Month: March 2017

Sun’s impact on climate change quantified for first time

Sun’s impact on climate change quantified for first time

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

Quiet sun [image credit: NASA]

Solar variation influencing climate is suddenly plausible, say researchers. Who knew? Well, nearly everyone except climate modellers. Although they still mutter about human influence, the reality of the solar slowdown is starting to bite it seems. If as they suggest ‘A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree’ what might they expect from a ‘stronger sun’?

For the first time, model calculations show a plausible way that fluctuations in solar activity could have a tangible impact on the climate, reports Phys.org.

Studies funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation expect human-induced global warming to tail off slightly over the next few decades. A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree.

There is human-induced climate change, and there are natural climate fluctuations. One important factor in the unchanging rise and fall of the Earth’s temperature and its different cycles is the sun. As its activity varies, so does the intensity of the sunlight that reaches us.

One of the key questions facing climate researchers is whether these fluctuations have any effect at all on the Earth’s climate. IPCC reports assume that recent solar activity is insignificant for climate change, and that the same will apply to activity in the near future.

Researchers from the Physical Meteorological Observatory Davos (PMOD), the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (EAWAG), ETH Zurich and the University of Bern are now qualifying this assumption. Their elaborate model calculations are supplying a robust estimate of the contribution that the sun is expected to make to temperature change in the next 100 years.

For the first time, a significant effect is apparent. They expect the Earth’s temperature to fall by half a degree when solar activity reaches its next minimum. According to project head Werner Schmutz, who is also Director of PMOD, this reduction in temperature is significant, even though it will do little to compensate for human-induced climate change. “We could win valuable time if solar activity declines and slows the pace of global warming a little. That might help us to deal with the consequences of climate change.”

But this will be no more than borrowed time, warns Schmutz, since the next minimum will inevitably be followed by a maximum.

Strong fluctuations could explain past climate

At the end of March, the researchers working on the project will meet in Davos for a conference to discuss the final results. The project brought together various research institutions’ capabilities in terms of climate effect modelling.

PMOD calculated what is known as “radiative forcing” taking account of particle as well as electromagnetic radiation, ETH Zurich worked out its further effects in the Earth’s atmosphere and the University of Bern investigated the interactions between the atmosphere and oceans.

The Swiss researchers assumed a greater fluctuation in the radiation striking the Earth than previous models had done. Schmutz is convinced that “this is the only way that we can understand the natural fluctuations in our climate over the last few millennia.” He says that other hypotheses, such as the effect of major volcanic eruptions, are less conclusive.

Exactly how the sun will behave over the next few years remains a matter of speculation, however, since appropriate data series have only been available for a few decades and they reveal no evidence of fluctuations during this time. “To that extent, our latest results are still a hypothesis,” says Schmutz, “and it remains difficult for solar physicists to predict the next cycle.”

But since we have been observing a consistently strong phase since 1950, it is highly likely that we will experience another low point in 50 to 100 years’ time. It could be every bit as intense as the Maunder Minimum, which brought particularly cold weather during the 17th century.

Important historical data

The research project also placed great importance on the historical perspective. The Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Bern compared data series on past solar activity with other specific climatic conditions.

People have been recording the number of sunspots, which correlates well with solar activity levels, for some three centuries now. However, it is much more difficult to quantify exactly how cold it was on Earth back then. “We know that the winters during the last minimum were very cold, at least in northern Europe,” says Schmutz.

The researchers still have a fair amount of work to do before they have a detailed understanding of the relationship between solar activity and the global climate both in the past and in the future.

Source: Sun’s impact on climate change quantified for first time | Phys.org

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

March 27, 2017 at 08:45AM

Predicting Planetary Temperature (without referring to radiation)

Predicting Planetary Temperature (without referring to radiation)

via Scottish Sceptic
http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

We are constantly being told that the Greenhouse effect is due to a radiative process. I want to show simply that it is not. Instead as per Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller I want to show that from first principles it … Continue reading

via Scottish Sceptic http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

March 27, 2017 at 08:23AM

Miami Beach Turning Into Modern Day Atlantis–Fake News BBC

Miami Beach Turning Into Modern Day Atlantis–Fake News BBC

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t QV

 

 

 

image

http://ift.tt/2naEn0b

 

The fake news BBC World at One today took the chance to add a bit of Project Climate Fear to their unashamedly anti Trump agenda, with a a piece on how rising seas are turning Miami Beach into a modern day Atlantis.

