The sun is the powerhouse; CO2 is its control knob. It is a complicated system, but none of its complications are going to ward off ACO2.
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by JCH
↧
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Tom Scharf
I think the phrase “bitter rationalization” might be appropriate here.
↧
Comment on Week in review by climatereason
Captain
Thanks for those additional graphs.
My aim is to chronicle as objectively as I can the likely CET temperatures from the current instrumental limit of 1659 back as far as can realistically can be done.
As you know my article ‘The long Slow thaw’ took us back to 1538.
As it happens there is a considerable amount of British related material for the period 1200 to 1400 AD which should encompass the downturn to the LIA. Material for the 15th century seems much less available.
Consequently I am concentrating on the 1200 to 1400 period which looks especially interesting due to the highly variable climate we can observe at times and the well recorded extreme events.
Whilst the cause of the downturn is, of course, interesting I don’t want to invent my own theories and then have to adjust my findings in order that everything dovetails neatly together.
There are quite enough people looking for causes on this blog without me adding to them.
However I have had this interesting conversation with Mr Gates about volcanoes a number of times and from the evidence on the ground it is difficult to see their long term effect. Which is not to say they have NO effect just that it doesn’t appear to last long.
tonyb
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Bob Ludwick
@ Fernando Leanme
“Building such a plant is a waste of resources.”
Au contraire. I think that when all is said and done, we will find that building such a plant proved to be HIGHLY effective in accomplishing its primary objective: transferring the wealth and resources from the people who earned them to the the self-licking ice cream cone consisting of politicians allocating the wealth and resources to their friends and political sycophants who conveniently started the companies to which the wealth and resources were allocated, followed by said friends and sycophants funneling a good portion of the allocated resources back to the politicians who allocated them via political contributions, speaking fees, book advances, ad infinitum. Oh, and Peter Lang explains that the ‘carbon footprint’ of said plant is probably larger than that of a gas or oil fired plant, because of the huge footprint generated during its construction.
Calling goat ropes like this a scam would be slandering old time, traditional scams.
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Jonathan Abbott
Mosher:
It doesn’t matter what you think, either. It will be up to the people in 100 years. But you brought it up, and I chipped in. That’s the way blog comments work.
Oh, and it also doesn’t matter a damn what Obama’s concept of his own identity is.
↧
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Bob Ludwick
@ Fernando Leanme
Re my comment about the progressive politician/green corporation self-licking ice cream cone:
↧
Comment on Week in review by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
tonyb, “Which is not to say they have NO effect just that it doesn’t appear to last long.”
As far as the CET, volcanic impacts would appear to not last long since the AMOC is a major source of energy and the initial radiative effect of volcanic sulfates is short term with respect to lower troposphere impact. I haven’t done it, but if you remove the AMO signal from CET you should get a better indication of volcanic influence in the longer term.
With the Sol y Vol I estimated a low long term “global” forcing which should require around 300 years for about 0.8C of ocean impact.
If you look at the CET/NH you should see a long slow thaw from around 1500, but for the ocean it would be a long slow recovery from around 1700. Basically, the oceans and AMOC are still warm enough to help thaw the NH and moderate CET.
I like your work, but CET similar to global, it isn’t a perfect global correlation. The IPWP appears to have a better “Global” correlation.
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Stephen Segrest
Jim2 — Could you also provide us your opinion on the billions of dollars provided (under the same DOE Loan Guarantee Program) to Georgia Power’s (and their Partners) Vogtle nuclear units?
↧
Comment on Week in review by beththeserf
Seems, Horatio, there are jest more interactive variables
in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in modellers’
climatology.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by climatereason
Captain
Many thanks for the information.
I am not sure that any matrix can be considered an exact proxy for the globe as the globe consists of many different climates and trying to average them all together as climate science tries to do just means we miss the nuances i.e some places might be cooling whilst others warm and vice versa.
CET appears to be a reasonable but by no means perfect global proxy and a better NH proxy with the caveats above.
This link leads to a global borehole temperature reconstruction to 1500 that was coordinated by the University of Michigan
http://www.earth.lsa.umich.edu/climate/core.html
Basically an upwards trend from 1500 can be observed. I contacted the author who confirmed the difficulties of smoothing and averaging etc and that he was more confident of reasonable accuracy if we looked at the graph from around 1700. Basically I would date the long slow thaw from 1700 which shows up in temperature reconstructions both borehole AND land.
