+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 52
Latest: Carnesia
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 16222
Total Topics: 264
Most Online Today: 4
Most Online Ever: 201
(December 08, 2019, 11:34:38 pm)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Author Topic: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️  (Read 76062 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #150 on: November 30, 2014, 04:17:42 pm »

WHY do these humans insist on destroying our home? Don't they know its their home too?  ???

http://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/3/58.65/-158.91/ALL/satellite/loss,forestgain?begin=2001-01-01&end=2013-01-01&threshold=25
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #151 on: December 01, 2014, 04:04:54 pm »
Gas and Coal To Replace Hydropower in Brazil, Pollution to Follow  >:(

Brazil, the world’s cleanest energy user, is getting dirtier  :(.

 Vanessa Dezem, Bloomberg 
 December 01, 2014 

Sao Paolo, Brazil — The Brazilian government is seeking to award contracts in an auction tomorrow for natural gas- and coal-fueled power plants, reversing a drive that previously favored renewable-energy projects. It would lead to the first new thermal plants in three years, after the government scaled back such projects and awarded wind contracts starting in 2009 and solar energy earlier this year.

The government is seeking to award contracts in an auction tomorrow for natural gas- and coal-fueled power plants, reversing a drive that previously favored renewable-energy projects. It would lead to the first new thermal plants in three years, after the government scaled back such projects and awarded wind contracts starting in 2009 and solar energy earlier this year.

Thermal plants, which are faster and easier to build and open than wind or hydroelectric facilities, will be used as a stopgap to ensure energy supplies after the worst drought in eight decades dried up reservoirs at hydro-dams that produce 70 percent of Brazil’s power. Without the extra energy supplies, Brazil may be forced to ration power as soon as next year if the drought continues, said BNP Paribas SA and consultant Thymos Energia.

“Coal and gas plants can meet an urgent need,” Bernardo Bezerra, a manager at the Rio de Janeiro-based energy consultant PSR, said in an interview. “The big question mark is: Is it worth contracting an expensive source of energy for so many years, when you have cheaper and cleaner sources available like wind simply because of a short-term need?”

Energy ‘Security’  ::)

Brazil’s energy research and planning agency, known as EPE, says it is.

“It’s important for the security of the system that we have more thermal energy — it was because of thermal that we avoided rationing last year,” Jose Carlos de Miranda Farias, EPE director of electric energy research, said in a telephone interview from Brasilia. “We need to guarantee supplies to Brazilian consumers who refuse to deal with energy shortages of even half an hour.”

Using fossil fuels at a time of need highlights tensions facing Brazilian policy makers as they join United Nations talks next week aimed at limiting global warming. While envoys from 190 nations are pushing for an agreement in 2015 to limit fossil-fuel emissions, Brazil may need to boost emissions to stabilize its power market and meet growing demand.

Brazil, the biggest polluter in Latin America, had a 6.7 percent jump in carbon emissions last year, according to data from BP Plc. That was the fastest increase worldwide after Qatar, Colombia and the Philippines. A spokesman for Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy wasn’t immediately available to comment.

For the world to meet its goals of limiting global warming, Brazil would have to cut carbon emissions an average of 0.9 percent a year until 2040, the International Energy Agency estimates. Current government policies put Brazil on course for annual increases of 1.8 percent over that period, the Paris- based institution estimates.

Idled Plants

Brazil restarted all of its idled thermal-power plants to make up an energy shortfall as hydroelectric output plummeted. Use of the costlier energy source boosted electricity spot prices to records.

Wind and solar developers including Renova Energia SA and Enel Brasil Participacoes Ltda were the only companies to win contracts in the last auction on Oct. 31.

Wind will still play a big role in tomorrow’s A-5 auction — the renewable source accounts for about 14 gigawatts of installed capacity on offer, or almost half of the projects that qualified to bid. In Brazil’s energy auctions, the government sets a ceiling price and developers bid down the price at which they are willing to sell the power. The lowest bid wins the contract.

Big Shift

The big shift in this auction is that thermal plants come with the best terms. In an effort to lure more projects, the nation’s energy regulator raised the cap on thermal-electricity rates to 209 reais ($83.51) a megawatt-hour from an initial proposal of 197 reais. The new price is more than twice that of the last gas project that was awarded in 2011.

And unlike the auction held last month, when the first federal contract was awarded for solar plants, the government is grouping all the projects together. That means gas and coal plants will compete head-to-head with clean-energy producers.

“The pressure is no longer on cleaning up the energy mix in Brazil — we already have a clean mix,” Rafael Brandao, co- owner of Rio Alto Energia, a renewable-energy developer, said in an interview in Sao Paulo. “This is a good excuse to dirty up that mix.”

Water Levels

Electric grid operator ONS says water levels at Brazil’s most important dams are averaging just 15 percent of total capacity    , almost two months into Brazil’s rainy season. A year earlier, when the drought was starting, reservoirs were 41 percent full.

Tomorrow’s auction “is an intelligence test: Does the government understand that now is a good time to install more thermal-electric generation?” Joao Carlos de Oliveira Mello, president of consultant Thymos Energia, said in an interview at Bloomberg’s office in Sao Paulo. “Since 2009, we haven’t planned for any thermal-electricity. Brazil needs a cheap and stable thermal-electric complex.”

