Thursday, August 8, 2013

Climate, the “new normal” and the Australian elections

by Andrew Glikson

The 1st Law of Humanity: Don’t kill your children!
(Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, chief climate advisor to the German Government).
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/inshort/files/Schellnhuber-keynote-COP18-state-dinner-Doha.pdf

Earth is worth £3,000 trillion, according to scientist's new planet valuing formula
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1361145/Earth-worth-3-000-trillionaccording-scientists-new-planet-valuing-formula.html

Earth rising over the Moon - http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/features/bm_gallery_4.html

That people can be duped to accept the destruction of the atmosphere – the lungs of the biosphere - is something no science-fiction has yet described, yet, as the summary of the scientific evidence presented below indicates, is now science-fact.

By the end of the 20th century powerful vested interests, including corporations and few billionaires and their political mouthpieces, combined to promote saturation of the terrestrial atmosphere with carbon dioxide, in contravention of climate science, are experiencing a Pyrrhic victory oblivious to the unfolding tragedy.

Nothing exemplifies these developments more than the current Australian elections. An internet search for the terms ‘Australia’ ‘elections’ and ‘climate change’ recovers very little in terms of party policies
(http://theconversation.com/why-labor-should-fight-the-2013-election-on-climate-change-13865, http://www.theguardian.com/environment/southerncrossroads/2013/aug/05/australian-election-2013-climate-change).

For example, the words ‘climate change’ (or ‘global warming’) were not even mentioned in a recent ABC prime time QandA pre-election program, in which the opposition shadow environmental minister participated. A cosmetic carbon price is threatened by the largest party, nor do many refer to Australia being on track to become an equivalent of Saudi Arabia in terms of global fossil fuel (coal) exports.

Featuring heavily in the current election campaign are the potential financial debts of future generations but little is said about the environmental debt – life under 4 degrees Celsius (above pre-industrial temperatures). Only a minor party is focused on the climate calamity.

When the theory of ‘economic rationalism’ emerged, pricing every item including cultural and spiritual values, a question arose as to “The price of the Earth”, currently estimated as 3000 trillion pounds (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1361145/Earth-worth-3-000-trillion-according-scientists-new-planet-valuing-formula.html).

A Faustian Bargain is on (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/doubling-down-on-our-faustian-bargain_b_2989535.html). What commenced some 20 years ago as a scientific debate has deteriorated to media-dominated pseudo-debate replete with misrepresentations of the science. Below I highlight the principal line of evidence emerging from geological and paleoclimate science:

Critical to the evolution of life since at least ~3.5 billion years-ago, from where the earliest known stromatolites and micro-fossils are recorded [1], are the combined effects of solar insolation and atmospheric chemistry, which control temperatures (-90° to +58°C) and the state of H2O at the surface as vapor, ice or liquid – the latter allowing life. Compensating for the continuous release of CO2 from the crust and mantle by volcanic eruption are tectonic, weathering and sedimentary processes that recycle the crust and lock CO2 in carbonates and organic matter subducted into the mantle [2], preventing a run-away build-up of atmospheric greenhouse gases (the Venus syndrome [3]).

Movement of carbon between land, atmosphere, and oceans in billions of tons of carbon per year. Yellow numbers are natural fluxes, red are human contributions in billions of tons of carbon per year. White numbers indicate stored carbon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle
The histories of the atmosphere, the oceans and life are thus closely intertwined. The atmosphere, mediating the carbon, oxygen and nitrogen cycles (see above image), acting as the lungs of  the biosphere, regulates an aqueous medium where microbiological metabolic processes occur, from chemo-bacteria around volcanic fumaroles, to nanobes in deep crustal fractures, to nearsurface phototrophs. From ~420 million years ago the advent of land plants ensued in flammable carbon-rich land surfaces interfaced with an oxygen rich atmosphere, ensuing in a combustible combination [4]. Repeatedly through geological history volcanic eruptions and asteroid impacts triggered major release of greenhouse gases (GHG) from the crust as well as extensive surface fires, major climate changes and mass extinctions of species [5].