The study was cited as ‘Huang, S., Pollack, H. N., and Shen, P.Y., 2000. Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures. Nature, 403: 756-758.’
R Gates posted this a few weeks ago and I don’t know if it follows your information.
‘ocean heat content covering 1257 volcano’
http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/31/bertrand-russells-10-commandments/#comment-643159
Definitely agree with the idea of a time lag as regards land/ocean temperatures. As you can see in the link the ocean temperature is still recovering from the LIA.
We really need to explain how the many warm and cold eras during the Holocene has occurred as co2 was not the trigger for them unless the ice cores are wrong. The modern warm period does not look extraordinary when looking at it in historical context
tonyb
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by Joshua
==> “I don’t know if Daniel describes all progressives but he does describe Michael and Joshua awfully well….”
No doubt., I ALWAYS view killing people as progress.
ALWAYS!
↧
Comment on Week in review by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
tonyb, “We really need to explain how the many warm and cold eras during the Holocene has occurred as co2 was not the trigger for them unless the ice cores are wrong.”
I doubt that anyone will be able to explain much that will be accepted by CO2 minions any time soon. There are a few new papers that are still paywalled to me that look into the polar seesaw and D-O events. Without being able to put a finger on “cause” there is generally a variety of small oscillations with periods of up to ~5000 years that can synchronize producing peaks or valleys of about +/- 1 C in the oceans. If you combine lots of reconstructions and smooth over say 100 years, you get a standard deviation of around 0.3 C which is about the same if you smooth the instrumental period over 100 years. Other than CO2 theory, there is nothing particularly unusual if you compare apples to apples. If you drop back to weather time frames of 30 years or less, there is so much noise you can get whatever you like.
To me that means that 0.8C +/-0.2 C per doubling is about all you can have any confidence it. That is mainly because with current technology there is no chance in hell there will be a major advance in ice sheets which really drive climate.
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by kim
Pig in a poke,
Vote, don’t tote,
It’s no joke,
Panels are rote.
=========
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by jhprince2014
Bundle up: it’s at or below freezing in all 50 states!http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WINTRY_WEATHER_50_STATES?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
↧
Comment on We are all confident idiots by jim2
Dave, I just wanted to add to our previous conversion about Chinese vs American culture that I worked for a Chinese woman with a PhD for a few years. I understand what you mean by the difference. I’ve worked with several Asians over the years.
On the AWG note, what is your take that warming by whatever means will be catastrophic and to what degree would warming have to occur to present a significant problem?
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by jim2
Stephen Segrest | November 18, 2014 at 10:36 pm |
Jim2, rls, Ragnaar, Others — In a context of only discussing the U.S. DOE Loan Program — I’m trying to figure out what principles you stand for.
…
What principles are you standing on when you approve of DOE Loan guarantees for nuclear?
***********
Stephen, you know, life is complex. I have to consider every situation on a case by case basis. Most issues are not black or white.
One of my main principle is for me to survive and thrive. Another, similar principle is for my country to survive and thrive. I value personal freedom, small government, and the Rule of Law, and that our politicians and judges interpret the Constitution strictly.
That’s not all of my principles, but hopefully, that will help.
So, bottom line, I feel nuclear will help me and my nation survive and thrive. I don’t have the same take on “renewables.” See, it’s really quite simple.
↧
Comment on We are all confident idiots by Joshua
Just so happens I was looking a the “top 20″ Ted talks while on the elliptical… and the 1rst two both had elements related to the “Americans BS too much” discussion.
Only a small part of either video relates directly – the upshot being that there is another side to Americans’ propensity for BSing that Dave doesn’t seem to recognize.
↧
↧
Comment on We are all confident idiots by Danny Thomas
Shoot. This is a test isn’t it? Uh……….yours?
“Whose sentences are the complexidiest of them all?” (Did I get it right? :)
↧
Comment on Climate/Energy Policy and the GOP Congress by David Springer
CO2 does next to nothing compared to water in all its forms. Earth is a water world and the sun is a water heater.
Write that down.
↧
Comment on We are all confident idiots by kim
Escritoire, Escritoire, on the Wall.
===============
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