Copyright 2014 Bloomberg

A. G. Gelbert   December 1, 2014 

This is a huge mistake. The crisis of low rainfall should be accepted as a good reason to NOT build more hydro power projects that damage the biosphere and open up the current dams to normal biosphere friendly fish movements.

The shortfall in energy can be made up thus:

1. Install PV on rooftops to lower the electricity demand.

2. Massively subsidize Electric vehicle prices and put a large tax on internal combustion engine powered new vehicles.

3. Install GridBank super capictor/battery systems in giant PV arrays to provide power to homes, factories and vehicle charging stations at night.

4. Use the massive output of Brazil's ethanol production to generate electricity INSTEAD of fuel for cars and trucks.

The above is a permanent and sustainable solution, not a stopgap. It's time for governments to stop running around like chickens with their heads cut off. We know how to solve our energy problems. Only the unsustainable status quo is preventing us from doing that.

TINA to a Low Carbon Economy
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #152 on: December 03, 2014, 07:28:45 pm »


Quote
The Climate Change Concern Index—a composite measure that combines perceptions about whether climate change is a crisis and whether it will have adverse personal effects—finds that
nearly 3-in-10 (29%) Americans are highly concerned about climate change,
21% are somewhat concerned,
29% are somewhat unconcerned,
and 21% are very unconcerned.



Full article at link:

Wednesday, December 03, 2014
 
TODAY’S STUDY: HOW RELIGION INFLUENCES PERCEPTIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Quote
Believers, Sympathizers, & Skeptics – Why Americans are Conflicted about Climate Change, Environmental Policy, and Science; Findings from the PRRI/AAR Religion, Values, and Climate Change Survey

Robert P. Jones, Daniel Cox, Juhem Navarro-Rivera, November 2014 (Public Religion Research Institute and American Academy of Religion)

Executive Summary


The Importance of and Concerns about Climate Change


http://www.newenergynews.blogspot.com/


Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #153 on: December 06, 2014, 03:13:34 pm »


Stanford Report, December 4, 2014
Stanford's Precourt Institute and KQED launch new e-book series on climate change

The new four-part iBooks Textbook series, Clue into Climate, and an accompanying iTunes U course can be downloaded for free on iPad.

By Mark Shwartz

Clue into Climate, an interactive e-book series on climate change, is now available free of charge on iPad. The four-part iBooks Textbook series was produced by KQED, public media for Northern California, in partnership with Stanford's Precourt Institute for Energy and the University of California Museum of Paleontology.


e-book series cover art

'Clue into Climate' is a four-part e-book series on climate change. The free, interactive volumes are designed primarily for middle- and high-school students.

Primarily developed for middle- and high-school students, but also relevant for lifelong learners  , the series explores the causes of climate change, its impacts on freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems, and innovative strategies for curbing and adapting to change.

The four iBooks Textbooks and an accompanying free iTunes U course can be downloaded through the iBooks Store. Infographics, videos and other media from the series will be available on KQED's QUEST website on Dec. 12.

"Responding to climate change involves many thousands of conversations around the world," said Michael Mastrandrea, a co-director of science for Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "The KQED books put the science in clear, vibrant terms, inviting dialogue on risks in a changing climate and the opportunities for response."

Here is a summary of the four-book series:

•Clue into Climate: Causes of Change (29 pages) investigates what climate change is, and explores its causes and how scientists make projections about future changes. The book features animations and videos on greenhouse gases and the carbon cycle.

•Clue into Climate: Changing Water (33 pages) explains how climate change influences rainfall patterns and the loss of glaciers. This book examines preparations for these changes, and features animations and videos about the water cycle and the cryosphere.

•Clue into Climate: Changing Ecosystems (32 pages) explores the impact global warming will have on plant and animal species, and how an increased level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is impacting our forests and oceans. Highlights include interactive animations and videos about Arctic animals, ocean acidification and redwood trees.

•Clue into Climate: Facing Our Future (39 pages) shows how communities can prepare for and adapt to climate-related issues, such as sea-level rise, increased wildfires and impacts to agriculture. Through audio reports, interactive graphics and videos, the book also examines California's Cap-and-Trade Program and alternative energy sources, such as biofuels and solar power.


"From California's severe drought to the United Nation's recent warning that the world must phase out fossil fuels completely by 2100, climate issues are in the news more than ever," said Robin Mencher, director of education and media learning for KQED. "KQED's climate iBooks Textbooks for iPad couldn't have been published at a better time for educators and students. The books offer a real-life, media-rich experience, exploring what climate change looks like on the ground and what can be done to stem its effects."

Each book in the series features a career spotlight video, highlighting people working on climate change issues. 

The books also include opportunities for students to engage in discussion through a social media activity called Do Now , and to create and share their own media projects on climate-change topics.

The books and iTunes U course also align with the Next Generation Science Standards and Climate Literacy, a set of climate principles developed by scientists, educators and several federal agencies.

"Even though recent polls show that a majority of Americans now believe climate change is happening, climate change remains a controversial and divisive issue when it comes to policymaking," says Lisa White, director of education at the University of California Museum of Paleontology. "These new books offer a way for KQED's partners to bring relevant research to life, and promote greater access to information about climate and global environmental change in an easy-to-understand package for not only students but also the public."

