Category: Uncategorized

Uncategorized 1 Jul 2017

Strong earthquake swarm in Bárðarbunga

This earthquake swarm was in the north-east area of the Bárðarbunga volcano. caldera, area that has showed the most earthquake activity since this started in September-2015.

http://ift.tt/2tu0HZ7

Thanks to Sonya Porter for this link

“In particular, scroll down to North Sea Earthquake,” says Sonya.

The post Strong earthquake swarm in Bárðarbunga appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now http://ift.tt/2qcAwB3

July 1, 2017 at 08:14PM

Uncategorized 1 Jul 2017

Claim: Climate will hit Poor People harder than Rich People

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

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Two separate studies have appeared recently claiming that climate will increase income inequality. In my opinion, both studies contradict readily observable evidence.

The first press release;

Study: Climate change damages US economy, increases inequality

Unmitigated climate change will make the United States poorer and more unequal, according to a new study published in the journal Science. The poorest third of counties could sustain economic damages costing as much as 20 percent of their income if warming proceeds unabated.

States in the South and lower Midwest, which tend to be poor and hot already, will lose the most, with economic opportunity traveling northward and westward. Colder and richer counties along the northern border and in the Rockies could benefit the most as health, agriculture and energy costs are projected to improve.

Overall, the study—led by Solomon Hsiang of the University of California, Berkeley, Robert Kopp of Rutgers University-New Brunswick, Amir Jina of the University of Chicago, and James Rising, also of UC Berkeley—projects losses, economic restructuring and widening inequality.

“Unmitigated climate change will be very expensive for huge regions of the United States,” said Hsiang, Chancellor’s Associate Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. “If we continue on the current path, our analysis indicates it may result in the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the country’s history.”

…

Climate Scare in US South

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

A recent study published in Science predicts there will be no comfort from US southerners in the future. As reported in the Atlantic

The American South Will Bear the Worst of Climate Change’s Costs
Global warming will intensify regional inequality in the United States, according to a revolutionary new economic assessment of the phenomenon.

The study, published Thursday in Science, simulates the costs of global warming in excruciating detail, modeling every day of weather in every U.S. county during the 21st century. It finds enormous disparities in how rising temperatures will affect American communities: Texas, Florida, and the Deep South will bleed income in the broiling heat, while some chillier northern states gain moderate benefits.

“We are really sure the South is going to get hammered,” says Solomon Hsiang, one of the authors of the paper and a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley. “The South is really, really negatively affected by climate change, much more so than the North. That wasn’t something we were expecting going in.”

First of all, this comes from model projections, not from observed temperatures and precipitation.

The graph shows daily maximums, averaged annually for the southern region as defined by the National Weather Service (NWS). The rise since 1895 is less than 1F, not even noticeable. You can also clearly see a quasi-60 year cycle, and that we are coming off the warmer phase with a cooler phase likely ahead.

Precipitation over the same period of 120 years shows a slight rise, nothing dramatic, and also oscillating with scattered peaks and valleys.

Secondly, all forecasting was done using the worst-case scenario

Out of five scenarios in IPCC report RCP8.5 is the most extreme. Neither AR5 nor the paper describing RCP8.5 call it a “business as usual” scenario, because it is not. Such a scenario would assume continuation of existing trends through 2100. A worst-case scenario assumes trends change for the worse. RCP8.5 assumes population growth at the 90th percentile of the probability forecast for 2100 (i.e., not considering real-world factors) and near-stagnation of technological progress.

Thirdly the models show no skill at all at regional forecasting, never mind their deficiencies at the global scale.

Roger Pielke Sr. repeatedly points to the elephant in the room about these papers — the ignored assumption that climate models’ predictions about global climate (when fed accurate predictions about emissions) are a sufficiently skillful basis for public policy — and that downscaling these models produces regional forecasts also useful for making public policy. There is little evidence of either. See here for a discussion of the literature about model validation (see the end section here for links to the literature). He says there is even less evidence for their skill at regional levels. He reviewed the literature validating regional downsizing five years ago, and relatively little progress has been made since then.
From Larry Kummer, US Economic Damage from Climate Change

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Adaptation by humans is not allowed.

The projections presume that humans will not adapt in response to changing conditions, even though we have also done so, and have presently unprecedented capacities.

Matthew Kahn explains this clearly in Climate Change Adaptation Economics

An econometric research team follows the following recipe. First, it takes historical data and estimates how weather conditions correlate with economic conditions. For example, when it is extremely hot in a county — do we observe based on past data that the county’s per-capita income is lower than usual. The research team takes these past correlations and takes a climate change model (that tells you a guess of what will be future climate conditions by county) to predict future economic outcomes under the assumption that the historical correlation between weather and economic outcomes persists into the future.

