Subscribe: Comments for RealClimate
Preview: Comments for RealClimate

Comments for RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

Last Build Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:25:43 +0000


Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Andrew

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:25:43 +0000

Re: Tony #221 Obviously I can't speak for Dr. Mann, but (also obviously) he must be fully aware that we have blown past the 405ppm threshold. Hence, we will find ourselves in a situation of >2C average global warming compared to pre-industrial sometime around 2036, if Dr. Mann's estimate for ECS is roughly correct. And 1.5C should be reached around 2026, which is less than ten years from now. By then not only climate scientists, but I would think a large part of the global population will be fully aware of the dangerous consequences of global warming and the urgency of public policies to reduce carbon emissions - thanks in a large part to Dr. Mann, James Hansen and many other vocal figures in the climate science community. "Given that he thought, in 2014, that some parts of the world were already seeing dangerous impacts, what does he think now?" I am curious too, and would appreciate an "update" article by Dr. Mann. It's always good to know how deep a hole we have already dug ourselves in.

Comment on Why global emissions must peak by 2020 by Karsten V. Johansen

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 10:21:58 +0000

Sorry for some misspellings due to the fantastic AI in my smartphone software. Republican senators, not just one of them. And iranian forces.

Comment on Why global emissions must peak by 2020 by Karsten V. Johansen

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 10:14:40 +0000

Here comes news for the Paris"agreement" (it's not by any means binding if you didn't notice) optimists: "The world's biggest coal users — China, the United States and India — have boosted coal mining in 2017, in an abrupt departure from last year's record global decline for the heavily polluting fuel and a setback to efforts to rein in climate change emissions. Mining data reviewed by The Associated Press show that production through May is up by at least 121 million tons, or 6 percent, for the three countries compared to the same period last year. The change is most dramatic in the U.S., where coal mining rose 19 percent in the first five months of the year, according to U.S. Department of Energy data. Coal's fortunes had appeared to hit a new low less than two weeks ago, when British energy company BP reported that tonnage mined worldwide fell 6.5 percent in 2016, the largest drop on record. China and the U.S. accounted for almost all the decline, while India showed a slight increase. The reasons for this year's turnaround include policy shifts in China, changes in U.S. energy markets and India's continued push to provide electricity to more of its poor, industry experts said. President Donald Trump's role as coal's booster-in-chief in the U.S. has played at most a minor role, they said." We don't need any more silly optimism. We need James Hansen's carbon fee and dividend, as fast as possible. It's working in British Columbia. So where are you, sandernistas, Greens, climate scientists? Some Republican senator are in. I'm pretty sure more neomccarthyism and bombraids against syrian, Iranians and whatever forces won't save us from climate desaster. In fact it won't even save us from more trumpism, even if dressed as Clinton III or Bush III...

Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Thomas

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:42:05 +0000

Climate change label leads to climate science acceptance Date: June 21, 2017 Source: Cornell University "In a nationally representative survey, 74.4 percent of respondents identified as Republicans said they believed that climate change is really happening. But only 65.5 percent said they believed in global warming. In contrast, 94 percent of Democrats replied "yes" to both questions." Taking a broad brush avg number, the survey is suggesting a mean average of up to 80% of mainstream Americans agree/believe that global warming and climate change is really happening. This majority opinion / science based world view is not reflected across the media, online discussions, the WH or Congress. A mostly 'silent majority' maybe?

Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Mal Adapted

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 23:06:48 +0000

Our host:
even if there are a few days a year above 37 C web bulb, places (like the Ganges Valley) become uninhabitable
Yes, I don’t think this point is fully appreciated.
That ESRI site of Vinny's is nifty, and horrifying. Evidently, even under RCP4.5 (peak emissions in 2040), most of coastal and insular S and SE Asia and the wet tropics of Africa and the Americas will be practically uninhabitable by 2050. I don't know about all y'all, but I'm planning to still be alive in 2050. We are cursed, to live in such interesting times.

Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Alastair B. McDonald

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 22:22:44 +0000

In #215 barton wrote ABM 204: absorption only takes place in the boundary layer. BPL: Quantum mechanics stops working above the boundary layer? News to me. Good point, I should have written net absorption only takes place in the boundary layer. In other words, diurnal warming of the atmosphere which is the result of net absorption, does not occur above the boundary layer.

