The science of climate change
In my early days of following Angry Bear, there was a climate change denialist troll whose handle was “CoRev.” Most of the stuff CoRev posted was standard denialist fare that had been debunked. At the time, one favorite denialist claim was the “hiatus,” a period between 2001 and 2014 during which warming seemed to “pause.” This, according to CoRev and like-minded denialists, was scientific evidence that climate change was a hoax. Part of the denialist schtick was to plot temperature data starting only a few years before 2001, exaggerating the apparent “pause.” In fact, if you plotted data starting in 1920, the pause appeared quite modest and a best-fit trend line starting in the 1970s supported the global warming hypothesis.
During this time, data emerged showing continued ocean temperatures increases and suggesting that the “missing” warming during the “hiatus” could be explained by heat storage in the world’s massive oceans.
Since 2014, two things happened: (1) the “hiatus” ended and global temperatures resumed their climb, and (2) CoRev disappeared. I don’t know whether CoRev changed its mind or simply bailed when the scientific evidence overwhelmed its denialist beliefs.
Talking Points Memo has an excellent piece on global warming data. Here’s a money quote:
“2015 became the warmest year on record, ending the hiatus, only to be surpassed by 2016, which remains the warmest calendar year so far in many records.
“A lot of year-to-year variability is associated with El Niño events. But it is more than that. Further analysis reveals that the Pacific decadal variability, sometimes referred to as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillation, resulted in changes in the amount of heat sequestered at various ocean depths.
“The Pacific Decadal Oscillation may be thought of as a northern-hemisphere version of the Inter-decadal Pacific Oscillation.
With the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, there were major changes in Pacific trade winds, sea-level pressure, sea level, rainfall and storm locations throughout the Pacific and Pacific-rim countries. These changes extended into the southern oceans and across the Arctic into the Atlantic.
“The effects are greatest in winter in each hemisphere. There is good but incomplete evidence that changes in winds alter ocean currents, ocean convection and overturning, resulting in changes in the amount of heat sequestered deep in the ocean during the negative phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.”
I won’t abuse the TMP copyright by posting the whole thing. Read the rest here:
Global temperature rises in steps
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
January 15, 2022
Atmospheric Concentration of Carbon Dioxide, 1960-2022
(Parts per million by volume)
1960 ( 316.91) (Low)
1961 ( 317.64)
1962 ( 318.45)
1963 ( 318.99)
1964 ( 319.62)
1965 ( 320.04)
1966 ( 321.37)
1967 ( 322.18)
1968 ( 323.05)
1969 ( 324.62)
1970 ( 325.68)
1971 ( 326.32)
1972 ( 327.46)
1973 ( 329.68)
1974 ( 330.19)
1975 ( 331.12)
1976 ( 332.03)
1977 ( 333.84)
1978 ( 335.41)
1979 ( 336.84)
1980 ( 338.76)
1981 ( 340.12)
1982 ( 341.48)
1983 ( 343.15)
1984 ( 344.87)
1985 ( 346.35)
1986 ( 347.61)
1987 ( 349.31)
1988 ( 351.69)
1989 ( 353.20)
1990 ( 354.45)
1991 ( 355.70)
1992 ( 356.54)
1993 ( 357.21)
1994 ( 358.96)
1995 ( 360.97)
1996 ( 362.74)
1997 ( 363.88)
1998 ( 366.84)
1999 ( 368.54)
2000 ( 369.71)
2001 ( 371.32)
2002 ( 373.45)
2003 ( 375.98)
2004 ( 377.70)
2005 ( 379.98)
2006 ( 382.09)
2007 ( 384.02)
2008 ( 385.83)
2009 ( 387.64)
2010 ( 390.10)
2011 ( 391.85)
2012 ( 394.06)
2013 ( 396.74)
2014 ( 398.81)
2015 ( 401.01)
2016 ( 404.41)
2017 ( 406.76)
2018 ( 408.72)
2019 ( 411.66)
2020 ( 414.24)
2021 ( 416.45)
2022 ( 418.56) (High)
amazing what one part per million per year can add up to over time. There is a snake in Australia (I think) whose venom is lethal at a concentration of 0.02 parts per million. I mention that because ther are people who think 400 parts per million concentration of CO2
in the atmosphere is too small to worry about. they get a big laugh out of us caring about it.)
Amazing what one part per million per year can add up to over time….
[ Fine comment. ]
If the James Hansen model can be taken from the reserve, how much small amounts matter will be completely clear. I posted the Hansen article 3 times with no success.
The last 8 years, since 2015, each and all, have been the warmest years globally since 1880. This year promises to add to these warmest of years, and will likely be near the very warmest ever recorded. The model of James Hansen and colleagues, and the beginning of an El Nino cycle this year explain what is happening.
The model of James Hansen has been posted, but has not appeared.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha00410c.html
December, 2008
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
By James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Robert Berner, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer and James C. Zachos
Abstract
Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~ 3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, * is ~ 6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, the planet being nearly ice-free until CO2 fell to 450 ± 100 ppm; barring prompt policy changes, that critical level will be passed, in the opposite direction, within decades. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm ** to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. *** An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects.