Clue into Climate follows the release last June of the two-part e-book series, Energy, produced by KQED and Stanford's Precourt Institute for Energy. Volume 1, Energy: The Basics, investigates the nature of energy and energy resources. Volume 2, Energy: Use and Efficiency, explores how people use energy, from generating electricity to developing energy-efficient technologies. The Energy books and a companion iTunes U course can also be downloaded free of charge on iPad.

Clue into Climate is a project of KQED Science with support from KQED's Campaign 21. The series was developed by Andrea Aust, KQED science education manager, and produced by Lauren Farrar, KQED science interactive media producer, with contributions from KQED's David Pierce, Craig Miller and Molly Samuel.

Additional contributors to the iBooks Textbook series include Christopher Field, Robert Jackson, Katharine Mach, Michael Mastrandrea and Mark Shwartz from Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution at Stanford; Lisa White and Jessica Bean from the University of California Museum of Paleontology; and Minda Berbeco from the National Center for Science Education.

Media Contact

Mark Shwartz, Precourt Institute for Energy: (650) 723-9296, mshwartz@stanford.edu

Dan Stober, Stanford News Service: (650) 721-6965 dstober@stanford.edu

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/december/ebooks-climate-change-120414.html

Agelbert NOTE: The founder of the above institute, Dr. Franklin Orr, was just confirmed as Under Secretary for Science and Energy. So, hopefully, this will help the DOE get away from fossil and nuclear fuel nuttery. 


Dr. Franklin Orr Confirmed as Under Secretary for Science and Energy
December 4, 2014 - 10:10am

Stanford Report, December 5, 2014
Stanford Professor Lynn Orr confirmed as head of DOE science and energy research

After a yearlong delay, the U.S. Senate has confirmed Lynn Orr as under secretary for science and energy in the U.S. Department of Energy.


By Mark Shwartz


Franklin 'Lynn' Orr

Professor Franklin "Lynn" Orr, founding director of the Precourt Institute for Energy at Stanford University, has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate as under secretary for science and energy in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Orr was nominated by President Obama in November 2013 and approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in January 2014. The full Senate finally approved his nomination on a voice vote Thursday morning.

"The science and energy research supported by DOE is a critical component of the energy transitions that lie ahead,"
Orr said. "I am looking forward to starting work with Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and his team to tackle those challenges."

Orr, 67, will oversee all of the DOE's science research programs, including a majority of the DOE's national labs. This position is part of the department's recent reorganization, which expanded the role of the under secretary for science to encompass both science and energy.

Orr's role will include oversight of research in the Office of Science, the Office of Fossil Energy, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, the Office of Indian Energy and the Office of Technology Transfer Coordinator.

"Lynn Orr is an outstanding scientist and has successfully led a major multidisciplinary program on energy sources, technology and analysis at one of the top research universities," Moniz said. "This experience will serve him well as the DOE under secretary for science and energy. I look forward to working closely with Lynn to shape the nation's clean energy agenda, and to sustain American leadership in science. I thank the Senate for approving his nomination."

SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory at Stanford will be one of the national laboratories to reside within the new organizational unit.

Earlier this year, Orr stepped down from his post as the director of the Precourt Institute for Energy, which he had led since the institute was created in 2009. Prior to leading the Precourt Institute, Orr served as the founding director of the Global Climate and Energy Project at Stanford from 2002 to 2008.

Since 1985, Orr has been an associate professor and professor in Stanford's Department of Energy Resources Engineering (formerly the Department of Petroleum Engineering  ;D). He was dean of the School of Earth Sciences at Stanford from 1994 to 2002 and chairman of the Department of Petroleum Engineering from 1991 to 1994.  Orr held several other research positions from 1970 to 1985 in New Mexico, Texas and Washington, D.C. He received his BS from Stanford University and PhD from the University of Minnesota.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/december/orr-doe-appt-120514.html

IF Dr. Orr is not a pro fracking sleeper agent for big oil, this is good news for we-the-people. Despite his PETROLEUM PIGGERY credentials, the fact that his confirmation was delayed a year means he GETS IT in regard to climate change and the FACT that dirty energy is the CAUSE.






Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #154 on: December 06, 2014, 04:17:12 pm »
THERE HAS BEEN NO HIATUS FROM TEMPERATURE INCREASE, PERIOD!
Quote
Random  says:  4 Dec 2014 at 11:21 PM

 I’m actually a bit frustrated how those elaborate statistical discussions fail to communicate the basic point to the layman, that all the talk about the ‘hiatus’ is just a product of looking at the wrong metrics. I had much better results in discussions with ‘skeptics’ by just stating that the *global* mean does not make for a good metrics in a situation, when three of four values go up and one goes down. Just look at figure 6 on page 4 in Jim Hansen’s paper from early 2013: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2014/20140121_Temperature2013.pdf

Can anybody spot a ‘hiatus’? No? I certainly can’t. Temperatures rise consistently on the southern hemisphere in summer and winter. Temperatures rise consistently on the northern hemisphere in summer. There’s no ‘hiatus’. Only winter in the northern hemisphere has seen a decline in temperatures – which isn’t a ‘hiatus’ in my book either.

I think it would actually be better to put away fancy statistics in this case and to even not argue about the length of the period the ‘skeptics’ choose to look at – and just tell them, that the global mean was a poor choice of metrics in a situation where three indicators go up and one goes down. Because it suggests a ‘hiatus’ where clearly there isn’t one. That’s simple arithmetics that average people can understand. 

I’m not saying that the statistical argument was unimportant. I’m just saying that – instead of being frustrated by laymen and the media, who “just don’t get it” – we should simply tell a story of “you’re relying on the wrong calculation” that is much easier to understand.

I for my part had very good success in discussions with “skeptics” here – no one has been able to counter that one yet. They either went mum or evasive.    - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/recent-global-warming-trends-significant-or-paused-or-what/#sthash.3AgHgStk.dpuf


Recent global warming trends: significant or paused or what? 

Filed under: Climate Science Communicating Climate Instrumental Record Reporting on climate skeptics — stefan @ 4 December 2014



Fig. 1. Global temperature 1979 to present – monthly values (crosses), 12-months running mean (red line) and linear trend line with uncertainty (blue)

You clearly see a linear warming trend of 0.175 °C per decade, with confidence intervals of ±0.047 °C per decade.
That’s global warming – a measured fact.  - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/recent-global-warming-trends-significant-or-paused-or-what/#sthash.3AgHgStk.dpuf
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #155 on: December 08, 2014, 07:30:34 pm »
At Lima Talks, Nations Worst Hit by Global Warming Say Climate Aid Isn’t Charity, But Reparations 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RN6djR8_IgUE&feature=player_embedded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RN6djR8_IgU

http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/08/un-climate-summit-lima-peru/

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars    and conscience free crooks ,    they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!

Quote
We as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values… when machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”
-- Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #156 on: December 12, 2014, 02:16:14 pm »
The most popular deceptive  climate graph

Filed under: Climate Science
 Communicating Climate
 Instrumental Record
 skeptics
 Sun-earth connections
 — stefan @ 8 December 2014

The “World Climate Widget” from Tony Watts’ blog is probably the most popular deceptive image among climate “skeptics”.    We’ll take it under the microscope and show what it would look like when done properly.  So called “climate skeptics” deploy an arsenal of misleading graphics, with which the human influence on the climate can be down played (here are two other  examples deconstructed at Realclimate).  The image below is especially widespread.  It is displayed on many “climate skeptic” websites and is regularly updated.


The “World Climate Widget” of US “climate skeptic” Anthony Watts  with our explanations added.  The original can be found on Watts’ blog

What would a more honest display of temperature, CO2 and sunspots look like?

1. It is better to plot the surface air temperature.  That is what is relevant for us humans: we do not live up in the troposphere, nor do natural ecosystems, nor do we grow our food up there. By the way, the satellite-based tropospheric temperatures shown by Watts show almost the same climatic warming trend as those measured by weather stations near ground level (in both cases 0.16 C per decade over the last 30 years).  However, variability in the tropospheric data is considerably larger, especially because of higher sensitivity to El Nińo (as happened in 1998) and the solar cycle (we showed that in Foster and Rahmstorf ERL 2011 – when corrected for those factors the surface and troposphere data agree closely).  Because of increased noise, the trend is less obvious to the eye, especially if one shows monthly values which adds yet more noise.  Let us thus use the GISTEMP global annual temperature record from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Science (all surface data sets agree to better than 0.1 °C, see comparison graph).

2. One needs to scale the CO2 data correctly for an honest comparison with temperature, so that it can actually be used to evaluate climate scientists’ predictions of the CO2 effect.  You can calculate this with a complicated climate model, but one can also use a back-of-envelope estimate.  A CO2 increase from 280 to 400 ppm (equivalent to 2 Watts/meter2 radiative forcing) produces about 1 °C of global warming (at the time when 400 ppm is reached – some further warming will follow with delay). Thus, an increase of 100 ppm CO2 on the right hand side of the graph corresponds to a temperature increase of 0.8°C on the left hand side. That matches the IPCC’s estimate of the “transient climate response (TCR)” of ~2°C at the time of CO2 doubling (see Technical Summary of the IPCC WG1 report, p. 84). The TCR is smaller than the equilibrium climate sensitivity (about 3°C for doubled CO2) because it takes time to warm the oceans. The full equilibrium warming is thus only reached after a time delay. We are going to use the annual values from the famous CO2 measurements which began in 1958 on Mauna Loa in Hawaii.

3. And last but not least one should show honest sunspot data (annual time series), not just a snapshot of the number of spots on the sun today (which is completely uninformative for climate purposes – it’s apparently been added to the widget simply to insinuate an important role of the sun  ;)). Here also there is a question of the proper scaling (which is actually not that important because solar activity is cyclical and shows no significant trend over the period of the graph).  We will chose the scaling from the correlation analysis of Lean and Rind (2008) from which one can find a measurable effect on global temperature with an amplitude of 0.05°C.


When done this way the graph looks like this:


One of the readers of our German sister blog KlimaLounge, Bernd Herd, has programmed a widget for this graph so it can be added to any website at a size you like, automatically updated annually. 

