Global warming discussion IV

[Trakar]

Ouch ....any chance this 2015 SPIKE in CO2 is related to CO2 sink degradation??
Since Anthro releases appear down.

Its been a few months since I looked at this data, I'll pull together an update post by this next weekend. My offhanded guess would be that they aren't doing a lot lately, but with temps as high as they've been this winter in the arctic, I'm not sure what's been happening lately.

As for " 'murican people think its a hoax," well, there seem to be fewer and fewer of his kind of 'muricans the last couple years! Not that evidence means anything to these types.

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/201...ay-climate-change-is-happening/4111445374964/

76% - AGW is happening
10% - Not sure
14% - AGW ain't happening

http://closup.umich.edu/files/ieep-nsee-2015-fall-climate-belief.pdf

A majority of Republicans (56%) now believe that there is solid evidence of global warming, up from 47% a year ago, joining solid majorities of Democrats (79%) and Independents (69%).

Quinnipiac University. Dec. 16-20, 2015. N=1,140 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 2.9.
http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm

"Would you like to see the next president support policies to combat climate change, or oppose policies to combat climate change?"

OVERALL 69% SUPPORT STATEMENT 23% REJECT STATEMENT 8%UNSURE
REPUBLICAN 47% SUPPORT 44% REJECT 9%UNSURE
INDEPENDEN 70% SUPPORT 22% REJECT 8%UNSURE
DEOMCRATIC 91%SUPPORT 4% REJECT 0%UNSURE

 

[CapelDodger]

OVERALL 69% SUPPORT STATEMENT 23% REJECT STATEMENT 8%UNSURE
REPUBLICAN 47% SUPPORT 44% REJECT 9% UNSURE
INDEPENDENT 70% SUPPORT 22% REJECT 8% UNSURE
DEMOCRATIC 91%SUPPORT 4% REJECT 6% UNSURE

Well, there's the data. The science is clearly politicised.

 

[Trakar]

Well, there's the data. The science is clearly politicised.

LOL, only thing we can be sure of is that they polled a lot more Republicans and independents than they did Democratic supporters or the combined data percentages would have been much different.

 

[Warmer1]

And they were singing Bye... Bye... Roy Spencer!!

"After spending far too much time over the years dealing with Doug Cotton’s brand of physics (both directly and indirectly through the many people who ask me about his views), I have decided to suspend comments on my blog."

Dr. Roy Spencer's climate change denial;

"Finally, if the climate system is insensitive, this means that the extra carbon dioxide we pump into the atmosphere is not enough to cause the observed warming over the last 100 years — some natural mechanism must be involved. Here you can read about my favorite candidate: the Pacific Decadal Oscillation."

He has to know this BS just isn't going to fly anymore and he might just want to quietly disappear now it's probably getting too dangerous for him to keep lying given what is in store for humanity.

I wonder if he felt he had to post the February temperature before running away. Imagine him trying to continue to BS his way around the recent temperature spike?

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

Nice work Doug Cotton! The comments have been removed from his site and I wish I had seen them.

Hopefully other deniers will throw in the towel.

 

[Warmer1]

Thanks

Have to remember where I am.

Yes, no matter how hard it is for you.

You may be a lot happier here

http://projectcamelot.org/interviews.html

 

[Hlafordlaes]

I am a little depressed recently, thinking all that nice snow we are getting in the Pyrenees late this winter comes from the cold spot to the east of Greenland, which comes from AGW. Skiing and playing on the evidence of our slow demise...

 

[Warmer1]

For those that enjoy peer-reviewed science - the always energetic Richard Alley.

Richard Alley - 4.6 Billion Years of Earth’s Climate History: The Role of CO2

24 minutes long. Published on Jun 1, 2015
National Academy of Science member Richard Alley presents on 4.6 Billion Years of Earth’s Climate History: The Role of CO2, during the Symposium—Earths, Moons, Mars & Stars at the National Academy of Sciences 152nd Annual Meeting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujkcTZZlikg

I wish I had seen this sooner.

 

[Warmer1]

I also enjoyed this interview with Richard Alley discussing the threat of global methane release saying that it is "likely" not as big a threat as many believed initially.

Five and a half minutes long Published on Oct 16, 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKVSHyezW30

 

[macdoc]

Geez those Feb numbers are nuts.

Last month was far and away the hottest February on record for the planet, by a margin that has surprised even the climate scientists who closely monitor global temperature data. It was also the most anomalously warm month Earth has seen in 135 years of NASA record keeping, continuing an astonishing recent streak that could see 2016 set a new record for hottest year.

One particularly notable aspect of last month’s heat was that it beat out January as the most anomalously warm month on record by a solid 0.36°F (0.2°C).

http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/february-blows-away-global-heat-record-160314.htm

 

[Pixel42]

NOAA's state of the climate report for February is up.

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for February 2016 was the highest for February in the 137-year period of record, at 1.21°C (2.18°F) above the 20th century average of 12.1°C (53.9°F). This not only was the highest for February in the 1880–2016 record—surpassing the previous record set in 2015 by 0.33°C / 0.59°F—but it surpassed the all-time monthly record set just two months ago in December 2015 by 0.09°C (0.16°F). Overall, the six highest monthly temperature departures in the record have all occurred in the past six months. February 2016 also marks the 10th consecutive month a monthly global temperature record has been broken.

 

[fuelair]

Lol

Surely you jest. This has got to be the most exciting place.

Would be much more exciting if we were not prevented from telling the full truth about certain members here!!!!!