Comment on What do you need to know about climate? by Mal Adapted

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 20:34:51 +0000

There is this bizarre conceptualization on both Left and Right that “government” is some entity existing outside of the interactions of the citizens governed– kind of like God, I guess.
Upfront disclaimer: if I'm so smart, why aren't I rich? I can't claim it's only because I'm righteous, but I have my idiosyncratic standards; let's leave it at that 8^|. Moving on: IMHO z's 'bizarre conceptualization' is nevertheless accurate, depending on the details of 'interactions' and 'citizens governed'. For example: in recent years, annual profits to the fossil fuel industry were around $100G; about as much as the total wealth Charles Koch and his brother David currently control between them. The brothers Koch are today among the world's richest men, while I OTOH am not. I for one am skeptical a hypothetical God intervened in this state of affairs. Again IMHO, it's largely due to the 'freedom', afforded to generations of the Koch family and a few others by the US government and the 'free' global energy market, to privatize the benefits of the energy in fossil carbon while socializing the climate-change costs. Regardless, wealth on that scale is empowering, as RC regulars and other sadder but wiser adults know; and as Charles Koch, a shrewd businessman himself, most assuredly does. In a 2012 interview with ("The Capitalists' Tool"), he cautiously discussed his and his fellow fossil-fuel billionaires' strategy for using their wealth to reshape the American republic to their liking:
The goal has always been, Charles says, 'true democracy,' where people 'can run their own lives and choose what they want to buy, choose how to spend their money.'"
Heh. He would say that, wouldn't he? In any case, the anarcho-capitalists' investment strategy is evidently working: only a generation ago, even $1G of personal wealth was "beyond the dreams of avarice", and US voters still widely deplore the influence of money in politics as a national disgrace! So much that they keep voting, through their legislators, to make buying elections illegal, while bare pluralities of SCOTUS justices keep making it legal again. Although he's kept the law on his side so far, Charles Koch is still sensitive to public opinion. From the Forbes interview again:
Both Kochs [brothers Charles and David] innately understand that--unlike the populist appeal of their fellow midwestern billionaire Warren Buffett and his tax-the-rich advocacy--their message of pure, raw capitalism is a much tougher sell, even among capitalists.
Well, yes. Innate or otherwise, Charles Koch's willingness to be quoted as above in 2012 is more evidence for the success of his family's long-term investment strategy. Now, virtually open-ended political donations may legally be made by close-mouthed bagmen, while global mean surface temperature rises by 0.2 degrees per decade and fossil-fuel profits flow from a 'free market', untroubled by collective intervention to mitigate a Tragedy of the global climate Commons. Any questions?

Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Hank Roberts

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:11:40 +0000

and Lightning Hybrids' X-prize candidate "100 MPG hydraulic-biodiesel hybrid car ... Available in 2010" page is 404, saved at the Internet Archive. Alas.

Comment on What do you need to know about climate? by Alarmistsforbreakfast

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 15:47:49 +0000

Dan Miller says: 24 Jun 2017 at 3:53 PM He is a simpler explanation: Climate 101 1. It’s warming 2. It’s us 3. We’re sure 4. It’s bad Ok. I have a scientific, even simpler explanation. The earth surface temperature is equal to the absorbed solar irradiation which is received by the disc, pi*r^2, distributed over the hemisphere 2pi*r^2, absorbed in a volume of a sphere 4/3pi*r^3(atmosphere), absorbed in another volume 4/3pi*r^3(solid earth): 1/2(1361/(4/3)^2)=383W/m^2, 286.7K The effective temperature emission observed by space is found through heat transfer(radiative) and the inverse square law: (1361-383)/4=244W/m^2, 256K The tropopause temp is found via gravity: 4/3*g^2 Which can be used in a formulation of gauss law of gravity: 1361/(4/3)=(383+128)-4g^2-(4/3)g^2 I guess you missed the fact that gravity is a force that needs a source power, which happens to be equal to surface temperature: 4g^2 In gauss law of gravity you use surface flux instead of a point force in the center of mass. By the way, this model works to find surface temperature on mars and venus as well. Venus is kind of a trophy in this discussion, since the greenhouse theory failed to show any calculations in that case. [edit - you are free to post nonsense until it gets boring, but leave out the name-calling and pseudo-macho posturing]

Comment on Unforced Variations: June 2017 by Barton Levenson

Sat, 24 Jun 2017 23:02:17 +0000

For that matter, McGeorge Bundy was a JFK/LBJ administration staffer involved with the Viet Nam war.