Comment on UK floods in context by Alexander Biggs

February 11, 2014, 2:41 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by manacker

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

$

0

0

It is good to see how through the UK Met. Office has analyzed the recent UK floods, and also shows how poor our attempts to predict climate, using mathematical models, are. Obviously the IPCC models upon which we depend need to be checked against rainfall in Indonesia and the western Pacific..

Asa scientist it is gratifying to see the recognition that climate prediction is indeed a global problem. I have little doubt that the current very hot summer we are experiencing in Australia is linked to the exceptionally cold and wet winter in the N. hemisphere.

---

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by manacker

February 11, 2014, 2:45 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

≪ Previous: Comment on UK floods in context by Alexander Biggs

$

0

0

Peter Lang There are two proposals here: 1. The Hansen et al. proposal is to forcibly shut down and scrap all <em>existing</em> coal-fired power plants in the USA by 2030, replacing them with non-fossil fuel (best alternate = nuclear) stations. This requires additional investment not otherwise required, in order to build and commission the new plants and scrap the old ones (that do not need to be shut down). This is the alternate I was talking about, which I have called "hare-brained" (0.08C impact by 2100 at a new investment cost of $1.5 trillion before 2030). 2. A second proposal (made by you and others) to replace all planned <em>future</em> coal-fired plants <em>globally</em> with nuclear plants, starting ASAP (by simplifying the regulatory process, shortening project lead times, etc. etc.) This alternate could make sense, as there is no added incremental investment or cost required (nuclear can inherently compete with coal, once the regulatory hurdles are removed). This proposal would also have a greater theoretical temperature impact by 2100 of around 0.6C. The problem here is political, as many nations are still frightened of nuclear power. Hope this clears it up. Max

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

February 11, 2014, 2:47 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by manacker

$

0

0

Roger A. Pielke Sr.

I’ve been asking this question, but have received no serious replies. That suggests the answer is “No, no one has attempted to address that question”

Probability that mitigation policies would succeed

Can anyone point to any authoritative analyses that evaluate the probability that the mitigation policies proposed by their advocates would succeed in delivering the claimed benefits?

The question is about the probability of success in the real world given the real world diplomacy, trade, conflict, international and domestics economics and politics, etc.

The expected benefits must be clearly specified in terms of climate damages avoided. They must be measurable benefits (of climate damages avoided) and the dates by which those benefits would be realised.

Some examples of subordinate questions that may help to understand what is involved in answering the primary question above are
(I’ve used Australia’s ETS as an example but the questions can be applied to all the advocated mitigation policies):

1. How much would Australia’s ETS change sea levels by 2050 and by 2100? Provide the answer in units of length, with mean, standard deviation

2. How much would Australia’s ETS, if it lasted, change global average surface temperature? Answer in units of temperature with mean, standard deviation.

3. How much would it change the productivity of the land? Answer in $ of change to GDP, with mean, standard deviation and probability distribution.

4. What is the probability distribution of climate damages avoided if the ETS lasted to 2100? Answer in real 2013 dollars, with mean, standard deviation.

5. What is the probability that the ETS would last to 2100?

6. What is the probability that the world will implement Australia’s ETS?

7. What is the probability that the world will implement any global ETS?

8. What is the probability that a global ETS will survive for 100 years?

9. What is the probability a global ETS, if implemented, would be maintained for 100 years with high participation rate (e.g. at least 80% of all GHG emissions from all man caused sources from all sectors of all economies in all countries of the world)?

My submission to the Australian Senate hearings on Repeal of the Carbon Tax Legislation may be of interest (Submission No.2 here: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/Clean_Energy_Legislation/Submissions

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

February 11, 2014, 2:51 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

$

0

0

We’ve got a twofer and a great future, really. Fossil fuels with mildly beneficial warming and great beneficial biome stimulation, with nuclear for back-up if necessary, and if fears of it are unfounded or overshadowed.

Naw, saddle up in fear, loose frothing bits of guilt.
===================

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

February 11, 2014, 3:02 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

$

0

0

I blame the bad jokes on the machine from which they’re read to me. It’s like waiting for go.dotEquilibrium. Thresholds shift constantly and are determinably, interminably, value laden. Phase changes do seem exceptional to this general rule.
========================

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

February 11, 2014, 3:05 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by kim

$

0

0

Manacker,

Thanks. I now understand what your $1.5 trillion refers to.

However, I think the figure should be between $690 billion and $1.5 trillion even for replacement by 2030, because the $1.5 trillion does not take into account that many of the coal plants will have to be replaced by new plants by 2030 anyway. In fact nearly half will be retired and replaced by the cheapest/best alternative in that time anyway. Much of it will be coal since the infrastructure is in place and the world is now turning back to coal. So the cost to replace the roughly half the coal plants with nuclear by 2030 should be the cost difference between least-cost new fossil fuel and new nuclear.

Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

February 11, 2014, 3:09 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

$

0

0

Manacker,

I also understand the reality that to replace the entire coal fleet with nuclear by 2030 is unrealistic, pie in the sky stuff, and demonstrates a lack of understanding of real world large scale projects, funding, etc. James Hansen should stick to what he knows (from is PhD) modeling Venus’ atmosphere.

Comment on Week in review by David Springer

February 11, 2014, 3:12 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Mi Cro

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop on Climate Science Needed to Support Robust Adaptation Decisions by Peter Lang

$

0

0

I might also mention that the earth’s global ocean is more or less isothermal at the bottom pole to equator 24/7 365 days a year just like Venus’ 90 bar troposphere. That’s not a coincidence IMO.

---

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Mi Cro

February 12, 2014, 1:28 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by john vonderlin

≪ Previous: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

$

0

0

Another disbeliever in the free market.

I don’t believe it’s that simple Steve. They only have to match the risk / perceived risk of their competitors. Even if they believe in the risk, it doesn’t make them right, and they’ll still make a lot of money.

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by john vonderlin

February 12, 2014, 1:30 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK floods in context by Agnostic

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Mi Cro

$

0

0

This overview of historical hail damage trends in the U.S. gives insight into how insurance companies can manipulate the system. http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/socasp/weather1/changnon.html

Comment on UK floods in context by Agnostic

February 12, 2014, 1:40 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK floods in context by R. Gates, Skeptical Warmist

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by john vonderlin

$

0

0

I had not thought from reading other comments of yours that you doubt the physics’ argument that there is a GHE of ACO2.

No I do not doubt it, but at the moment the evidence (ie the lack of warming) suggests that natural variability overwhelms it, that the climates sensitivity is much lower than is required for alarm or drastic action to mitigate.

If that is the case, and I do mean “if”, then society would be much better focussing its resources both financial and intellectual on adaptation to whatever changes may occur to the climate and on better understanding it without the over confidence, hubris, name-calling, and hand-wringing.

Comment on UK floods in context by R. Gates, Skeptical Warmist

February 12, 2014, 1:51 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Bill Norton

≪ Previous: Comment on UK floods in context by Agnostic

$

0

0

Equating the very low thermal inertia sensible tropospheric heat with “no warming” in the whole system is incorrect. The fluctuations in sensible heat in the troposphere are highly dependent on ENSO over the short-term. The correct view when discussing “no warming” in the whole system is to actually look at the whole system, or be clear that you mean no increases in sensible tropospheric heat over a certain period. Sensible tropospheric heat can be a proxy for energy gains or losses in the system, but over shorter periods it is an exceptionally poor proxy.

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Bill Norton

February 12, 2014, 1:52 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

≪ Previous: Comment on UK floods in context by R. Gates, Skeptical Warmist

$

0

0

J. C. comment.
“Koch remarked that uncertainty about the magnitude of climate change ended up being a relatively minor factor in decisions related to investing in individual water projects, as other factors dominated the decision making rationale.”

This is a more telling comment than most people realize. Coke and many other corporations are excellent at paying homage to popular political agendas, but when it comes to making decisions, they rely on hard data. For project siting and design, building codes and historical information hold sway. In design meetings, I have never had big clients or insurance companies mention anything about climate change.

One might think the agencies that create storm intensity curves consider future impacts of climate change. I have tried to determine if they do, but all I can find is that they pay lip service to climate change, and then continue to rely solely on historical data.

If anyone knows differently, I would like to hear about it.

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

February 12, 2014, 1:54 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Bill Norton

$

0

0

Thanks, Bob. Perhaps you’re right after all.

Comment on Week in review by David Springer

February 12, 2014, 1:54 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK floods in context by Robert I Ellison

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

$

0

0

AK it was 12 days ago you left the instructions and I didn't see them because you put them out of order a day after the fact between two comments I'd already read (see below). I stumbled upon it after using the auto subscription service and noting that comments delivered to email address still had reply button even though already at deepest nesting. I posted the URL that the button launched to Brandon and Brandon said hey I bet you can just modify a URL and that's all it takes. So I tried it and that was all it takes. Then I had a bit of fun with it. *shrugs* <blockquote> Joshua | January 30, 2014 at 7:04 pm | What I find curious is that a few other commenters seem to have the knack. AK | January 31, 2014 at 9:03 am | I do it now and then, although usually to keep somebody else from inserting something between my comment and the one I’m answering. Here’s how I do it, using Firefox: Don Monfort | January 30, 2014 at 7:08 pm | You are upset and confused, springy. Your victory was confirmed by an impartial </blockquote>

---

Comment on UK floods in context by Robert I Ellison

February 12, 2014, 1:56 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Les Johnson

≪ Previous: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

$

0

0

I know what it is now. It is the salt content in the Law Dome ice core. This is a high resolution millennial ENSO proxy.

see – http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00003.1?journalCode=clim

Top down modulation of climate is the result of this UV/ozone interaction – as discussed in any of the papers linked to directly.