 

[Trakar]

Would be much more exciting if we were not prevented from telling the full truth about certain members here!!!!!

To the discerning, everyone here reveals themselves pretty clearly.

 

[Trakar]

Drive you to just kick dirt,...its not the message, its the messaging.

Global Carbon Dioxide Emissions Have Now Been Flat for Two Years Running
The International Energy Agency says emissions growth has decoupled from global economic growth.
by Mike Orcutt
March 16, 2016
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...ons-have-now-been-flat-for-two-years-running/

New data published by the International Energy Agency extends the surprising finding, discovered last year, that global carbon dioxide emissions have stopped growing despite continued economic growth. The latest data show the trend has continued for a second consecutive year, which the IEA says is a result of renewable energy accounting for 90 percent of new electricity generation in 2015...

versus

NOAA records the biggest annual increase in CO2 levels
NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory has been monitoring carbon dioxide levels for decades. Mariella Moon , @mariella_moon
03.09.16 in Green
http://www.engadget.com/2016/03/09/mauna-loa-carbon-dioxide-emissions/

The Mauna Loa Observatory, which has been monitoring carbon dioxide levels since the 1950s under NOAA, has recorded the steepest rise ever within a year-long period. Apparently, the average CO2 level for February 2016 is 404.02 parts per million, 3.76ppm higher than February 2015's and 50ppm higher than what scientists consider a safe level. It broke the previous record set in September 1998, when the observatory detected a 3.70ppm growth over the span of 12 months...

The information in both stories is almost entirely correct and accurate. It isn't so much in the tale but in the telling that the confusion emerges

It isn't just that the growth of emissions continues while the growth rate of emissions has stayed consistent (steady growth versus exponential, logarithmic, etc. growth).

Nor is it simply the difference between Atmospheric CO2 levels versus calculated direct Human Emission levels from fossil carbon fuel.

It's how all of these nuances of understanding are so often so casually lost

 

[macdoc]

One more thing...

Just When You Thought Winter Was Finally Over: Nor’easter Targets the East Coast This Weekend

One of the leading historical analogs to this weekend’s storm is a storm that brought northern New England nearly two feet of snow on March 23, 1998, also during a strong El Niño year. That storm spared the big coastal cities; though it’s likely this year’s storm will be strongest in central New England, averaging out the top fifteen closest matches to the upcoming pattern shows the cities may well get hit pretty hard too.

 

[Warmer1]

A very short presentation of what will funding climate change denial for $73 million will buy. (< 3 min)

In the UpFront Reality Check, Mehdi Hasan highlights the ties between climate denial and the fossil fuel industry.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes...t-climate-change-deniers-160318161140419.html

 

[Warmer1]

Survivable IPCC projections - Reality, much worse than fiction

"We are basing our collective future safety on this planet on pure science fiction"

We need to sequester a significant fraction of 35 billion tons of CO2 a year. Using 10 billion tons per year as an example "We don't do anything on this planet at that scale"

(< 7 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl33gdLUa4Q

 

[Trakar]

Survivable IPCC projections - Reality, much worse than fiction

"We are basing our collective future safety on this planet on pure science fiction"

We need to sequester a significant fraction of 35 billion tons of CO2 a year. Using 10 billion tons per year as an example "We don't do anything on this planet at that scale"

(< 7 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl33gdLUa4Q

Note - RCP8.5 should not be considered a hard upper bound, it is merely a much closer match to current conditions than any of the other three RCPs considered in this analysis. There are several papers out by leading climatologists suggesting RCPs looking at much higher changes than the 8.5 W/m² used to generate RCP8.5. Most of these are based upon paleoclimate studies looking at episodes of higher CO2 and Temperature in our planet's earlier history. These are also the same studies suggesting that we may see CO2 concentrations in the 750-1200ppm in another century or so.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Note - RCP8.5 should not be considered a hard upper bound, it is merely a much closer match to current conditions than any of the other three RCPs considered in this analysis. There are several papers out by leading climatologists suggesting RCPs looking at much higher changes than the 8.5 W/m² used to generate RCP8.5. Most of these are based upon paleoclimate studies looking at episodes of higher CO2 and Temperature in our planet's earlier history. These are also the same studies suggesting that we may see CO2 concentrations in the 750-1200ppm in another century or so.

Oh, crap!

Because a scenario with CO2 concentration rising 10 ppm a year by 2050 and +2.00°C is very likely on sight of what we are doing now in 2016 and what we have learnt since those representative paths were drafted

 

[beelzebub]

Trakar, aleCcowaN,
I would not be so pessimistic - CO₂ output from power generation has stalled for the past 2 years, and for reasons that will continue to erode power-generation CO₂ levels for the foreseeable future. These are primarily:-

1. Increasing installation of renewable energy sources.
2. Increasing awareness of energy efficiency (Insulation, LED lights etc)

With transportation, the gradual move to more efficient diesel and petrol engines and the introduction of electric vehicles will help reduce CO₂ emissions here as well.
We could easily see total CO₂ emissions level off, or even start declining, in just a decade or two.
I believe we are currently not tracking RCP8.5, but are closer to RCP6.0 (up to 3C warming) and if we continue to reduce CO₂ emissions, we might just keep temperatures to around 2C to 2.5C.
Fingers crossed!

 

[Trakar]

Oh, crap!

Because a scenario with CO2 concentration rising 10 ppm a year by 2050 and +2.00°C is very likely on sight of what we are doing now in 2016 and what we have learnt since those representative paths were drafted

When you put it like that, what more needs saying?