Blog

In Search of Global Warming

by William Yeatman on August 24, 1998

in Science

Climatologists are critical of Vice President Al Gore’s tendency to attribute the latest isolated weather event to global warming. Gore has found evidence of global warming in a variety of weather phenomena — from January’s ice storms in the Northeast, to the June wildfires in Florida, to warmer than normal temperatures in July.

“There is a problem with making a lot of hay out of one individual event,” warns Gerald North, head of Texas A&M University’s meteorology department. “The climate is the average of all those events happening all over the world,” he adds.

Other scientists are similarly cautious.

  • “There are probably multiple causes, and we don’t know for sure what warming may be human induced or what may be natural fluctuations,” says Robert Quayle, head of the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.

  • Although the first seven months of this year were the warmest worldwide in a quarter-century, Patrick Michaels, a climatologist at the University of Virginia, reports that temperatures have already begun to return to normal and could come in below normal for the year as a whole.

  • John Christy, a climatologist at the University of Alabama, says the globe has warmed since the 19th century — but, he adds, “that was probably the coldest century of the last 10.”

  • “Overall, there is no evidence that extreme weather events, or climate variability, has increased, in a global sense, through the 20th century,” a 1995 report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found.

As scientists’ climate models improve, they predict less global warming. In 1990, the median predicted warming by 2100 was 3.2 degrees Celsius. By 1995 that estimate had dropped to 2 degrees Celsius — with a low estimate of 1 degree, including factors that may cool the climate (see figure http://www.ncpa.org/pd/gif/median.gif).

Source: Anna Bray Duff, “More Global-Warming Hot Air,” Investor’s Business Daily, August 25, 1998.

Electricity Consumption is the Key to Economic Growth; Current Federal Funding Has Little Effect on Emissions

by William Yeatman on August 22, 1998

in Blog

Electricity Consumption is the Key to Economic Growth

Electricity has become increasingly important to the U.S. economy over the last twenty years, according to technology forecaster and consultant Mark P. Mills, president of Mills-McCarthy & Associates, Inc. Since 56 percent of the nations supply of electricity is provided by burning coal, reductions in coal use under the Kyoto Protocol could have serious economic consequences, especially since the service sector has grown relative to other economic sectors.

The U.S. economy has become significantly more efficient since 1977, says Mills. In that year, “one dollar spent on energy use supported $9.50 of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Today one dollar spent on energy yields $14 of GDP.” Most of this improvement has occurred in the service and manufacturing sectors, which make up 85 percent of GDP. This was accomplished through converting energy use from combustible fuels to electricity use. “All of the net growth in new energy supply for two decades has come from electricity,” according to Mills.

Energy demand in services has increased by 30 percent, but has increased electricity use by 71 percent. Manufacturing has only increased energy use by 8 percent while increasing electricity use by 25 percent.

While the amount of combustible energy required to support a single dollar of GDP has dropped precipitously, the amount of electricity needed to support a dollar of GDP has remained constant. This is true despite large gains in the efficiency of many electricity applications. Mills warns that “policies cannot restrict the supply of electricity, or increase its cost, without endangering the economy.” Mills article, which appeared in the World Climate Report (August 10, 1998), is available at www.nhes.com.

Current Federal Funding Has Little Effect on Emissions

The U.S. federal government spends about $5 billion per year on global warming related programs, but makes no appreciable reductions in short-term emissions with this money. According to a new Congressional Budget Office report, these funds are spent either directly on global warming programs or indirectly on programs that effect fossil fuel use. “Since most of the funds are spent to learn more about the phenomenon and to improve energy efficiency in the future, the short-term effect [on emissions of greenhouse gases] is minimal,” the report said (BNA Daily Environment Report, August 17, 1998).

Satellite Data Still Robust Despite Challenge; El Nios Role in Texas Heat Wave Confirmed; More Evidence of Rapid Natural Warming

by William Yeatman on August 22, 1998

in Science

Satellite Data Still Robust Despite Challenge

A paper claiming to have detected an error in the satellite temperature data has caused quite an uproar. The press has jumped all over the story proclaiming that the main pillar of the skeptics argument has now fallen and it is time to move on with reducing greenhouse gas emissions. AAP Newsfeeds headline proclaimed, “New Evidence to Silence Global Warming Doubters,” and the Washington Post headline blared, “Global Warming Assertions Enhanced; Study Cites Flaw in Data Collection That Undermines Position of Skeptics.”

The authors of the paper, physicists Frank Wentz and Matthias Schabel at the California-based Remote Sensing Systems, claim to have discovered that the satellite global temperature data is distorted by a loss of altitude known as orbital decay (Nature, August 13, 1998). This changes one of the angles from which the satellites measure the microwaves used to determine the Earths temperature. According to Wentz and Schabel, taking this error into account changes the temperature trend from 1979 to 1995 from a cooling of 0.05 degrees C to a warming of 0.07 degrees C.

Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, and Dr. Roy Spencer of NASA, who compile and publish the satellite data, agree that orbital decay must be accounted for. When they take the effect into account, however, they still find a cooling of 0.01 degrees C. The difference between the two findings gets to the crux of the matter. Apparently, Mr. Wentz and Mr. Schabel used data that had already taken most of the effect into account.

Spencer and Christy, in order to insure accuracy, check the measurements of satellites against one another. According to The Economist (August 15, 1997), “calibrating one satellite against another allows all sort of errors to be compensated for, whether they are known or not.” Wentz and Schabels conclusions result from double-correcting the same effect.

El Nios Role in Texas Heat Wave Confirmed

Despite Vice President Al Gores claims that the heat wave in the southern United States is proof of global warming, level headed scientists are blaming the phenomenon on El Nio. A new study published by the National Weather Service (NWS) says that even though it has weakened considerably El Nio is still to blame for the high temperatures in the Southwest. It will probably persist for another month.

“Were expecting this warm water to peter out in the next 3 to 6 weeks,” says Anthony Barnston, a forecaster with the NWS. El Nio will be replaced by La Nia which could mean even more dryness for the southern U.S. “If we dont get more normal precipitation in the late summer and early fall, were looking at a very large [drought],” says Barnston (Science, July 31, 1998). The study is available at nic.fb4.noaa. gov/index.html.

Hurricanes in Decline

Several studies have discredited the claim that a warmer planet will lead to an increase in hurricane activity. Robert Balling, a climatologist at Arizona State University, found in a study published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute that Atlantic hurricane activity has declined. Other studies have found similar results.

A new study by Mark C. Bove, David F. Zierden and J. OBrien at Florida States Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, looked at hurricane records of the Gulf of Mexico extending back to 1896, and found that the number of hurricanes have declined in recent years. The data show a peak in the 1916-1925 period of 14 storms, 6 of which were severe. The 1986-1995 experienced only 8 storms, 1 of which was severe, equaling the study periods previous low set in 1896-1905.

Its not clear why the decline is happening, says Mark Bove. One explanation is that there appears to be a 30-year cycle of hurricane activity that has been detected by William Gray, a hurricane expert at Colorado State University. But the cause of the 30-year cycle is also unclear (Associated Press, July 22, 1998).

More Evidence of Rapid Natural Warming

While a lot of ink is being spilt on the possibility of manmade global warming, researchers are finding more and more evidence that the earth has undergone profound, natural climate variations over short periods of time. The latest research, published in Science (August 14, 1998), has found that there was a significant warming about 2,000 years ago in equatorial Africa. The evidence shows that lake water during this period warmed by about 8 degrees F. Other research has also found a similar warming in Alaska and Lapland during the same era, but the new findings are “important because it was conducted around the equator, a region that plays a crucial role in determining the climate system throughout the planet.”

“Our findings show that the climate can warm up suddenly without any connection to human activity,” says lead researcher Aldo Shemesh of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel. Though the factors that triggered the warming are unknown, Shemesh believes that they “could allow scientists to distinguish between natural climate variability and warming due to manmade factors” (Greenwire, August 17, 1998).

EPAs Propaganda Machine Rolls On; $1.5 Million to Create Scientist-Activists; Solar Energy Off the Dole?

by William Yeatman on August 22, 1998

in Politics

EPAs Propaganda Machine Rolls On

The EPA is “spending untold millions on propaganda about global warming,” according to Investors Business Daily (August 4, 1998). “The EPA calls this educational outreach,” says IBD, The EPA is “spending untold millions on propaganda about global warming,” according to Investors Business Daily (August 4, 1998).