Relations between CO2 rise rates and mean global temperature rise rates during warming periods, including
the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, Oligocene, Miocene, late Pliocene, Eemian (glacial termination),
Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, Medieval Warming Period, 1750-2012 and 1975-2012 periods.

The current rise of atmospheric GHG at an unprecedented rate (see above image), defines the Anthropocene [6] as an oxidation event, a new geological era triggered by a species which has uniquely mastered ignition, excavating and releasing hundreds of billions of tons (more than 560 GtC) of carbon from geological formations into atmosphere. The consequences for the biosphere, referred to as the 6th mass extinction of species [7], are leading to a tragedy for human ideals and for nature.

Is the Anthropocene event horizon a purely pre-determined natural? Alternatively, where does responsibility lie?

On the scale of the species, once the energy output of the genus Homo was magnified through combustion by many orders of magnitude, the phenomenon can be deemed an inherent part of natural evolution. This may lead to a deterministic conclusion: It is unlikely to expect any species to be as perfectly wise and responsible as to be able to constrain the effects of its invention.

Where does free will lie? On the scale of modern civilization, since the greenhouse effect [8] and its underlying laws of physics and chemistry [9] have been identified in the 19th century, the question arises to what extent would societies and their leaders accept the implications of the science for human industry? Will the scientific method itself and the enlightenment [10] form the basis of future decisions?

In so far as government and corporate decisions are influenced by misconceptions and misrepresentations of the science, as an excuse for inaction, responsibility for the rapidly unfolding shift in the state of the terrestrial climate lies with the shortsightedness of Homo sapiens.

It is the peer review system which forms the venue for science communications. However, toward the end of the 20th century a multitude of media pieces and hundreds of websites began proliferate pseudoscience notions ignorant of the principles of science in general and of climate science in particular. Nor, in general, were practicing climate scientists allowed the same access to the popular media to communicate their research, a situation aggravated by conspiracy theories and ad-hominem aimed against climate scientists.

The lesson of numerous attempted debates since 2005 with those who deny the reality of global warming, or attempt to attribute it to natural non-human factors, show these notions cannot be dissuaded by any amount of evidence [11, 12, 13]. Numerous erroneous claims continue to be made. To cite just a few examples:
  • The claim, as if temperature rise preceded CO2 rise during the glacial terminations therefore the current rise of temperature is not the result of CO2 rise [14], cannot be sustained. The effects of CO2 and temperature variations are intertwined. During the last ~400,000 years glacial eras were terminated by solar maxima, affecting decreased CO2 solubility in warming water and thereby a rise in CO2 levels of the atmosphere. By contrast climate developments since the 18th century, when negligible or no rise in insolation occurred, were triggered by the anthropogenic greenhouse effect of the release of >560 billion ton carbon, consistent with the basic laws of physics [9]. 
  • The claim as if global warming represents recovery from the ‘Little Ice Age’ (LIA) cannot be sustained: The LIA was caused by a near-cessation of sunspot activity during ~1650-1700, depressing global temperatures by ~0.2-0.3°C relative to preceding periods. By contrast, following a lull, global warming from about 1975 tracked toward more than 1.5°C over the continents relative to pre-industrial temperatures [15]. 
  • Claims related to the cosmic rays flux (CRF) effects: A dominant solar effect on the climate since 1970 is ruled out by measurements of solar radiation [16]. The incidence of cosmic rays, which oscillate reciprocally with the 11 years sunspot cycle, has been shown to have minor effects on cloud nucleation and has not varied significantly since the mid-20th century [17]. 
  • The claim as if carbon dioxide is emitted mainly from volcanoes: According to the United States Geological Survey (2012) sub-aerial and sub-marine volcanism emits approximately 150 – 260 million tons CO2 per-year whereas anthropogenic emissions total about 35 billion tons CO2/per-year [18]. 
  • Mars warming [19]: The argument invokes unknown solar system-wide phenomena, despite measurements of solar radiation and the cosmic ray flux which show little change since the mid-20th century. Some temperature fluctuations in Mars are known to be related to dust storms. 
To the extent that misleading pseudoscience of this nature continue to help governments and vested interests to promote the combustion of fossil fuels (cf. ‘the future of coal’ [20]), at the expense of the future of the atmosphere, the unthinkable consequences of 4° Celsius and higher [21] on the terrestrial atmosphere-ocean system have already commenced through a series of extreme weather events, reflecting the rise in energy/temperature of the atmosphere/ocean system [22] – the “new normal” [23].