The trends in the CO2 and temperature anomaly curves agree very well with each other.  This is surprising at first because CO2 is of course not the only factor that influences global temperature. There are two reasons for this agreement:

(1)  Of the other anthropogenic factors, some have a warming effect (other greenhouse gases such as methane) while others have a cooling effect (air pollution). These roughly balance in global average. The IPCC AR4 report found a radiative forcing of 1.7 W/m2 from the CO2 increase alone, while the total from all anthropogenic factors amounted to 1.6 W/m2.

(2)  Natural factors (volcanoes, solar cycle) influencing the trend are very small in comparison to anthropogenic CO2 (as e.g. standard correlation analyses show, see for example Lean and Rind 2008, Foster and Rahmstorf 2011). The IPCC AR5 found their contribution to global temperature change since 1951 to be in the range of −0.1°C to 0.1°C.

It requires quite some skill to produce a misleading graph like Watts’ global climate widget, which hides the actual connections between global temperature, CO2 and the sunspot cycle. Watts’ widget is quite a useful indicator though: whenever you see it on a website, you know they are trying to fool rather than inform you there.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/the-most-popular-deceptive-climate-graph/#sthash.gNUsKzLJ.dpuf
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #157 on: December 13, 2014, 04:21:08 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F-M6Ly3Jqw&feature=player_embedded
Tornado in Oklahoma Los Angeles, CALIFORNIA!  :o
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #158 on: December 16, 2014, 07:07:22 pm »
The mindset of a defender of a gradual transition to Renewable Energy while watching a documentary on climate change effects on the biosphere.

At least he is wearing the appropriate garb.  ;D
« Last Edit: December 16, 2014, 11:43:37 pm by AGelbert »
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #159 on: December 24, 2014, 07:30:30 pm »
Greenland's Ice Loss Now Comes from Surface  :o




SAN FRANCISCO — Greenland's disappearing ice shifted gears in the past decade, switching from shrinking glaciers to surface melting, researchers reported here last week at the American Geophysical Union's annual meeting.

Instead of losing ice where massive glaciers meet the sea, Greenland now sends meltwater rushing into the ocean via a vast network of lakes and rivers, according to several studies. The results do not mean that glaciers have stopped their speedy flow, only that surface melting now exerts a more powerful influence on ice loss, researchers said.

 "We no longer see giant icebergs calving" from glaciers, releasing ice into the sea, said Lora Koenig, a glaciologist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, who led one of the new studies. "The majority of water is coming from surface melt." [Photos: Under the Greenland Ice Sheet]

Koenig discovered that lakes in west Greenland now stay liquid through the frigid winter, as long as an insulating snow blanket keeps the water warm. These lakes get a head start on melting the next summer. "Water is not a good thing to have persisting year-round," Koenig said Dec. 15 at a news conference. "What this water is really doing is priming the pump [for melting] for the next season."

Full article:
http://news.yahoo.com/greenlands-ice-loss-now-comes-surface-141536542.html
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #160 on: December 27, 2014, 06:07:11 pm »
Quote

Carl Dalton   
 December 26, 2014 



SIMPLE FACT

The Total Solar Heat Input” into the Biosphere of the Planet
+
The Total unnaturally generated mega trillions of watts, of “Heat Output” into the Biosphere of the Planet
+
The factors that Climate Scientists have not as yet recognized

COMBINED

Is subject to the same;

Overall Greenhouse Effect

Climate Scientists and Climate Change Activists have been, and are so focussed on solar input and GHG emissions, as to being the source of global warming;

They have failed to realize, that it is;

“Hundreds of millions of years” of fossilized energy, being “Converted” into hundreds of quadrillions of watts of HEAT;

Over a mere

“Two to three centuries”

That is the major source of the problem;

And the fact that;

Energy may be converted, but energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Is the major cause of the problem.

Therefore it follows, that as this excess heat energy which has not been able to escape, has instead been sequestered (as potential energy) into the only rapid up/intake medium available, the planets salt water oceans.

To the point that four fifths of the Earth’s total surface area, has increased in temperature to a depth of 700 metres; “and only to this temperature and depth”, because a great deal of this excess heat is being carried away by the oceanic currents, towards the cooling polar icecaps.

And as the polar icecaps are simultaneously being bombarded, with “multi quadrillions” of infinitesimally small hydrocarbon pollutants (which has also caused high levels of cancer in the Inuit people, and caribou reindeer); which both absorb solar radiation and re-radiate it as heat into the ice below; so they are being melted from above, and from below.



Therefore given these additional factors, taken in conjunction with the masses of scientific evidence that serve to confirm/prove, that the globe is actually and factually overheating; it follows, that all of the future predictions that have been made in regard to the rapidity of climate change, are in deficit to a great degree.

And given this poor state of climate affairs + the sub cerebral vacuity, and hence intransigence of “The Incorporated Parasitic Mass” of fossil fuel merchants and their quisling politicians; I feel that there is but small hope, that humanity at large can be persuaded, or will be prompted to take decisive action; before either it is, or it is almost too late to save the living planet.

Just another nutcase?

It does not need a Rocket Scientist to realize;

If instead of a single 3 prop vertically mounted wind rotor; wind towers are constructed incorporating “multiple level” (magnetic levitated/100% wind power delivery) lateral wind driven rotors (as with those rotating heat extractors on building roof’s), to drive a central vertical axle.

The amount of torque = power = electricity, generated over the same area of ground as that of one current type 3 prop wind turbine; is only limited by the towers height, and the number of lateral rotors incorporated into the structure of the tower.

