Month: May 2017

The Derailed Gravy Train Apocalyptic Effect – G7 becomes G6 and Merkel Gets Mad

The Derailed Gravy Train Apocalyptic Effect – G7 becomes G6 and Merkel Gets Mad

via Climate Scepticism
https://cliscep.com

    It’s not 100% definite yet, but it looks like Trump is going to pull the US out of the Paris Climate Agreement. This would be a big deal, not for the climate, as many alarmists suggest, but for the global credibility and viability of the whole UN IPCC driven climate change narrative. At … Continue reading The Derailed Gravy Train Apocalyptic Effect – G7 becomes G6 and Merkel Gets Mad

via Climate Scepticism https://cliscep.com

May 28, 2017 at 11:09AM

Nature Unbound III – Holocene climate variability (Part B)

Nature Unbound III – Holocene climate variability (Part B)

via Climate Etc.
https://judithcurry.com

by Javier

The Neoglacial has been a period of progressive cooling, increasing aridity, and advancing glaciers, culminating in the Little Ice Age. The main Holocene climatic cycle of ~ 2400 years delimits periods of more stable climatic conditions which were identified over a century ago. The stable periods are punctuated by abrupt changes.

Previous post:  Part A

The Neoglacial period

Neoglaciation was the term coined to describe the global glacier advances after the Holocene Climatic Optimum (HCO) that François Matthes identified in the 1940’s. Glacier growth was caused by orbital-driven insolation changes. Although variability in local conditions caused the Neoglacial to start at different times in different glaciological areas, it is generally agreed that it started between 6000-5000 years BP in both hemispheres. Glaciers fluctuated with major glacier advances followed by shorter glacier retreats, culminating in the Little Ice Age when globally glaciers reached their maximum Holocene extent (figure 43). The Neoglaciation featured global cooling as temperatures responded more to the decrease in solar forcing due to orbital insolation changes than to the increase in GHG forcing.

Figure 43. Global glacier advances during the Holocene. Number of areas that display glacier advances for every century during the Holocene. World glaciers were distributed between 17 geographical areas. 12 belonging to the Northern Hemisphere are represented in brown, 4 from the Southern Hemisphere in blue, and one for the Low Latitudes in yellow. For a geographical representation of the glaciers included in each area see Solomina et al., 2015, figure 1. Orange and grey downward bars represent significant volcanic and cold events respectively according to the references indicated. Grey curve is the June insolation at 60°N (inverted scale). The Neoglacial period is characterized by generalized glacier advances that take place coinciding with the decrease in Northern Hemisphere solar forcing. Source: Courtesy of Olga Solomina.

Cooling events during the HCO, like the 8.2 kyr event, were followed by a complete recovery of temperatures and globally glaciers reached their minimum Holocene extent in most areas between 6000-5500 years BP. However there is evidence that the world did not completely recover from the cooling events that took place between 5600 and 5100 BP, initiating the Neoglaciation. This Mid-Holocene climate reversal has been recorded globally in multiple proxies both as a decrease in temperatures and as hydrological changes (Magny & Haas, 2004; Thompson et al., 2006). While the entire sixth millennium BP had a very challenging climate compared to previous millennia, the cooling event that took place 5.2 kyr BP was particularly abrupt (figure 44, Thompson et al., 2006). Due to the contemporary change of climate regime and global temperatures, some regions became cooler and drier, while others became cooler and wetter, leading to a rapid global glacier advance that buried organic remains, like the Quelccaya Glacier plant (Distichia muscoides, Peru), the South-Cascade Glacier rooted tree-trunk (Washington State) and the Ötztal Alps ice-man, that have remained continuously frozen until the present global warming (Thompson et al., 2006).

