jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
I'm shivering, I am willing to let the eastern Canadian prairies take on a bit of record highs for November and December. Just want to do our part.
Global warming discussion III
- Thread starter lomiller
- Start date
- Status
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
sloinker
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2011
- Messages
- 455
I work at a coal fired power plant so I get to hear denial every day.
Right now there is a college doing a study that is small in scope, of freezing the CO2 out of the stack gas stream and making dry ice, sublimation and all that.
It was also -27F the other day, record cold for so early in the year. I got to listen to another round of denial because of it.
Right now there is a college doing a study that is small in scope, of freezing the CO2 out of the stack gas stream and making dry ice, sublimation and all that.
It was also -27F the other day, record cold for so early in the year. I got to listen to another round of denial because of it.
The whole "hiatus" thing is taking the massive outlier of 1998 and using it as the start point.
I stand by my previous prediction that 2014 is the new hottest, 2015 will be even worse, and expand it with people will use 2014-2015 as the new beginning of "it hasn't warmed in the past five years" claims.
I don't doubt it.
But the denier line for the last couple years has been that there has been no statitiscally significant warming since 1998 (a year they totally cherry-picked).
Wasn't that technically true, though? If 2014 is the hottest year on record, will the 1998-2014 span contain statistically significant warming?
It's not true because you don't use obvious outliers in trend lines. You certainly don't use them as the most significant point in the comparison.
The "hiatus" line that deniers use is based on cherry-picked dates which yield downward-sloping graphs of mean global temperature:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2014
If 2014 is as hot as it's looking to be, will there be any date range from the last 20 years that will result in a downward sloping line?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2014
If 2014 is as hot as it's looking to be, will there be any date range from the last 20 years that will result in a downward sloping line?
1998 was the only remaining global outlier. Not counting '98, the last 15 years have been the hottest 15 years. However, some people still use 1934 as the fourth hottest year for the contiguous US in the same way.
Correct, but it IS true that from 1998 to 2013, there hasn't been any warming (that we can reliably measure):
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:1998/to:2013
Yes, my point is IF YOU DO COUNT 1998, will a very hot 2014 result in statistically significant warming so that there's no range of dates in the last 20 years will show insignificant warming? Or was 1998 so hot that it will take a really really bad year to equal it?
1998 has already been surpassed at least twice, by both 2005 and 2010.
I'm not sure what you're asking, though.
ETA: I'm getting mostly old results in Google searches. There's also 2012 as the current record, and 2014 is almost certain by now. 1998 is, at best, number 5. I could try putting the last 12 years' temperatures into excel and drawing a bad trend line based on short-term and obviously faulty inputs, but that doesn't help. The original claim is intentionally misleading. 1998 was hot because of an El Nino. All that should really mean is that if we get another El Nino any time soon, it will be truly horrendous.
Last edited:
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 12,637
Unless the removed co2 is put into a stable form and geologically sequestered (something no "clean coal" scheme I am aware of is even looking at, yet alone testing) clean coal is not viable technology with regard to addressing the current episode of climate change issues.
Well, you still hear the "there's been no warming in the last 15 years" line occasionally (I hear on a talk radio station from L.A. all the time, and in conservative articles). After 2014, if it's as hot as we think it will be, will that nonsense finally be over, even from the denialists? Won't they have to come up with a new line of denial?
Last edited:
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 12,637
'98 is only the hottest year according to one dataset (which did not include high latitude temperatures), most datasets list 2005, 2010, (and likely 2014) as warmer than '98.
Last edited:
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 12,637
As many posters here seem to agree, the first step in analyzing this climate deal between the US and China should revolve around determining whether this agreement takes real and substantive steps towards addressing the global fossil carbon emissions problem. Therefore, before arguing politics and technology, perhaps it is best to see what the climate scientists, the experts in climate science, feel about the steps taken in this agreement and the type of foundation it creates for future international agreements with respect to addressing the problem the human extraction and release of fossil carbon into our planet’s active carbon cycle:
“My take is that this is an historic agreement for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that we now have a good faith effort on the part of the planet’s two leading carbon emitters to work together to lower planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions,” said Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University.
“Efforts to reduce U.S. emissions have been blocked, in part, by people who argue that the U.S .should wait for China to act, this deal has the potential to get us all beyond what has been a major — maybe the major — political challenge for emissions reductions in the U.S.” According to Paul Higgins, a climatologist and Director of the American Meteorological Society’s Policy Program.
Donald Wuebbles, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Illinois. “There will be a lot of pressure on the rest of the world if the U.S., China, and Europe are all on board to getting major reductions in emissions going,” Wuebbles said. “An important part of this is that it will likely produce momentum in energy and transportation systems towards alternative approaches that hopefully will in turn then drive prices down for the alternatives and make them even more feasible going beyond 2030.”
Make no mistake, however, though all of these scientists support this deal as a good first step, none of them are claiming that this step is a solution to our problems in and of itself. This step, by itself will not even prevent the damages that lay on the near horizon. It is merely encouraging as a first positive step toward addressing the problems that loom in the coming centuries due to our exploitation of fossil carbon fuels.
Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, “The agreement with China is a good first step. But we hope it is but a first step because it is not enough to prevent significant climate change. Since the current strategy allows considerable climate change to occur, a second part needs to be how we will cope with the changes that will certainly occur,” he said. “The absence of such planning means we live with the consequences, which can be severe and uneven, and often fall on the heads of many innocent peoples such as small island states inundated with high sea levels.”
