US scientists launch world’s biggest solar geoengineering study.


Research programme will send aerosol injections into the earth’s upper atmosphere to study the risks and benefits of a future solar tech-fix for climate change

 The sun from space
Scientists say the planet could be covered with a solar shield for as little as $10bn a year. 

The $20m (£16m) Harvard University project will launch within weeks and aims to establish whether the technology can safely simulate the atmospheric cooling effects of a volcanic eruption, if a last ditch bid to halt climate change is one day needed.

Scientists hope to complete two small-scale dispersals of first water and then calcium carbonate particles by 2022. Future tests could involve seeding the sky with aluminium oxide – or even diamonds.

Janos Pasztor, Ban Ki-moon’s assistant climate chief at the UN who now leads ageoengineering governance initiative, said that the Harvard scientists would only disperse minimal amounts of compounds in their tests, under strict university controls.

“The real issue here is something much more challenging,” he said “What does moving experimentation from the lab into the atmosphere mean for the overall path towards eventual deployment?”

Geoengineering advocates stress that any attempt at a solar tech fix is years away and should be viewed as a compliment to – not a substitute for – aggressive emissions reductions action.

But the Harvard team, in a promotional video for the project, suggest a redirection of one percent of current climate mitigation funds to geoengineering research, and argue that the planet could be covered with a solar shield for as little as $10bn a year.

Kevin Trenberth, a lead author for the UN’s intergovernmental panel on climate change, said that despair at sluggish climate action, and the rise of Donald Trump were feeding the current tech trend.

“But solar geoengineering is not the answer,” he said. “Cutting incoming solar radiation affects the weather and hydrological cycle. It promotes drought. It destabilizes things and could cause wars. The side effects are many and our models are just not good enough to predict the outcomes”

Natural alterations to the earth’s radiation balance can be short-lasting, but terrifying. A 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption lowered global temperatures by 0.5C, while the Mount Tambora eruption in 1815 triggered Europe’s ‘year without a summer’, bringing crop failure, famine and disease.

A Met Office study in 2013 said that the dispersal of fine particles in the stratosphere could precipitate a calamitous drought across North Africa.

Frank Keutsch, the Harvard atmospheric sciences professor leading the experiment, said that the deployment of a solar geoengineering system was “a terrifying prospect” that he hoped would never have to be considered. “At the same time, we should never choose ignorance over knowledge in a situation like this,” he said.

“If you put heat into the stratosphere, it may change how much water gets transported from the troposphere to the stratosphere, and the question is how much are you [creating] a domino effect with all kinds of consequences? What we can do to quantify this is to start with lab studies and try to understand the relevant properties of these aerosols.”

Stratospheric controlled perturbation experiments (SCoPEX) are seen as “critical” to this process and the first is planned to spray water molecules into the stratosphere to create a 1km long and 100m wide icy plume, which can be studied by a manoeuvrable flight balloon.

If lab tests are positive, the experiment would then be replicated with a limestone compound which the researchers believe will neither absorb solar or terrestrial radiation, nor deplete the ozone layer.

Bill Gates and other foundations are substantially funding the project, and aerospace companies are thought to be taking a business interest in the technology’s potential.

The programmme’s launch will follow a major conference involving more than 100 scientists, which begins in Washington DC today.

Solar geoengineering’s journey from the fringes of climate science to its mainstream will be sealed at a prestigious Gordon research conference in July, featuring senior figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Oxford University.

Pasztor says that most scientific observers now see the window to a 1.5C warmed world as “practically gone” and notes that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations will continue rising for many decades after the planet has reached a ‘net zero emissions’ point planned for mid-late century.

But critics of solar radiation management approach this as a call to redouble mitigation efforts and guard against the elevation of a questionable Plan B.

“It is appropriate that we spend money on solar geoengineering research,” said Kevin Anderson, the deputy director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. “But we also have to aim for 2C with climate mitigation and act as though geoengineering doesn’t work, because it probably won’t.”

Source:https://www.theguardian.com

Advertisements

We Have Released a Monster: Previously Frozen Soil Is “Breathing Out” Greenhouse Gases


Katey Walter Anthony, a leading scientist in studying the escape of methane, at her research site where methane is collecting beneath the ice, in Fairbanks, Alaska, on October 21, 2011. With temperatures warming across much of that region, which scientists primarily believe is because of the rapid human release of greenhouse gases, permafrost is also warming, and signs are emerging that frozen carbon may be destabilizing.

A study published in the journal Nature has revealed an alarming new climate feedback loop: As Earth’s atmosphere continues to warm from anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD), soils are respirating carbon — that is, carbon is being literally baked out of the soils.

Microorganisms in soil generally consume carbon, then release CO2 as a byproduct. Large areas of the planet — such as Alaska, northern Canada, Northern Europe and large swaths of Siberia in Russia — have previously been too cold for this process to occur. However, they are now warming up, and soil respiration is happening there. As a result, these places are contributing far, far more CO2 and methane to the atmosphere than they ever have.

