Is “several degrees” of warming “virtually certain,” as NASA claims?

by Marlo Lewis on December 17, 2009

in Blog

Earlier this week, at an American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, NASA unveiled new data on atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), notably carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor, from its Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) unit on the agency’s Aqua spacecraft. NASA touted two main findings as “breakthroughs” in GHG research.

One supposed breakthrough is the discovery that CO2 is not “well-mixed” through the global troposphere (mid-level atmosphere), but is actually “lumpy” — distributed in higher concentrations in two “belts” circling the globe, especially in Northern hemisphere, which is more heavily industrialized. Now, I suppose this is a breakthrough in the sense that it will allow researchers to improve CO2 “transport models,” which hitherto have assumed that CO2 concentrations are uniform throughout the troposphere. But it would be surprising indeed if scientists did not know until now that industrialized regions have higher CO2 levels than non-industrialized areas.

The second supposed breakthrough is the claim that the AIRS data remove “most of the uncertainty about the role of water vapor [feedback]” in climate change.  “AIRS temperature data have corroborated climate model predictions that the warming of our climate produced as carbon dioxide levels rise will be greatly exacerbated — in fact, more than doubled — by water vapor,” said climate scientist Andrew Dressler of Texas A&M University. According to Dressler, “We are virtually certain to see Earth’s climate warm by several degrees Celsius in the next century, unless some strong negative feedback mechanism emerges elsewhere in the Earth’s climate system.” Dressler is talking about the assumption, common to all IPCC climate models, that the initial warming from rising CO2 levels increases concentrations of the atmosphere’s main greenhouse gas, water vapor, trapping more outgoing longwave (heat or infrared) radiation (OLR) and increasing global average rainfall.

William Gray of Colorado State University, perhaps the world’s leading hurricane forecaster, offers a different perspective on the NASA water vapor data. Gray’s comment follows:

I have just heard that NASA has a new satellite in orbit that can directly measure CO2 content in the atmosphere and that these new measurements are beginning to show that there is a positive association between increased rainfall (from higher CO2 gas amounts) and Outgoing Longwave Radiation (OLR) suppression. This is to be expected in and around the areas of precipitation — but not necessarily in global areas surrounding precipitation where return flow mass subsidence is driving the water vapor radiation emission level to a lower and somewhat warmer temperature.

I and a colleague, Barry Schwartz, have been analyzing 21 years (1984-2004) of ISCCP (International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project) outgoing longwave radiation on various space scales as related to precipitation differences. We have investigated how OLR changes with variations in precipitation from NOAA reanalysis data on time scales from 3 hours, a day, a month, and up to a year scale.

We find that on a small space scale where rainfall is occurring OLR is greatly suppressed. But on the larger regional to global scales, OLR rises with increasing precipitation. This is due to increased return flow subsidence in the surrounding cloud free and partly cloudy areas. Globally, we are finding that net OLR increases with net increased amounts of global precipitation. This is the opposite of what most GCMs [general circulation models] have programmed into their models and, if I’m interpreting the new NASA announcement correctly, opposite to what they are currently reporting to the media.

Dr. Gray presents a more detailed examination of these issues in his March 2009 Heartland Institute climate conference paper, available here.

joann December 17, 2009 at 4:02 pm

In time, more and more will come out that Global Warming is much over hyped…. there is change occurring, but it's not from human CO2…. http://www.carboncommand.com

richb313 December 17, 2009 at 4:14 pm

This is what has always bothered me about the AWG Hypothesis in general was the positive feedback to watervapor. If this were the case then why oh why did life ever survive on this palnet to begin with. A positive feedback system without a corresponding negative feedback would have resulted in a runaway process from which there can be no recovery.

deauntay mckinney December 19, 2009 at 12:39 am

deauntay mckinney said – This is indeed a wake up call for the whole world – we must change it or lose it – President Obama said during a recent summit "There has to be movement on all sides." – the future is depending on us

HIRAM BERMUDEZ December 28, 2009 at 12:53 am

GLOBAL WARMING OR ENDING? MAYA'S PREDICTED THE END OF THE WORLD 12/21/2012,NOSTRADAMUS SAID.{ WHEN THE END OF THE WORLD IS NEAR DROUGHT'S AND NATURAL DISASTER'S WILL OCCUR.] THE BIBLE SAY'S APOCALPSE.I PREDICT 24/48 ON MY D-DAY PLANET SUN WILL IMPACT PLANET EARTH LIKE IT ALLMOST DID.12/24/82 – 12/26/82 PLANET SUN MADE THE HOLE ON THE OZONE SOUTHEAST OF PUERTORICO APROX.10:30 AM.FOR MORE INFO.PLEASE REPLY.BERMUDEZHIRAM@YAHOO.COM OR WAIT FOR THE BANG OR BOOM.FROM HERE TO ETERNITY.KEEP COOL,WARM,DRY,OR OUT OF FOREST FIRE'S.TO SAVE THE UNIVERSE.IT HAS A PRICE OF ONE $TRILLION BUT THERE IS NO GUARANTEE'S.SO SORRY.SAYO NATA.RET.U.S.NAVY VIETNAM-U.S.M.C.THE CLOCK IS STILL TICKING BUT I'M ONLY GETTING OLDER.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: