I dare say the 37C reading in Suffolk in 1808 is hard to verify, though there were a lot of high readings back in July of that year.
Still, if Heathrow can be a good indicator, I’ll believe a primitive thermometer under a tree in Suffolk, or the 38C+ recorded with Glaisher screen in Kent, July 1868…or anything you want me to believe. (Australia’s BoM never met a tarmac it didn’t like.)
Hey Laden, are you bored with beating up Revkin or are you just crusading against anyone who doesn’t fall into line? Is Obama really a denier?
For someone who does nothing but messaging, messaging doesn’t seem to be something you like. Perhaps you should evaluate what you do for a living.
But is there a basis for assuming circulation changes that would lead to a change in frequency or intensity of heat waves, wrt to increased GHG forcing?
Most heat waves appear to last one to two weeks over a relatively small portion of the earth fairly infrequently.
It is difficult for me to believe that relatively small variations imposed by RF would be significant, particularly compared with the large variations that occur, for example, from winter to summer anyway. Clearly it’s not just a matter of say pole to equator temperature gradient, because summer pole to equator temperature gradients have always been quite weak. I think the brevity, locality, and infrequency of heatwaves points to smaller scale variation, of which there may be an infinite variety in any RF regime.
Whereas on average during the summer
2003 the share of over‐65s deaths represents 79% of the total deaths in France, it reached 86.5% on
August 12th, i.e. an increase of 9.5%. The share of over‐75s deaths reached 73.1% on the same day, an
increase of 16.5%, and the share of the over‐85s deaths 41.2%, i.e. an increase of 26.8%. Lastly, the share
of over‐95s deaths reached 8.9% on August 12th, an increase of 46%. These distortions in the age
distribution of deaths become greater at older ages. This implies that the excess mortality varied
considerably with age and that it rose as the age increased
The kids went on holiday and left the elderly alone in their houses.
Generally speaking that’s where the fish are. Tributaries to rivers as from the hot springs are where you cast your line. Something about the transition line between the two.
When the Wall Street Journal asked the great and the good to name the most influential invention of the last millenium, those in more temperate climes were free to choose things like the internet, birth control, the printing press and other fripperies. Lee Yuan Kew got straight to the point, naming air conditioning. The authoritarian leader of Singapore understood that without air conditioning, those in tropical countries could not be as productive as those with more forgiving climes.
This is relevant to discussions about climate change. The United States currently uses more energy for air conditioning than all other countries combined. The U.S.consumes 185 billion kilowatt hours on air conditioning each year.
By 2050, half the world’s population will live in the tropics.
Currently the climate is one factor in keeping them poor.
However, they are getting richer. In 2010 China installed 50 million air conditioning units. This will help them improve productivity and get richer still.
Currently, the Konsensus has introduced a new line of argument into the climate debate. They have de-emphasized the focus on sensitivity of the atmosphere to a doubling of CO2 concentrations, probably because all the new studies show that sensitivity is far lower than the Konsensus has claimed. Now they are just saying we must leave fossil fuels in the ground. It’s about as content heavy as Nancy Reagan’s ‘Just Say No.’
If we leave fossil fuels in the ground we are leaving the tropics and half the world’s people trapped in a cycle of poverty.
I’m not saying ‘drill, baby, drill.’ If we can provide them with nuclear power, hydropower, wind and solar instead I am all in favor of it. But for those who think it is a viable alternative just to not provide the developing world with power you have nothing but my contempt.
It’s hot outside even without climate change.
Re the AAO, somewhere I spotted an article or presentation about a 300 yr oscillation in the Southern Ocean. At the recent Ringberg Workshop, Mojib Latif’s presentation also mentions Southern Ocean centennial variability
ML papers here.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967064514000320
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00281.1
The KCM does not fully address changes in wind forced gradients and (ocean forcing) the constraints to observations where the southern westerlies experiencing variability (and persistence ) greater then recent observations.
kcom1,
Hobby Lobby Inc. is a company and not a church but they (not the shareholders) sued the Government on religious grounds against AHC birth control policy. If a company can believe in a god we are in a very grey area. So yeah corporations are people in America.
South of Lake Erie, the path of the jet stream can make a 20 – 30F difference in temperatures, when it’s out of the gulf in the summer we have heat waves. Now for the last decade or so, there have been far more heat waves, than we had in the 60’s as I remember my childhood, in fact most cars and homes didn’t have air conditioning back then, now also all of them do. If there was a general large scale difference in the area bounded by the jet stream, that would make a significant difference in average temp.
We are aware of laddy laden’s style, willy. Propaganda. You got nothing better to do? Pathetic.
Ken – overwhelmingly most places and applications (industrial for sure) renewables cost more (needed back up makes it worse). If you assume that prices continue to drop-maybe renewables will be superior. (If the system is saddled with older costlier less efficient older renewable resources that will make it harder to have the lowest prices.). Some assume a continued linear drop in costs, which could get you there. Others (me included) suspect you will reach a point where the decrease in cost starts to flatten out such that it happens at a much lower rate and slows down over time. (Ie. Prices don’t linearly approach zero, but rather some other higher minimum cost.)
Oh certainly. For pure entertainment value the 1864 essay is a fun read as scientists of the time grappled things we take for granted today; i.e. one theory of the time that the sun may remain hot because of meteor strikes, fun stuff. Obviously our problem today is simply too many meteors hitting the sun:)
Big Al Gore is an expert on messaging and message parlors. He knows a good messaging campaign should have a happy ending.
It is amazing to think he was almost the POTUS, and some think he was cheated out of it!
Curious: There’s no proposed integration of wind with solar, where they complement. Also, the EIA LCOE is misrepresented, since the EIA segregates land wind turbines from ocean. Land wind turbines are far more cost effective than ocean, WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, and are comparable to the cheapest natural gas.
Fossil fuel costs here, for the most part, do not include NETWORK COSTS and costs of upstream emissions in addition to energy costs there. And the proposed and contemplated architecture for introducing and integrating wind into the energy system are simply a variant of the standard model, with no consideration given to a model which completely decentralizes energy generation, excluding central utilities, and taking advantage of local storage, smart grids, supplementary solar, and lateral sharing rather than vertical integration.
In short, this is a pancky defense of a world which is under assault by disruptive energy technology.
Go ahead. Pretend it can continue and try to get government entrenched in it. Eventually, the communities and counties and countries which do so will become non-competitive as a result, simply because renewables will provide energy to locales at costs below the network costs of distribution which they won’t need.
Planningengineer,
Some on this blog claim that the cost of solar is dropping exponentially. I believe them, so I’m going to wait until it goes to zero. Anyone who doesn’t believe that is a calculus denier!
I do wonder about the cost of labor…perhaps that goes to zero also…hmmm…I better go back and look at those deltas and epsilons again….
Click on the link, Don Don.
No need to thank me.
Hasn’t it dawned on any one that the 2015/16 El Nino reached a moderate El Nino threshold during May 2015. This is almost precisely 18.0 years after the 1997/98 El Nino reached a moderate El Nino threshold in May 1997.
2015.4 – 1997.4 = 18.0 years
Ring any bells? 18.0 years is the Saros cycle for the Moon. It is part of the 31/62 Perigee-Syzygy lunar cycle that synchronizes the lunar tidal cycles with the Earth’s seasons.
Of course they weren’t!
A winter night in Alaska is now hotter than a summer day used to be in Libya, didn’tcha know?