This phenomenon is already evidenced by a recently released study led by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which Truthout reported on recently.

This means that even if all human fossil fuel emissions were halted immediately, soils would continue to release approximately the same amount of CO2 and methane emissions as the amount produced by the fossil fuel industry during the mid-20th century.

Another Tipping Point

The study showed that the uptick in soil respiration is set to add between 0.45 and 0.71 parts per million (ppm) of CO2 to the atmosphere each year between now and 2050.

Disturbingly, humans are already adding between 3.2 to 3.55 ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere as of this year, which is the first time CO2-increase rates have broken records two years in a row.

The amount of CO2 that soil respiration will add to the atmosphere — on top of what humans are directly adding — is significant.

Climate feedback loops, sometimes referred to as positive feedback loops, runaway feedback loops, or amplifying feedback loops, are important to understand if we are to truly comprehend the nature of ACD. Many feedback loops are already in play, and more are coming into being on a regular basis.

For example, when atmospheric warming caused by fossil fuel emissions leads to the melting of Arctic sea ice, the reflectivity lost by disappearing sea ice allows more solar radiation to heat the Arctic Ocean, which then causes more sea ice to melt. This is perhaps the most well-known climate feedback loop.

The discovery of the soil feedback loop intensifies concerns about our rapidly warming climate. Increasing soil respiration — also known as “the compost bomb” — is set to add between 30 and 55 billion tons of extra CO2 to the atmosphere over the next 35 years, as Earth’s temperature warming approaches 2C.

Moreover, the study categorizes its findings as conservative estimates. In fact, the Earth could well see as much as four times the amount of CO2 (2.7 ppm) from soil respiration alone if the phenomenon becomes more wide-ranging than expected. And given that scientific predictions rarely keep pace with how rapidly the planet is changing, it would not be surprising if the prevalence exceeds expectations.

Catastrophic for Humanity

Dr. Thomas Crowther, the lead researcher on the soil study, told The Independentthat, given that ACD is happening more rapidly than expected, the impending climate-denying Trump presidency could well be “catastrophic for humanity.”

He is not exaggerating: A lot can happen in four years, when it comes to climate disruption. In fact, every year makes quite a difference. The study shows that at a minimum, 0.45ppm of CO2 will be leached from northern soils every year between 2016 and 2050, with about 1C worth of atmospheric warming during that period.

The study also shows that if Earth is warmed to 2C above preindustrial baseline temperature levels by 2050, which is essentially a certainty in the best-case scenario, then an average of approximately 0.71ppm of CO2 will be released from soils every year through the year 2050.

The Earth has already warmed by more than 1C above preindustrial baseline temperatures. It is unlikely that human civilization can survive warming of 3.5C or higher, as humans have never lived on a planet that warm. However, we are currently on track for a minimum warming of 5 to 7C, or worse, by 2100.

“It’s fair to say we have passed the point of no return on global warming, and we can’t reverse the effects,” Dr. Crowther told The Independent when the study was released. “But we can certainly dampen them.”

Other climate scientists emphasized the importance of using the soil study to inform measures to mitigate the damage of ACD. Professor Ivan Janssens with the University of Antwerp called the study “very important,” because the response of soils to ACD could well be one of the largest sources of uncertainty in climate modelling.

“We urgently need to develop a global economy driven by sustainable energy sources and start using CO2, as a substrate, instead of a waste product,” Dr. Janssens told The Independent. He suggested that if significant progress is made on this front, it may still be possible to avoid catastrophic warming.

There Is No Global Warming Hiatus After All


Improved data and better analysis methods find no slowdown in the pace of global temperature rise, NOAA scientists report

noaa-ship.jpg
The NOAA ship R/V Roger Revelle collects climate data in the Antarctic in 2008.
 Did global warming take a breather in the early 21st century? Not at all, according to fresh analysis of temperature data that incorporates more information and better methods for parsing historical trends.

In 2013, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released an assessment report that found what appeared to be a halt in the pace of warming. The rate at which surface temperatures rose between 1998 and 2012 was only about a third to a half that seen between 1951 and 2012. This was termed the “hiatus,” and climate change skeptics jumped on the result as evidence that there was no reason to worry.

Earlier this year, though, scientists at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration declared that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880. And now researchers have found that the record temperatures, when combined with better analysis methods, have eliminated any evidence of a pause in global warming.

When the IPCC report was unveiled, scientists tried to figure out where the missing heat had gone. Some thought it may have gotten stored away in the Atlantic or Pacific oceans. Others noted that 1998 was the year of a strong El Niño that caused particularly warm weather around the globe, and using it as the starting point for any trend was problematic.

In their new study, published online today by Science, NOAA scientists address another concern about the temperature data—inconsistencies in how and where it was collected.

“We know that the raw temperature records contain various inconsistencies over the long time history,” says co-author Boyin Huang. “Stations may have been moved, sensors are replaced and improved, observation techniques change, and so on.” Before World War II, for instance, most researchers took water temperatures by putting a bucket over the side of a ship. After the war, water temperatures were mostly monitored at engine intakes. Later, more of the water data was collected at buoys instead of from ships.