References

  1. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v441/n7094/abs/nature04764.html
  2. http://www.platetectonics.com/book/page_12.asp
    http://www.columbia.edu/~vjd1/carbon.htm
  3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect
  4. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/324/5926/481.abstract
  5. http://www.skepticalscience.com/Earths-five-mass-extinction-events.html
  6. http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1938/842.abstract
  7. http://edition.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/23/green.century.mass.extinction/index.html 
  8. http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm
  9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-body_radiation
  10. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/enlightenment/
  11. http://www.bookdepository.com/Merchants-of-Doubt-NaomiOreskes/9781608193943?redirected=true&gclid=CPe3uYiZ4bgCFUpZpQodIhcAvQ
  12. http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Change-Denial-Heads-Sand/dp/1849713367
  13. http://www.amazon.com/A-Short-Introduction-Climate-Change/dp/11076187625
  14. http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
  15. http://berkeleyearth.org/
  16. http://www.mps.mpg.de/homes/natalie/PAPERS/warming.pdf
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X06004328
  17. http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/Publications/Journals/rahmstorf_etal_eos_2004.html http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682603000415
  18. http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php
  19. http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
  20. http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/coal-mining-has-a-future-combet
  21. http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/4-degrees-briefing-for-the-world-bank-therisks-of-a-future-without-climate-policy
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/merkelclimate-advisor-blasts-politicians-for-doing-too-little-a-868024.html
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121119104842.htm 
  22. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n7/full/nclimate1452.html
    http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/07/30/1205276109.full.pdf+html
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/08/extreme-metrics/
    http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate_committees?url=ec_ctte/extreme_weather/index.htm 
  23. http://blog.ucsusa.org/bigger-hotter-and-longer-wildfires-are-the-new-normal-as-theclimate-changes-in-the-west-183

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Another Arctic cyclone brewing

Another cyclone is brewing in the Arctic. Below are Naval Research Laboratory projections of sea ice drift a few days ahead.

[ click on image to enlarge ]
The image below, from Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut (DMI), shows surface pressure over the Arctic Ocean on August 7, 2013.

from: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/weather/arcticweather.uk.php

Below are two projections of pressure and wind direction for August 11 and August 15, 2013.



edited screenshots from animation at weather-forecast.com
A further post with more details on this cyclone will be added soon.


Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Methane levels keep rising rapidly

Global methane levels keep rising rapidly. Earlier this month, the post Methane as high as 2303 ppb quickly became outdated and was updated with the post Methane as high as 2349 ppb. Meanwhile, though, the most recent data show that the highest level reached on August 5, 2013, was 2442 ppb.


This recent peak level is only slightly below the highest peak level this year, which was a level of 2475 ppb reached on April 26, 2013, which at the time was considered a one-off local peak.

These recent high peak levels do seem to be more than just local peaks, given that high levels of methane are suddenly recorded over much of the globe, as described in the earlier post Methane as high as 2349 ppb.

The image on the right (added later, editor) also shows that not only have peak levels greater than 2300 ppb appeared since late June 2013, but also have the highest daily mean methane levels suddenly increased by about 20 ppb recently.

The image below shows over how many square kilometers methane was present at over 1950 ppb globally over the past few days.