Figure 44. Evidence for an abrupt global cold and arid event at 5.2 kyr BP. High and low latitude locations of proxy evidence for abrupt climate change ~ 5,200 yr ago. Evidence for abrupt cooling (blue), aridity (red), flooding (green) and high wind (purple). South-Cascade Glacier rooted tree-trunk (Washington State); remains and artifacts in the Little Salt Spring (Florida); Cariaco Basin metal concentration (Fe, Ti) in ODP site 1002; Quelccaya Glacier ice-buried wetland plant Distichia muscoides (Juncaceae), dated at 5,138 ± 45 yr B.P.; bog pollen records of rapid and drastic vegetation changes in Isla Santa Inés (Chile); eolian soil record from Hólmsá (Iceland); North Atlantic benthic core in ODP site 980; dendrochronological records from Irish and Lancashire oaks with some of their narrowest rings during the 3,195 BC decade; Ötzi, the ice-man from South-Tyrol; core S53 palynological record from Burullus Lagoon (Nile Delta); Soreq Cave (Israel) speleothem; Mauritanian coast core 658C; Kilimanjaro ice-core record; Awafi dry lake sediments in SE Arabia; Lake Mirabad sediment in the Zagros Mountains (Iran); Lunkaransar dry lake sediments in NW India; sedimentary section along the Hongshui River, in the southern Tengger Desert, NW China. From multiple sources, some referenced in L.G. Thompson et al. 2006. PNAS 103, 10536–10543.

Coincident with the abrupt cooling and hydrological changes of ~ 5,200 yr BP, archaeological studies support a general pattern of abandoned Neolithic human settlements in several areas, including the Andes and the entire Eastern Mediterranean, indicating a widespread climatic crisis that marks the transition from the Chalcolithic to the early Bronze Age (Weninger et al., 2009).

Holocene climate variability

The Last Glacial Maximum and the HCO constitute two extreme metastable states, separated by only 10,000 years, that correspond to essentially the same amount of incoming energy from the Sun. The main difference between both states is in the redistribution and minimal or maximal exploitation of that energy by the planet. This is due to the orbital configuration, tectonic disposition, ice and cloud albedo, oceanic-atmosphere response and biological feedback. Since they constitute dramatically different climatic states, the nature of abrupt climatic changes is also different in the two states. Glacial variability comes mainly in the form of warming episodes (Dansgaard-Oeschger events; figure 45) while interglacial variability comes from cooling episodes (Bond events; figure 45). There are no global warming abrupt changes in the Holocene once the thermal maximum is reached, just cooling events followed by recovery.

The other major salient characteristic of the Holocene abrupt climatic changes compared to glacial abrupt changes is their much smaller amplitude (figure 45). It has become a lot more difficult to identify these changes because their signal is much lower and more difficult to separate from the noise of small high frequency climatic variability. This has created much confusion about the nature and causes of Holocene abrupt climatic changes and has given many the false impression that the Holocene is characterized by long periods of climate stability. Nothing is further from the truth. The Holocene is a period of almost constant climate change with climatic stability being the exception.

Figure 45. Nature of climatic oscillations during the Ice Age. Oscillations during an interglacial are smaller and are cooler (Bond) events, and oscillations become larger the colder temperatures become. During the glacial period oscillations are very large and are of a warming nature (Dansgaard-Oeschger events). The black line represents the obliquity cycle. The asterisk marks the current position, where we are very worried that the present warming is the ‘largest in thousands of years’ instead of being worried that the next cooling will also be bigger than the previous and will probably lead to glacial inception.

In 1968 climatologist J. Roger Bray recognized several major past cooling episodes and attributed them to a solar cycle. “A combination of geophysical, biological and glaciological information supports the idea of a 2,600 year solar cycle” (J.R. Bray. 1968. Glaciation and Solar Activity since the Fifth Century BC and the Solar Cycle. Nature 220, 672-674). This solar cycle, slightly shorter than he calculated, is now known as the Hallstatt cycle while, in justice, it should be named the Bray cycle. Since Bray’s report, other researchers have confirmed the reoccurrence of cooler climates with a periodicity of about 2400 – 2600 years by different techniques, glacial moraines, temperature-sensitive tree rings widths, and δ18O isotope and chemical analysis of sea salts and dust in ice cores (O’Brien et al., 1995). Most researchers also ascribe a solar origin to this climatic cycle, since the cooling periods coincide with periods of high Δ14C formation, which is associated with low solar activity.

