Defying IPCC Models, U.S. Blizzard Frequency Has Nearly Quadrupled Since 1960, As U.S. Continues Cooling


What Models Say:


♦  IPCC TAR (2001):  “Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms

♦   Kunkel et al., 2002:  “Surface conditions favorable for heavy lake-effect snow decreased in frequency by 50% and 90% for the HadCM2 and CGCM1 [models], respectively, by the late 21st Century. This reduction was due almost entirely to an increase in average winter air temperatures.”

♦   IPCC AR4 (2007):  Snow season length and snow depth are very likely to decrease in most of North America

♦   Kapnick and Delworth, 2013:  “In response to idealized radiative forcing changes, both models produce similar global-scale responses in which global-mean temperature and total precipitation increase while snowfall decreases. … By using a simple multivariate model, temperature is shown to drive these trends by decreasing snowfall almost everywhere” (press release)  “In North America, the greatest reductions in snowfall will occur along the northeast coast, in the mountainous west, and in the Pacific Northwest. Coastal regions from Virginia to Maine … will get less than half the amount of snow currently received.”


What Observations Say:


Coleman and Schwartz, 2017

“Data revealed 713 blizzards over the 55 years, with a mean of 13 events per season. Seasonal blizzard frequency ranged from one blizzard in 1980/81 to 32 blizzards in 2007/08Federal disaster declarations resulting from blizzards totaled 57, with more than one-half of them occurring in the twenty-first century.”

“Storm Data attributed 711 fatalities during the 55-yr study period, with an average of one individual per event; 2044 injuries were reported, with a mean of nearly three per blizzard. Property damage totaled approximately $9.11 billion in unadjusted dollars, with an approximate mean of $12.6 million per storm.”

“Seasonal blizzard frequencies displayed a distinct upward trend, with a more substantial rise over the past two decades. … The modeled increase in blizzard activity showed a nearly fourfold upsurge between the start and end of the study period at 5.9 and 21.6 blizzards, respectively. On the basis of current model trends, the expected blizzard total for a season is 32 blizzards by 2050; uncertainty exists on whether the linear trend will continue or stabilize in the near future.”


The Historical Context: More Snow Means Temperatures Are Cooling, Not Warming


It has long been assumed in the scientific community that snow coverage would decrease during warm periods, and increase during cool periods.  For example:


Eichenlaub, 1970

Evidence suggests that lake effect snowfall has significantly increased during the past several decades, particularly in Southern Michigan and Northern Indiana. While the observed changes cannot be definitively ascribed to any single factor, it seems likely that a general cooling of winter temperatures may be partially responsible for this climatic change.”

[M]any of the snowfall time-series curves for the lake stations show downward trends during the 1920’s and 1930’s, at the height of the recent warm period, and the more recent snowfall increase has coincided with a general world-wide cooling which has occurred in the last several decades.

Recent evidence derived from [isotope] analysis of ice core samples on the Greenland ice cap indicates a continuance of this cooling trend for another 20 or 30 years.”


What Dr. Eichenlaub was describing with regard to the increasing and decreasing temperature and snowfall trends is explained by Dr. Agee (1980).  The Northern Hemisphere’s surface temperatures warmed by “nearly 1°C” between 1890 and 1940, and then after 1940 and through the mid-1970s, the Northern Hemisphere experienced “comparable cooling” (almost -1°C).  (Most of these observations of warming and cooling amplitudes have now been removed from modern Northern Hemisphere datasets via “adjustments” so as to comply with climate model projections.)


Agee, 1980


In the temperature records for Indiana and Iowa (U.S.), Agee (1980) reported that, following the overall hemispheric pattern, both states warmed sharply during the 1920s to 1940s and then cooled by more than 2°C in the decades after.   This was the context that Eichenlaub (1970) was referring to in pointing out that the U.S. had been experiencing a long-term cooling trend since the 1940s which led to a significant increase in snowfall.




The U.S. Cooling Trend Has Returned In Recent Decades


According to NOAA, winter temperatures for the contiguous U.S. declined at a rate of -1.13°F per decade between 1995 and 2014.

NOAA screenshot

 


Large Regions Of The U.S. Are Still Colder Now Than They Were In The 1950s


Rogers, 2013


Christy and McNider, 2016


Tipton et al., 2016


North American Continent Is Not Discernibly Warmer Than During The Little Ice Age


Gennaretti et al., 2014


Pitman and Smith, 2012 


Steinman et al., 2016


Fortin and Gajewski, 2016

“Biological production decreased again at ~ 2 ka and the rate of cooling increased in the past 2 ka, with coolest temperatures occurring between 0.46 and 0.36 ka [460 and 360 years ago], coinciding with the Little Ice Age. Although biological production increased in the last 150 yr, the reconstructed temperatures do not indicate a warming during this time. … Modern inferred temperatures based on both pollen and chironomids are [currently] up to 3°C cooler than those inferred for the mid-Holocene.”


Summary


It is widely accepted that enhanced snow cover and more frequent snow storms (blizzards) occur when winter temperatures are cooling (or cooler relative to an identified warm period).   U.S. temperatures cooled dramatically after the 1940s and 1950s, and they may only have recently reached the levels of warmth achieved in the first half of the 20th century, when snow cover was significantly reduced.   Blizzard frequency has increased almost four-fold since 1960, even as climate models have claimed they should be declining in frequency.   This increase in snow storms has coincided with a 20-year (1995-2014) winter temperature cooling trend in the U.S.

Overall, there has been no discernible anthropogenic influence on U.S. snow storm frequency in the last several decades, and there has been no discernible anthropogenic influence on U.S. temperatures in the last several hundred years, or even the last several decades relative to the early 20th century.

 

 

German Greens Move To Water Down Nature Protection Laws – To Clear Way For Wind Parks!

The German online Nordwest Zeitung (NWZ) reports here how mainly German Socialists and Greens (of all people) are moving to relax strict laws designed to protect nature and endangered species.

The aim is to clear the way for the industrialization of the North German rural countryside and natural areas with wind turbines.

Pushed by Germany’s Greens and Socialists, the country’s nature protection act to be watered down to make the industrialization of natural areas far easier. Image cropped from here.

Journalist Marco Seng reports that under the existing law a planned wind park near the town of Zetel, for example, will have to remain shut down for 6 months every year in order to protect the area birdlife. However, denying wind park construction and operation in order to protect nature and wildlife has become just too much to ask of Germany’s socialists and environmentalist greens.

They are now pushing through a watered-down law.

Each year in early spring a number of bird species transit through or nest in north German regions, which wind park developers and operators happen to find ideal wor wind energy generation. That’s a big problem. Under the current federal law wind turbines located in sensitive areas are required to shut down from March 1 to August 30 in order to comply with § 44 of the German Nature Protection Act.

Seng reports how a number of turbines are planned to be erected in different areas this year. For example the county of Friesland gave its approval in early January to rezone the areas by the end of March and allow the construction of turbines. Citizens groups however have protested, claiming that the turbines will not be profitable due to the summer shutdown period. Yet the mayors insist they will still make a profit and the projects will go ahead.

All this is highly controversial as the NWZ writes that recent studies and expert assessments have concluded that “many bird species are threatened, foremost predatory birds because they do not avoid turbines“.

Also the Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung (German Wildlife Foundation) estimated that approximately 250,000 bats and over 12,000 predatory birds fall victim to wind turbines annually, with a high number being killed over northern Germany. Recently some courts found in favor of the red kite hawk, and thus some planned wind parks were denied approvals to be constructed. The reason, NWZ reports, “a high risk of death to birds and adverse feeding conditions for predatory birds.”

So it’s little wonder that wind energy proponents are adamantly pushing for relaxing Germany’s nature protection laws.

At other locations, wind park projects are being given the green light anyway, angering nature-protection activists. The NWZ quotes Monika Oetje-Weber of the Kammersand citizens’ action group:

If all the information and documentation on the presence of important bird species had been taken seriously, then the approvals would have never been issued.”

The municipalities and project proponents, however, insist that the the turbines that are to be erected will pose no threat to bird life.

Watering down the nature protection laws to allow the turbines to run all year.

Because of the intensifying collision course between wind projects and birdlife and nature, and the increasing protests against wind parks in rural areas, the German government is now moving to alter Germany Federal Nature Protection Act to make it easier to build and operate wind parks and highways. The NWZ writes:

You read that correctly. In the future the Federal Nature Protection Act’s § 44 Section 1 No.1 ban against killing will be valid for interventions and projects if the risk of death for especially protected species in unavoidably signficantly high.”

This means the bar will be significantly lowered for wind projects. The reaction from nature activists came swiftly and harshly. The NWZ:

‘The amendment leads to a dramatic threat increase to birdlife and bats by wind turbines, and that is unacceptable,’ says Fritz Vahrenholt, Chairman of the German Wildlife Foundation. The killing of birds is thus no longer a principle reason for obstructing wind turbine parks.”

Other leading traditional environmental protection groups such as NABU are outraged, writes the NWZ:

We see absolutely no necessity for the planned amendment. We demand that lawmakers do not pass the amendment as it currently stands,’ says NABU President Olaf Tschimpke.”

Others accuse the government of having hollowed out the country’s nature protection laws and caving in to industry lobbyists. Others say that approval committees have not been strict enough when it comes to species protection assessments, claiming that the planning of the projects violates the law.

The NWZ concludes that a major collision between nature protection and the wind industry is now more unavoidable than ever. But the trend is clear: in Germany nature and birdlife are losing the battle against the powerful industrial wind lobby and climate protection activists.

Germany risks seeing the worst government-steered environmental disaster since the collapse of Communism late last century.

 

Massive Data Tampering Uncovered At NASA – Warmth, Cooling Disappears Due To Incompatibility With Models

Note: Due to the very positive feedback of this post, I’ve decided to leave it up at the top spot for another day. -PG
==============================================

In 1981, James Hansen was the Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.  He was also the lead author of a seminal paper published in the prestigious journal Science entitled “Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide“.  In the paper, Hansen and his colleagues reported (and illustrated with multiple graphs) the widely accepted 100-year (~1880-1980) record of hemispheric and global temperature changes.  At the time, most climate scientists were reporting that the Northern Hemisphere’s (NH) temperatures had undergone a rapid warming of between +0.8 and +1.0°C between the 1880s and 1940.  Then, after 1940 and through 1970, NH temperatures were reported to have dropped by about -0.5 to -0.6°C, a decades-long cooling trend which at the time had fomented widespread debate about global cooling in the scientific community.

Like their peers, NASA’s Hansen and his co-authors indicated that the Northern Hemisphere had warmed by ~0.8°C between the 1880s and 1940, and then cooled by ~0.5°C between 1940 and 1970.

A graph of “observed temperature” for the Northern Hemisphere was included in the paper to illustrate these climatic trends.

Today, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies is directed by Dr. Gavin Schmidt, a trained mathematician.  (James Hansen retired from the position in 2013.)   Schmidt’s version of the Northern Hemisphere’s temperature record for 1880-1980 looks vastly different than what his predecessor had illustrated in 1981.  Instead of leaving the historically observed temperatures alone, NASA has invented new ways to portray the pre-1981 temperature history of the Northern Hemisphere.

2017 NASA Hemispheric Graph

To subjectively summarize the wholesale adjustments to past temperature data, the +0.8°C warming between 1880 and 1940 has been reduced to +0.35°C.  The -0.5°C cooling between 1940 and 1970 has been reduced to -0.2°C.  And in NASA’s 2017 version of Northern Hemisphere temperatures, 1980 is now even with 1940.  Neither year was warmer than the other.  In the original 1981 NASA graph, however, 1980 was -0.3°C colder than 1940.

If the originally recorded observations for the Northern Hemisphere had not been erased from the temperature record, the pre-1981 trend would look like it does in the graph below (black trend line).  In other words, if the temperature observations as they appeared in 1981 had not been tampered with, it would be clear the Northern Hemisphere’s surface temperatures have undergone an oscillation, or warming-cooling-warming cycle, with no significant net change from the earlier warming amplitude or rate (1880-1940) to the more recent one (1980s-present).

Why Did NASA Eliminate The Early 20th Century Warming And Mid-20th Century Cooling?

The fundamental reason why NASA has manipulated past temperature data is so that the historical climate record may conform to the IPCC models that presume variations in surface temperatures are predominantly determined by anthropogenic CO2 emissions.  Fossil fuels consumption in particular and anthropogenic CO2 emissions in general plodded along steadily at about 1 GtC/year (gigatons of carbon per year) during the 1900 to 1945 period.  Then, after 1945, human emissions exploded.  They reached 4 GtC/year by the 1970s, 6 GtC/year by the 1990s, and 10 GtC/year by 2014.

NASA recognized that (a) anthropogenic CO2 emissions were not rising much at all while the surface temperatures were rising dramatically (1880s-1940s), and that (b) surface temperatures were cooling (1940s to 1970s) while anthropogenic CO2 emissions were surging upwards.  These observed trends did not support climate modeling; instead, they undermined the models.  So, to counteract this, NASA has undergone a decades-long effort to change past temperature data that do not adhere to modeled expectations.  In other words, NASA has sought to suppress the 1880s to 1940 warming amplitude and rate, and they have warmed up the 3 decades of NH cooling by about +0.3°C.  In this way, the overall 1880s-present trend will look linear rather than oscillatory, and it will also look more and more like the trends in anthropogenic CO2 emissions (above graph).   When the facts don’t fit the models, NASA apparently changes the facts.