Unlike vertical prop rotors which injure and kill birdlife, lateral rotors can also be surrounded by wire mesh preventing this; and as turbines are underground there is no health risk from its electromagnetic field.

For methods to naturally/cleanly generate unlimited amounts of electricity refer to;

www.fromthecircletothesphere.com and click on the Global Overheating tab

The above fact filled comment was in regard to other comments in the Story below:

Norway Utility Plans to Invest as Much as $8.1 Billion in Renewables

 Alex Morales, Bloomberg 
 December 24, 2014

 http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/12/norway-utility-plans-to-invest-as-much-as-8-1-billion-in-renewables#comment-138754
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #161 on: December 28, 2014, 05:42:03 pm »
Pictorial metaphor:
Biosphere versus the 1% holding humanity hostage.

Nature doesn't just "bat last"; it BATS FIRST, in the MIDDLE, and LAST! Wall Street PUNKS "Lord of the Manor" thinking is an ABERRATION borne of arrogant, navel gazing, narcissistic MAGICAL THINKING.  8)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Nci-GVuHE&feature=player_embedded
Of course, the above scenario may sadly play out with BOTH the hostage and the bad guy getting offed...

Comfort loving, but stupid, thinking. 





Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #162 on: December 30, 2014, 12:44:25 am »
Pope Francis to Issue ‘Unprecedented’ Edict on Climate Change


 Dec 28, 2014


In 2015, Pope Francis is expected to address the issue of climate change to a U.N. general assembly and the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics, and call a summit on the threat of the world’s main religions.

Vatican insiders say Francis will meet other faith leaders and lobby politicians at the U.N. general assembly in New York in September, when countries are scheduled to agree on new anti-poverty and environmental goals.

The Guardian reports:


Urging all Catholics to take action on moral and scientific grounds, [a rare encyclical on climate change and human ecology] will be sent to the world’s 5,000 Catholic bishops and 400,000 priests, who will distribute it to parishioners.

… In recent months, the pope has argued for a radical new financial and economic system to avoid human inequality and ecological devastation. In October he told a meeting of Latin American and Asian landless peasants and other social movements: “An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it.

“The system continues unchanged, since what dominates are the dynamics of an economy and a finance that are lacking in ethics. It is no longer man who commands, but money. Cash commands.

"The monopolising of lands, deforestation, the appropriation of water, inadequate agro-toxics are some of the evils that tear man from the land of his birth. Climate change, the loss of biodiversity and deforestation are already showing their devastating effects in the great cataclysms we witness,” he said.

Observers expect Francis’ environmental radicalism to be resisted by Vatican conservatives and right-wing church circles, particularly in the United States.

Cardinal George Pell, for instance, is a former archbishop of Sydney who has been placed in charge of the Vatican’s budget and who has claimed that global warming has ended and that if carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere were doubled, “plants would love it.”

Dan Misleh, director of the Catholic climate covenant, said: “There will always be 5-10% of people who will take offense. They are very vocal and have political clout. This encyclical will threaten some people and bring joy to others. The arguments are around economics and science rather than morality.

“A papal encyclical is rare. It is among the highest levels of a pope’s authority. It will be 50 to 60 pages long; it’s a big deal. But there is a contingent of Catholics here who say he should not be getting involved in political issues, that he is outside his expertise.”

—Posted by Alexander Reed Kelly.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/pope_francis_to_issue_unprecedented_edict_on_climate_change_20141228
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #163 on: January 08, 2015, 10:21:49 pm »
Not Leaving Carbon in the Ground is a Death Sentence

Quote
A new study published in the journal Nature argues that most of the remaining fossil fuel reserves on our planet will need to be left in the ground if we want to have any chance at preventing catastrophic climate change. The scientists behind the research argue that most Canadian tar sands oil, all Arctic oil and gas, and most shale gas has to stay buried underground if we want to avoid the 2 degrees Celsius warming benchmark.

Christophe McGlade, the lead researcher on the study, told The Guardian that, “We’ve now got tangible figures of the quantities and locations of fossil fuels that should remain unused in trying to keep within the 2C temperature limit.”So, what are the quantities and locations of the fossil fuels that need to stay underground?  ???

Well, McGlade and his team found that 82% of coal reserves globally need to stay underground to save our planet. That includes 92% of coal reserves right here in the U.S.

As for gas, 49% of global gas reserves can’t be burned, which includes 100% of gas reserves in the Arctic, 61% of gas reserves in the Middle East, and 63% of gas reserves in China and India.


Finally, the researchers found that 33% of the world’s oil reserves must stay underground, including 38% of reserves in the Middle East, 85% of reserves in Canada, and 100% of oil reserves in the Arctic.

Basically, if we want to have any chance at saving our planet from the greatest threat it’s ever faced, we have to leave fossil fuels and the carbon that comes with them in the ground.
It’s that simple.

Unfortunately, countries and companies are still spending billions on oil and gas exploration. A report by Oil Change International and the Overseas Development Institute found that collectively, the G20 nations and companies within them, which includes the United States, are spending a staggering $88 billion per year on fossil fuel exploration subsides to Big Oil. The US alone spent a whopping $5.1 billion on oil and gas exploration subsidies to big energy companies in 2013 alone.