By looking at proxy temperature reconstructions and at major global glacier advances, and other climate proxies, it is easy to recognize the major abrupt cooling changes of the Holocene. Roger Bray identified cooling episodes at 0.3, 2.8, 5.5, 8.2 and 10.2 kyr BP over 45 years ago (figure 46). These episodes give us an average spacing of ~ 2400 years and, at the same time, they define the major climatic states of the Holocene.

Figure 46. Northern Hemisphere paleoclimate records showing main Holocene abrupt climate change events. (A) Greenland GISP2 ice-core δ18O. (B) Western Mediterranean (Iberian Margin) core MD95-2043, sea surface temperature (SST) C37 alkenones. (C) Eastern Mediterranean core LC21 (SST) fauna. (D) North Atlantic Bond series of drift-ice stacked petrologic tracers. (E) Romania (Steregoiu), mean annual temperature of the coldest month. (F) Gaussian smoothed (200 yr) GISP2 potassium (non-sea salt) ion proxy for the Siberian High pressure system. (G) High resolution GISP2 potassium (non-sea salt). Notice that all Holocene abrupt climate changes are cooling events. Source: B. Weninger et al. 2009. Documenta Praehistorica Vol. 36, pp. 7-59.

The Bray cycle delimits five periods that roughly correspond to the Blytt-Sernander sequence. Vegetation changes suggest that they constitute distinctive climatic states established by insolation conditions from the obliquity and precession cycles (figure 47). Every abrupt cooling from the Bray cycle would constitute a tipping point in the gradual insolation changes and the world would settle to a different climatic state after recovering. We have just started a sixth period with the proposed name of Anthropocene, that should last around 2,200 years, until about 4,200 C.E. Every one of the last five periods (since 10.2 kyr ago) started with global warming as a recovery from the depressed temperatures of the cooling oscillations that separate the periods.

Figure 47. Major periods of the Holocene set by obliquity and a ~2400 year Bray cycle. Black curve, global temperature reconstruction by Marcott et al., 2013, from 73 proxies averaged by differencing and with the original published dates. Temperature anomaly rescaled as in figure 37. Purple curve, Earth’s axis obliquity cycle. Blue boxes, major periods of regional and global glacier advances as in Mayewski et al., 2004 and references within. Red curve, Bond et al., 2001 ice-rafted debris stack (inverted) from four North Atlantic sediment cores. Grey bars, cooling oscillations part of the ~2400 year Bray cycle. Pink bars, the 8.2 kyr cooling event proposed to be due to the outburst of pro-glacial Lake Agassiz and the 4.2 kyr arid-cold event. Grey arches on top, a regular 2475 year periodic marker.

Bond events

In addition to the major cooling events of the Bray cycle, other cooling events have taken place during the Holocene, and they have been seen in numerous proxies, but particularly in the Bond series of events. The amount of detrital petrological tracers transported by icebergs and deposited in the ice-rafted debris belt (an Atlantic region between 40-50° N) greatly increases during episodes of southward and eastward advection of cold surface waters and drift ice from the Nordic and Labrador seas (Bond et al., 2001; figure 48 A). This sensitive proxy has registered every cold episode of the Holocene, with a resolution of 50 years.

Figure 48. Bond events constitute a record of cold events during the Holocene. (A) Map of North Atlantic coring sites. Bond events represent periods of increased deposition of petrological tracers by drift ice at the core locations (black dots) within the ice-rafted debris belt (IRD, yellow box). They are interpreted as periods of cooler, ice-bearing surface waters displaced eastward from the Labrador Sea and southward from the Nordic Seas. (B) The Holocene record of iceberg activity (black curve) is a stack of the four cores showing the combined detrended record of hematite-stained grains, detrital carbonate, and Icelandic volcanic glass. The last drift-ice period corresponds to the Little Ice Age, and other known climatic periods of the past can be correlated to this record. The numbering of enhanced drift-ice periods represents the unsuccessful attempt by Gerard Bond to correlate the now called Bond events with the ~ 1500 year Dansgaard-Oeschger stadial cycle, also reflected in ice-rafted debris records. Source: G. Bond et al., 2001 Science 294, 2130-2136. The Bond cycle is a composite of different periodicities. The early Holocene period clearly displays 1,000 year periodicity as shown by a Gaussian filter applied on the series (green curve). A 1,500 year periodicity is only present from 6,000 yr BP (red curve). The 1,500 year fit is problematic as some peaks appear to follow the 1,000 year periodicity. Source: M. Debret et al., 2007. Clim. Past Discuss., 3, 679–692.

