Is the US losing the Climate Tech war?

[westwall]

Climate

You have free access to this content
Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover

1. 
   
   
   • Josefino C. Comiso1,
   • Claire L. Parkinson1,
   • Robert Gersten1,2,3 and
   • Larry Stock1,4

Article first published online: 3 JAN 2008



Abstract
[1] Satellite data reveal unusually low Arctic sea ice coverage during the summer of 2007, caused in part by anomalously high temperatures and southerly winds. The extent and area of the ice cover reached minima on 14 September 2007 at 4.1 × 106 km2 and 3.6 × 106 km2, respectively. These are 24% and 27% lower than the previous record lows, both reached on 21 September 2005, and 37% and 38% less than the climatological averages. Acceleration in the decline is evident as the extent and area trends of the entire ice cover (seasonal and perennial ice) have shifted from about −2.2 and −3.0% per decade in 1979–1996 to about −10.1 and −10.7% per decade in the last 10 years. The latter trends are now comparable to the high negative trends of −10.2 and −11.4% per decade for the perennial ice extent and area, 1979–2007.

Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover - Comiso - 2008 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

See how easy that was. An article about Arctic Sea Ice, written by a real scientist, that supports the hypothesis that the Arctic is rapidly warming. Since it was published in 2008, the decline in Arctic Ice has continued.

Now your turn, present me an article from a credible source supporting your point of view







WOW, now that was a blast form the past. What's it like now?
Oh lookey here, it's within the 1981 to 2010 average. And look at that will ya.....There's more ice in the Arctic now, then there was in 2007. How is that possible? You claimed the Arctic is continuing to lose ice. Hell it was claimed it would be gone completely by last year by your leading alarmists IIRC.

What gives?

 

[westwall]

Frank, was there a point to any of that? We all know Greenland was a Viking settlement. A really cold and miserable one. It's much warmer in Greenland today than it was even at the height of the MWP, due to that global warming thing.

The evidence says exactly the opposite. Even Jared Diamond in his book "Collapse" had to admit that the Viking settlements were viable till it got cold. They supported at least 10,000 people, a cathedral, 12 churches a monastery and a nunnery. No colony that was barely scraping by could ever hope to do that. And they did it for 500 years. Far longer than we've been around as a country. Not only that they were prosperous enough to send out exploration groups on multiple occasions.

In other words, in a society that you claim was barely making it they were able to let valuable labor leave for months at a time to explore. And the peer reviewed papers show beyond doubt that the MWP was at least 2 degree's warmer than today.

Why is it that when you are presented by facts you ignore them, or lie about them?

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate

You have free access to this content
Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover

1. 
   
   
   • Josefino C. Comiso1,
   • Claire L. Parkinson1,
   • Robert Gersten1,2,3 and
   • Larry Stock1,4

Article first published online: 3 JAN 2008



Abstract
[1] Satellite data reveal unusually low Arctic sea ice coverage during the summer of 2007, caused in part by anomalously high temperatures and southerly winds. The extent and area of the ice cover reached minima on 14 September 2007 at 4.1 × 106 km2 and 3.6 × 106 km2, respectively. These are 24% and 27% lower than the previous record lows, both reached on 21 September 2005, and 37% and 38% less than the climatological averages. Acceleration in the decline is evident as the extent and area trends of the entire ice cover (seasonal and perennial ice) have shifted from about −2.2 and −3.0% per decade in 1979–1996 to about −10.1 and −10.7% per decade in the last 10 years. The latter trends are now comparable to the high negative trends of −10.2 and −11.4% per decade for the perennial ice extent and area, 1979–2007.

Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover - Comiso - 2008 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

See how easy that was. An article about Arctic Sea Ice, written by a real scientist, that supports the hypothesis that the Arctic is rapidly warming. Since it was published in 2008, the decline in Arctic Ice has continued.