Non-Adjusted Temperature Data Appear To Correlate With 20th Century Solar Forcing

In a paper just published in the journal New Astronomy, scientists Yndestad and Solheim (2017) have released a reconstruction of solar activity (Total Solar Irradiance, or TSI) for 1700-2013.  As explained here, the 20th Century contained the so-called Modern Grand Maximum of very high solar activity.

Taking a closer look at the 20th Century solar irradiance trend only, the (a) rapid rise in TSI for 1900-1950, the (b) dramatic drop in TSI during the 1950s to 1970s, and then the (c) abrupt 1980s to early 2000s increase in TSI all seem to correspond generally to the non-adjusted temperature trend for the Northern Hemisphere — prior to the NASA temperature data manipulation.


In fact, many other recently published surface temperature reconstructions indicate that the warming-cooling-warming oscillatory 20th Century trend may correlate with this solar forcing trajectory.

Rydval et al. (2017), for example, include several graphs of surface temperatures for Northern Hemisphere locations that show warming and cooling periods largely correspond to multi-decadal- and centennial-scale records of high (warming) and low (cooling) solar activity.  In the NH graphs below, for example, notice how the temperature records follow a similar track that correspond with the non-adjusted (pre-1981) NASA temperature record: (a) rapid warming from around 1900 to the mid-20th Century, (b) rapid cooling for a few decades, and then (c) another warming ascent from about the 1970s or 1980s onward.  Also notice that the mid-20th Century peak warmth is not significantly different than the warmth achieved in the last decade or two, again affirming an oscillatory pattern rather than a linear one.


Rydval et al., 2017

“[T]he recent summer-time warming in Scotland is likely not unique when compared to multi-decadal warm periods observed in the 1300s, 1500s, and 1730s … [E]xtreme cold (and warm) years observed in NCAIRN appear more related to internal forcing of the summer North Atlantic Oscillation. … There is reasonable agreement in general between the records regarding protracted cold periods which occur during the LIA and specifically around the Maunder solar minimum centred on the second half of the seventeenth century and to some extent also around the latter part of the fifteenth century coinciding with part of the Spörer minimum (Usoskin et al. 2007).”


Temperature records for many other regions within the Northern Hemisphere (as well as several from the Southern Hemisphere) may also align with the original (non-adjusted) NASA temperature observations and recent reconstructions of TSI.   So as not to cross the threshold of excessiveness, only a small portion of the many similarly correlative warming-cooling-warming temperature reconstructions available are included below.


Yamanouchi, 2011 (Arctic)

Box et al., 2009  (Greenland Ice Sheet)

Hasholt et al., 2016  (Southeast Greenland)

“We determined that temperatures for the ablation measurement periods in late July to early September were similar in both 1933 and the recent period [1990s – present], indicating that the temperature forcing of ablation within the early warm period and the present are similar.”

Kobashi et al., 2011  (Greenland Ice Sheet)

Chafik et al., 2016  (Atlantic, North)

de Jong and de Steur, 2016 (Irminger Sea, North Atlantic)

Reynolds et al., 2017 (Central England, North Atlantic)

Saenger et al, 2009 (Bahamas, Northern Hemisphere)

 

De Jong et al., 2016  (Andes, South America)

“[T]he reconstruction…shows that recent warming (until AD 2009) is not exceptional in the context of the past century. For example, the periods around AD 1940 and from AD 1950–1955 were warmer. This is also shown in the reanalysis data for this region and was also observed by Neukom et al. (2010b) and Neukom and Gergis (2011) for Patagonia and central Chile. Similarly, based on tree ring analyses from the upper tree limit in northern Patagonia, Villalba et al. (2003) found that the period just before AD 1950 was substantially warmer than more recent decades.”

O’Donnell et al., 2016 (Southeast Australia)

de Jong et al., 2013 (Chile)

Gouretski et al., 2012  (graph) (Global Ocean 0-20 m)


To summarize, then, there seems to be no scientific justification for NASA’s conspicuous temperature data tampering.  From all appearances, the removal and/or doctoring of observed temperature data from the pre-1981 period was a tendentious act designed to change the appearance of graphs to fit climate models that presuppose a deterministic anthropogenic influence.  NASA’s apparent manipulation of climate science endangers the reputation of scientists across all disciplines.  It should be stopped immediately before even more credibility is lost.

Failure…Hundreds Of Billions For Nothing As Germany CO2 Reductions Stagnant Almost 10 Years!

It’s good to see that I am not the only person looking critically at Germany’s rather inept attempt to switch over to green energy sources in order to reduce CO2 emissions.

The environmentalprogress.org site here presents a good overview of Germany’s recent performance when it comes to reducing so-called “greenhouse gases”. Unfortunately German citizens have not seen any success recently for the tens of billions of euros they are paying extra for the “Energiewende” (transition to renewable energy).

A new Environmental Progress analysis finds that “German emissions increased in 2016 for a second year in a row“, blaming the result on “the country closing one of its nuclear plants and replacing it with coal and natural gas“. Obviously wind and sun failed to step in and do the job.

Environmental Progress reports the shocking result:

Not only did new solar and wind not make up for the lost nuclear, the percentage of time during 2016 that solar and wind produced electricity declined dramatically.

Germany added a whopping 10 percent more wind turbine capacity and 2.5 percent more solar panel capacity between 2015 and 2016, but generated less than one percent more electricity from wind and generated one percent less electricity from solar.”

The site describes Germany’s wild variability that the country has to deal with producing power from sun and wind.

2016’s rise to 916 gigatonnes of CO2 extends Germany’s streak of failing to lower its CO2 emissions to 8 years. The following chart goes to 2014. The year 2015 saw 908 gigatonnes CO2 emissions compared to 902 in 2014.

germany-annual-co2-emissions-jpg-uba

Chart source: UBA Umweltbundesamt (Federal Office of the Environment).

This means Germany literally has made virtually no progress at all over the past decade. The latest jump in CO2 emissions make the chances of Germany reaching its 2020 CO2 reductions target even far more remote. Add to this that subsidies for wind and solar power recently have been watered down and the surge of up to 2 million refugees will boost demand for energy. Germany’s commitment to fulfilling the Paris Agreement is looking like a real farce.

Another fact that shows that solar and wind will never work: Environmental Progress points out that even if Germany adds 50% more solar panel capacity by 2030, it will boost solar’s share of power from 6% to 9 percent.

Germany’s Energiewende has only succeeded in massively elevating Germany’s consumer power prices, making its power almost twice as expensive as power in neighboring France, which relies heavily on nuclear. While France’s power is half the cost, the country also emits far less CO2 from electricity production:

Germany January 2017_v2.015.jpeg Chart source: http://www.environmentalprogress.org.

That’s what one would call success. Why some countries are still racing into the renewable energy foray despite the German debacle, remains a mystery.

Read all of the Environmental Progress report here.

 

Another Showcase Example Of Fake Science, Climate Propaganda By Germany’s SRF Public Radio

Correction: Reader Fred informs that the SRF is not a German radio station, but instead belongs to Switzerland: “And yes, all people living in Switzerland are forced to pay around 300 US dollars a year for that crap, even if you never watch or listen the SRF […] it is just another leftwing propaganda machine.”
==================================================

The German public radio and television network is funded by mandatory annual fees made by every German citizen. It is massive and it dominates the country’s media landscape. Unfortunately it is not at all objective and balanced, though it may be claimed to be so at Wikipedia and elsewhere.

German public television, for example, works closely with CNN. It is unabashed totally anti-Trump. On November 9 when it became clear that Trump would be the next president, total shock and meltdown spread across all of the German public media.

Like the BBC, German public media are also very much universally climate alarmist, insisting the science is settled (even though it is less so than ever today). Some have argued quite convincingly that Germany is now firmly under a media-political opinion dictatorship – but that’s a topic for another day.

The latest example of climate propaganda and fake science purveyed by the elitist German politico-media comes from SRF German public radio, so reports Africa-geology expert Dr. Sebastian Lüning at his Die kalte Sonne site.

===========================================

SRF Africa correspondent gets it all wrong in Ghana: Embarrassing mixing up of coastal processes and climate change

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated/edited by P Gosselin)

On December 7, 2016, Patrick Wülser at Radio SRF went off on weepy sea level climate alarmism:

Climate change in Ghana: The ocean is swallowing Totope piece by piece
What climate scientists are predicting is already happening in Ghana: The fishing village has already in part sunken into the sea.

Rising sea level and ever more powerful tidal waves are eating away at the coast of West Africa and threatening fishing villagers. The consequences of climate change and the construction of deep-sea harbors and dams have accelerated the erosion of the coastline over the past 20 years. The fishing village of Toto in Ghana has already in part sunken into the sea.”

A rather cheap piece of propaganda theater, as just a critical glance at the map will clearly shows that this village is located in the Volta Delta on a typical coastal sand dune island, which because of the sand dune shifting and sea erosion — also without sea level rise — is always undergoing change naturally. The sediment-transport processes in the region were already comprehensively described in detail back in 1998 by Nairn et al. (pdf here).

Back then coastal protection measures were proposed, but obviously were never implemented.

But there’s more to the story as the huge Volta-water reservoir is pressing down the entire area of the Volta-Delta and its Akosombo dam is preventing the Volta’s land mass from reaching its old Delta area. This means sea erosion can no longer be compensated. Therefore it is easy to demonstrate that the situation described in Totope/Ghana has very little to do with climate change and rising sea level rise, and in fact has much more to do with changed land-use and natural coastal erosion processes.

Moreover, this new SRF propaganda piece is only a rehash of an older Zeit article from 2012.

When one looks at the Wikipedia entry on Song(h)or-Lagune, one cannot find the claimed huge danger through climate change anywhere. Rather the concerned focus is much more on unsustainable use, e.g. through over-fishing, cutting down of the mangroves and drainage in order to create more farmland:

Threats and possible consequences

The main threats to the site exist as varied forms of excessive utilization. Some common cases are over-fishing, extreme harvesting of mangroves, extensive drainage and cultivation for farmland, heavy grazing by cattle and livestock, and an unsustainable level of salt winning. These threats are difficult to neutralize because the human communities surrounding the lagoon are largely poor and over-populated. In effect, the local people are dependent upon their harvesting of the lagoon for survival. Although ecotourism provides an ecologically friendly source of income, the practice is not extensive enough to sustain the local communities. Additional threats originate from the use of pesticides and herbicides, the damming of creeks and channels for the purpose of expanding infrastructure, and rubbish dumping.[16] These threats can and, in some instances, have had dire consequences. The breeding cycles of nesting species, like the several sea turtle species hosted by the lagoon, can be disturbed by exaggerated human activity. Furthermore, the eggs of such species are often trampled by grazing cattle and livestock. Another realized effect of human exploitation is the apparent shrinking of the lagoon, which can be easily observed in the satellite photo comparison shown at the opening of this article. Further disturbance of the lagoon could result in not only the loss of species that inhabit the site, but also the loss of nutritive and moderating benefits provided by the site. Aside from purifying ground water, acting as a reservoir for nutrients, and supporting the local food chain, the lagoon regulates water flow, staggers and lessens the effects of flooding, and disperses the extreme erosive forces exerted on the shore by the Atlantic Ocean.[17]

re

Germany’s Federal Accounting Office Slams Government For Out-Of-Control Electricity Costs

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) — Germany’s version of the Washington Post — reports here that the country’s Energiewende (transition to green energy) has been fraught with “serious errors” and that the government has lost control of its energy policy.

The FAZ cites a report released by the Bundesrechnungshof (federal accounting office).

Out-of-control costs

The report unloads criticism on Economics Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who is also vice chancellor to Angela Merkel.

The federal accounting office report slams Gabriel’s Economics Ministry, concluding, that it “has no overview of the financial impacts of the Energiewende.” In short, the government has lost control over the project – similarly like it lost control of the construction of Hamburg’s Elbphilharmonie concert hall, which originally had been estimated to cost less than 80 million euros, but wound up costing a scandalous 789 million euros before finishing years behind schedule!

“Serious organizational deficiencies”

The accounting office report also accuses Germany’s energy policy of being fraught with “serious organizational deficiencies” that are “difficult to comprehend“.

In the earlier days of the Energiewende, proponents such as Green Party member Jürgen Trittin boasted that the green energy project would be affordable, costing the average German citizen about as much as the cost of “one scoop of ice cream each month“. Since then Germany’s electricity costs for consumers have exploded and are now among the highest in the world, averaging near 30 cents per kilowatt hour.

The stability of the supply has also taken a serious hit.

Price spiral continues

Even worse, the prices of German electricity bare projected to increase substantially over the coming years. The FAZ adds:

The federal accounting office sees a risk that it will get more expensive to advance the Energiewende.”