* Surface reflectivity of sun’s radiation
** Currently ~ 420 ppm: https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
*** Net change in radiant emittance or irradiance
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/climate/oceans-global-warming.html
June 15, 2023
Ocean Warmth Set a Record for May
By Delger Erdenesanaa
Temperatures are already breaking records this year: Last month was the warmest May for the world’s oceans since record-keeping began in 1850, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/19/marine-heatwave-uk-irish-coasts-threat-oysters-fish-high-temperatures
June 19, 2023
‘Unheard of’ marine heatwave off UK and Irish coasts poses serious threat
Sustained high temperatures over summer could trigger mass mortality of fish and oysters, say scientists
By Helena Horton – Guardian
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/climate/florida-ocean-temperatures-reefs.html
July 12, 2023
How Hot Is the Sea Off Florida Right Now? Think 90s Fahrenheit.
Researchers are recording ocean temperatures that pose severe risks to coral reefs and other marine life.
By Catrin Einhorn and Elena Shao
joel
coRev was also a firm believer that Social Security was going to bankrupt the economy. i argued with him, until i realized it was a waste of time…not so much in trying to convince him, but in trying to keep his ilk from convincing everyone.
Maybe the CoRevs scattered around aren’t that big of a problem. Bigger problem are the billions who probably think the chemistry and heat physics are likely accurate, but perceive several of the approaches advocated by some are really more negative to their lives and much more immediately so than gradual warming will be, specifically more expensive and less reliable energy or much denser residential patterns.
I have faith that our energy sources will move away from carbon, but maybe multiple decades behind goals discussed as 2035 targets. But if that happens, what does denser living do for you that isn’t already part of decision making? I’m okay not walking to the local bakery now, so probably will be 12 years from now (God willing, ha!). Dense living for people happy in the suburbs or even less dense places seems a tactic to survive a lower, but more expensive, energy lifestyle. But that won’t be necessary in 40 years, so why spend time and resources on it now? The window of time where it appears to be an important climate mitigation is going to prove narrow. Tangent, but range and recharge time are important considerations for me in going EV. Price also. Yesterday I read that having an EV in hot, sunny places is a problem since the heat degrades battery charge-holding significantly. “Always park in the shade”. Other advice included not charging above 80% and not using fast-chargers. I get it. I trickle-charge car batteries when needed. Still, seems to add even more caution to making a switch.
Eric
not meaning to be mean here, but your comment suggests that you and the vast majority of the people have the saeme problem with climate as they have with social security: an inability to tell the difference between important and not-important.
we are not going to solve the global warming problem without some cost and inconvenience which pale in significance when you know what not-solving it will cost…in money and life-changing “inconvenience.”
we the people will not change our ways without government leadership. today our government and the media are owned by people who believe (as in religion) in short term profits and don’t give a damn about your life, now or in the future.
Eric
i am not a fan of ev’s myself (as currently conceived replacement for overpowered and overused gas cars). and i hate city (apartment house) living myself. but there are peope who don’t mind it, and if neighbors could be taught to be civilized, learn to adapt to it.
meaning… i drive slower, less often, and less distance…an old car (saving embedded environmental cost), but i would rather live in a hut in the desert than live “closer to work.” i am hoping most people would prefer the city so i can have the desrt to myself.
point of this last is that we need to make some big changes (maybe i shouldn’t tell you that) that some of us won’t like, but may find better than the alternative. relying on big science and big technology to save us from having to DO anything is not going to work out well for us.
Coberly, just for kicks, what do 75 year SS forecasts look like if you throw in say 40 years of -30% per capita energy decreases?
Eric
I don’t believe the actuaries have considered that question. My guess is that we are going to need SS more than ever to help us get through climate related changes to the economy..either the fixes or the failure to fix… and the formula of workers paying part of their wages into a financial instrument that moves their money’s value into the future with minimum risk of loss…(the financial instrument is called Social Security) is the only way to do this, at least if the rube goldberg proposals so far advanced to “save social security” are any example of the alternatives.
Climate change deniers are joining the long list of species whose survival is threatened by worsening climate change impacts.
but, hey! if we are the last ones standing, we win. right?
Not quite ROTF, but at least LOL. Too near to truth for ROTF.
With any luck, no one alive today will be around when climate change does humanity in.
It’s a problem for ‘future humanity’ to deal with, should any be around to do so.
So, no worries, mates. Don’t worry. Be happy.
(This not how I personally feel about the issue.)
@Fred,
From what I’ve read, we can expect humanity to be engulfed in climate wars by 2050. If alive, I’ll be 95. I tremble for our children and grandchildren.
“With any luck, no one alive today will be around when climate change does humanity in.”
I should have said “no older person alive today”, because one might choose to worry about ones children & grandchildren if not ‘the human race’ or ‘the planet’ generally. We are mostly short-term thinkers, y’know.
Dobbs
even I think Joel will still be around, more power to him, hopefully collecting his social security.
unless, or course, climate change gets here (enough to do the job) sooner than you think.
but i’m glad you are thinking about the future. ha sounded to me like you expect to be among those standing on the fan tail of the Titanic singing Nearer My God To Thee.
Perhaps there will be another period of Dark Ages and we will begin again, somewhat wiser than before.
In Spielberg’s prophetic film ‘A.I.’, ‘based on the 1969 short story “Supertoys Last All Summer Long” by Brian Aldiss’ (Wikipedia), the closing scenes depict robots of the distant future poring over artifacts of ancient human civilization, such as it was.
I’ve always wondered if they will examine the remains of millions of derelict automobiles, find ancient videos of families ‘seeing the USA in their Chevrolets’ and wonder if the creatures pouring out of those wonderous wheeled creatures were attendants along for a ride.
See also David Macauley’s ‘Motel of the Mysteries’.