously important factors for which we have limited understanding:

1- Changes in seasonal solar irradiation;

2- Energy flows between ocean and atmosphere;

3- Energy flow between air and land;

4- The balance between Earth’s water, water vapor, and ice;

5- The impacts of clouds;

6- Understanding the planet’s ice;

7- Mass changes between ice sheets, sea level and glaciers;

8- The ability to factor in hurricanes and tornadoes;

9- The impact of vegetation on temperature;

10- Tectonic movement on ocean bottoms.

Yet, today’s modelers believe they can tell you the planet’s climate decades or even a century in the future and want you to manage your economy accordingly.

Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian astrophysics laboratory once calculated that if we could know all the variables affecting climate and plugged them into the world’s largest computer, it would take 40 years for the computer to reach an answer.

Radiation versus Temperature

by Willis Eschenbach, June 8, 2019 in WUWT


Due to the recent posts by Lord Monkton and Nick Stokes, I’ve been thinking about the relationship between radiation and temperature. So I turned to the CERES dataset. Here is a scatterplot of the monthly global average surface temperature versus the monthly global average downwelling total radiation absorbed by the surface. The total radiation is the sum of the net solar radiation at the surface and the downwelling longwave radiation at the surface. I’ve removed the seasonal variations from the data.

Note that 3.7 W/m2 is the increase in downwelling longwave radiation expected from a doubling of CO2 …

When I saw that, I thought well, maybe the increase is small because there’s a lag between the absorption of the radiation and the warming. To see if that was the case, I did a cross-correlation analysis of the relationship.

EIA data shows wind & solar met 3% of U.S. energy after $50 billion in subsidizes

by Larry Hamlin, June 6, 2019 in WUWT


The EIA AEO 2019 report shows that in year 2018 wind and solar energy resources provide about 3% of U.S. total energy consumption while fossil fuel energy resources provide about 81% of total energy use.

The dominate use of fossil fuels in meeting U.S. energy needs remains little changed from a decade ago before use of renewable energy resources became mandated and supported by lucrative government subsidizes.

Using additional EIA data the total wind and solar provided energy going back to year 2000 is available which allows an assessment of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) payments to be made.

‘Skeptical Environmentalist’ Bjorn Lomborg sets fire to the scourge of ‘unbridled climate alarmism’

by Charles the moderator , June 7, 2019 in WUWT


Fear’s a great motivator, right? So what better way to motivate people to care about climate change than to scare the crap out of them? Even if you have to leave out some details to do it?

New York Magazine climate columnist David Wallace-Wells seems to be a student at the School of We’re Hurtling Toward Global Environmental Catastrophe and We’re All Gonna Die. Last night, he shared a short piece by James Dyke, a senior lecturer in global systems at the University of Exeter, explaining some of the horrible things humanity is in for:

Latest Global Temp. Anomaly (May ’19: +0.32°C) A Simple “No Greenhouse Effect” Model of Day/Night Temperatures at Different Latitudes

by Dr. Roy Spencer, June 7, 2019 in WUWT


Abstract: A simple time-dependent model of Earth surface temperatures over the 24 hr day/night cycle at different latitudes is presented. The model reaches energy equilibrium after 1.5 months no matter what temperature it is initialized at. It is shown that even with 1,370 W/m2 of solar flux (reduced by an assumed albedo of 0.3), temperatures at all latitudes remain very cold, even in the afternoon and in the deep tropics. Variation of the model input parameters over reasonable ranges do not change this fact. This demonstrates the importance of the atmospheric “greenhouse” effect, which increases surface temperatures well above what can be achieved with only solar heating and surface infrared loss to outer space.

Des coraux qui s’adaptent aux températures plus élevées

by Paul Berth, 31 mai 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie


Selon certaines prédictions, basées sur des modèles informatiques, de nombreux récifs coralliens auront disparu des océans tropicaux au cours des 80 prochaines années[1]. La cause est bien évidemment le réchauffement climatique pouvant provoquer un blanchiment des coraux. Par exemple, en 2014–2017, a eu lieu un évènement global de blanchiment, le 3e au cours des 20 dernières années, et de nombreux coraux furent affectés sur des milliers de kilomètres carrés[2],[3]. Les médias, avides de catastrophisme, en ont beaucoup parlé avec des titres une fois de plus très alarmistes (exemple ici).