Germany’s shocking electricity price spiral shows no signs of slowing. A week ago the online Kieler Nachrichten here reported in a separate story that “electric bills for consumers will be significantly higher in 2017” and that if things do not change, prices will continue to rise until at least 2023.

 

Scientists Find Climate’s ‘Cause Of Causes’…Highest Solar Activity In 4000 Years Just Ended…Cooling Begins In 2025

“It is generally accepted that the climate warms during periods of strong solar activity (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period) and cools during periods of low solar activity (e.g., the Little Ice Age).” Lyu et al., 2016

Graph Source: WoodForTrees.org
Scientists are increasingly tuning out the claims that the Earth’s temperatures are predominantly shaped by anthropogenic CO2 emissions, or that future climate is destined to be alarmingly warm primarily due to the rise in trace atmospheric gases.  Instead, solar scientists are continuing to advance our understanding of solar activity and its effect on the Earth system, and their results are progressively suggestive of robust correlations between solar variability and climate changes.
For example, in 2016 alone, there were at least 132 peer-reviewed scientific papers documenting a significant solar influence on climate.  Among them there were 18 papers that directly connected centennial-scale periods of low solar activity (the Little Ice Age) with cooler climates, and periods of high solar activity (the Medieval Warm Period and the Modern Warm Period [20th Century]) with high solar activity levels.  Another 10 papers warned of an impending solar minimum and concomitant cooling period in the coming decades.
And this trend of scientists linking climate changes to solar forcing mechanisms — and bypassing an anthropogenic explanation — continues to rage on in 2017.

A Seminal New Paper Unveils The ‘Cause Of Causes’ Of Climate Change

In their groundbreaking New Astronomy paper, Norwegian professors Harald Yndestad and Jan-Erik Solheim indicate that the modern (1940-2015) Grand Maximum of very high solar activity — the highest solar activity levels in 4,000 years — has just ended.   Within 10 years, or by 2025, these scientists project the next solar minimum period (which will be similar in character to the late 18th Century’s Dalton Minimum) will exert its cooling effect on the Earth’s climate.
Yndestad and Solheim have been working together on this project for more than 2 years.  Although Dr. Yndestad was “skeptical about the idea of ​​sunspots as climate indicators” initially, the two discovered “for the first time” a strong long-term correlation between Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) and sunspots for periods of 84 and 210 years, confirming the “Cause of causes” of climate change.  Details can be found in their illuminating new paper.

Yndestad and Solheim, 2017

Summary

“Deterministic models based on the stationary periods confirm the results through a close relation to known long solar minima since 1000 A.D. and suggest a modern maximum period from 1940 to 2015. The model computes a new Dalton-type sunspot minimum from approximately 2025 to 2050 and a new Dalton-type period TSI minimum from approximately 2040 to 2065. … Periods with few sunspots are associated with low solar activity and cold climate periods. Periods with many sunspots are associated with high solar activity and warm climate periods.”

1940-2015 Grand Maximum Of Solar Activity, Highest In 4,000 Years, Just Ended

“Studies that employ cosmogenic isotope data and sunspot data indicate that we are currently leaving a grand activity maximum, which began in approximately 1940 and is now declining (Usoskin et al., 2003; Solanki et al., 2004; Abreu et al., 2008). Because grand maxima  and minima occur on centennial or millennial timescales, they can only be investigated using proxy data, i.e., solar activity reconstructed from 10Be and 14C time-calibrated data. The conclusion is that the activity level of the Modern Maximum (1940–2000) is a relatively rare event, with the previous similarly high levels of solar activity observed 4 and 8 millennia ago (Usoskin et al., 2003). Nineteen grand maxima have been identified by Usoskin et al. (2007) in an 11,000-yr series.”

Solar Activity Minimum/Maximum Periods Linked To Colder/Warmer Climates

“Twenty-seven grand minima are identified with a total duration of 1900 years, or approximately 17% of the time during the past 11,500 years (Usoskin et al., 2007). An adjustment-free reconstruction of the solar activity over the last three millennia confirms four grand minima since the year 1000: Maunder (1640–1720), Spörer (1390–1550), Wolf (1270–1340) and Oort (1010–1070) (Usoskin et al., 2007). The Dalton minimum (1790–1820) does not fit the definition of a grand minimum; it is more likely a regular deep minimum that is observed once per century or an immediate state between the grand minimum and normal activity (Usoskin, 2013).  Temperature reconstructions for the last millennium for the Northern Hemisphere (Ljungquist, 2010) show a medieval maximum temperature at approximately the year 1000 [Medieval Warm Period] and a cooling period starting at approximately 1350 [Little Ice Age], immediately after the Wolf minimum and lasting nearly 500 years, with the coldest period in what is referred to as the Little Ice Age (LIA) at the time of the Maunder minimum. A cold period was also observed during the time of the Dalton minimum. The Maunder and the Dalton minima are associated with less solar activity and colder climate periods. In this investigation, minimum solar activity periods may serve as a reference for the identified minimum irradiations in the TSI oscillations.”

Other scientists have just published papers in peer-reviewed journals documenting a robust correlation between solar activity and surface temperatures in the paleoclimate record.  Zawiska et al. (2017) have found that the amplitudes of the warming and cooling periods — modulated by changes in solar activity and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) — during the last 1,000 years far exceeded the temperature changes that have occurred since about 1950, or since anthropogenic CO2 emissions began rising at an accelerating pace.  For example, these scientists point out that within a matter of 100 years (1050-1150 to 1150-1250), summer temperatures rose from 9.2°C during a low solar activity period (Oort Minimum) to 12.0°C in concert with the subsequent rise in solar activity.
Zawiska and colleagues also point out that the rise in modern era temperatures began around 1800, not the 20th century.  In fact, they find that temperatures rose by 4.3°C (from 8.5°C to 12.8°C) within 75 years starting at the beginning of the 19th century (+0.57°C per decade), and this warming “correlates with the positive NAO index and increased solar activity.”   The authors further indicate that the warming in the 20th/21st centuries has been “less pronounced” by comparison.
During the 19th century, of course, anthropogenic CO2 emissions rates were but a tiny fraction of what has been observed since the mid-20th century, strongly suggesting that temperature changes associated with natural variations in atmospheric/oceanic cycles (NAO) and solar activity far exceed the forcing strength of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Zawiska et al., 2017

Summary

“The chironomid-based temperature reconstruction from Lake Atnsjøen in Eastern Norway with mean resolution of 30 years provided evidence that large-scale processes, such as the NAO fluctuations and solar activity modified local climate, and subsequently affected lakes functioning. The three minor cooling periods were reconstructed in the first half of the Millennium: 1050–1150, 1270–1370, 1440–1470 CE, that coincide with solar activity minima: Oort, Wulf, and Spörer respectively. Furthermore, a two peaked cooling period in the second half of the Millennium was identified that coincided with the LIA. These changes co-occurred with the prevailing negative NAO index.”

Cold Periods (Temp. Average 9.2 °C) Correlate With Low Solar Activity, NAO

“At 1050–1150 CE the first of the short-term cooling periods of the last Millennium began and the mean July temperature in the Lake Atnsjøen region dropped to 9.2 °C. The beginning of this cooling coincided with the Oort solar activity minimum. The reconstructed climate deterioration agrees very well with temperatures revealed for Europe (PAGES 2k Consortium, 2013) and Finland (Luoto and Helama, 2010), and partly with tree-ring based temperature trends from Northern Sweden (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The climate cooling around 1100 CE has been observed also in Northern America, Russia and Central Asia (Osborn and Briffa, 2006; Wanner et al., 2008), but intrestingly not in Greenland (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The beginning of the 1270–1370 CE cooling coincide with Wulf solar activity minimum suggesting that the climate was responding to Sun activity. The climate cooling synchronous to this solar minimum had almost global range and it has been recorded from Europe, Arctic, North America and Antarctica (Osborn and Briffa, 2006; PAGES 2k Consortium, 2013) but again not in Greenland (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The beginning of the 1440–1470 CE cold period is synchronous to the pronounce negative NAO phase (Trouet et al., 2009). … Maunder solar minimum caused a very deep negative NAO index phase (Shindell et al., 2001), which consecutively lead to significant drop in the reconstructed temperature.”

Warm Periods (Temp. Average 12°C) Correlate With High Solar Activity, NAO 

“According to presented reconstruction, climate shifted towards warmer conditions during 1150–1250 CE, as mean July temperature raised to 12 °C. Studies from Finland and Sweden also indicate short climate warming around 1200 CE (Luoto and Helama, 2010; Osborn and Briffa, 2006)  … The above described time interval 1000–1250 CE coincides with the MCA [Medieval Climate Anomaly] that occurred around 950–1250 CE and was regarded as a generally warmer and drier period (Mann et al., 2009).
The temperature reconstruction from Lake Atnsjøen indicates that recent and ongoing climate warming began already in 1800 CE following the LIA. Temperatures increased very fast, from 8.5 to 12.8 °C during the first 75 years, but in the 20th century the increase became less pronounced.
The warming at the beginning of 19th century in the region of Lake Atnsjøen coincides with a reconstruction from Southern Finland (Luoto, 2013), and a record from Northern Sweden (Osborn and Briffa, 2006).  Its onset correlates with the positive NAO index and increased solar activity.”


Another scientist just published a paper in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology that also concludes solar activity drove variations in the East Asian Monsoon (EAM), El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), and the centennial-scale cooling periods corresponding to the Oort, Wolf, Spörer, and Maunder sunspot minimums.
In his graph of Western Tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures (SSTs), notice how Park (2017) also documents a dramatic warming event occurred beginning about 1800, with the SST warming rate and amplitude far exceeding that which has occurred in recent decades, once again demonstrating the lack of correlation between anthropogenic CO2 emissions and surface temperatures relative to natural variation.

Park, 2017

“Late Holocene climate change in coastal East Asia was likely driven by ENSO variation.   Our tree pollen index of warmness (TPIW) shows important late Holocene cold events associated with low sunspot periods such as Oort, Wolf, Spörer, and Maunder Minimum. Comparisons among standard Z-scores of filtered TPIW, ΔTSI, and other paleoclimate records from central and northeastern China, off the coast of northern Japan, southern Philippines, and Peru all demonstrate significant relationships [between solar activity and climate]. This suggests that solar activity drove Holocene variations in both East Asian Monsoon (EAM) and El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). In particular, the latter seems to have predominantly controlled the coastal climate of East Asia to the extent that the influence of precession was nearly muted during the late Holocene.”


The year has just begun, and, in addition to the 3 papers introduced above, there have already been several other 2017 scientific papers published in scientific journals documenting a robust correlation between solar activity and climate changes.  With the rapidly growing body of evidence that has been accumulating within the last few years, it can no longer be said that it is “settled” science that the Sun and its modulation of natural atmospheric/oceanic oscillations (NAO, ENSO, PDO, AMO) has only a negligible influence on climate.  The claim that we human beings predominantly drive climate changes with our CO2 emissions is increasingly being challenged, if not categorically undermined, in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Sun et al., 2017

“[A]t least six centennial droughts occurred at about 7300, 6300, 5500, 3400, 2500 and 500 cal yr BP. Our findings are generally consistent with other records from the ISM [Indian Summer Monsoon]  region, and suggest that the monsoon intensity is primarily controlled by solar irradiance on a centennial time scale. This external forcing may have been amplified by cooling events in the North Atlantic and by ENSO activity in the eastern tropical Pacific, which shifted the ITCZ further southwards. The inconsistency between local rainfall amount in the southeastern margin of the QTP and ISM intensity may also have been the result of the effect of solar activity on the local hydrological cycle on the periphery of the plateau.”

Deng et al., 2017

The results indicate that the climate of the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA, AD 900–1300) was similar to that of the Current Warm Period (CWP, AD 1850–present), which contradicts previous studies. … As for the Little Ice Age (LIA, AD 1550–1850), the results from this study, together with previous data from the Makassar Strait, indicate a cold and wet period compared with the CWP and the MCA in the western Pacific. The cold LIA period agrees with the timing of the Maunder sunspot minimum and is therefore associated with low solar activity.”

Zielhofer et al., 2017

Western Mediterranean Holocene record of abrupt hydro-climatic changes … Imprints of North Atlantic meltwater discharges, NAO and solar forcing …Early Holocene winter rain minima are in phase with cooling events and millennial-scale meltwater discharges in the sub-polar North Atlantic. … [A] significant hydro-climatic shift at the end of the African Humid Period (∼5 ka) indicates a change in climate forcing mechanisms. The Late Holocene climate variability in the Middle Atlas features a multi-centennial-scale NAO-type pattern, with Atlantic cooling and Western Mediterranean winter rain maxima generally associated with solar minima.”

Matveev et al., 2017

“An increase in atmospheric moisture for the warm period of the year (May–September) since 1890s, and mean annual temperatures since the 1950s was identified. During the same time period, there was a marked increase in amplitude of the annual variations for temperature and precipitation. … These fluctuations are consistent with 10–12-years Schwabe–Wolf, 22-years Hale, and the 32–36-years Bruckner Solar Cycles. There was an additional relationship found between high-frequency (short-period) climate fluctuations, lasting for about three years, and 70–90-years fluctuations of the moisture regime in the study region corresponding to longer cycles.”