The numbers also feature in the image on the left and they illustrate the huge jump that took place somewhere between July 31 and August 1, 2013.

It may be that there has indeed been a huge sudden increase in methane.

On the other hand, it could also be that EuMetSat implemented a re-calibration on July 31. After all, EuMetSat announced recently that IASI Level 2 products from Metop-B had been declared operational and would be available on GTS from 31 July.

Such a re-calibration (if it did indeed take place) does appear to make sense, given the discrepancy between IASI's mean methane levels and the levels recorded at stations. Below are measurements taken at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, which given the station's location close to the equator are often taken as global averages (flasks on the left, and hourly average in situ measurements on the right).

[ click on image to enlarge ]
from: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/index.php

Mauna Loa methane levels are often quoted to be about 1830 ppb, whereas the highest IASI mean levels did barely cross the 1800 ppb mark earlier this year. Since the jump, the highest IASI mean levels have suddenly been significantly higher (20 ppb more, at around 1820 ppb).

Even so, the current situation is very worrying. High levels of methane are present not only on the Northern Hemisphere, but also on Antarctica and over the oceans on the Southern Hemisphere, as shown in a recent post. And of course, the situation remains most threatening in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS), as described at the Methane-hydrates blog and and at Arctic Methane FAQ.

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Methane as high as 2349 ppb


Earth is undergoing one of the largest climate changes in the past 65 million years, Stanford climate scientists Noah Diffenbaugh and Chris Field report, and it's on pace to occur at a rate 10 times faster than any change in that period.

“We know from past changes that ecosystems have responded to a few degrees of global temperature change over thousands of years,” said Diffenbaugh. “But the unprecedented trajectory that we're on now is forcing that change to occur over decades.”

Some of the strongest evidence for how the global climate system responds to high levels of carbon dioxide comes from paleoclimate studies. Fifty-five million years ago, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was elevated to a level comparable to today. The Arctic Ocean did not have ice in the summer, and nearby land was warm enough to support alligators and palm trees. But apart from the rate of change, Diffenbaugh adds, another key difference is that “today there are multiple human stressors that were not present 55 million years ago, such as urbanization and air and water pollution.”

By the end of the century, should the current emissions of greenhouse gases remain unchecked, temperatures over the northern hemisphere will tip 5-6 degrees C warmer than today's averages. In this case, the hottest summer of the last 20 years becomes the new annual norm.

The situation looks to be even more dire than that, argues Sam Carana. In addition to carbon dioxide, there are further pollutants driving global warming. Moreover, as pictured below, feedbacks can dramatically accelerate the rise in temperature locally, particularly in the Arctic.

Image 21. For more details on feedbacks, see extended version of this image and discussion at

The level of methane in the atmosphere has already been rising even faster than the level of carbon dioxide, as illustrated by the image below. Moreover, there's the threat that large additional amounts of methane will suddenly be released, in particular from the Arctic seabed.


In August 2013, methane were recorded as high as 2349 ppb, as illustrated by the graph on below (added later, editor), showing that in early August, the world's mean methane level suddenly increased with at least 10 ppb compared to mean levels over the past few months.




To get an idea just how much methane has entered the atmosphere, have a look at the image below, covering several days from the start of August 2013.

[ click on image to enlarge ]


This is further illustrated by the two images below. The image directly below shows where the highest methane levels (i.e. over 1950 ppb, in yellow) were recorded on August 2, 2013.

[ click on image to enlarge ]
The image below shows the presence of methane on August 2, 2013, for a number of ranges, including at levels over 1950 ppb (this time in red).

[ click on image to enlarge ]
The methane threat is further described in the post Methane hydrates, which also features the image below.


Methane as high as 2303 ppb

This post has been updated as Methane as high as 2349 ppb.

Friday, August 2, 2013

Where does the methane come from?