Abrupt changes are the result of internal feedbacks in the climate system itself – as suggested in the NAS quote – and covered fully in the link and others I have provided.

It is hard to believe that such a comprehensive misdirection is not deliberate for obscure purposes of your own. We have been through this before – you ask questions and then complain that I don’t answer them satisfactorily. You treat my answers as an excuse for arm waving that the papers I link to in greater and greater numbers don’t support either top down modulation or abrupt change in this instance. You just need to look at the titles to realize that this is not so.

We will let the reader decide who is acting in good faith shall we?

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Les Johnson

February 12, 2014, 1:58 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

≪ Previous: Comment on UK floods in context by Robert I Ellison

$

0

0

Bill: Business as a whole has AGW low on its list of concerns.

Lloyds survey of business leaders showed that climate change ranked 32 out of 50, as a business concern.

http://www.lloyds.com/~/media/Files/News%20and%20Insight/Risk%20Insight/Risk%20Index%202013/Report/Lloyds%20Risk%20Index%202013report100713.pdf

Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

February 12, 2014, 2:07 pm

≫ Next: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Les Johnson

$

0

0

“Your advice to form a firm and compete with the giant insurers is quite daft.”

I’ve seen evidence of business related naivete in Mosher several times despite the fact that he’s obviously quite a bright fellow. I have no idea as to his background but I assume he’s an academic who’s not been in business for himself for any extended period, which inevitably supplies valuable insights into the ways of the world.

The climate debate interests me, as do politics, from the point of view of personality and temperament. It seems to me after hanging around these blogs for 5 or 6 years now, that warmists tend to be quite naive in certain areas, which permits a kind of idealism not shared by skeptics.

Comment on Week in review by David Springer

February 12, 2014, 2:08 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK floods in context by Robert I Ellison

≪ Previous: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by pokerguy (aka al neipris)

$

0

0

Do you have a link to how the troposphere temperature of Uranus was obtained? There was a flyby of Uranus in 1973 by Voyager 2 but other than that nada so it isn’t a direct observation. You just made up the data again right?

Comment on UK floods in context by Robert I Ellison

February 12, 2014, 2:08 pm

≫ Next: Comment on UK-US Workshop Part II: Perspectives from the private sector on climate adaptation by Les Johnson

≪ Previous: Comment on Week in review by David Springer

$

0

0

‘This non-equilibrium behavior is due to a combination of nonlinear and random effects. We give here a unified treatment of such effects from the point of view of the theory of dynamical systems and of their bifurcations. Energy balance models are used to illustrate multiple equilibria, while
multi-decadal oscillations in the thermohaline circulation illustrate the transition from steady states to periodic behavior. Random effects are introduced in the setting of random dynamical systems, which permit a unified treatment of both nonlinearity and stochasticity. The combined treatment of nonlinear and random effects is applied to a stochastically perturbed version of the classical Lorenz convection model.

Climate sensitivity is then defined mathematically as the derivative of an appropriate functional or other function of the systems state with respect to the bifurcation parameter. This definition is illustrated by using numerical results for a model of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation.’
http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/tcd/PREPRINTS/Math_clim-Taipei-M_Ghil_vf.pdf

‘Researchers first became intrigued by abrupt climate change when they discovered striking evidence of large, abrupt, and widespread changes preserved in paleoclimatic archives. Interpretation of such proxy records of climate—for example, using tree rings to judge occurrence of droughts or gas bubbles in ice cores to study the atmosphere at the time the bubbles were trapped—is a well-established science that has grown much in recent years. This chapter summarizes techniques for studying paleoclimate and highlights research results. The chapter concludes with examples of modern climate change and techniques for observing it. Modern climate records include abrupt changes that are smaller and briefer than in paleoclimate records but show that abrupt climate change is not restricted to the distant past.’ http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10136&page=19

‘We construct a network of observed climate indices in the period 1900–2000 and investigate their collective behavior. The results indicate that this network synchronized several times in this period. We find that in
those cases where the synchronous state was followed by a steady increase in the coupling strength between the indices, the synchronous state was destroyed, after which a new climate state emerged. These shifts are associated with significant changes in global temperature trend and in ENSO variability. The latest such event is known as the great climate shift of the 1970s. We also find the evidence for such type of behavior in two climate simulations using a state-of-the-art model. This is the first time that this mechanism, which appears consistent with the theory of synchronized chaos, is discovered in a physical system of
the size and complexity of the climate system.’ http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/21743.pdf

‘In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. The most we can expect to achieve is the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.’ http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/505.htm

There are very many references to non-linearity in climate throughout the literature – and although people like Matthew seem positively resistant to the idea of nonlinearity in climate – nonetheless it is so.