Europe Cold Only A Preview: Meteorologist Bastardi Warns Of “Weather Headlines Coming Out Of Europe”!

At today’s Weatherbell Daily Update, meteorologist Joe Bastardi looks at the forecast over the next 15 days for Europe. The following chart depicts the forecast accumulated snowfall by January 27, 2017.

Image cropped from Weatherbell 11 January 20017 Daily Update.

As the chart makes clear, plenty of winter snow is in the pipeline. The cold that Europe experienced earlier this month was likely just a preview of remains ahead for the continent. The widespread snow cover threatens to send nighttime temperatures to harsh levels. Bastardi even goes on to say that the snowfall over Europe will be “a big headline maker”.

Bastardi, a veteran in the forecasting business, also shows the GFS temperature outlook for January 22-27, which will follow 10 days of below normal tempertaures:

Almost the entire European continent will gripped by cold during the period. Joe promises that we are going to be seeing weather headlines coming out of Europe, and may well be similar to what happened in 2013.

That likely means a very late spring. The gardening industry should take note.

 

-30°C In Poland — Europe Arctic Cold Blast Claims Close To 60 Lives As Media Remain Mostly Silent!

Reader Indomitable Snowman sent a link to an AccuWeather report telling us of the intense winter weather gripping eastern Europe and how it has claimed close to 60 lives thus far. German weather site wetteronline.de also reports of close to 60 cold deaths so far from the current Eastern European cold blast.

Although we get scattered reports of cold deaths here in Europe, it’s been tough to find a total tally from the German global warming-devout mainstream media.

Accuweather writes:

Millions of people from Baltic states and Poland southward to the Mediterranean Sea have endured dangerous cold and bouts of snow. Thousands of refugees have also had to endure the bitter cold which is expected to last through at least Thursday. Temperatures plummeted to the lowest level in years in Warsaw, Minsk, Budapest and Moscow.”

Rescue from cold for the birds?

Entering the German term “Kältetote” (cold deaths) in Google, one gets few reports of the total deaths in Europe (at the time this post was written) from the German mainstream media. Online daily Bild did wrote here 2 days ago how the intensely cold conditions posed a dangerous threat to refugees in transit. Indeed this was true, and it still is.

Yet, another site here seem to think the real story of the day was how one man rescued a bird from freezing to death — as if poor citizens do not matter so much?

Die Welt reports 50 victims

To its credit, the online Die Welt here reported on the eastern European cold deaths earlier today:

Especially in the east and south of the continent several dozen people have frozen to death, in Belarus, Ukraine, in Hungary and Slovakia, in Bosnia, Austria, Belgium and Italy. Especially hard hit is Poland, where the mercury fell at times to -30°C. […] In total the cold wave in January has claimed so far about 50 victims, since November the number is close to 70 people.”

The most vulnerable unable to afford heat

Moreover it appears that Europe’s socialist, compassionate systems aren’t really doing their job of helping society’s weakest. Die Welt comments that “pensioners, the unemployed and the homeless often cannot afford heating” and thus are the ones paying the price of a low-energy society with their lives.

Die Welt has been reporting regularly on the story, writing four days ago how the cold was claiming the lives of refugees and the homeless.

Cold wave forecast to spread, continue

Unfortunately there is going to be no let up in people freezing to death. The cold and wintry mix will spread across central Europe by the weekend, according to wetteronline.de.

Western Europeans need to brace themselves. Image: wetteronline.de

The German weather site writes:

A powerful high over the Baltic Sea and a strong Mediterranean low will flood the continent with Siberian cold air across all of Central Europe next week. Even highs of -10°C are within the range of possibility. […] Temperatures will fall into the cellar. With the exception of coastal areas and maybe northwest Germany, permanent frost conditions will persist for almost the entire week.. In the south high temperatures will range from -10 to -5°C.”

 

Pravda: “Scientists Now Warn Of A New Ice Age” As Temperature Plummets to – 80°F In Russia!

UPDATE! “Arctic outbreak kills dozens…

===============================================
Some impressive winter events have been taking place all across the northern hemisphere lately. Especially eastern and southeastern Europe have been pounded by massive snowfalls and tremendously cold temperatures. Turkey has been buried by heavy snows and extreme temperatures have gripped the entire USA and vast areas of Russia.

The global warming climate appears to have been hacked by natural factors.


Extreme cold and snow pound the northern hemisphere as some scientists warn of the potential for ice age conditions. Photo of Greenland by NASA (public domain)

  • In Russia Moscow celebrated the coldest orthodox Christmas in 125 years.
  • Snowfall paralyzed the city of Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Massive snow falls across the Balkans, Italy and Greece.
  • Dozens of Europeans have since frozen to death.
  • Northern Albania villages have been cut off by 120 cm of snow.
  • A temperature of -62°C (-80°F) was recorded in Chanty-Mansijsk (Russia).

Arctic conditions spread deep into the Mediterranean

These are all odd events when considering the “consensus” forecasts made 15 years ago, which warned that snow and ice would become rare.

In fact many scientists warned that Mediterranean conditions would spread into northern Europe. Lately, however, just the opposite has happened: Arctic conditions have plunged down into the Mediterranean!

Even worse, there is no end in site for the harsh European winter conditions, German mass circulation daily Bild writes here.

Warning of an impending ice age

So in the face of all the earlier global warming predictions, it is now only ironic that yesterday the German-language Pravda TV site here published an article warning of an impending ice age. The article cites Yale scientist Wei Liu and a recent paper he published on the “overlooked possibility of a collapsed Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation“. Should the ocean heat conveyor collapse, then there would be “a prominent cooling over the northern North Atlantic and neighboring areas, sea ice increases over the Greenland-Iceland-Norwegian seas and to the south of Greenland.”

Note: Pravda is a rebel-type German site, and so could be viewed to be in similar ranks as climate alarmist sites, but with an opposite view. A collapsed AMOC is still speculative.

Useless models

The Pravda report summarizes Liu’s paper as follows:

CO2 has nothing to do with it, rather the influence of the sun is the dominant factor: less sunspots (Climate: solar physicists project global cooling (video)), weakening of the earth’s magnetic field, impact on the jet stream are decisive factors that can quickly lead our climate into an ice age (Scientists: Consensus 2016: the climate models are useless (Video)).”

Pravda also describes how some experts say today’s climate models fail to take the known ocean and solar factors in account.

UPDATE:
Snow forecast for Europe for the next 10 days!:


Note how far south that snow cover reaches, all the way deep into the Mediterranean – covering Sicily, Greece, southwestern Turkey and North Africa.

Smackdown: AMS Paper Exposes Media, Scientists As Falsely Hyping Human Attribution In Extreme Weather Events

Source: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:2015.4/to:2017.1/plot/rss/from:2015.4/to:2017.1/trend

“Climate models are unable to predict extreme events because they lack spatial and temporal resolution. In addition, there is no clear evidence that sustained or worldwide changes in extreme events have occurred in the past few decades.”    —- IPCC AR4 (2007) Section 8.3.9.3  Page 232


According to no less of an authority than the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), there is a significant lack of evidence connecting anthropogenic global warming to changes in the frequencies or intensities of extreme weather events (such as storms, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and tornadoes).   In Chapter 2 of the most recent IPCC report (AR5, 2013), for example, we find these (7) conclusions affirming the the lack of clear observational evidence linking extreme weather events to human activity.


IPCC AR5, Chapter 2:

1. “Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century”
2. “No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years”
3. “In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale
4. “The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados
5. “In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms
6. “In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century.”
7. “In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low


The IPCC conclusions summarized above are supported by references from the peer-reviewed scientific literature extending through 2013. Since the 5th IPCC report was released 3 years ago, many more scientific papers have been published that also endorse the position that there is not an established link between increases in the frequency or intensity of extreme weather events and anthropogenic climate change.  For example:


van der Wiel et al., 2016       “[N]o evidence was found for changes in extreme precipitation attributable to climate change in the available observed record.”
Boos and Sterelvmo, 2016       “Thus, neither a physically correct theoretical model nor a comprehensive climate model support the idea that seasonal mean monsoons will undergo abrupt, nonlinear shifts in response to changes in greenhouse gas concentrations, aerosol emissions, or land surface albedo.”
Guo et al., 2016       “[T]he combined spatial-temporal variability of U.S. tornado occurrence has remained nearly constant since 1950.”
Chang et al., 2016       “With increasing greenhouse gases, enhanced high-latitude warming will lead to weaker cyclone activity. Here we show that between 1979 and 2014, the number of strong cyclones in Northern Hemisphere in summer has decreased at a rate of 4% per decade.”
Chen et al., 2017       “[T]here is a close linkage between the weakening of cyclonic activity after the early 1990s and the nonuniform surface warming of the Eurasian continent.”
Sugi et al., 2015       “Recent review papers reported that many high-resolution global climate models consistently projected a reduction of global tropical cyclone (TC) frequency in a future warmer climate.”
Chenoweth and Divine, 2014       “Our results suggest that nineteenth century [tropical cyclone] frequency is comparable to that for the same area during the entire satellite era from 1965–2012.”
Cheng et al., 2016       “The results thus indicate that the net effect of climate change has made agricultural drought less likely and that the current severe impacts of drought on California’s agriculture have not been substantially caused by long-term climate changes.”
Hoerling et al, 2016       “[A]ppreciable 35-yr trends in heavy daily precipitation can occur in the absence of forcing, thereby limiting detection of the weak anthropogenic influence at regional scales.”
Kundzewicz et al., 2014       It has not been possible to attribute rain-generated peak streamflow trends [floods] to anthropogenic climate change over the past several decades. … [P]resently we have only low confidence in numerical projections of changes in flood magnitude or frequency resulting from climate change.”
Benito et al., 2015       “[I]n most cases present flood magnitudes are not unusual within the context of the last millennium … [T]he frequency of extreme floods has decreased since the 1950s
Delworth et al., 2015       “In our simulations the tropical wind anomalies account for 92% of the simulated North American drought during the recent decade, with 8% from anthropogenic radiative forcing changes. This suggests that anthropogenic radiative forcing is not the dominant driver of the current drought
McCabe and Wolock, 2015       “[F]or the past century %drought has not changed, even though global PET [potential evapotranspiration] and temperature (T) have increased.”
van Wijngaarden and Syd, 2015       “Changes in annual precipitation over the Earth’s land mass [through 2013]… The trends for precipitation change together with their 95% confidence intervals were found for various periods of time. Most trends exhibited no clear precipitation change. … A change of 1% per century corresponds to a precipitation change of 0.09. mm/year.”
Cai et al., 2014       “Recent drought in 1993–2008 was still within the frame of natural climate variability based on the 306 yr PDSI reconstruction.”
Doerr and Santín, 2016       “[M]any consider wildfire as an accelerating problem, with widely held perceptions both in the media and scientific papers of increasing fire occurrence, severity and resulting losses. However, important exceptions aside, the quantitative evidence available does not support these perceived overall trends. Instead, global area burned appears to have overall declined over past decades, and there is increasing evidence that there is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago.”

So although the science — indeed, the IPCC — is rather clear in documenting the lack of evidence affirming the anthropogenic global warming/extreme weather link, just about every day we are nonetheless barraged with claims that human-caused droughts will destroy all 888 million trees in the US Southwest by 2100, that we humans are causing “weather whiplash” with our CO2 emissions, or that this past year we humans caused eight 500- or 1000-year floods.    In other words, when it comes to advocating for the anthropogenic global warming cause, the observations and evidence contradicting the narrative that says humans have caused more frequent and severe floods, droughts, hurricanes, storms, tornadoes . . . is largely ignored.

Just as the leading temperature graph above illustrates, a warm temperature anomaly is, according to an alleged “consensus” of climate scientists, caused by humans, not natural factors (i.e., the 2015-’16 Super El Niño event).  A cooling temperature anomaly, on the other hand, is just called “natural variability.”   No need to substantively support this “explanation” of human vs. natural attribution with actual scientific evidence.   It is enough just to claim it is so.

Likewise, when severe drought conditions parch the US Southwest — or, as of today, “catastrophic flooding” deluges the very same region — all that needs to be reiterated is that we humans double drought frequencies and triple flood frequencies with our CO2 emissions — regardless of whether this reiteration is supported by observational evidence.  (It is not.)  This way, catastrophic floods and devastating droughts which occur at the same time and in the same place can be said to be human-caused, and each single event can necessarily be claimed to have been driven by anthropogenic climate change.  Those who question (or deny) the “truth” of these human attribution pronouncements deserve to be marginalized as “climate deniers” and “anti-science.”  This seems to be how modern-day “climate science” works.