Gerard Bond attempted to fit the periods of increased drift-ice that he identified during the Holocene into a single cycle related to the Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle, by making two unwarranted assumptions: That every period of cooling responded to the same cause, and that some well-resolved peaks separated by several centuries to a millennium could correspond to a single cold event. The evidence, however, shows that the HCO displays a millennial periodicity in Bond events, with single isolated peaks separated by ~ 1000 years, while the Neoglacial shows a more complex picture with multiple peaks not so well resolved and a more irregular spacing. Debret et al. (2007), adjust the Bond record of Holocene cold events to a 1,000 year periodicity between 12 and 7 kyr BP and to a 1,500 year periodicity for the last 6,000 years (figure 48 B). It is clear that the Bond record mixed periodicity reflects the climatic shift that took place at the MHT from mainly solar forcing to a mixed solar and oceanic forcing (figure 41), and therefore it can be concluded that the first assumption of Gerard Bond is incorrect: different peaks represent cooling from different causes, and thus a Bond cycle does not exist in the Holocene. We must reject also his second assumption and treat every peak as a different cooling event and try to identify the cause that originated it. We must move from a Bond series of 8 events (plus number zero) in 12,000 years (one event every 1500 years), to a series of at least 15 cold events with a mixture of periodicities during the Holocene.

The lows of the ~ 2400 year Bray cycle, the main climatic cycle during the Holocene, correspond to Bond events 7, 5a, 4a, 2a, and 0. These events not only show a corresponding age and correct periodicity, but they also constitute the highest petrological tracer peaks for each 2400 year period, suggesting that they were the strongest cooling periods at each time, as glaciological, biological and geophysical evidence also supports.

Holocene millennial cycles

As we have seen in part I and II of the series, low frequency-high amplitude climate change does not take place in a chaotic manner, but mainly through cycles, quasicycles, and oscillations that respond to periodic changes in the forcings that act over the climate system. Figure 49 (adapted from Maslin et al., 2001) shows that these climatic periodicities cover the full spectrum of climate variation, and that, in general, the longer periodicities produce larger variations in climate. Thus Holocene climate change is dominated by periodic variability in the millennial band (grey band, figure 49).

Figure 49. Climate cycles and periodicities dominate climate change at all temporal scales. Spectrum of climate variance showing the better studied climatic cycles and their proposed forcings, although some are not widely accepted. Cycles, quasicycles, and periodic oscillations are found over the entire temporal range, indicating they are a salient property of climatic variability. As a general rule, the lower the frequency, the more intense the climatic variance produced. The 150 Myr Ice Age cycle has produced four Ice Ages in the last 450 million years. It is proposed to be caused by the crossing of the galactic arms by the Solar system. The 32 Myr cycle has produced two cycles during the Cenozoic era, the first ending in the glaciation of Antarctica and the second in the current Quaternary Ice Age. It is proposed to be caused by the vertical displacement of the Solar system with respect to the galactic plane. The orbital or Milankovitch cycles are the best studied, and between them and the Lunar nodal regression cycle of 18.6 years lies the orbital gap, where no astronomical cycle is known to affect climate. Our knowledge of this range is very insufficient, despite millennial climate cycles (grey band) determining most of Holocene climatic variability. Short term climate variability is dominated by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation. Adapted from: M. Maslin, et al. 2001. Geophysical Monograph Series 126. pp. 9-52.