Full Article at link:  8)

 http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/01/why-carbon-should-be-left-ground#sthash.go4461DJ.dpuf
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33007
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️
« Reply #164 on: January 11, 2015, 02:54:57 pm »


Agelbert NOTE: the STERIC contribution to SLR (Sea Level Rise) is defined as the volume increase due to an increase in average ocean temperature, which reduces average seawater density (yeah, I had to look it up.  :-[).
Hey, I don't do this for a livin' ya know!

Diagnosing Causes of Sea Level Rise

Filed under: Climate Science
 Oceans
 — eric @ 8 January 2015

Guest post by Sarah G. Purkey and Gregory C. Johnson,
 University of Washington / NOAA


I solicited this post from colleagues at the University of Washington. I found their paper particularly interesting because it gets at the question of sea level rise from a combination of ocean altimetry and density (temperature + salinity) data. This kind of measurement and calculation has not really been possible — not at this level of detail — until quite recently. A key finding is that one can reconcile various different estimates of the contributions to observed sea level rise only if the significant warming of the deep ocean is accounted for.    There was a good write-up in The Guardian back when the paper came out.– Eric Steig

Sea leave rise reveals a lot about our changing climate. 

A rise in the mean sea level can be caused by decreases in ocean density, mostly reflecting an increase in ocean temperature — this is steric sea level rise.

It can also be caused by an increase in ocean mass, reflecting a gain of fresh water from land.

A third, and smaller, contribution to mean sea level is from glacial isostatic adjustment. The contribution of glacial isostatic adjustment, while small, has a range of possible values and can be a significant source of uncertainty in sea level budgets. Over recent decades, very roughly half of the observed mean sea level rise is owing to changes in ocean density with the other half owing to the increased in ocean mass, mostly from melting glaciers and polar ice sheets. The exact proportion has been difficult to pin down with great certainty.

Knowing the proportion of sea level rise (SLR) owing to mass addition
versus thermal expansion is not only important for quantifying total SLR. Each component also imparts information about the effects of climate change. First, the ocean absorbs over 90% of the excess heat from greenhouse gas forcing.

In order to monitor and model global warming accurately, we need to know where and how much heat is entering the ocean, and which is directly (although nonlinearly) related to steric SLR.

Sea level rise (SLR) is an important consequence of climate change, and quantifying rates of melting of land ice, including contributions from the massive Greenland and West Antarctica ice sheets is vital to understanding sea level rise. Knowing local rates of past SLR and what is driving those rates will help to improve global and local projections of SLR that are essential for informing adaptation strategies in coastal communities.

Over the past two decades, revolutionary advances in the global ocean observing system have made it possible to estimate the relative contributions of mass and thermal expansion with increasing certainty.

Since 1992
satellite altimetry has provided high-resolution measurements of sea surface height. These data are used to estimate local and global sea level variations.

Since 2002, monthly large-scale variations in ocean mass have been estimated using data from the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE), twin orbiting satellites capable of measuring very small changes in Earth’s gravitational field. GRACE data can be used to estimate variations in ocean mass either by measuring changes in gravity over the ocean or by measuring glacial retreat, melting of polar ice sheets, and changes in terrestrial reservoir storage.

Finally, starting around 2005 the international Argo Program’s array of autonomous profiling floats first achieved sparse near-global coverage, allowing estimates of steric sea level changes in the upper half of the ocean using in situ measurements of ocean temperature and salinity. Thus, since around 2005, satellite and in situ observation systems have allowed for direct estimates of the total change in SLR, that owing to changes in ocean mass, and that owing to temperature (and to a lesser extent salinity) changes in the upper half of the ocean volume.

Agelbert NOTE: This is REALLY important! Why? Because, since 2005, there is NO ROOM FOR ARGUMENT from those that DON'T DO THE MATH! These are not "models"; these are scientific instruments ACCURATELY measuring the real world. This is the kind of data that cannot be refuted with mathematician statistical fun and games. It also offers mathematicians in general, and climate scientists in particular, some HEAVY DUTY ammunition  to counter climate denier propaganda.

With these revolutionary developments in ocean observation, many researchers have been asking some obvious, but very important, questions. Does the total sea level change equal the sum of heating and mass changes within estimated instrumental error? If not, which measurement systems might be biased or incomplete? Is neglect of a deep steric contribution preventing the budget from closing?

In situ data deeper than the current 2000 m Argo sampling limit are the best way to address some of these questions. In the 1990s, for these purposes and others, international investigators working on the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (GO-SHIP) began to repeat a subset of these sections at decadal intervals.

With the first decadal re-survey recently completed, we have investigated changes in deep ocean temperature and salinity in the bottom half of the ocean volume, around the globe between the 1990s and the 2000s. In our most their paper, we combine these full depth measurements of ocean steric changes with satellite sea-surface height data to evaluate the SLR budget, including any deep steric expansion, and make an estimate of the global ocean mass changes independent of GRACE data.

First, we interpolate satellite sea surface height data to the times and locations of these repeat sections to look at the total sea-surface height changes between repeats. We then calculate the difference of this total sea-level change and the full-depth steric changes from the repeat section salinity and temperature data. The result is the change in ocean mass between section occupations.  ;D


Figure 1: Mean ocean mass sea level rise (mm per year) in within each boundary (black lines) calculated using all full depth data available (gray lines). From their paper.