Now your turn, present me an article from a credible source supporting your point of view







WOW, now that was a blast form the past. What's it like now?
Oh lookey here, it's within the 1981 to 2010 average. And look at that will ya.....There's more ice in the Arctic now, then there was in 2007. How is that possible? You claimed the Arctic is continuing to lose ice. Hell it was claimed it would be gone completely by last year by your leading alarmists IIRC.

What gives?

And look how many times the ice has been less than 2007 since then.

Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area

Of course a lying asshole would pick one day or one small period and then pretend that was the whole trend.

 

[Old Rocks]

Frank, was there a point to any of that? We all know Greenland was a Viking settlement. A really cold and miserable one. It's much warmer in Greenland today than it was even at the height of the MWP, due to that global warming thing.

The evidence says exactly the opposite. Even Jared Diamond in his book "Collapse" had to admit that the Viking settlements were viable till it got cold. They supported at least 10,000 people, a cathedral, 12 churches a monastery and a nunnery. No colony that was barely scraping by could ever hope to do that. And they did it for 500 years. Far longer than we've been around as a country. Not only that they were prosperous enough to send out exploration groups on multiple occasions.

In other words, in a society that you claim was barely making it they were able to let valuable labor leave for months at a time to explore. And the peer reviewed papers show beyond doubt that the MWP was at least 2 degree's warmer than today.

Why is it that when you are presented by facts you ignore them, or lie about them?

Let's see those papers. The last time you tried to show that, you linked to a paper concerning the MWP evidence in the Indian Ocean sediments, and that paper stated that the overall global warming for that period was estimated at 0.2 C, one quarter of the warming that we have already experianced.

 

[Old Rocks]

2 000-year-long temperature and hydrology reconstructions from the Indo-Pacific warm pool Abstract Nature

Nature 460, 1113-1116 (27 August 2009) | doi:10.1038/nature08233; Received 6 December 2008; Accepted 15 June 2009



2,000-year-long temperature and hydrology reconstructions from the Indo-Pacific warm pool
Delia W. Oppo1, Yair Rosenthal2 & Braddock K. Linsley3

1. Department of Geology and Geophysics, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA
2. Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, and Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Rutgers, The State University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA
3. Department of Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, University at Albany–State University of New York, Albany, New York 12222, USA

Correspondence to: Delia W. Oppo1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to D.W.O. (Email: doppo@whoi.edu).



Topof page
Northern Hemisphere surface temperature reconstructions suggest that the late twentieth century was warmer than any other time during the past 500 years and possibly any time during the past 1,300 years (refs 1,2). These temperature reconstructions are based largely on terrestrial records from extra-tropical or high-elevation sites; however, global average surface temperature changes closely follow those of the global tropics3, which are 75% ocean. In particular, the tropical Indo-Pacific warm pool (IPWP) represents a major heat reservoir that both influences global atmospheric circulation4 and responds to remote northern high-latitude forcings5, 6. Here we present a decadally resolved continuous sea surface temperature (SST) reconstruction from the IPWP that spans the past two millennia and overlaps the instrumental record, enabling both a direct comparison of proxy data to the instrumental record and an evaluation of past changes in the context of twentieth century trends. Our record from the Makassar Strait, Indonesia, exhibits trends that are similar to a recent Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction2. Reconstructed SST was, however, within error of modern values from about ad 1000 to ad 1250, towards the end of the Medieval Warm Period. SSTs during the Little Ice Age (approximately ad 1550–1850) were variable, and

0.5 to 1 °C colder than modern values during the coldest intervals. A companion reconstruction of

18O of sea water—a sea surface salinity and hydrology indicator—indicates a tight coupling with the East Asian monsoon system and remote control of IPWP hydrology on centennial–millennial timescales, rather than a dominant influence from local SST variation.

Hmmm..................

 

[westwall]

Frank, was there a point to any of that? We all know Greenland was a Viking settlement. A really cold and miserable one. It's much warmer in Greenland today than it was even at the height of the MWP, due to that global warming thing.