Within the paleo-climatological scientific community there is widespread acceptance of millennial cycles during the Holocene because their effects are observed in most climatic proxies, and there is ample agreement over certain periodicities that come out of frequency analysis and are in phase from multiple proxies at different locations. Instrumental-era climatologists and astrophysicists are however very skeptical of such periodicities because they have not collected evidence about these long cycles in the short time of modern instrument observations, and we lack a proper understanding of the mechanisms that generate the periodicity and produce the climatic effect. Similar objections were made to Alfred Wegener’s continental drift theory that despite solid evidence from geography, geology, paleontology, and biology, was shunned until the development of plate tectonics theory could explain how continents drifted.

A further complication arises because some climate periodicities do not show the behavior of proper cycles and present gaps when the signal cannot be detected in the data. We already observed that problem when reviewing the Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle, where the oscillations depend on a set of conditions in sea-level, temperatures, and obliquity, to become perceptible. Wavelet analysis of millennial climate cycles during the Holocene shows periods when one or more of the currently operable cycles do not show up in the data. As we do not have a proper knowledge of the mechanisms of these cycles, we do not have an explanation for this behavior. And we also have to consider the awkward nature of most climate proxy data (Witt & Schumann, 2005), which is affected by random and systemic errors causing uncertainties along the age axis that grow worse as we go back in time. This data is often unevenly sampled and has increasing compression with growing age, causing a reduction in data density in the older portion of the data. It also suffers from different noise intensity for different paleoclimatic periods and is affected by changing sampling rates. Quite often this awkward nature of paleoclimatic proxy data is not properly accounted for when performing standard time series analyses, which were developed for evenly sampled and stationary time series over a well-defined time axis.

Despite these problems, three relatively well established millennial-scale climatic periodicities can be described based on evidence. They are the already mentioned ~ 2400 year Bray solar variability cycle, a ~ 1500 year oceanic cycle that might be related to the D-O cycle of glacial periods, and the ~ 1000 year Eddy solar variability cycle. As mentioned above, Holocene cycles display abrupt cooling at their lows, creating the conditions for enhanced iceberg activity in the North Atlantic that produces Bond ice-rafting events. As the three cycles have different periodicities, sometimes the lows of two cycles are so close together in time as to make it difficult to resolve them. This is the case in the Little Ice Age, when the lows of all three cycles took place in close succession, contributing to make this the coldest period in the Holocene, bringing it to the brink of triggering a glacial period. After each abrupt cooling of the lows of these three cycles comes a warming recovery, that was a complete recovery during the HCO, but only partially complete during the Neoglacial. The global warming that has taken place during the last 350 years cannot be separated from the previous cooling without losing part of its context. As already indicated in figure 46, each period of warming during the descent to the next glacial stage should be more intense than the previous ones, as climatic variability increases outside the warm conditions of an interglacial climatic optimum.

Conclusions

6) The Neoglacial has been a period of progressive cooling, increasing aridity, and advancing glaciers, delimited by the 5.2 kyr event at its beginning and the Little Ice Age at its end.

7) Holocene climate variability is characterized by periodic cooling events of reduced amplitude compared to glacial climate variability. The main climatic cycle of ~ 2400 years delimits five periods of consistent climatic conditions identified over a century ago in the Blytt-Sernander sequence, separated by abrupt climatic changes.

8) Additional Holocene abrupt climatic variability is reflected in Bond peaks of increased drift ice in the North Atlantic. Abrupt Holocene variability responds mainly to periodicities in the millennial time frame. Abrupt Holocene changes have all been of a cooling nature, followed by global warming.

9) Bond events display a mixture of periodicities that respond to different forcings, thus a Bond cycle does not exist in the Holocene.

Acknowledgements

I thank Andy May for reading the manuscript and improving its English.

