Daily Archives: April 22, 2011

Dearth Day… Earth Daze… Whatever

Celebrate Earth Daze!

Green Day: The day set aside to save the planet has become a second Halloween where we fear imaginary planetary ghouls and goblins. Greenies get the treats, but the trick has been on us.

It is appropriate that Earth Day comes a week after Tax Day, for our slavish dedication to saving the planet rather than saving jobs imposes a hidden tax on all of us in the form of reduced economic growth and rising inflation.

This Earth Day, we have more to fear from rising gas and food prices than from rising sea levels.

Continue reading

Peter Glover discusses “fracking”

Ten Fracking Things Everyone Should Know
By Peter C Glover

As dull headlines go it’s on a par with the (almost certainly apocryphal) classic “Small earthquake in Chile. Not many dead”. But “Hundreds rally against fracking” – the hydraulic fracturing procedure used in shale gas extraction – must be up there with the dullest.

Hundreds? Only hundreds? I can remember a time when just whispering the world’s most powerful epithet “Big Oil” would have had eco-warriors everywhere reaching for their scaling ladders and megaphones. After all, even “progressives” need to keep up empty traditions.

Okay, the headline was only at a Time Warner online news site, so no one actually read it. I only picked up via a Google Alert. But the report did reveal just what got ‘hundreds’ out of their pits; even though quite a few seemed a little confused as to why they were protesting outside the Capitol building in Albany, New York State. One banner, the article reported, stated, “In NY state, no more drilling for fossil fuels”. Another: “We want New York to lead the change”. Some plainly thought it an anti-fossil fuel march, not a march against a particular method of extraction: hydraulic fracking. Another proclaimed, “You can’t drink gas”. Pithy. Accurate. I like it.

The rather pathetically-attended Albany protest was even thought newsworthy north of the border. One Canadian paper ran the anti-fracking story headlining it, “Natural gas carries unexamined risks”. So does getting out of bed in the morning – but let’s stay focused. Sadly, the article’s impact was somewhat diluted by a photo of a banner-waving biologist placarding the message: “Water Is Life Is Water”. Albeit not an English major, we can applaud the sentiment – it’s always good to hear science confirm the suspicions of generations of the common layman. (Energy Tribune)

Another look at the sun’s climate influence

Is It The Sun Wot Done It?
Thursday, 21 April 2011 17:35 Dr. David Whitehouse

If you are not confused about the Sun’s (the star that is not the newspaper as alluded to by the headline) role in influencing the Earth’s climate then perhaps you haven’t been paying attention recently.

It is a common story in climate change science. Some researchers will offer definitive statements that the Sun couldn’t possibly be responsible to any significant degree in the recent warm period the Earth has experienced. Look behind such comments however and you will find that the science, as science often is, is more equivocal, as a few recent papers indicate. There is much food for thought.

The common view is that the Sun did have a majority influence up until about 1950 – 60, but since then, because of forcing from greenhouse gasses, its role has been miniscule.

Miniscule globally that is. Regionally it might be a very different matter. Solar scientists have been going on about this for years. The speculation is that the Sun’s influence could be significant regionally such as across, say, Europe in winter, but not significant globally. However, one does wonder how many local regions are needed to be present before such a solar effect might become more global?

We all know of the way solar activity has been at a very high level in the past century. Solar activity peaked in the mid 1950’s and mid-1980’s and then declined (some researchers conveniently like to ignore the 1980’s peak and just focus on the 1950’s one). Solar activity was rising throughout the 20th Century at just the same time that the Earth’s annual average temperature increased, rising steadily with some standstills until about 2000 when it has remained static at the warmest level in the instrumental period (since 1860).

Add to this the observations that show when solar activity was low in the 17th century – when for decades there were hardly any sunspots to be seen – there was a coincident period called the Little Ice Age, and when solar activity was low for a decade or two at the start of the 19th century (the so-called Dalton Minimum) the Earth also chilled slightly has led some to speculate that there is a connection.

Low solar activity, cool earth: High solar activity, warm Earth? There must be a connection because all these correlations are straining explanation by chance. The problem is that no one has come up with a physical mechanism whereby the Sun and climate are linked in a convincing way. It doesn’t seem that solar modulation of Cosmic Rays affecting cloudiness can do it. So what is going on? (GWPF)

Roger Pielke Sr. highlights an important new climate paper

Guest Post “Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation And Northern Hemisphere’s Climate Variability” By Marcia Glaze Wyatt, Sergey Kravtsov, And Anastasios A. Tsonis

A very important new paper has been accepted for publication in Climate Dynamics that adds further substance into the topic of spatio-temporal chaos that was discussed on Judy Curry’s weblog Climate Etc in the post by Tomas Milanovic  titled

Spatio-temporal chaos

This new paper is a part of the Ph.d. dissertation of Marcia Wyatt at the University of Colorado

The new paper is

Wyatt, Marcia Glaze , Sergey Kravtsov, and Anastasios A. Tsonis, 2011: Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and Northern Hemisphere’s climate variability  Climate Dynamics: DOI: 10.1007/s00382-011-1071-8. (Roger Pielke Sr.)

More from Roger Pielke Jr. on the Nisbet Report

Analysis of the Nisbet Report — Part II, Political Views of Scientists

One part of Matthew Nisbet’s recent report that has received very little attention is its comparative analysis of ideological and partisan perspectives of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Nisbet shows that AAAS members are extremely partisan and ideological.  The word “extremely” is mine, and what do I mean by it?  Look at the figure above:  AAAS members are more partisan than MSNBC viewers and even Tea Party members.  AAAS members are more ideological than evangelical churchgoers but less so than Fax News viewers.  In both cases AAAS members are very different than the public as a whole. (Roger Pielke Jr.)

I was going to ignore this model-twaddle but it seems to be gaining some traction

Columbia engineering study links ozone hole to climate change all the way to the equator

First time that ozone depletion is shown to impact the entire circulation of the southern hemisphere

In a study to be published in the April 21st issue of Science magazine, researchers at Columbia University’s School of Engineering and Applied Science report their findings that the ozone hole, which is located over the South Pole, has affected the entire circulation of the Southern Hemisphere all the way to the equator. While previous work has shown that the ozone hole is changing the atmospheric flow in the high latitudes, the Columbia Engineering paper, “Impact of Polar Ozone Depletion on Subtropical Precipitation,” demonstrates that the ozone hole is able to influence the tropical circulation and increase rainfall at low latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere. This is the first time that ozone depletion, an upper atmospheric phenomenon confined to the polar regions, has been linked to climate change from the Pole to the equator. (EurekAlert)

So, what’s wrong with this? To begin with it isn’t observational but a model comparison “study” and readers are probably aware of our opinion on PlayStation® climatology.

Secondly, we have no evidence of anything but seasonal and/or cyclical changes in polar stratospheric ozone levels which are likely the result of changes in the strength of the Antarctic Polar Vortex, itself the result of other cycles (solar, ENSO, PDO, … just about the whole alphabet soup of atmospheric disturbances and cycles). See our ozone page for more on the nonsense about “ozone depletion”.

It’s a little amusing that they offer this as yet another climatic warming influence (is there any room left for enhanced greenhouse at all?) but we see nothing particularly interesting here.

Ozone hole “…caused a great deal of the climate change that’s been observed” (WUWT discussion)