Recently Congress voted to allow the Environmental Protection Agency to spend money on educational outreach and informational seminars on global warming. Critics of the legislation worry that it will allow the EPA to continue its advocacy of the Kyoto Protocol, which the U.S. Senate has not ratified.

IBD notes that there are five federal agencies the EPA, the Agriculture Department, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Geological Survey sponsoring 20 pro-Kyoto workshops nationwide. One of the attendees of an EPA workshop, who questioned the science behind global warming, was told to “sit quietly” or leave.

EPAs web site asks state governments to “encourage and support the federal government to take action at the national level.” Brochures distributed at an EPA-sponsored conference in Baltimore demanded that the U.S. “now begin designing policies and programs” to comply with the Kyoto Protocol. In Atlanta, EPA literature, warned of heat waves, storms, droughts, migration and crowding, disease carrying animals and infective parasites. “[T]hese visions of doom,” says IBD, “are all designed to scare people into pressing Congress to take away their freedom with more rules and laws.”

$1.5 Million to Create Scientist-Activists

A Green group is planning to spend $1.5 million to help “some of the nations leading environmental scientists” become “professional communicators.” The program, funded by the Ecological Society of America and operated by Oregon State University, also hopes to “improve the flow of accurate, credible scientific information to policy makers and the general public on critical issues of the environment.”

Though there is nothing wrong with improving scientists communication skills, its abundantly clear that this program is meant to promote the extremist ideological views of Green activists. Project director Judith Vergun of OSU says that “[t]he current rate of ecological change is unprecedented in the history of the Earth.”

The press release announcing the program goes on to state: “For instance, on the issue of global warming, many people may be confused by complicated studies and pseudo-scientific critics who argue the phenomenon is an unproven theory of no particular importance.”

According to the press release, “[T]he vast majority of credible scientists,” believe that “global warming is now a reality, that the time for action is here and that the looming crisis is very real, with implications for everything from severe weather events, to the spread of disease, disruptions of agriculture and forestry, rising sea levels and habitat loss.” It continues: “the gap between common perceptions and scientific reality has to be bridged” (OSU News Service, August 4, 1998).

Solar Energy Off the Dole?

Congress appears ready to cut funding for the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) through the Department of Energy. SEIA received $1 million (about 60 percent of its budget) in 1997. Expected cutbacks have forced Scott Sklar, SEIAs president, to lay off 10 of his 21 staff members (National Journal, August 15, 1998).

Solar energy has been subsidized for decades, but the millions of dollars sunk into this alternative fuel have not made it self sufficient. Congress action may be the first step to weaning solar power off of welfare.

Canadas “clean-technology” industry is also being hit with the budget-cutting axe. The Canadian Environmental Industry Strategy, a three-year, $14.7 million program has had its funding zeroed out. Most of the money was used to help Canadian industries sell their technology overseas (The Gazette (Montreal), August 17, 1998).

Kyoto in the Pulpit

Some church groups are beginning to shift their focus from saving souls to saving the planet. The debate over global warming, according to The New York Times (August 15, 1998), “is spilling over into pulpits and pews as religious organizations speak out about morality, faith, and the Kyoto Protocol.”

The National Council of Churches sent a letter to convince the U.S. Senate to ratify the Kyoto Protocol without requiring emissions reductions from the developing nations. The councils general secretary, Rev. Joan Brown Campbell says that the group wants global warming to be “a litmus test for the faith community.”

The National Religious Partnership for the Environment is embarking on a major lobbying effort to convince Senators from nine states, from Appalachia to Michigan, to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Senators Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) have been targeted.

Some larger religious organizations, such as the United States Catholic Conference and the National Association of Evangelicals, are planning to consider their own positions on the issue. The Southern Baptist Convention “has not taken a position, and in view of the unsettled science, it seems unlikely that we will take such a position,” according to spokesman William Merrell.

Measuring the Temperature of the Earth From Space

by William Yeatman on August 19, 1998

in Science, Students

The paper published by Frank Wentz and Matthias Schabel in Nature this week (August 14, 1998) is bound to generate controversy about the satellite measurements of global tropospheric temperatures. These measurements, for the period since 1979, have been made with the TIROS-N satellite Microwave Sounding Units (MSUs) by myself and Dr. John Christy (The University of Alabama in Huntsville). We are grateful to Wentz and Schabel for discovering the first convincing evidence for needed corrections to our satellite-based global temperatures.