A Wake-Up-Call Scientific Paper

Perhaps no paper found in a reputable journal (American Meteorological Society’s Weather, Climate, and Society) has been as openly critical of the narrative “science” of extreme weather human attribution as the one just published by University of Manchester’s Janković and Shultz (2017).   The authors pull no punches in boldly asserting that the brand of human attribution science as currently practiced by climate activists such as Michael Mann and Michael Oppenheimer “contradicts the scientific evidence and engenders a “massive oversimplification” or even “misstatement” of the “true state of the science.”  They further question the claims that a pre-industrial or “below 350 ppm [carbon dioxide]” climate is necessarily more benign or less affected by extreme weather, and they warn that “unachievable” CO2 emissions reduction policies are at risk of being classified as “ill advised, ineffective, and disingenuous” if and/or when the public eventually recognizes how flimsy the evidence is upon which these policies are based.

Janković and Shultz even dare to reference the late Dr. Stephen Schneider’s heartfelt rationalization for climate change advocacy by invoking his stated position that climate scientists must necessarily “offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have” so as to “capture the public’s imagination” by “getting loads of media coverage” as a means to advance the cause.  This, of course, is not science.  It is political activism.  Unfortunately, this is all too often the direction that modern “climate science” has been headed in recent years.

What follows are selected excerpts (all direct quotes) from the Janković and Shultz (2017) paper entitled, “Atmosfear: Communicating the Effects of Climate Change on Extreme Weather“.   Considering there were  500 papers supporting a skeptical position on global warming alarm published in scientific journals during 2016, perhaps the publication of wake-up-call, borderline-iconoclastic scientific papers such as this will become more and more commonplace in the near future.  For the sake of salvaging at least some credibility for what has come to be known as modern-day “climate science,” one can only hope.


Janković and Shultz (2017)

‘”[C]limate Change Means More Extreme Weather” Is A Massive Oversimplification—If Not Misstatement—Of The True State Of The Science’

In 2011, the nonprofit science and outreach organization Climate Communication—whose staff and science advisors include, among others, Richard Sommerville, Jerry Melillo, Ken Kaldeira, Kerry Emanuel, Michael Mann, and Michael Oppenheimer—issued the following statement:

As the climate has warmed, some types of extreme weather have become more frequent and severe in recent decades, with increases in extreme heat, intense precipitation, and drought. …  All weather events are now influenced by climate change because all weather now develops in a different environment than before.”

Yet, this statement, as well as numerous others in the popular literature and media stories, contradicts the scientific evidence.

[R]educing the complexity of climate change (as if a single outcome were known) into the soundbite of “climate change means more extreme weather” is a massive oversimplification—if not misstatement—of the true state of the science.

‘Policy Based On Attribution Claims … Run The Risk Of Being Ill Advised, Ineffective, And Disingenuous’

[A] preindustrial climate may remain a policy goal, but it is unachievable in reality.  … [A]ttribution science appears to have a unique potential to boost motivation for climate action because of its appeal to responsibility to prevent socioenvironmental impacts of the anthropogenically charged atmosphere…. [S]ome commentators resort to the language of human rights, government’s malfeasance, and corporate liability. …  [A]ttribution claims allow policy-makers to put forward a case for morally robust policies based on mitigation of greenhouse emissions. Weather extremes are proxies of climate crisis, dismantling the climate complexity into the simpler and more visible conventional idiom of atmospheric hazard. …  It is assumed that a new postanthropogenic atmosphere will be graced by a more benign weather than the anthropogenic one preceding it. … [I]t remains to be determined whether such [CO2 emission reduction] plans ought to be legitimized by a presumed rise in future weather extremes and whether a successful implementation of such plans would result in a demonstrable reduction of socioeconomic damages caused by supercharged weather. If neither of these results is justified, a policy based on attribution claims (and [fear]) runs the risk of being ill advised, ineffective, and disingenuous. 

‘Climate Change Is Not Manageable By A Policy Based On A Mere Scientific Consensus’

Scientists and policy-makers sometimes refer to the status of the unadulterated climate by the preindustrial levels of carbon dioxide, under the assumption that staying below 350 ppm would entail a climatically safer world characterized, among other things, by a decrease of anthropogenically driven extremes. Does a world under the 350-ppm limit (or any other limit) automatically translate into one characterized by a more favorable climate? …  Reducing carbon emissions, regardless of how effective, cannot of itself reduce weather impacts (e.g., Schultz and Janković 2014). …  Climate change is not a discrete problem independent of development imperatives, nor is it manageable by a policy based on a mere scientific consensus (Prins et al. 2010). [E]ven if anthropogenic climate change were effectively stopped, extreme weather would continue. Members of the public and governmental representatives who had been sold on the idea that “stopping climate change will reduce extreme weather events” would understandably question their bill of goods, reducing scientific credibility.

‘Uncritical Attribution Claims … Bolstered By The Cultural And Media Propensity For Hyping Extreme Events’

We believe that the weatherward rather than landward attention results in part from an uncritical adoption of attribution claims that, in turn, shape the perception of climate change as a long-term weirding of weather, bolstered by the cultural and media propensity for hyping extreme events (Leyda and Negra 2015). Attribution claims and atmosfear have helped to consolidate the representation of climate change as a material threat with origins in an adulterated atmosphere, safety from which must be sought in tackling that threat. As a result, in popular parlance, climate change is often represented as a carbon-driven entity (or agency) endowed with a causal power that alters social life and the natural environment (Fleming and Janković 2011; Hulme 2015).

With such events seemingly outside the expected natural range of possibilities, the media increasingly turned to blaming climate change for the severe weather (e.g., Janković 2006; Hulme 2014).

The good cause—one that most of us support—can all too readily corrupt the conduct of science, especially science informing public policy, because we prefer answers that support our political preferences, and find science that challenges them less comfortable (Kellow 2008).

In 1989, Stephen Schneider, one of the leading twentieth-century climate scientists, summarized the need for this particular form of scientific-cum-moral double engagement to Discover magazine.

“[W]e [scientists] are […] working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we [scientists] have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.”

“O Canada!” What An Energy Buffoon You Have “On Guard For Thee” In Ontario …Wynne’s Debacle

We’ve been hearing bits and pieces coming out of Ontario concerning its renewable energy debacle.

Now I read at the CBC an opinion piece by Robin Urback from late November on just how bad the situation is getting. Man, and we thought things were bad in Germany and Europe!

It turns out that Ontario prime minister Kathleen Wynne is the real deal when it comes to energy policy incompetence. The Ontarian version of the Energiewende is probably outdoing Germany’s very own.

Rex Murphy sums it up here at the National Post:

It cannot have escaped the attention of many that Ontario is most unsettled these days. That its industries are anxious, its debt colossal, its citizens not in a pleasant mood. Ontario is in a lot of pain.”

For one, Ontarians are up in arms over the skyrocketing electricity prices:

Electricity Prices - Historical Snapshot

Groundwork for an uprising? Ontario electricity used to be a low-priced commodity. Now prices are skyrocketing. Source: Ontario Energy Board here.

And according to the CBC, Wynne now says she is very sorry about the mess she has created with energy consumers. The CBC quotes Wynne:

Our government made a mistake. It was my mistake. And I’m going to do my best to fix it,”

If there’s one thing I like about Donald Trump, it is his advice that you can’t expect the very people who created the mess to later be the ones to fix it. They are the last people who should be involved in the solution. Their rightful place is in the unemployment line, in exile, or in a political gulag.

So why wasn’t this debacle prevented from happening? After all this is not the sort of thing that just pops in out of the blue. The answer is that Wynne and her team ignored and dismissed the constant chorus of warnings, thinking they knew much better. Urback writes (sarcastically):

In any case, we probably shouldn’t blame this one on the Liberals. Indeed, besides the dozens of reports, years of increasing consumer prices, dire financial warnings and protests over unaffordable hydro bills — there was no way they could have seen this coming.”

If any one has doubts about Wynne being way out of touch, check out what she said concerning coping with high electricity prices in a recent interview posted at FaceBook by KeepHydroPublic here:

Source of news clip: www.facebook.com/keephydropublic/?fref=nf

Note how she says she got her the energy costs under control by having her home renovated to make it energy efficient. In other words, she is telling viewers if you find it’s difficult to pay your monthly energy bills, then just spend thousands of dollars (that you don’t have, but she does) on renovating your entire house!

The site writes:

The Ontario Government has made it impossible for residents to pay their bills. When asked if she ever looks at her bill the Premier stumbles and says she’s privileged to have a house better renovated for less consumption. In 2017 we will fight the Ontario Government’s every attempt to blame residents about consumptions. The Government tries to blame residents for the bad deals they made which is costing people more. And now they want to sell people’s asset to pay for their mistakes. Ontarians do not have the privilege to lose their biggest utility.”

And what is especially stunning is that over 80% of Ontario’s electricity supply already comes from carbon-free sources (nuclear and hydro), making the mad rush into wind and sun, and all the social problems they bring, completely unnecessary. It’s all a big green show with huge cost and practically no benefit.

And these people think it’s the Russians?

 

Germany Sees 4 Catastrophic Wind Turbine Failures In Four Weeks …Man Nearly Hit By Ice Projectile

A few of days ago I reported on a spate of wind turbine collapses occuring in Germany and Europe. Well the folly appears to be continuing as the online German Tageblatt here reports how yet another has come crashing down, with a passerby witnessing it live.

The fourth collapse in four weeks!

German news site NTV here writes:

South of Hamburg an approximately 100-meter tall wind turbine collapsed. The turbine in Neu Wulmstorf fell during the morning, a police spokesman said. A passerby observed the incident and called the fire department.”

The NTV reports it’s still unknown why the bolted connection 20 meters high came apart at around 11 a.m, but was probably due to brisk winds at the time.

The latest incident led the Swiss online daily Baseler Zeitung (BaZ) here to report on the unusual series of wind turbine failures in neighboring Germany, writing that such a string of failures “is not supposed to happen“.

The BAZ adds that normally Germany sees about 6 or 7 such failures over an entire year.

There have been four serious incidents in northern Germany over the past four weeks. ‘Too many in such a short time,’ writes Philipp Stukenbrock of Ingenieurbüro 8.2 Consulting, which specializes in wind parks.”

The four recent collapses in summary:

  1. Early December, the tower of a 70-meter tall turbine snapped in half and the turbine and blades crashed to the ground in the state of Mecklenburg-Pomerania.
  2. In the northeast German state of Saxony, the tower of a 100-meter tall turbine snapped some 15 meters above the ground.
  3. Early this week a 40-meter blade came apart and fell to the ground in Brandenburg.
  4. As described above, the tower of a 100-meter tall turbine south of Hamburg broke catastrophically 20 meters above the ground.

Ice projectiles

Collapsing turbines are not the only hazard posed by wind parks. There’s also the danger of falling ice, as the WN.de here reports.

On the morning of New Year’s Eve, Werner van Veenendaal was out for a walk near Bochum in the Ruhr region, when a roughly 2-foot long ice projectile flew off from the tip of a blade of a nearby 98-meter tall wind turbine and crashed close by, shocking the bejesus out of him. From the photo of the ice chunk, a direct hit certainly could have been lethal.

van Veenendaal told the Westfälische Nachrichten daily that he also found several other chunks of ice of similar size in the area: “The street was also littered with smaller pieces.” And because it was foggy he was not able to see the tops of the turbines and thus “could not see that there was ice on them“.

Luckily he wasn’t hit, or worse!

Shock Freeze A Harbinger Of Things To Come? The Many Signs Of More Cooling!

As Europe and USA brace for more frigid weather, some are asking if this is what we need to expect to cope with in the future.

Now it’s clear that the recent “record warm” 2 years had little to do with CO2, and instead were almost entirely due to the well-known El-Nino phenomenon over the past two years.

And now that the recent El Nino has disappeared, temperatures globally are in a free fall and back at levels of the previous decade and indications show a further  drop.

The ENSO now in cool phase

Unfortunately even that enhanced layer of CO2 we have in the atmosphere was not able to trap any of the recent heat. The 20-year pause remains pretty much intact, and will be extended as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) hovers near the cooling La Nina territory.

Note that it will take the cooler equatorial Pacific surface temperatures a few months to make there way into the lower tropospheric satellite data. Don’t be surprised if this year we see a repeat of 1999.

Last El Nino not really warmer than 1998

Dr. Roy Spencer here wrote that 2016 will in fact NOT be statistically warmer of any significance compared to 1998.

According to global warming theory, the earth is supposed to warm some 2.0 to 4.5°C by 2100, which means 0.2 – 0.45°C per decade. So shouldn’t the recent El Nino have warmed the globe some 0.4 to 0.8°C more than 1998? Not even close, as the speedometer below shows! For hardcore warmists, it is increasingly becoming a huge challenge to explain the glaring lack of warming so far this century.

The Speedometer for the 15 years 4 months January 2001 to April 2016 shows the [1.1, 4.2] C°/century-equivalent range of global warming rates (red/orange) that IPCC’s 1990, 1995 and 2001 reports predicted should be happening by now, against real-world warming (green) equivalent to <0.5 C°/century over the period, taken as the least-squares linear-regression trend on the mean of the RSS and UAH satellite global lower-troposphere temperature datasets. Quelle: http://joannenova.com.au/2016/05/monckton-ipcc-climate-models-speeding-out-of-control-compared-to-real-world/

German weather and climate analysis site wobleibtdieerderwaermung here writes on this:

The IPCC climate models for the temperature development have been way too high with their estimation as the comparison of the model calculations to the real, observed development recorded by satellite for January 2001 to Juni 2016.

