Earth and climate – an ongoing controversy
Regular Talkshop contributor and climate expert Ian Wilson highlights the lack of scientific logic in the idea that carbon dioxide (CO2) somehow controls climate variations in the modern era. This has led to such absurdities as claims of a ‘climate emergency’ and demands to stop using oil, gas, and coal, with many countries actively pursuing policies along those lines.
Climate scientists insist that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations (measured in parts per million or ppm) are forcing the Earth’s atmospheric and oceanic temperatures to increase, writes Ian Wilson.
They base their claim on the premise that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that prevents infrared light from escaping the Earth’s atmosphere.
They propose that the trapped infra-red radiation results in a net gain in the energy that is stored in the Earth’s atmosphere (~ 2 %) and oceans (> 90 %).
The scientists quantify this build-up in energy using a parameter called the Earth’s [top of the atmosphere] Energy Imbalance (EEI). If the EEI is positive then the Earth’s climate system gains energy, if it’s negative then the system loses energy, largely due to the energy flow into and out of the oceans.
The best estimates of the observed EEI at the moment are about 0.8 watts per square metre (W m^-2). Many scientists implicitly assume that this energy imbalance is caused, in large part, by anthropogenic GHGs.
Theoretical climate models indicate that if you take into account GHGs, ozone, the Earth’s albedo, aerosols, and solar irradiance, the net anthropogenic forcing component upon the Earth’s climate system should be about 1.6 +/- 0.8 W m^-2.
It is important to understand that climate scientists treat the rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations as a “forcing” upon the climate system.
They measure the effect of this “forcing” in units of W m^-2 [i.e. joules (of energy) per second per metre^2].
This means that we need to look for a response to this “forcing” of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans by CO2 in units that match that of the “forcing” itself i.e. watts or joules (of energy) per second [N.B. the m^-2 part of the units is superfluous because we can integrate of the entire area of the Earth’s surface].
Effectively, what this means is, that at time scales longer than about a year, the time-rate-of-change ocean heat content (d(OHC)/dt) should provide the most reliable indicator of the EEI. Climate models indicate that the net EEI should become increasingly positive with time, as CO2 concentrations slowly increase.
If this is the case, you would expect that the total energy content of the Earth’s oceans (e.g. from 0 to 2000 m) to increase at an ever-increasing rate with time. Note that this is the same as saying that the d(OHC)/dt (for 0 to 2000 m – measure in Zeta joules = 10^21 joules) should become increasingly positive with time, as well.
However, what if this is not true? In this case, it would bring into question CO2’s role in the forcing of the increasing world mean temperatures in recent decades.
Continued here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
January 18, 2020 at 04:07AM
Iowa Climate Science Education 