The evidence says exactly the opposite. Even Jared Diamond in his book "Collapse" had to admit that the Viking settlements were viable till it got cold. They supported at least 10,000 people, a cathedral, 12 churches a monastery and a nunnery. No colony that was barely scraping by could ever hope to do that. And they did it for 500 years. Far longer than we've been around as a country. Not only that they were prosperous enough to send out exploration groups on multiple occasions.

In other words, in a society that you claim was barely making it they were able to let valuable labor leave for months at a time to explore. And the peer reviewed papers show beyond doubt that the MWP was at least 2 degree's warmer than today.

Why is it that when you are presented by facts you ignore them, or lie about them?

Let's see those papers. The last time you tried to show that, you linked to a paper concerning the MWP evidence in the Indian Ocean sediments, and that paper stated that the overall global warming for that period was estimated at 0.2 C, one quarter of the warming that we have already experianced.

The warming is different based on where you are. What is certain is the effect was GLOBAL and warmer than the current day.



Here's one of many. Knock yourself out.....

"Observed increases in ocean heat content (OHC) and temperature are robust indicators of global warming during the past several decades. We used high-resolution proxy records from sediment cores to extend these observations in the Pacific 10,000 years beyond the instrumental record. We show that water masses linked to North Pacific and Antarctic intermediate waters were warmer by 2.1 ± 0.4°C and 1.5 ± 0.4°C, respectively, during the middle Holocene Thermal Maximum than over the past century. Both water masses were ~0.9°C warmer during the Medieval Warm period than during the Little Ice Age and ~0.65° warmer than in recent decades. Although documented changes in global surface temperatures during the Holocene and Common era are relatively small, the concomitant changes in OHC are large."


Pacific Ocean Heat Content During the Past 10 000 Years

 

[Old Rocks]

Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data Abstract Nature

Nature 433, 613-617 (10 February 2005) | doi:10.1038/nature03265; Received 21 July 2004; Accepted 9 December 2004



There is a Corrigendum (23 February 2006) associated with this document.



Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data
Anders Moberg1, Dmitry M. Sonechkin2, Karin Holmgren3, Nina M. Datsenko2 & Wibjörn Karlén3

1. Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
2. Dynamical-Stochastical Laboratory, Hydrometeorological Research Centre of Russia, Bolshoy Predtechensky Lane 11/13, Moscow 123 242, Russia
3. Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

Correspondence to: Anders Moberg1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.M. (Email: anders.moberg@misu.su.se).



Topof page
A number of reconstructions of millennial-scale climate variability have been carried out in order to understand patterns of natural climate variability, on decade to century timescales, and the role of anthropogenic forcing1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. These reconstructions have mainly used tree-ring data and other data sets of annual to decadal resolution. Lake and ocean sediments have a lower time resolution, but provide climate information at multicentennial timescales that may not be captured by tree-ring data9, 10. Here we reconstruct Northern Hemisphere temperatures for the past 2,000 years by combining low-resolution proxies with tree-ring data, using a wavelet transform technique11 to achieve timescale-dependent processing of the data. Our reconstruction shows larger multicentennial variability than most previous multi-proxy reconstructions1, 2, 3, 4, 7, but agrees well with temperatures reconstructed from borehole measurements12 and with temperatures obtained with a general circulation model13, 14. According to our reconstruction, high temperatures—similar to those observed in the twentieth century before 1990—occurred around ad 1000 to 1100, and minimum temperatures that are about 0.7 K below the average of 1961–90 occurred around ad 1600. This large natural variability in the past suggests an important role of natural multicentennial variability that is likely to continue.

MWP not as warm as anything we have seen since 1990.

 

[westwall]

Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data Abstract Nature

Nature 433, 613-617 (10 February 2005) | doi:10.1038/nature03265; Received 21 July 2004; Accepted 9 December 2004



There is a Corrigendum (23 February 2006) associated with this document.



Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data
Anders Moberg1, Dmitry M. Sonechkin2, Karin Holmgren3, Nina M. Datsenko2 & Wibjörn Karlén3

1. Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
2. Dynamical-Stochastical Laboratory, Hydrometeorological Research Centre of Russia, Bolshoy Predtechensky Lane 11/13, Moscow 123 242, Russia
3. Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

Correspondence to: Anders Moberg1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.M. (Email: anders.moberg@misu.su.se).



Topof page
A number of reconstructions of millennial-scale climate variability have been carried out in order to understand patterns of natural climate variability, on decade to century timescales, and the role of anthropogenic forcing1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. These reconstructions have mainly used tree-ring data and other data sets of annual to decadal resolution. Lake and ocean sediments have a lower time resolution, but provide climate information at multicentennial timescales that may not be captured by tree-ring data9, 10. Here we reconstruct Northern Hemisphere temperatures for the past 2,000 years by combining low-resolution proxies with tree-ring data, using a wavelet transform technique11 to achieve timescale-dependent processing of the data. Our reconstruction shows larger multicentennial variability than most previous multi-proxy reconstructions1, 2, 3, 4, 7, but agrees well with temperatures reconstructed from borehole measurements12 and with temperatures obtained with a general circulation model13, 14. According to our reconstruction, high temperatures—similar to those observed in the twentieth century before 1990—occurred around ad 1000 to 1100, and minimum temperatures that are about 0.7 K below the average of 1961–90 occurred around ad 1600. This large natural variability in the past suggests an important role of natural multicentennial variability that is likely to continue.

MWP not as warm as anything we have seen since 1990.

Not where I live. It was significantly warmer here in the Sierra Nevada Mountains during the MWP. 3 degrees C warmer.



"Millar et al. report that "the range of dates for the deadwood samples, AD 815-1350, coincides with the period identified from multiple [our italics] proxies in the Sierra Nevada and western Great Basin as the Medieval Climate Anomaly," among which are tree-ring reconstructions indicating "increased temperature relative to present (Graumlich, 1993; Scuderi, 1993) and higher treelines (Graumlich and Lloyd, 1996; Lloyd and Graumlich, 1997), and pollen reconstructions [that] show greater abundance of fir in high-elevation communities than at present (Anderson, 1990)."
Focusing on other of their findings, the five researchers say "the Medieval forest on Whitewing was growing under mild, favorable conditions (warm with adequate moisture)," as indicated by "extremely low mean sensitivities [to stress] and large average ring widths." More specifically, they conclude, as reported in their abstract, that annual minimum temperatures during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly in the region they studied were "significantly warmer" (+3.2°C) "than present," while in their final paragraph they say their results "closely compare to climate projections for California in AD 2070-2099 (Hayhoe et al., 2004)," in which "average temperature increases of 2.3-5.8°C were projected and slight increases or decreases in precipitation."




CO2 Science

 

[bripat9643]

For the past 10 years or so, dozens of small businesses across Europe and Asia have focused on finding new niches for energy-saving products and services.

This, after all, is what any capitalist entrepreneur would do, and what any genuine conservative politician would support. So we see countries like Holland, Spain and Germany creating jobs and earning export dollars with stunning new ideas, and dealing with climate change at the same time.

This has to be better than the do-nothing, heads-in-the-sand approach of the extreme right wing in the US and Australia.

Here's one idea I absolutely love - replacing street lighting with a fluourescent gel that 'paints' roads and cycle lanes. This could save the UK $967 million per year - will we see the GOP pushing the same idea? I am guessing not.


BBC - Autos - In the Netherlands luminous lines guide drivers

Yeah, right, U.S. companies never come up with energy saving ideas.

Get a grip

 

[Old Rocks]

Right now, the energy companies that are coming up with the most interesting ideas on producing electricity on the grid are in Oklahoma and Texas. With the combination of wind and grid scale batteries Oncor is proposing to put on it's grid, wind becomes, 24/7, and the same for solar. Given the continueing reduction in installation prices for both, that will begin the phasing out of coal fired plants. And make the building of further nuclear plants uneconomical.