 

It starts at about 25 mins in, with Trump’s expected announcement this week to drop Obama’s Clean Power Plan. (As usual, you may not be able to access the BBC iPlayer outside the UK).

Queue their correspondent from Florida, who tells us quite literally that “rising seas and flooding are turning Miami Beach into a modern day Atlantis, the city being submerged by water”

A virulently anti Trump interviewee then tells us that Miami has 30 years left, and we later learn that sea levels at Miami are rising at ten times the global rate.

 

Of course, you won’t hear any real facts on the BBC.

For instance, that the current rate of rise is 2.45mm/year, and that it has been rising at this rate or more since 1940.

 

http://ift.tt/2ntyspI

They might also have mentioned that, according to Church & White’s analysis, the land there is actually sinking at a rate of 0.53mm/yr, thus accounting for a fifth of the rise.

In common with other locations on the US East Coast, sea levels have been rising steadily for the last century, as part of a perfectly natural process since the end of the Little Ice Age, as well as a glacial isostatic process.

 

Interestingly, the programme refers to all of the property development going on in Florida, with the irate anti Trump interviewee basically calling those buying condos idiots.

I suspect that those involved in building and purchasing these know a lot more about the real facts than the BBC reporter, who clearly has already made his mind up.

 

Maybe at some point in the distant future the seas might win, but the couple of millimeters a year of sea level rise in the last century don’t seem to have made much of an impression:

 

http://ift.tt/2naKWjr

 

http://ift.tt/2naNYnZ

Lummus Park, Miami Beach – The 1930s and now.

And I very much doubt whether Obama’s Clean Power Plan will make the slightest difference either!

 

 

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

March 27, 2017 at 07:30AM

Late winter polar bear habitat 2017 vs. 2006 and 2011 shows no trend

Late winter polar bear habitat 2017 vs. 2006 and 2011 shows no trend

via polarbearscience
http://ift.tt/1oHvY57

Here is a bit of historical perspective for rational readers trying to make sense of the doom-mongering of others that current sea ice conditions spell trouble for polar bears, given that the winter maximum extent for 2017 reached a new seasonal low (keeping in mind that NSIDC does not publish error bars for these measurements, which helps elevate such pronouncements to “news”).

Ice extent (courtesy NSIDC’s MASIE) at 25 March (Day 84) is below for 2017, 2011 and 2006, almost 3 weeks after the winter maximum was declared at 7 March for 2017, 9 March for  2011, and 12 March for 2006. Extent at the maximum for 2006 was estimated at 14.68 mkm2, 14.42 mkm2 for 2017, and 14.67 mkm2 in 2011 (what tiny differences make headlines these days).

Remember: there are no polar bears in the Sea of Okhotsk or in the Baltic Sea (marked with an * below) yet ice in those regions is included in the Arctic totals used to determine maximum seasonal extent. Much (and sometimes, all) of the “Arctic” variation in extent at this time of year is accounted for by variation in Sea of Okhotsk and Baltic Sea coverage.

Sea ice day 84 March 25 2017_2011_2006 labeled

Bottom line: total winter ice extent for the Arctic ≠ winter polar bear habitat and neither have changed much in a decade.

See close up of the above graphic below.


Polar_Bear_male_Regehr photo_March 21 2010_labeled

2006 had less polar bear habitat than 2017 yet bears ultimately thrived!

Sea ice day 84 March 25 2017_2011_2006 labeled verticalSea ice was breaking up on 25 March in eastern Hudson Bay in 2006 (evident even in the above chart) and there was just a bit of sea ice off Labrador (map above, far right).

Yet, Davis Strait bears were surveyed the following year and found to have increased markedly since the previous survey – which means if late March ice had a negative impact on survival in 2006, it was not enough to offset the long-term increase (although it may have been enough to impact body condition in some bears).

Below is a graph of the March average extent for 1979-2016 (NOT the seasonal maximum but usually close), where the 2006 low stands out just as strongly as the drop in summer ice in 2007, discussed here. However, although there has been year-to-year variation, there has not been a further dramatic drop since then (the 2017 point yet to be determined of course but likely in the same ballpark as 2006, 2015, and 2016).

In other words, no trend since 2006.

March average extent graph 1979-2016_NSIDC

via polarbearscience http://ift.tt/1oHvY57

March 27, 2017 at 06:55AM