The Global Warming Speedometer for January 2001 to June 2016 shows observed warming on the HadCRUT4 and NCEI surface temperature datasets as below IPCC’s least prediction in 1990 and somewhat on the low side of its 1995 and 2001 predictions, while the satellite datasets show less warming than all IPCC predictions from 1990 to 2001. Later IPCC predictions are too recent to be reliably testable. Source: Is the Reuters “news” agency committing fraud?

North Atlantic is cooling

Things also do not bode well for the global warming alarmists in the Atlantic as well, as Kenneth Richard pointed out here yesterday: “North Atlantic Cooling Has Plunged Below 1950s (And 1800s) Levels – And Scientists Project More Cooling“.

The sun enters period of cool activity

Solar activity is also now at a low point as the current cycle winds down. meanwhile a majority of scientists are confident the next cycle will also be a weak one. Periods of weak solar cycles are associated with periods of global cooling.

solar cycle trend of SESC sunspot numbers

Trend over one solar cycle (sunspot number). Now we are ending solar cycle 24. International sunspot numbers.

Greenland on record ice mass rampage

And although Arctic temperatures have been well above normal this winter, Greenland’s surface ice mass continues at its rampage record level:

Top: The total daily contribution to the surface mass balance from the entire ice sheet (blue line, Gt/day). Bottom: The accumulated surface mass balance from September 1st to now (blue line, Gt) and the season 2011-12 (red) which had very high summer melt in Greenland. For comparison, the mean curve from the period 1990-2013 is shown (dark grey). Source: DMI.

Greenland ice mas is now some 100 gigatons (cubic km) above normal.

Intense cold across Europe and North America

Currently Europe is being gripped by an intense cold wave, one that has sent temperatures in Germany to as low as -27°C this morning.

A number of stations recorded readings under -20°C. Image: Wetter24.

USA is also bracing for a cold wave — one that is going to intensify and send temperatures far below normal over the coming days.

Temperatures in the southwest close to 40°C below (6 a.m. EST). Image cropped from earth.nullschool.net

 

North Atlantic Cooling Has Plunged Below 1950s (And 1800s) Levels – And Scientists Project More Cooling

While it has understandably not received much, if any, media attention, the North Atlantic Ocean has been rapidly cooling since the mid-2000s, or for more than 10 years now.   The longer the cooling trend continues — and scientists are projecting more cooling for the coming decades  —  the more difficult it will be to ignore.   The North Atlantic Ocean is, after all, a key trend-setter for hemispheric- and perhaps even global-scale climate changes.

In their new paper, for example, Reynolds and colleagues (2017) point out that natural fluctuations in heat transport initiated by the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) are “directly linked” to precipitation and warming/cooling temperature trends in Africa, Brazil, North America, and Europe.   Not only that, but the authors explain that a centennial-scale reduction in surface heat transport (AMOC) can explain the dramatic reduction in surface temperatures from the warmth of the Medieval Warm Period to the frigid Little Ice Age, which, of course, could imply that centennial-scale increases in surface heat transport could explain warming periods.

Reynolds et al., 2017       Evidence derived from instrumental observations suggest that Atlantic variability, associated with changes in SSTs and fluctuations in the strength of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), is directly linked with broader scale climate variability, including Brazilian and Sahel precipitation (Folland et al., 1986 and Folland et al., 2001), Atlantic hurricanes and storm tracks (Goldenberg et al., 2001 and Emanuel, 2005), and North American and European temperatures (Sutton and Hodson, 2005, Knight et al., 2006 and Mann et al., 2009). Furthermore, evidence derived from palaeoceanographic records suggests that a reduction in the meridional heat transport through the surface components of the AMOC was in part responsible for the reductions in temperatures associated with the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA; 1000–1450) to Little Ice Age (LIA; 1450–1850) transition (Lund et al., 2006, Trouet et al., 2009, Trouet et al., 2012, Wanamaker et al., 2012 and Moffa-Sánchez et al., 2014).

Examining the Reynolds et al. (2017) graph of North Atlantic sea surface temperatures since the early 1800s, we notice that temperatures (shown to have declined by about -0.45 °C since 2005) are colder now than they were in the 1940s and 1950s, and that even the early 1800s had warmer temperatures than now.

Serykh (2016) points out that the warming enjoyed across Europe and Asia between the 1970s and late 1990s may have been associated with natural decadal-scale oscillations in heat transport.   Similar to Reynolds et al. (2017), Serykh’s graph of ocean heat content reveals no net warming in the last 60 years.

Serykh, 2016       A dipole structure of inter-decadal variations in the heat content of the ocean and heat fluxes from the ocean to the atmosphere has been detected in the North Atlantic. The following fact deserves special attention: the cyclonic and anti-cyclonic atmospheric circulation anomalies, as well as the decrease and increase in the ocean heat content, take place concurrently and quasi-synchronously in the Iceland minimum and Azores maximum regions. Owing to this, the western heat transport anomalies along the 50th parallel increase or decrease the transport of heat from the Atlantic Ocean to the Euro-Asian continent, and the climate in Europe and Siberia becomes more marine or more continental. The very fast climate warming of the Euro-Asian continent that began in the 1970s may be associated with the enhanced heat transport from the North Atlantic in this period. This is evident from the fields and time series obtained in the present paper. The hiatus of this warming after 1999 may be due to the decreased heat transfer from the North Atlantic Ocean to the Eurasian territory.


Dramatic Cooling In the North Atlantic (Affecting Global Climate) Linked To Natural Variability, Not Human Influence

Scientists first began highlighting the North Atlantic cooling trend a few years ago.  Hermanson et al. (2014), for example, pointed out that the AMOC modulates the water temperatures in the North Atlantic by driving the transport of warmer (cooler) ocean water on decadal scales.   Using data that extended through 2012, they (correctly) forecast the cooling trend that had begun in the mid-2000s would continue.  It has.

Hermanson et al., 2014       The observed 5 year mean temperature averaged over the upper 500 m of the SPG [Subpolar Gyre, North Atlantic Ocean] [shows] a marked cooling in the late 1960s followed by a period with below average temperatures, and a warming in the 1990s followed by a period with above average temperatures. … The forecasts that were initialized between 2008 and 2012 (crosses) all show a general trend for further decreases in temperature, continuing the observed [cooling] trend. The 2012 forecast spread suggests that the chance of the observed warm SPG mean temperature anomaly of 2003–2007 (0.53) occurring again in 2013–2017 is less than 6%.

To gain further confidence in this forecast we examine the physical mechanisms that control SPG [North Atlantic Ocean] temperatures. Previous studies showed that the 1990s SPG warming was driven by increased convergence of ocean heat transport resulting from an increase in the AMOCand the 1960s cooling was driven by reduced ocean heat transport convergence following a reduced AMOC. The hindcasts show changes in ocean heat transport convergence, consistent with these earlier events. The forecasts show a continued decrease in ocean heat transport convergence, consistent with a cooling SPG [Subpolar Gyre, North Atlantic Ocean].

A year ago, Robson et al. (2016) published a paper in Nature explaining that the previous warming trend (1995-2005) had “reversed” to a -0.45 °C cooling trend since 2005 (through 2015), and, like Hermanson et al. (2014) and Reynolds et al. (2017), they attributed both the 1995-2005 warming trend and the current cooling trend to the vagaries of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, even pointing out that the trends are not consistent with an anthropogenic influence.

Robson et al., 2016       In the mid-1990s the North Atlantic subpolar gyre warmed rapidly, which had important climate impacts such as increased hurricane numbers and changes to rainfall over Africa, Europe and North America. Evidence suggests that the warming was largely due to a strengthening of the ocean circulation, particularly the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Since the mid-1990s direct and indirect measurements have suggested a decline in the strength of the ocean circulation, which is expected to lead to a reduction in northward heat transport. Here we show that since 2005 a large volume of the upper North Atlantic Ocean has cooled significantly by approximately 0.45 °C or 1.5 × 1022 J, reversing the previous warming trend. … The observed upper ocean cooling since 2005 is not consistent with the hypothesis that anthropogenic aerosols directly drive Atlantic temperatures.

As the introductory graph of the North Atlantic trend shows above, Duchez and colleagues (2016) report that today’s temperatures are colder than they were in the 1950s — up to 2 °C colder than average — and the “most extreme in the modern record [1948-2015].”.

Duchez et al., 2016       [C]old ocean temperatures were the most extreme in the modern record [since 1948] over much of the mid-high latitude North-East Atlantic. … we consider the exceptionally cold ocean surface anomaly that was already in place prior to the onset of the 2015 heat wave. The SST anomaly field for June 2015 shows temperatures up to 2 °C colder than normal over much of the sub-polar gyre with values that are the coldest observed for this month of the year in the period 1948–2015 indicated by stippling. The cause of this cold anomaly has been the subject of widespread interest in the media, we now show for the first time that it can be attributed to a combination of air–sea heat loss from late 2014 through to spring 2015 and a re-emergent sub-surface ocean heat content [cold] anomaly that developed in preceding years.

Chafik et al. (2016) connect the warming-cooling-warming-cooling oscillatory patterns in the North Atlantic to the natural atmospheric forcing associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) (which is symbiotically connected to the AMOC), and they also highlight the recent cooling trend in their graph (ending in 2012).   They further agree with other scientists that the North Atlantic region is “important for global mean temperature warming,” meaning that what happens in the North Atlantic may have broad implications for climate.

Chafik et al., 2016       The multidecadal variability of the North Atlantic Ocean has a strong signal in the sea surface temperature with many global climate linkages [Enfield et al., 2001; Knight et al., 2006]. An even stronger multidecadal signal can be found in the subpolar temperatures and salinities, where the Atlantic Water inflow variations constitute an essential part in the variability [Hátún et al., 2005; Häkkinen et al., 2011a; Reverdin, 2010]. The atmospheric forcing in the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean is dominated by the variability of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), i.e., the leading mode of atmospheric variability in the North Atlantic sector, which modulates the atmosphere-ocean momentum and heat exchanges on a range of temporal scales. The subpolar ocean variability thus appears to be tightly connected to atmospheric forcing and associated basin-scale circulation changes, which together force the subpolar ocean properties toward extremes [Lozier et al., 2008, 2010], either to warm-saline or cold-fresh conditions on multidecadal scales. These regime changes have recently been argued to be important for global mean surface temperature warming acceleration and hiatus [Chen and Tung, 2014; Drijfhout et al., 2014].

Koenigk and Brodeau (2016) point out that Arctic sea ice area and volume changes (decline) in the last 30 years are “dominated by” the natural variability in heat transport (AMOC), and that a cooling trend may be in the works through 2030.

Koenigk and Brodeau, 2016       Decadal variations of Arctic sea ice extent and ice volume are of the same order of magnitude as the observed ice extent reductions in the last 30 years and are dominated by the variability of the ocean heat transports through the Barents Sea Opening and the Bering Strait. Despite a general warming of mid and high northern latitudes, a substantial cooling is found in the subpolar gyre of the North Atlantic under year-2015 and year-2030 conditions. This cooling is related to a strong reduction in the AMOC, itself due to reduced deep water formation in the Labrador Sea.

Still more scientists — Barcikowska et al. (2016) — observe a North Atlantic/tropical Pacific cooling-warming-cooling trend that may presage global temperature implications (cooling) for the coming decade(s).

Barcikowska et al., 2016       If the observations-based component of variability originates from internal climate processes, as found in the model, the recently observed (1970s-2000s) North Atlantic warming and eastern tropical Pacific cooling might presage an ongoing transition to a cold North Atlantic phase with possible implications for near-term global temperature evolution.


The North Atlantic Is Much Colder Now Than When CO2 Levels Were Much Lower

Because it is important to consider context, it should be pointed out that the 1995-2005 warming that occurred in the North Atlantic was not only well within the range of AMOC-driven natural variability, the relative warmth in that decade was still comparatively cold when considering the long-term temperatures for the North Atlantic region.  In fact, scientists have recently determined that the modern temperatures for the North Atlantic are still among the coldest of the last several thousand years — even the last few hundred.

The conspicuous lack of a net warming trend is significant because it is often claimed that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are the predominant cause of warming global ocean waters.  But there is no correlation between net ocean heat or surface temperature changes in the North Atlantic and the dramatic rise in anthropogenic CO2 emissions since the 1950s.  Or since the 1850s.   Or since Medieval times.  Or since the Holocene began.

The Last 165 Years…

de Jong and de Steur, 2016

The Last 1,200 Years…

Rosenthal et al., 2017

The Last 10,000 Years….