This bold writing violates the Lucas Critique. Robert Lucas is one of the University of Chicago’s greatest economists. I was not one of his greatest students but I learned from him that as the “Rules of the Game” change that forward looking decision makers re-optimize. He studied this issue in the context of government counter-cyclical macro policy (i.e tax cuts during recessions) but the same point applies in the case of climate change. (my bold)

Let me explain;

Suppose it has always been 90 degrees in Phoenix in April but moving forward it will now be 105 degrees on average in Phoenix in April because of climate change. This is what I mean by a change in the Rules of the Game. The key stochastic process’ core parameters have changed. The climate scientists estimate such relationship using geocoded time series data. They spread their findings (through the New York Times and through wild bloggers such as Joe Romm).

Investors (those who invest in durable buildings, businesses, families) who live and work in a specific area such as Phoenix have strong incentives to take pro-active actions to reduce their exposure to hotter Aprils. They have thousands of adaptation strategies (and richer people have even more). One of the points I argue in Climatopolis is that induced innovation will take place because of Paul Revere style forecasts of hotter summers. Demand creates supply! I haven’t even mentioned government at the local, state or federal level. While many adaptation strategies are private goods (think of air conditioners), there are also public goods (sea walls, air cooling centers). If government changes its investments because of the new “Rules of the Game”, then the poor’s well being can improve in the face of a changing climate even if they can’t afford any of the private adaptation strategies. We are not passive victims here. The greatness of capitalism is that the set of alternatives we have to choose from keeps growing due to innovation and product differentiation. Each of these private and public goods helps us to individually and collective adapt.

As these changes takes place, the historical correlations between climate and economic losses are attenuated. This is why I don’t have much confidence in the predictions reported in the new Science Paper.

Summary

Alarmist blinders could not be more obvious. Their only solution is spending many trillions of dollars attempting to prevent future warming and climate change by reducing CO2 emissions (so-called “Mitigation”). The much more rational and time-honored policy of Adaptation would mean watching for changes and challenges to actually appear then mobilizing resources in response. But that would mean waiting because nothing is yet happening outside the normal range of temperatures and precipitation. Unacceptable to true believers.

Thus It Begins

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

Guest essay by David Archibald

Back in late April, European wine growers were hit by the most damaging frost since 1991. That frost affected vines as far south as Tuscany. More recently it is the western Corn Belt that has been affected by late Spring frost. The following two figures show damage to crops from frosts a few days ago:

Figure 1: Chickpea crop in Saskatchewan just north of the Montana border, 27^th June 2017 (image source Mike Foley, yellow is frost-killed dead plant material)

Figure 2: Frozen corn just east of McLaughlin, South Dakota, 27^th June, 2017

(image source Joel Bierman)

Figure 3: South Dakota Spring frost incidence 1974 – 2003

As Figure 3 shows, the majority of frosts for McLaughlin are usually over by mid-May.

Figure 4: U.S. Drought Monitor

Warmer is wetter and colder is drier. In a cooling climate there will be a concommitant reduction in moisture available.

Figure 5: Spring Wheat Futures

The reaction of the wheat market has been a 50% increase in price over two weeks. That has geopolitical implications, as shown by the following graphs.

Figure 6: Percentage of personal budget spent on food

This is a graphic made in 2010 using data from 2009. At 6.9 percent, the United States has the lowest percentage of disposable income spent on food of any major country and will be hardly affected. But most countries spend between a quarter and half their income on food. A rise in the budget allocation to food, driven by the prices of wheat and other grains, will result in a reduction in economic activity.

Figure 7: Imported grain and domestic grain production in the Middle East

The Middle East lost the ability to feed itself from its own production decades ago. Even countries as large as Egypt live a hand-to-mouth existance. Egypt recently sold off a couple of islands in the Red Sea to Saudi Arabia in return for Saudi funding of the Egyptian budget, and thus grain imports. On average, humans get about 48 percent of their calories from grains. Wheat, with the best amino acid profile of the major grain crops, is a near-complete foodstuff for those not allergic to it. Tunisia has wheat consumption of 80 percent of their calorific intake. We know from the raid on Bin Laden that his household visited the local bakery three times a day to buy bread. The wheat price rise has geopolitical implications.

Figure 8: F10.7 flux 2014 – 2017

Where to from here? Relative to the climate of the last century, an F10.7 flux above 100 causes warming and below that level causes cooling. As of today, the F10.7 flux is 71, not far above the activity floor of 64. Solar minimum is three years away and then we are likely to have at least two years of activity below 100 as activity rises into Solar Cycle 25. Thus some of the heat that built up in the second half of the 20^th century due to the highest solar activity in 8,000 years will have a chance to radiate into space. Late spring frosts will become more frequent.

David Archibald is the author of American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare

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

July 1, 2017 at 02:19PM