Cependant, les choses ne sont pas si simples. Des données satellitaires et des études de terrain ont montré que tous les récifs coralliens ne se comportent pas de la même manière: de nombreux récifs n’ont pas blanchi pendant le dernier épisode El Niño, une très grande partie des coraux a résisté au stress thermique, et de fortes variations locales et régionales ont été observées dans le blanchiment[4]. La relation entre température élevée de l’eau de mer et blanchiment des coraux n’est donc pas évidente. Afin d’éclaircir la situation une équipe américaine a récemment publié une analyse globale des évènements de stress thermique en considérant 3351 sites différents dans 81 pays (Sully et al. 2019, dans Nature Communications[5]). Cette analyse globale est unique et démontre que les coraux sont en train de s’adapter par sélection naturelle et sont désormais un peu plus résistants au blanchiment. Nous avons ici une belle démonstration du fait que les modèles informatiques sont parfois bien loin de la réalité de terrain et qu’il ne faut pas tirer de  conclusions toujours hâtives!

10 Of 10 Coastal Antarctic Stations Show Zero Warming Over Past Decades. Failed Scientists Need To Resign

by Kirye in P. Gosselin, May 31, 2019 in NoTricksZone


Over the past few years, climate alarmists have increasingly been resorting to weather-ambulance chasing, which has necessitated the trotting of the globe in the search of weather anomalies to behold as proof of man-made climate change.

But one place they have been avoiding like the plague is Antarctica as a number of studies have been showing the opposite of what what predicted earlier has been happening down at the South Pole, except for volcanic activity beneath parts of the Antarctic ice shelf.

Analysis of Antarctic stations show cooling

Roy Spencer: Why so many tornadoes this year? It’s not what AOC, Bernie Sanders (or maybe even you) think

by Charles the moderator, May 29, 2019 in WUWT


By Roy Spencer | Fox News

Progressive politicians like Al Gore, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D.N.Y., don’t hesitate to blame any kind of severe weather – even if it is decreasing over time – on global warming.

With the devastating Dayton, Ohio tornadoes fresh on our minds, it is useful to examine exactly why (modest) global warming has produced fewer – not more – of such events.

The simple answer is that tornado formation requires unusually cool air.

Very few thunderstorms produce tornadoes. In the hot and humid tropics, they are virtually unheard of. The reason why is that (unlike hurricanes) tornadoes require strong wind shear, which means wind speed increasing and changing direction with height in the lower atmosphere.

These conditions exist only when a cool air mass collides with a warm air mass. And the perfect conditions for this have existed this year as winter has refused to lose its grip on the western United States. So far for the month of May 2019, the average temperature across the U.S. is close to 2 degrees Fahrenheit below normal.

Patrick Moore auditionné par la Chambre des représentant des Etats Unis à propos du rapport de l’IPBES

by Usbek, 29 mai 2019 in ClimatEnvironnementEnergie


Le  22 mai 2019 la Chambre des représentants des Etats Unis a organisé une audition sur le récent rapport d’évaluationglobale de l’IPBES (Plateforme intergouvernementale scientifique et politique sur la biodiversité et les services éco systémiques ).

Patrick Moore a été invité a donner son témoignage; nous en donnons ci-dessous une traduction (les liens et renvois en bas de page sont du traducteur).


Je vous remercie de m’avoir donné l’occasion de témoigner à l’audience d’aujourd’hui.

En 1971, alors que j’étais doctorant en écologie, je me suis joint à un groupe d’activistes dans un sous-sol d’église à Vancouver, au Canada, et j’ai traversé le Pacifique à bord d’un petit bateau pour protester contre les essais américains de bombes à hydrogène en Alaska. Nous sommes devenus Greenpeace. Après 15 ans au sein du comité directeur, j’ai dû quitter Greenpeace, qui commençait à adopter des politiques que je ne pouvais accepter d’un point de vue scientifique.

Je me suis donné comme mission de toujours appliquer de sains principes scientifiques lors de l’examen des problèmes environnementaux critiques auxquels nous sommes confrontés aujourd’hui.

Ce n’est qu’au début des années 1900, marquées par la disparition définitive de la tourte voyageuse en 1914, que le grand public a commencé à s’intéresser de près à la question de l’extinction des espèces. Cette prise de conscience a été inspirée par l’activisme précoce de Théodore Roosevelt, John Muir et Gifford Pinchot.

Washington Post Gets Excited By Tiny Increase In Green Vote At Euro Elections

by P. Homewood, May 28, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


You would think the Washington Post should be able to distinguish between a handful of protesting school kids and millions of grown up voters!

In recent months, massive demonstrations over climate change have rocked European capitals, dwarfing the mobilizations of the continent’s far right. Fridays for Future — a movement inspired by Swedish teenage activist Greta Thunberg — has seen countless European teenagers walk out of school to protest climate inaction. It underscores a growing consensus among the next generation of voters that governments must do more to mitigate environmental disaster, and an impatience with political parties that refuse to recognize the urgency of the situation.

Climate change, said an editorial in France’s Liberation newspaper, “has become the principal criteria of judging political action in the European Union.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/05/28/climate-change-threatens-wests-far-right/