Mark, 2016


The Ultimate Cause Of Oceanic Temperature Shifts, Climate Change: Solar Variability

In their Nature paper entitled “Solar forcing of North Atlantic surface temperature and salinity over the past millennium”, Moffa-Sánchez et al. (2014) point out that North Atlantic sea surface temperatures have risen and fallen by as much as 3.5°C within only multi-decadal- to century-long time periods several times during the last millennium.  This magnitude and rapidity of oceanic change — which occurred without any significant changes in atmospheric CO2 — is obviously far more pronounced than the tenths-of-a-degree net change (if that) over the last 100 years in the North Atlantic.  It is also wholly inconsistent with the climate modeled presumption that natural variability in ocean temperatures is so small, and the anthropogenic forcing of recent decades is so dominant, that natural variability can be clearly separated from anthropogenic forcing.

Our results reveal abrupt multidecadal to centennial shifts in the temperature and salinity of the NAC [North Atlantic Current] waters of 3.5 °C and 1.2 °C, respectively, during the past millennium.   

Indeed, the massive increase in anthropogenic CO2 emissions since 1950 have occurred during the same period of time that the North Atlantic has undergone essentially zero net temperature changes (as the papers and graphs above illustrate), strongly suggesting that anthropogenic CO2 climate forcing has exerted little to no influence on North Atlantic water temperatures.  This would also effectively rule out a significant anthropogenic influence on hemispheric- and even global-scale climate changes considering the North Atlantic’s seminal role as a climatic pace-setter.

Not only that, but as Smeed et al. (2014) affirm, the abrupt change (reduction) in the AMOC heat transport since the mid-2000s is far more pronounced in magnitude (ten times greater) and rapid than climate models have projected to accrue due to anthropogenic forcing, which also strongly suggests the AMOC (and oceanic heat transport in general) is not modulated by CO2 emissions.

Smeed et al, 2014       Model simulations predict a decrease of the AMOC in the 21st century in response to increasing greenhouse gases of the order of one half a Sverdrup per decade (IPCC, 2007). Our observations indicate that the actual change over the last decade is much greaterThe magnitude of the observed changes suggests that they are a part of a cyclical change rather than being directly linked to the projected anthropogenic AMOC decrease.  … We have shown that there was a slowdown in the AMOC transport between 2004 and 2012 amounting to an average of −0.54 Sv yr−1 (95 % c.i. −0.08 to −0.99 Sv yr−1 ) at 26◦ N, and that this was primarily due to a strengthening of the southward flow in the upper 1100 m and a reduction of the southward transport of NADW below 3000 m. This trend is an order of magnitude larger than that predicted by climate models associated with global climate change scenarios, suggesting that this decrease represents decadal variability in the AMOC system rather than a response to climate change.

So if anthropogenic CO2 emissions are not the North Atlantic’s climate control knob, what mechanism does modulate the AMOC, which, in turn, leads to abrupt multi-decadal- to centennial-scale warming and cooling periods?   Returning to Moffa-Sánchez et al. (2014), we find that there has been a robust correlation between the undulations in the AMOC and the variability in solar irradiance for the last 1,000 years.

Moffa-Sánchez et al., 2014       There were several centennial-scale fluctuations in the climate and oceanography of the North Atlantic region over the past 1,000 years, including a period of relative cooling from about AD 1450 to 1850 known as the Little Ice Age. These variations may be linked to changes in solar irradiance, amplified through feedbacks including the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. … The reconstructed centennial-scale variations in hydrography correlate with variability in total solar irradiance. We find a similar correlation in a simulation of climate over the past 1,000 years. [L]ow solar irradiance promotes the development of frequent and persistent atmospheric blocking events, in which a quasi-stationary high-pressure system in the eastern North Atlantic modifies the flow of the westerly winds. … Our results reveal abrupt multidecadal to centennial shifts in the temperature and salinity of the NAC [North Atlantic Current] waters of 3.5 °C and 1.2 °C, respectively, during the past millennium. The magnitude of the hydrographic variability is substantial and comparable to that recorded in a lower resolution record spanning the present interglacial from a nearby site, which highlights the similarities in the ocean variability on a diverse range of timescales. The timing of the hydrographic shifts shows a strong correlation with total solar irradiance (TSI) variability. Periods of solar minima (maxima) generally correspond to cold and fresh (warm and salty) conditions in the NAC.

Recently published scientific papers have documented that the Modern Grand Maximum of very high solar activity ended in the early 21st century, and this has, in turn, led to many predictions of global-scale cooling in the coming decades (Abdussamatov, 2016Torres and Guzmán, 2016Yndestad and Solheim, 2016Mörner, 2015Evans, 2016).   The recently observed trends in the North Atlantic ostensibly support these projections of near-term solar- and AMOC-forced multi-decadal cooling, as they are in phase with the dramatic decline in North Atlantic heat content and surface temperatures since the mid-2000s documented above.   If historical trends repeat, and if the North Atlantic continues to act as a harbinger of what is to come climatically, we may be on the cusp of cold period reminiscent of yet another Little Ice Age – the 19th in the last 7,500 years.

For the sake of humanity and the rest of the biosphere, let’s hope these near-term global cooling projections are inaccurate, as warmth is much preferred to cooling.

Two Recent Scientific Studies Show Climate Models A Long Way From Being Up To Par

Important Success: Clouds as a Climate Amplifier of Atlantic Ocean Cycles Confirmed

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated/edited by P Gosselin)
In September 2016 an exciting paper by a team led by Katinka Bellomo was published in the Geophysical Research Letters.

It described a climate amplifier for the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) based on clouds. According to the study, the cloud effect accounts for up to one third of the AMO associated temperature change. The abstract:

New observational evidence for a positive cloud feedback that amplifies the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) affects climate variability in the North Atlantic basin and adjacent continents with potential societal impacts. Previous studies based on model simulations and short-term satellite retrievals hypothesized an important role for cloud radiative forcing in modulating the persistence of the AMO in the tropics, but this mechanism remains to be tested with long-term observational records. Here we analyze data sets that span multiple decades and present new observational evidence for a positive feedback between total cloud amount, sea surface temperature (SST), and atmospheric circulation that can strengthen the persistence and amplitude of the tropical branch of the AMO. In addition, we estimate cloud amount feedback from observations and quantify its impact on SST with idealized modeling experiments. From these experiments we conclude that cloud feedbacks can account for 10% to 31% of the observed SST anomalies associated with the AMO over the tropics.”

In the same journal already in February 2016, an article by Tianle Yuan et al appeared on the same topic. The authors called out that the climate models were not able to reproduce the AMO ocean cycle in the tropics. They then described amplification mechanism through low-lying clouds that could incorporate the AMO into the models. The abstract follows:

Positive low cloud and dust feedbacks amplify tropical North Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is characterized by a horseshoe pattern of sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies and has a wide range of climatic impacts. While the tropical arm of AMO is responsible for many of these impacts, it is either too weak or completely absent in many climate model simulations. Here we show, using both observational and model evidence, that the radiative effect of positive low cloud and dust feedbacks is strong enough to generate the tropical arm of AMO, with the low cloud feedback more dominant. The feedbacks can be understood in a consistent dynamical framework: weakened tropical trade wind speed in response to a warm middle latitude SST anomaly reduces dust loading and low cloud fraction over the tropical Atlantic, which warms the tropical North Atlantic SST. Together they contribute to the appearance of the tropical arm of AMO. Most current climate models miss both the critical wind speed response and two positive feedbacks though realistic simulations of them may be essential for many climatic studies related to the AMO.”

While on the subject of clouds, for German speakers the following 2 videos can be viewed until January 21, 2017 can be watched on ZDF German television:

Operation Cloud Lab: Cloud Chasers
A team of scientists flies over the USA inside the world’s largest aircraft and carry out a series of unusual experiments for understanding the atmospheric phenomena.

See video.

The second video:

Operation Cloud Lab: The sky lives
Scientists study the life of the earth’s atmosphere at an extreme elevation in their “flying lab” over the USA. What impact does man have on the atmosphere?

See video.

[Note: The originals are in English, and so with a little searching they likely can be found in the Internet.]

1000 Skeptical Peer-Reviewed Climate Papers “Should Put UN IPCC To Shame,” Says Harvard Astrophysicist!

Claims that the earth is rapidly heating up because of man-made CO2 and thus heading for a “climate catastrophe” have taken a serious body blow over the past three years as a huge and fresh body of science emerges.

More than 1000 peer-reviewed papers published over the last 3 years expose climate alarmism as fake science.

1000 papers in three years

Yesterday Kenneth Richard published his list of 500 climate catastrophe skeptic papers appearing in scientific journals in 2016 alone. It is the latest addition to the 282 papers published in 2015, and the 248 papers published in 2014, bringing the total number of peer-reviewed papers published over the past three years to more than 1000.

As a result the once many dramatic hockey-stick shaped curves put out by some climate scientists over the past two decades showing the earth is headed for disaster have been exposed as fake science, which of course had spawned some 20 years of nonstop fake news – much of it designed to spread panic among the population.

Needlessly hyped

According to Richard, the vast collection of fresh papers show that natural factors play a much larger if not a dominant role when it comes to climate change. The expected global warming has been needlessly hyped, experts are now saying.

Puts IPCC to shame

Harvard astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon thinks the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has strayed way off track. “I’m not surprised by the large number or empirical evidence that rejects the CO2 dangerous global warming alarmism,” wrote Soon in an e-mail. “This sort of literature review ought to put the sort of biased, if not anti-science, reports by the UN IPCC to shame.”

Dr. Soon has long been a sharp critic of the mainstream institutionalized climate science. He added: “It is high time for the wider public to not only bear witness to the unbalance and corruption of our science institutions, but also to demand answers on why there has been such a disregard for truth and fact.”

Climate well within natural variability

Many among the 1000 peer-reviewed scholarly papers show that extreme weather events are in fact NOT increasing in any unusual manner, that they were also common in the past, and that today they are still well within the range of natural variability.

Other papers show that biodiversity is not under any serious threat. Hundreds of other papers have found that solar activity and oceanic cycles are in fact the driving factors behind climate change. In short the latest fresh batch of scientific literature is telling us that all the past alarmism likely has been needlessly shrill and that it’s time to take a step back and to seriously refocus.

Although most of the papers listed by Richard do not refute global warming and that man plays a role – they do cast undeniable doubt over the cause of the warming, especially the warming over the past 35 years. The recent literature clearly shows that natural factors indeed play a major role, and CO2 much less so.

Climate science a UN charade

Not mincing any words, Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball feels that global warming became a charade years ago and that it has gone on too long.

He offers an even harsher assessment of the UN climate science, writing that the IPCC is made up of “bureaucrats” who harbor a political agenda. “Extreme bias of climate research was deliberately created through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to prove rather than disprove the hypothesis that human CO2 was causing runaway global warming,” he wrote to NTZ in an email.  “The political message and funding were directed to only research that proved their hypothesis. Only journals that favored the objective were used and encouraged, so the preponderance of research and publications supported the predetermined message. It is a classic case of Lysenkoism

Dr. Ball authored the climate science critical book: Human Caused Global warming – The Biggest Deception in History.

 

Crumbling ‘Consensus’: 500 Scientific Papers Published In 2016 Support A Skeptical Position On Climate Alarm

crumbling-consensus

Climate science is supposed to be settled, right?

We are told that there is an overwhelming agreement, or consensus, among scientists that most weather and climate changes that have occurred since the mid-20th century have been caused by human activity — our fossil fuel burning and CO2 emissions in particular.  We are told that natural mechanisms that used to dominate are no longer exerting much of any influence on weather or climate anymore.  Humans predominantly cause weather and climate changes now.

For example, we are told that extreme weather (hurricanes, droughts, floods, storms) frequencies and intensities have increased since about 1950 primarily due to the dramatic rise in anthropogenic CO2 emissions since then.  Humans are now melting glaciers and ice sheets and (Arctic) sea ice at an alarmingly accelerated rate — reminiscent of an impending “death spiral“.  Humans now  heat up and acidify the oceans down to depths of thousands of meters by burning fossil fuels.   Humans are now in the process of raising sea levels so that they will catastrophically rise by 10 feet in the next 50 years.   Because of our CO2 emissions, humans are now endangering the long-term survival of 100s of thousands of animal species (especially polar bears), and climate models say we will cause a million species extinctions over the next 33 years with our CO2 emissions.   The Earth is even spinning slower, or faster, no, slower, well, faster — due to human activities.  Again, this is all settled science.  Only those who possess the temerity to deny this science (“climate deniers”) would disagree, or refuse to believe.

But what if much of what we have been told to believe is not actually true?   What if scientists do not overwhelmingly agree that humans have dominated (with ~110% attribution) weather and climate changes since about 1950, which is what we have been told by the UN IPCC?   What if scientists do not overwhelmingly agree that natural factors exert effectively no influence on weather and climate changes anymore — now that humans have taken over?

These are compelling questions.  Because in 2016 alone, 500 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in scholarly journals seriously question just how settled the “consensus” science really is that says anthropogenic or CO2 forcing now dominates weather and climate changes, and non-anthropogenic (natural) factors no longer exert much, if any, role.