Each method of collecting data produces slightly different results, similar to what might happen if someone measured their oven temperature with both a mercury and a digital thermometer—the data may be close, but it’s not an exact match. Accounting for those differences using established mathematical methods makes the full dataset more consistent.

“These homogenization techniques make it possible to compare temperature data collected from locations around the world and over many decades, improving the accuracy of temperature trend estimates,” Huang says. “The homogenization methods used are carefully documented in journal articles and agency websites that are publicly available.”

karl1HR.jpg
(NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information)

There have also been advancements made in where air temperature data is collected on land. Many parts of the Earth, especially in Africa, Asia, South America, the Arctic and the Antarctic, have had few measurement stations. But due to a recent effort, the number of data collection stations has doubled, and coverage has improved.

The new analysis accounts for the changes in data collection on land and sea, and the results show that the rate of global warming between 1998 and 2012 is almost double that reported in the IPCC assessment. Adding 2013 and 2014 to the dataset increases the rate further, and the pace of warming between 2000 and 2014—0.209 degrees Fahrenheit per decade—is nearly the same as that seen in the latter half of the 20th century, the researchers note.

“Science is a cumulative and continuous process, and this is reflected in our continued improvements to the land and ocean surface temperature datasets,” says study co-author Huai-Min Zhang. “The notion of a warming hiatus in the most recent decades, as defined by the [IPCC report], is no longer valid. The global warming rate has been just as fast over the last 15 years as over the previous 50 years.”

NOAA Data Shows No Global Warming for 58 Years! Congress Investigates!


 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has proven with their own data that there has been no Global Warming for…not just 2 decades…but for the last 6 decades!!

Does this surprise you? It shouldn’t! Congress is finally demanding answers!

The NOAA claims to have 58 years of data. In their latest press briefing, they only included a graph of the last 37 years.

Branco hits the nail on the head on the REAL truth about Global Warming! Money!

Political Cartoonist Branco hits the nail on the head on the REAL truth about Global Warming! Money!

The earlier data that they conveniently left out shows as much pre-1979 global cooling as post-1979 global warming!

In other words, over 6 decades, it has been a wash! <~ See the charts and an explanation by Tony Heller

What the data proves, is after the 50’s there was a period of global cooling and then global warming…bringing us right back to where we started!!!

Congress is going to investigate and just issued subpoenas to the Obama Administration.

The chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Lamar Smith, has requested that the NOAA hand over their data. He is also demanding internal communications between employees involved in the study.

Smith argued that “When an agency decides to alter the way it has analyzed historical temperature data for the past few decades, it’s crucial to understand on what basis those decisions were made.”

Rise and fall in temperature follow an easy to see schedule. It gets hot during the day and cools at night, even in winter.

It gets hotter during the Summer, and gets cooler during the Winter.

…AND…over time… it gets hotter some years and colder some years…hotter and colder…hotter and colder…and has been doing that, without human intervention for quite the long time now!

THIS FULL NOAA GRAPH proves over the last 6 decades there has not been the great Global Warming that Al Gore claims!

THIS FULL NOAA GRAPH proves over the last 6 decades there has not been the great Global Warming that Al Gore claims!

THIS FULL NOAA GRAPH proves over the last 6 decades there has not been the great Global Warming that Al Gore claims!

Of course, there is PLENTY of evidence that  Man-Made Global Warming is one GIANT hoax!

That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”."

That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”.”

One BIG example is the lie that Climate Change activists have been using that 98% of the Scientific community believe in man-made climate change.

But what they fail to tell you is that 98% comes from an equation of 75 out of 77 climate change scientists.

Imagine that! Al Gore lied, and he knows he lied!

Al Gore claimed that the seas were going to rise and islands would disappear! There were actually 35 lies in his movie “An Inconvenient Truth.

In fact, in October 2007 the High Court in London had identified nine “errors” in Gore’s movie that were so outrageous that it caused a major upheaval when they wanted to show the movie about climate change in their secondary schools.

Research it yourself! Look at both sides carefully! You decide who has been caught lying and manipulating data!

No wonder the left wants to silence Global Warming critics!

Maybe it is because Al Gore said in 2008 that the entire Arctic Shelf would be gone by 2013  and that it is not only not gone, it is  growing again. (By 30% in 2013)

Maybe it was because after he claimed in 2008 that the Arctic Ice would be totally gone by 2013, that by 2012, it had already grown by 50%.

Maybe it is because they found out that the scientists were fudging the data on the temperatures.

Maybe it is because they found out that the IPCC (United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has been lying.

Maybe it is because the American public does not like to be threatened when they exercise their 1st Amendment rights and disagree with him.

Maybe it is because Climate models showing global warming have been wrong 95% of the time.

Watch the video. URL:https://youtu.be/pSPCJ8Fe_AM