References [bibliography  ]

Moderation note:  As with all guest posts, please keep your comments civil and relevant.

via Climate Etc. https://judithcurry.com

May 28, 2017 at 09:04AM

Garbage study claims: global warming will cause U.S. sleep loss

Garbage study claims: global warming will cause U.S. sleep loss

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

From the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA – SAN DIEGO and the “correlation is not causation unless we take a survey and plug the results into a model and ignore UHI” department comes this “anything goes” paper that has the magic words for making headlines, but very little if any real science in it.

Losing sleep over climate change

Climate change may keep you awake — and not just metaphorically. Nights that are warmer than normal can harm human sleep, researchers show in a new paper, with the poor and elderly most affected. According to their findings, if climate change is not addressed, temperatures in 2050 could cost people in the United States millions of additional nights of insufficient sleep per year. By 2099, the figure could rise by several hundred million more nights of lost sleep annually.

The study was led by Nick Obradovich, who conducted much of the research as a doctoral student in political science at the University of California San Diego. He was inspired to investigate the question by the heat wave that hit San Diego in October of 2015. Obradovich was having trouble sleeping. He tossed and he turned, the window AC in his North Park home providing little relief from the record-breaking temperatures. At school, he noticed that fellow students were also looking grumpy and bedraggled, and it got him thinking: Had anyone looked at what climate change might do to sleep?

Published by Science Advances, the research represents the largest real-world study to date to find a relationship between reports of insufficient sleep and unusually warm nighttime temperatures. It is the first to apply the discovered relationship to projected climate change.

“Sleep has been well-established by other researchers as a critical component of human health. Too little sleep can make a person more susceptible to disease and chronic illness, and it can harm psychological well-being and cognitive functioning,” Obradovich said. “What our study shows is not only that ambient temperature can play a role in disrupting sleep but also that climate change might make the situation worse by driving up rates of sleep loss.”

Obradovich is now a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and a research scientist at the MIT Media Lab. He is also a fellow of the Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation at UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Obradovich worked on the study with Robyn Migliorini, a student in the San Diego State University/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, and sleep researcher Sara Mednick of UC Riverside. Obradovich’s dissertation advisor, social scientist James Fowler of UC San Diego, is also a co-author.

The study starts with data from 765,000 U.S. residents between 2002 and 2011 who responded to a public health survey, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The study then links data on self-reported nights of insufficient sleep to daily temperature data from the National Centers for Environmental Information. Finally, it combines the effects of unusually warm temperatures on sleep with climate model projections.

The main finding is that anomalous increases in nighttime temperature by 1 degree Celsius translate to three nights of insufficient sleep per 100 individuals per month. To put that in perspective: If we had a single month of nightly temperatures averaging 1 degree Celsius higher than normal, that is equivalent to 9 million more nights of insufficient sleep in a month across the population of the United States today, or 110 million extra nights of insufficient sleep annually.

Areas of the western and northern United States — where nighttime temperatures are projected to increase most — may experience the largest future changes in sleep. CREDIT Courtesy N. Obradovich

The negative effect of warmer nights is most acute in summer, the research shows. It is almost three times as high in summer as during any other season.

The effect is also not spread evenly across all demographic groups. Those whose income is below $50,000 and those who are aged 65 and older are affected most severely. For older people, the effect is twice that of younger adults. And for the lower-income group, it is three times worse than for people who are better off financially.

The effect on sleep of warmer than usual nights is most acute during the summer and among lower-income respondents and the elderly. CREDIT Courtesy N. Obradovich.

Using climate projections for 2050 and 2099 by NASA Earth Exchange, the study paints a bleak picture of the future if the relationship between warmer nights and disrupted sleep persists. Warmer temperatures could cause six additional nights of insufficient sleep per 100 individuals by 2050 and approximately 14 extra nights per 100 by 2099.

“The U.S. is relatively temperate and, in global terms, quite prosperous,” Obradovich said. “We don’t have sleep data from around the world, but assuming the pattern is similar, one can imagine that in places that are warmer or poorer or both, what we’d find could be even worse.”

###

The research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation, grants no. DGE0707423 and TG-SES130013 to Obradovich, DGE1247398 to Migliorini, and BCS1439210 to Mednick. Mednick is also funded by the National Institute on Aging (R01AG046646) and the Department of Defense (Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award).