Instead of supporting the “consensus” science one must believe in (to avoid the “climate denier” label), these 500 papers support the position that there are significant limitations and uncertainties inherent in climate modeling and the predictions of future climate catastrophes associated with anthropogenic forcing.  Furthermore, these scientific papers strongly suggest that natural factors (the Sun, multi-decadal oceanic oscillations [NAO, AMO/PDO, ENSO], cloud and aerosol albedo variations, etc.) have both in the past and present exerted a significant or dominant influence on weather and climate changes, which means an anthropogenic signal may be much more difficult to detect in the context of such large natural variability.  Papers questioning (and undermining) the “consensus” view on paleoclimate (Medieval) warmth, ocean acidification, glacier melt and advance, sea level rise, extreme weather events, past climate forcing mechanisms, climate sensitivity to CO2, etc., are included in this collection.

Because of the enormous volume of new papers available that support a skeptical position on anthropogenic climate change alarm, the list of 500 scientific papers with links has been divided into 3 sections, each with its own page (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).   There are 68 graphs included in the volume, most of which are used to demonstrate that “hockey-stick” reconstructions of past temperatures and sea levels relative to today are not supported by available evidence.

Despite its size, this list will hopefully be user-friendly and easy to navigate as a bookmarkable reference volume due to its outline (below) and organized categorization.  Each paper has an embedded link under the authors’ name(s).

Finally, there are 132 papers linking solar activity to weather and climate change (in addition to another ~90 that link natural oceanic/atmospheric oscillations [ENSO, NAO, etc.], clouds, volcanic activity . . . to climate change).  This is of special note because the IPCC has, since its inception, insisted that solar factors play almost no role in modern climate change.  Apparently scientists agree less and less with that “consensus” position.


Click any of the 3 links below

Part 1. Natural Mechanisms Of Weather, Climate Change (236 papers)

Part 2. Natural Climate Change Observation, Reconstruction (153 papers)

Part 3. Unsettled Science, Ineffective Climate Modeling (112 papers)


Part 1. Natural Mechanisms Of Weather, Climate Change

I. Solar Influence On Climate (132)
II. Natural Oceanic/Atmospheric Oscillation (ENSO, NAO, AMO, PDO, AMOC) Influence On Climate (45)
III. Natural Ozone Variability and Climate (3)
IV. A Questionable To Weak Influence Of Humans, CO2 On Climate (11)
V. Low CO2 Climate Sensitivity (4)
VI. Modern Climate In Phase With Natural Variability (17)
VII. Cloud/Aerosol Climate Influence (14)
VII. Volcanic/Tectonic Climate Forcing (9)


Part 2. Natural Climate Change Observation, Reconstruction

I. Lack Of Anthropogenic/CO2 Signal In Sea Level Rise/Mid-Holocene Sea Levels Meters Higher (34)
II. Warmer Holocene Climate, Non-Hockey Sticks (41)
III. No Net Regional Warming Since Early- Mid-20th Century (15)
IV. Abrupt, Degrees-Per-Decade Natural Global Warming (D-O Events) (8)
V. The Uncooperative Cryosphere: Polar Ice Sheets, Sea Ice (34)
VI. Ocean Acidification? (14)
VII. Natural Climate Catastrophes – Without CO2 Changes (4)
VIII. Recent Cooling In The North Atlantic (3)


Part 3. Unsettled Science, Ineffective Climate Modeling

I. Failing/Failed Renewable Energy, Climate Policies (10)
II. Climate Model Unreliability/Biases and the Pause (34)
III. Elevated CO2 Greens Planet, Raises Crop Yields (10)
IV. Wind Turbines, Solar Utilities Endangering Wildlife (7)
V. Less Extreme, Unstable Weather With Warming (15)
VI. Heat Not Hazardous To Polar Bears, Humans (3)
VII. No Increasing Trends In Intense Hurricanes (3)
VIII. No Increasing Trends In Drought Frequency, Severity (7)
IX. Urban Surfaces Cause (Artificial) Warming (4)
X. ‘Settled’ Science Dismantled (3)
XI. Natural CO2, Methane Sources Out-Emit Humans (3)
XII. Fires, Anthropogenic Climate Change Disconnect (5)
XIII. Miscellaneous (4)
XIV. Scientists: We Don’t Know (4)

Wind Turbines Crashing Down In Germany Amid Brisk Opposition And Even Sabotage!

Wind turbines are ugly, litter the landscape, endanger wildlife, generate erratically, destabilize power grids and even cause health problems. They also have a habit of coming apart and self destructing — thus creating a hazard to persons and property.

The Saxony online daily Sächsische Zeitung (SZ) here reports how a wind turbine collapsed near Leisnig just days ago. An investigation revealed how one of three blades failed catastrophically, thus creating a huge imbalance that caused the tower to buckle 15 meters above the ground and led to the structure to come crashing down. The site reports:

Through the force of the impact, the gearbox unit was driven almost 2 meters into the earth.”

The following short video surveys the damage. Note how one blade had totally come apart.

Earlier in December, Germany’s BILD daily reported how in the Mecklenburg Pommeria town of Süderholz a wind turbine tower snapped in half and crashed to the ground. An investigation is now underway. Süderholz mayor Alexander Benkert ordered the other remaining turbines to be thoroughly inspected.

Bild reports the tower simply snapped 25 meters up but that no one was injured.

Collapsing even when not in operation

In neighboring Denmark one wind turbine shows us that turbines can come apart even when they are not operating. Danish vejr.tv2.dk television site here reports how the blade of one turbine simply “tore off” during a recent storm.

Also here the English Manchester Evening News here reports how a recent storm ripped off all three blades from a turbine one afternoon in England, almost killing a man who happened to be taking his dog for a walk.

Mounting opposition to ugly, unreliable wind power projects

The seemingly collapse-prone turbines are likely yet just another reason on a long list why people now resist them. Once welcome and viewed as a source of clean energy, huge protests are now organizing and mobilizing against wind park projects. Germany’s online nordkurier.de here reports how an online survey found only 15% were in favor of installing more turbines in the Uckermark region.

In the Rhine-Main region, the Frankfurter Neue Presse (FNP) reports on how authorities in Darmstadt recently rejected the building of wind turbines on the Taunuskamm mountain, citing “groundwater protection” needs. The local Green Party, of all people, fumed at the rejection.

Sabotage

The resistance to wind energy in Germany has grown to such an extent that some people are now sabotaging them. In Fulda a person, or persons, broke into a tower and destroyed the electrical gear, causing the unit to halt. The wind park operator suspects wind energy opponents.

First the suspect(s) had on two earlier occasions stopped the turbine by simply pressing the emergency STOP button. In the third attempt on December 26 the switchbox was opened and its contents destroyed. The online Fuldaer Zeitung writes at the end of the article:

Indeed the opposition against further wind turbines in the Eiterfeld area was large in the past.”

Wind energy in Germany is no longer welcome.

 

Recent Study Shows Climate Models Still Crude, Poorly Weighted

Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt here bring our attention on a recent paper on the impact of “sea smell” on climate. Below is the press release in English.

Under the bottom line: Climate models are a very long way from being reliable. They are still at the primitive stages.
==============================================

Impact of sea smell overestimated by present climate models

Most comprehensive study on the atmospheric oxidation of the natural climatic gas dimethyl sulfide published

The formation of sulfur dioxide from the oxidation of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and, thus, of cooling clouds over the oceans seems to be overvalued in current climate models. Photo: Tilo Arnhold, TROPOS

The formation of sulfur dioxide from the oxidation of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and, thus, of cooling clouds over the oceans seems to be overvalued in current climate models. Photo: Tilo Arnhold, TROPOS

Leipzig. The formation of sulfur dioxide from the oxidation of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and, thus, of cooling clouds over the oceans seems to be overvalued in current climate models. This concludes scientists from the Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research (TROPOS) from a model study on the effects of DMS on atmospheric chemistry. Until now, models considering only the oxidation in the gas phase describe merely the oxidation pathway and neglect important pathways in the aqueous phase of the atmosphere, writes the team in the journal PNAS. This publication contains until now the most comprehensive mechanistic study on the multiphase oxidation of this compound. The results have shown that in order to improve the understanding of the atmospheric chemistry and its climate effects over the oceans, a more detailed knowledge about the multiphase oxidation of DMS and its oxidation products is necessary. Furthermore, it is also needed to increase the accuracy of climate prediction.

Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) is formed by microorganisms and is, for example, also part of human breath odor. However, it is more pleasant to remember as the typical smell of the sea. DMS represents the most common natural sulfur compound emitted to the atmosphere. Major contributors are oceans, which make up around 70 % of Earth’s surface. DMS is formed by phytoplankton and then released from the seawater. In the atmosphere, DMS oxidizes to sulfuric acid (H2SO4) via dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Sulfuric acid can form new cloud nuclei, from which new cloud droplets can emerge. Hence, marine clouds will be visually brightened, which influences the radiative effect of clouds and thus Earth’s climate. Therefore, the understanding and quantification of these chemical processes in the atmosphere is of high importance for the knowledge of the natural climate effect.

The oxidation process of DMS has already been investigated in various model studies – albeit without accurate considered aqueous-phase chemistry. In order to close these mechanistic gaps, scientists of TROPOS have developed a comprehensive multiphase chemical mechanism (“Chemical Aqueous Phase Radical Mechanism DMS Module 1.0”). This mechanism was coupled to a comprehensive gas-phase (MCMv3.2) and aqueous-phase mechanism (CAPRAM) and applied with the SPACCIM model. The SPACCIM model was developed at TROPOS and is, due to the detailed and combined description of microphysical and chemical processes in aerosols and clouds, particularly suitable for complex studies on atmospheric multiphase processes.

As most important outcome, the new model results showed that: “The processes in the aqueous phase significantly reduce the amount of sulfur dioxide and increase the amount of methanesulfonic acid (MSA). In earlier models, there was a gap between the projected values in the model and measurements. Now, the scientists have been able to clarify this contradiction and thus confirm the importance of the aqueous phase for the atmospheric oxidation of dimethyl sulfide and its products such as MSA”, reports Dr. Andreas Tilgner of TROPOS.

The results show that the role of DMS in Earth’s climate is still not sufficiently understood – despite many global model studies. “Our simulations indicate that the increased DMS emissions lead to higher aerosol particle mass loads but not necessarily to a higher number of particles or cloud droplets. The modeling results are important to understand the climate processes between ocean and atmosphere. In addition, geoengineering ideas are constantly being discussed, which are hoping for more cooling clouds by fertilizing the ocean”, explains Prof. Hartmut Herrmann from TROPOS. However, this study suggests that the production of sulfur dioxide is less pronounced and the effects on the back-reflection effect of the clouds are lower than expected. Therefore, the corresponding geoengineering approaches could be less effective than assumed. Tilo Arnhold


Publication:

Erik Hans Hoffmann, Andreas Tilgner, Roland Schrödner, Peter Bräuer, Ralf Wolke, and Hartmut Herrmann (2016): An advanced modeling study on the impacts and atmospheric implications of multiphase dimethyl sulfide chemistry. PNAS; 113 (42) 11776-11781, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1606320113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1606320113  


Further Information:

Prof. Hartmut Herrmann, Dr. Andreas Tilgner, Dr. Ralf Wolke; Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research (TROPOS); Tel. +49-341-2717-7024, -7178, -7054
https://www.tropos.de/institut/ueber-uns/mitarbeitende/hartmut-herrrmann/
https://www.tropos.de/institut/ueber-uns/mitarbeitende/andreas-tilgner/
https://www.tropos.de/institut/ueber-uns/mitarbeitende/ralf-wolke/
or Tilo Arnhold, TROPOS public relation, Tel. +49-341-2717-7189, http://www.tropos.de/en/current-issues/press-releases/  


Links:

Multiphase Modelling https://www.tropos.de/en/institute/departments/atmospheric-chemistry/multiphase-modeling/multiphase-modelling/
Chemical Aqueous Phase Radical Mechanism (CAPRAM) http://projects.tropos.de/capram/
SPectral Aerosol Cloud Chemistry Interaction Model (SPACCIM) https://www.tropos.de/forschung/grossprojekte-infrastruktur-technologie/technologie-am-tropos/numerische-modellierung/spaccim/
Surface of the oceans affects climate more than thought (press release, 30 Sep 2015) https://www.tropos.de/en/current-issues/press-releases/details/surface-of-the-oceans-affects-climate-more-than-thought/

The Leibniz Association connects 88 independent research institutions that range in focus from the natural, engineering and environmental sciences via economics, spatial and social sciences to the humanities. Leibniz institutes address issues of social, economic and ecological relevance. They conduct knowledge-driven and applied basic research, maintain scientific infrastructure and provide research-based services. The Leibniz Association identifies focus areas for knowledge transfer to policy-makers, academia, business and the public. Leibniz institutions collaborate intensively with universities – in the form of “Leibniz ScienceCampi” (thematic partnerships between university and non-university research institutes), for example – as well as with industry and other partners at home and abroad. They are subject to an independent evaluation procedure that is unparalleled in its transparency. Due to the  importance of the institutions for the country as a whole, they are funded jointly by the Federation and the Länder, employing some 18,500 individuals, including 9,300 researchers. The entire budget of all the institutes is approximately 1.7 billion EUR. http://www.leibniz-gemeinschaft.de/en/home/

===============================

PS: NTZ wishes everyone a Happy New Year!