Jonathan Koomey, a research fellow Stanford University who studies climate and energy policy. “Any one of the major emitters could by themselves destroy the climate,” he said, “so agreements like today’s pact between the U.S. and China are an essential part of fixing the problem.”
“It is probably our last-ditch opportunity to stave off dangerous human interference with the climate,” Mann said. “This historic agreement between the U.S. and China provides a glimmer of hope that we will see something significant come out of Paris.” Wednesday’s pact with China is the one that could be formed in Paris at the end of 2015. There, the U.N. will hold a climate summit that some — including Mann — believe could be the last opportunity for a global agreement on emissions reductions before irreversible warming occurs.
Personally, I am very pessimistic that any significant climate action will take place until after it is too late to avoid the repercussions that will make large portions of our globe so different from what our species has experienced throughout its span on the planet, that it will dramatically reduce the viability of our current global civilization. I hope that I am mistaken, but so far it seems that many of our politicians and citizenry are determined to make my fears an optimistic projection rather than a pessimistic projection.
“My take is that this is an historic agreement for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that we now have a good faith effort on the part of the planet’s two leading carbon emitters to work together to lower planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions,” said Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University.
“Efforts to reduce U.S. emissions have been blocked, in part, by people who argue that the U.S .should wait for China to act, this deal has the potential to get us all beyond what has been a major — maybe the major — political challenge for emissions reductions in the U.S.” According to Paul Higgins, a climatologist and Director of the American Meteorological Society’s Policy Program.
Donald Wuebbles, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Illinois. “There will be a lot of pressure on the rest of the world if the U.S., China, and Europe are all on board to getting major reductions in emissions going,” Wuebbles said. “An important part of this is that it will likely produce momentum in energy and transportation systems towards alternative approaches that hopefully will in turn then drive prices down for the alternatives and make them even more feasible going beyond 2030.”
Make no mistake, however, though all of these scientists support this deal as a good first step, none of them are claiming that this step is a solution to our problems in and of itself. This step, by itself will not even prevent the damages that lay on the near horizon. It is merely encouraging as a first positive step toward addressing the problems that loom in the coming centuries due to our exploitation of fossil carbon fuels.
Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, “The agreement with China is a good first step. But we hope it is but a first step because it is not enough to prevent significant climate change. Since the current strategy allows considerable climate change to occur, a second part needs to be how we will cope with the changes that will certainly occur,” he said. “The absence of such planning means we live with the consequences, which can be severe and uneven, and often fall on the heads of many innocent peoples such as small island states inundated with high sea levels.”
Jonathan Koomey, a research fellow Stanford University who studies climate and energy policy. “Any one of the major emitters could by themselves destroy the climate,” he said, “so agreements like today’s pact between the U.S. and China are an essential part of fixing the problem.”
“It is probably our last-ditch opportunity to stave off dangerous human interference with the climate,” Mann said. “This historic agreement between the U.S. and China provides a glimmer of hope that we will see something significant come out of Paris.” Wednesday’s pact with China is the one that could be formed in Paris at the end of 2015. There, the U.N. will hold a climate summit that some — including Mann — believe could be the last opportunity for a global agreement on emissions reductions before irreversible warming occurs.
Personally, I am very pessimistic that any significant climate action will take place until after it is too late to avoid the repercussions that will make large portions of our globe so different from what our species has experienced throughout its span on the planet, that it will dramatically reduce the viability of our current global civilization. I hope that I am mistaken, but so far it seems that many of our politicians and citizenry are determined to make my fears an optimistic projection rather than a pessimistic projection.
Last edited:
Very well put.
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 12,637
2012 was warmest in US, but only the 9th (If I'm Not Mistaken) globally.
macdoc
Philosopher
Fudbucker
Perhaps you should remind them that global warming means the oceans as well.
and heaven help us when the monster re-emerges....
The El Nino has been flirting with us......IF it breaks.....look out. All that heat is sitting there...unreal amounts of heat....consider the size of the Pacific, consider the amount of energy it takes to heat that amount of water 5C above average...
It ain't stopped, it is nowhere close to stopping...the atmosphere is transient compared to ocean heat.....little wonder the Western Antarctic is getting undermined. There is so much power in that warming ocean to drive our climate nuts....and it is.
So the big storm in the hot Pacific triggers the polar vortex outbreak in the north and North America gets an early dose of winter.....welcome to the Anthropocene.
Perhaps you should remind them that global warming means the oceans as well.
and heaven help us when the monster re-emerges....
The El Nino has been flirting with us......IF it breaks.....look out. All that heat is sitting there...unreal amounts of heat....consider the size of the Pacific, consider the amount of energy it takes to heat that amount of water 5C above average...
It ain't stopped, it is nowhere close to stopping...the atmosphere is transient compared to ocean heat.....little wonder the Western Antarctic is getting undermined. There is so much power in that warming ocean to drive our climate nuts....and it is.
So the big storm in the hot Pacific triggers the polar vortex outbreak in the north and North America gets an early dose of winter.....welcome to the Anthropocene.
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
There's already a new line in "no warming", without any announcement. The original claim was based on surface temperatures but now they're based on RSS satellite data for the Lower Troposphere. That's a crap measure for all sorts of reasons but it's the only one which still works for deniers - even UAH has gone off-script.
We'll keep hearing "No warming for 15/16/18 years" for years whatever happens. Just as we keep hearing "it's all based on models" and "the Hockey Stick is broken". And that hoary old chestnut "We only use 10% of our brains".
What will make people take notice is, for instance, another two years of drought in California. Or the disintegration of Sao Paolo.
- Status