In the press release, they give this DOI link, which seems to be DOA: http://ift.tt/2rd4mZT

But I dug out the article and here is the link: http://ift.tt/2r72JNm

The SI is here: http://ift.tt/2rd4710

Abstract

Human sleep is highly regulated by temperature. Might climate change—through increases in nighttime heat—disrupt sleep in the future? We conduct the inaugural investigation of the relationship between climatic anomalies, reports of insufficient sleep, and projected climate change. Using data from 765,000 U.S. survey respondents from 2002 to 2011, coupled with nighttime temperature data, we show that increases in nighttime temperatures amplify self-reported nights of insufficient sleep. We observe the largest effects during the summer and among both lower-income and elderly respondents. We combine our historical estimates with climate model projections and detail the potential sleep impacts of future climatic changes. Our study represents the largest ever investigation of the relationship between sleep and ambient temperature and provides the first evidence that climate change may disrupt human sleep.


There isn’t a single mention of UHI or Urban Heat Island in the paper, but they do say this in a roundabout way in the SI for the paper: http://ift.tt/2rcT1ZV

Some might desire that we control for common demographic covariates. Unfortunately, as these demographic characteristics may also be impacted by the climatic variables within a locality (for example, if a particular demographic sorts into living in less extreme environments), including these variables has the potential to bias our coefficient of interest on nighttime temperature anomalies (making the variables ‘bad controls’). As a result we exclude them from our specification in Equation 1 in the main text.

They reference “climatic variables within a locality”, i.e. “microclimates” or UHI if one considers that. The IPCC stated in AR3 that

“it is well-known that compared to non-urban areas urban heat islands raise night-time temperatures more than daytime temperatures”

In the abstract of this study, Obradovich posits:

Might climate change—through increases in nighttime heat—disrupt sleep in the future?

It’s as if this kid never heard of UHI as a factor for increasing nighttime temperature. Mind-boggling.

I wonder how many of the respondents were from major cities, like Las Vegas, NV? There, the city has been booming, and if you consider the usual “climate change” metric, i.e. average temperature, yes it looks like it’s gotten warmer there since about 1973-75, before that, the trend is mostly insignificant.

But if you look at the Maximum and minimum temperatures separately, a clear UHI signal emerges that correlates with the building boom. Maximum temperatures are actually lower than in 1937.

While minimum temperatures are upwards

Increasing minimum temperatures are a sure sign of UHI, the city government itself even acknowledges it¹. ((see references). UHI increases nighttime temperatures due to there being more concrete, asphalt, and other impermeable surfaces storing daytime heat and releasing it at night -this  is not “climate change” in the sense they use it, yet they don’t seem to even be aware of it as a possible confounding factor. Did the author, Obradovich, control for city dwellers vs. country dwellers? It doesn’t look like it.

The graph they cite “The effect on sleep of warmer than usual nights is most acute during the summer and among lower-income respondents and the elderly.” also isn’t about climate change. It’s about affordability for air-conditioning – not only for purchase, but for powering it. Low income and fixed income people (elderly) often can’t afford to purchase and/or run an air-conditioner. But instead of factoring in that, they immediately jump to climate change” as the culprit. Interestingly, in Table S4 of the SI for the paper, they show that low-income people tend to have about 4 times the rate of sleep loss as the financially well of. This could be due to lack of air-conditioning, or simply worrying how you are going to pay your bills and keep your kids fed – the things that really keep people up at night.

In a story in Psychology Today, they list the most common reasons for less sleep:

Increased sleep deprivation, or sleep deficit, has sometimes been described as a symptom of the recent decrease in leisure time in American society (see, for example, Juliet Schor’s bestseller The Overworked American). Working hours increased during the second-half of the 20th century, along with sharp growth in American productivity and prosperity. A doubling of productivity could have translated into both higher incomes and decreased working hours, yet today employees rarely have a choice between getting paid in time or money. Instead, Americans, relative to the past, work more, earn more, and spend more. This focus on work and consumption over leisure time has brought about an increased “time squeeze.”  While this is especially true for the average American woman, the time squeeze cuts across gender, social class, and marital status.