[ image July 29, 2013. Click on image to enlarge ]
Wildfires are still raging, sending huge amounts of smoke into the sky. Worryingly, much black carbon that comes with this smoke gets deposited at high latitudes, discoloring snow and ice, and thus speeding up the melt.

A lot of methane has been emitted over the last few days, and much appears to be due to wildfires, as illustrated by the image below, picturing the situation on July 31, 2013, p.m.

[ click on image to enlarge ]
Above image shows some methane on the right, over the Atlantic Ocean, which appears to originate from these wildfires and is visible in that location due to the Coriolis effect. The image below, picturing the situation on August 1, 2013, p.m., shows a lot of methane over Russia and elsewhere in Europe and Asia. Again, the methane on the left of Europe appears to originate from wildfires in North America.

[ click on image to enlarge ]
High levels of methane are recorded in many places on the Northern Hemisphere, and there is also a lot over the Southern Hemisphere, as illustrated by the image below.

[ click on image to enlarge ]
Where did the methane over the oceans on the Southern Hemisphere come from? It appears that it originates from hydrates under the ocean floor. For more about methane hydrates, also see the methane-hydrates blog.

Ecological Statement on the Future of Earth



The following statement was initiated by John B. Davies, in the hope that it will also be signed by many climatologists, ecologists and anyone who is similarly concerned about climate catastrophe, and given wide media coverage. The statement reflects the views of signatories personally, rather than the views of organizations they may be associated with, hence the links to personal pages such as at facebook and Google+. Nonetheless, businesses, groups and organizations are equally invited to join this call for action. Add your name and copy this statement widely! 



ECOLOGICAL STATEMENT ON THE FUTURE OF THE EARTH

Life on earth is facing a profound crisis.

Human industrial society has impacted life on earth in multitudes of ways especially through the vastly increased greenhouse gas concentration of the atmosphere. Trade and rapid transport around the earth are introducing invasive species everywhere. New bacteria and micro biological life are being moved to areas in which they did not previously live causing new diseases for animals and plants. Forests are being lost globally adding to the carbon concentration of the air and causing many species to go extinct.

Farming using nitrogenous fertilisers is causing a loss of nutrients whilst soil itself is being lost on a large scale as a result of farming

No later than 2050, and probably much sooner, global temperatures will have risen significantly. Farming will be nearly impossible in an unstable global climate and ecosystem. There will be large scale loss of species as a result of a collapsing global ecosystem.

There will probably have been a collapse of the global economy before 2050, which may come as almost a sudden event or could occur over a decade or two. This will probably lead into a political and societal collapse with far fewer people surviving on the planet in very inhospitable circumstances.

Human society is not reacting to the situation effectively because most nations and industries, but not all, make strenuous efforts to protect the living planet but because it is so costly our society does far from all that is absolutely necessary and then just hopes for the best.

The situation is far from hopeless if we react now. However, if humanity does not react to this crisis almost immediately, then global ecological collapse and the collapse of human civilisation before 2050 is almost inevitable. Most of the worst damage can still be avoided. However once the situation starts to deteriorate rapidly there will be no way in which it can be slowed or reversed, we will be doomed.

The first priority is for all governments and most people to acknowledge the grave crisis the earth is facing almost immediately because only then can humanity react effectively.

Secondly there needs to be a statement in general terms of what must be done. The two most important actions contained within the statement are a deep reduction in greenhouse gas emissions very quickly which will affect the wealthy nations more than others and very wealthy people more than poorer people. This may mean a global economic contraction. Secondly a group of leading scientists needs to be set up under the authority of the United Nations to set the priorities for urgent action in all other areas. These actions need to be implemented very quickly and with great determination so that they are effectively applied. Many areas, especially the arctic, are in a critical situation.

The trends which are leading life on this planet to disaster need to be shown to be turning around very quickly. This is achievable but unless this is done very quickly modern civilisation will collapse in the near future.

Sign the petition at AVAAZ, at:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/HELP_SAVE_LIFE_ON_EARTH

John B Davies
Douglas Spence