Despite the very limited spatial coverage compared to Argo (Fig. 1), this method allows for statistically significant global average and seven regional averages of ocean mass trends because ocean mass variations in most ocean regions are comparatively large in spatial scale since small-scale mass fluctuations are very quickly evened out by ocean surface gravity waves. Most small-scale variability in local sea level is related to steric changes that are captured in the steric SLR integration and removed from the total. Globally, our mass trend estimate, centered on 1996–2006, is 1.5 mm per year, with large spatial variability.

Our GRACE estimate of SLR trend (from an averaging kernel) is also 1.5 mm per year for 2003–2013, although this method may produce a slight underestimate of the actual trend. Nonetheless, the results from the two independent methods agree well within their uncertainties (both 0.4 mm per year), despite the fact that these two different decadal estimates only have 3 years of overlap. Furthermore, the spatial variability among the seven regions also shows good agreement, with most falling within error bars of each other.

Both methods find that the South Atlantic and North Pacific are gaining mass the fastest, while the North Atlantic and Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean are either gaining little or no mass (Fig. 1). This regional variability in ocean mass trends can be attributed to a number of factors.

In the North Pacific, the more rapid ocean mass addition has been attributed to large-scale changes in wind patterns over the ocean that affects the wind driven ocean circulation. These circulation changes will be reflected in sea surface topography, which is in part a reflection of shifts of mass from one region to another.

The relatively large mass gain in the South Atlantic is most likely also attributed to local changes in wind stress, possibly affecting the Weddell Gyre or the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.

The two regions with the smallest rates of mass increase are adjacent to Greenland or West Antarctica. These ice sheets are losing mass due to melt, thus losing some of their gravitational attraction, and causing an observable local decrease in sea level there as these waters are redistributed elsewhere.

Because we are using full-depth steric data, we can estimate the contribution of deep ocean warming (hence expansion) to the sea level rise. If deep-ocean warming below 2000 m is ignored, it introduces 13% error into the estimate of the global ocean mass trend. Furthermore, if ocean warming below 1000 m is ignored, the ocean mass trend estimate using our method no longer agrees with that from GRACE within error bars.  8)

This work highlights the importance of the deep ocean warming contribution to SLR. At the moment, the best direct estimates of these changes are using the spatially and temporally sparse but high quality and full-depth WOCE and GO-SHIP data sets to get basin-scale and global trends over decadal time-scales. To estimate regional evolution of deep-ocean warming and its contribution to SLR over shorter space and time scales requires an improved deep monitoring system.

Currently, prototype profiling floats capable of measuring temperature and salinity all the way to 6000 m are being tested for a Deep Argo array    (Figure 2). If enough of these floats are deployed, this new Deep Argo array, capable of measuring all but about 2% of the entire ocean volume, together with the current 0–2000 m Argo array, would allow for continuous monitoring of full-depth ocean heat uptake and hence steric sea level rise, both regionally and globally.


Figure 2. Deep Argo Float (a SOLO model from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography) being deployed from the R/V Tangaroa in the deep Southwest Pacific Basin in June 2014. Photo: LEARNZ  www.learnz.org.nz part of CORE Education www.core‐ed.org

References

1. S.G. Purkey, G.C. Johnson, and D.P. Chambers, "Relative contributions of ocean mass and deep steric changes to sea level rise between 1993 and 2013", Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, vol. 119, pp. 7509-7522, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2014JC010180

2. I. Joughin, B.E. Smith, and B. Medley, "Marine Ice Sheet Collapse Potentially Under Way for the Thwaites Glacier Basin, West Antarctica", Science, vol. 344, pp. 735-738, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1249055

3. W. Llovel, J.K. Willis, F.W. Landerer, and I. Fukumori, "Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade", Nature Climate change, vol. 4, pp. 1031-1035, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2387

4. K.E. Trenberth, J.T. Fasullo, and M.A. Balmaseda, "Earth’s Energy Imbalance", Journal of Climate, vol. 27, pp.
3129-3144, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00294.1

5. D.P. Chambers, and J.K. Willis, "Analysis of large-scale ocean bottom pressure variability in the North Pacific", J. Geophys. Res., vol. 113, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JC004930

6. J. Bamber, and R. Riva, "The sea level fingerprint of recent ice mass fluxes", The Cryosphere, vol. 4, pp. 621-627, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-621-2010

Article with all links to papers and studies:   http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/01/diagnosing-causes-of-sea-level-rise/#sthash.Vqc9Qfvx.dpuf
Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
For the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them. Pr. 22:22-23

 

+-Recent Topics

Experts Knew a Pandemic Was Coming. Here’s What They’re Worried About Next. by Surly1
May 12, 2020, 07:46:22 am

Doomstead Diner Daily by Surly1
May 12, 2020, 07:40:17 am

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 11:47:35 pm

Money by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 11:27:30 pm

Creeping Police State by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 10:35:38 pm

COVID-19 🏴☠️ Pandemic by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 10:19:30 pm

Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 10:07:28 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 09:54:48 pm

🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️ by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 09:10:24 pm

Intelligent Design by AGelbert
May 09, 2020, 06:38:41 pm