Moreover, the recent growth of digital media and smartphones has dramatically raised productivity expectations and blurred the line between work and personal life. This decrease in free time and increased pace of life and stress has brought with it reduced sleep, with real consequences for physical and mental health, performance at work, and quality of life.  For example, in the 1960s, the average amount of time Americans spent sleeping was between 7 and 8.5 hours a night, while today 50% of the population averages under 7 hours, and, according to a 2008 survey, 1 out of 3 Americans say they get a good night’s sleep only a few nights a month or less.

But Obradovich doesn’t seem to look at any of those factors, such as having a cell phone waking you up at night, or the general trend for less leisure time and more work. No, Obradovich jumps right on the correlation with temperature, thinking that is the only cause, seemingly excluding other more confounding factors. Then, they take that data from the survey and plug it into a model of their own design, and bam – instant conclusion – we’ll all get less sleep due to “climate change”.

Finally, Obradovich commits the cardinal sin of climate alarmists everywhere conflation of weather and climate in his thinking:

The study was led by Nick Obradovich, who conducted much of the research as a doctoral student in political science at the University of California San Diego. He was inspired to investigate the question by the heat wave that hit San Diego in October of 2015. Obradovich was having trouble sleeping. He tossed and he turned, the window AC in his North Park home providing little relief from the record-breaking temperatures. At school, he noticed that fellow students were also looking grumpy and bedraggled, and it got him thinking: Had anyone looked at what climate change might do to sleep?

Kid, one HEAT WAVE does not equate to “climate change” it’s weather, and weather is NOT climate.

In my opinion, this study by Obradovich is garbage, and was a conclusion looking for a paper to support it. How this sort of junk gets past peer review I have no idea.

References:

(1) Summary Report, Urban Heat Island Effect, City of Las Vegas, Office of Sustainability,  April 2010

From:  http://ift.tt/2sblvAv

(2) Source for data: NOAA/NWS Las Vegas, from

http://ift.tt/2rd8gln

(3) Losing Sleep in the 21st Century
In a rapidly evolving American society, people are sleeping less and less. May 07, 2013

http://ift.tt/2sbmSze

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

May 28, 2017 at 08:30AM

Beware the Ides of May

Beware the Ides of May

via Science Matters
http://ift.tt/2oqIky9

Triumphal Caesar Returns to Rome

OK, I know the saying was Ides of March, and it was a warning to Julius Caesar, forecasting his betrayal in the midst of Roman senators. The phrase came to mind as the American Caesar returned to his capital pondering what to do about the Trojan Horse offered from Paris. Will his senators have his back or put knives in it? A declaration from 40 of them makes it seem that they are prepared to confront the Paris Treaty and end its and everyone’s misery.

Paris COP Goes From Silver Bullet to Poison Pill for the Environment

Lost in all the politics, posturing and shaming is any awareness that this decades-long effort to mitigate warming by reducing fossil fuel emissions is itself a problem. The Société de Calcul Mathématique said in 2015: The battle against global warming: an absurd, costly and pointless crusade. The title is a link to the data, facts and information supporting their conclusion.

Beyond being costly and useless, the IPCC policies are directed at increasing energy poverty by eliminating the very sources that have raised the modern standard of living. And as numerous studies have shown, poverty and environmental degradation go hand in hand. When people can cook and heat themselves with fossil fuels, they don’t turn forests into firewood. Wealthier societies take much better care of their natural surroundings.

The UN Environmental program bet the farm on the global warming issue, thinking it to be a silver bullet to unplug industrial society and bring back pristine nature. The whole thing wastes time, talent and resources leaving pressing environmental concern unaddressed. It is the wrong path, the wrong program, and it will make matters worse if it isn’t stopped here and now.

via Science Matters http://ift.tt/2oqIky9

May 28, 2017 at 07:12AM