However, we believe that there are a few important points that should be considered when reporting on this paper.

1) The spurious cooling in the satellite record due to the orbital decay (“downward drift”) effect was only estimated by Wentz and Schabel as an average adjustment to our processed satellite data. The effect, which will have different values for the eight different satellites in the record, should instead be removed one satellite at a time before the satellites in the record are intercalibrated. We (John Christy and Roy Spencer) have performed this adjustment, with the results given below.

2) The effect reported by Mr. Wentz had been partly offset by an east-west drift in the satellites’ orbits. The valuable discovery of the downward drift effect by Wentz and Schabel allowed us to separately quantify two consequences of the east-west drift (MSU instrument temperature change, and observation time-of-day change). We have now performed these adjustments as well (below).

3) The global decadal temperature trends, for the period 1979-1997, from the various satellite, weather balloon, and surface temperature measurements are as follows, in order of increasing temperature trend: 

DEEP LAYER MEASUREMENTS





Weather balloon trend (Angell/NOAA)



-0.07 deg. C/decade
Unadjusted satellite trend:



-0.04 deg. C/decade




Weather balloon trend (Parker, UK Met Office):



-0.02 deg. C/decade




Our Adjusted Satellite Trend:



-0.01 deg.  C/decade




Wentz-estimated adjusted satellite trend:



+0.08 deg. C/decade





SURFACE MEASUREMENTS





Sea surface and land surface temperatures (U.K. Met Office):



+0.15 deg. C/decade
It can be seen that the adjustment by Wentz and Schabel does not agree with our (more complete) adjustments, or to the weather balloon data. Instead, their adjustment comes closer to the surface thermometer measurements, and herein lies a temptation to jump to conclusions.

4) The adjusted satellite trends are still not near the expected value of global warming predicted by computer climate models. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 1995 estimate of average global warming at the surface until the year 2100 is +0.18 deg. C/decade.

Climate models suggest that the deep layer measured by the satellite and weather balloons should be warming about 30% faster than the surface (+0.23 deg. C/decade). None of the satellite or weather balloon estimates are near this value.

5) 1998 UPDATE: The last six months of our adjusted satellite record (February through July 1998) were the warmest in the 20 year record. The updated trend is now +0.04 deg. C/decade (which is still only 1/6th of the IPCC-expected warming rate). The current demise of El Nino, and the possibility of a La Nina forming, will likely cause significant cooling in the coming months.

Here We Go Again – Satellite Measurements Fail to Show an Increase in Global Average Temperatures

by William Yeatman on August 19, 1998

in Science

A rather trivial bit of scientific research has gotten blown up into an end of the world scenario. A Washington Post headline blared, “Global Warming Assertions Enhanced; Study Cites Flaw in Data Collection That Undermines Position of Skeptics” and an AAP Newsfeed headline proclaimed, “New Evidence to Silence Global Warming Doubters.”

The articles refer to a new study that appeared in the August 13th issue of Nature that claims to have found an error in the global temperature data measured from satellites. The satellite measurements, taken since 1979, fail to show an increase in global average temperatures contrary to global warming predictions. This has been a thorn in the side of those who wrongly declare that the science is settled.

Drs. Frank Wentz and Matthias Schabel, from the company Remote Systems Sensing in Santa Rosa, California, claim to have found an error in the satellite data that is caused by orbital decay. When the error is taken into account the data show a slight warming trend instead of a cooling trend.

Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, and Dr. Roy Spencer of NASA, who compile and publish the satellite data, agree with the study in principle. They argue, however, that there are other countervailing effects that create a false warming which cancels the effect discovered by Wentz and Schabel.

Drs. Wentz and Schabel also erred in modifying the adjusted data (which has already taken into account many confounding variables). According to John Christy, applying the orbital decay finding to the raw data fails to produce a warming trend.

It is a shame that the press insists on inflating a perfectly good piece of research to support their preconceived notions.

One Reporter Punctures Global-Warming Hysteria; Others at Networks Prove His Point

by William Yeatman on August 12, 1998

in Blog

 ABC News’ Michael Guillen: Beware of Climate Hype

Washington, D.C. — Something unprecedented happened on ABC’s Good Morning America on Tuesday: A correspondent questioned global-warming hysteria. Unfortunately, such basic skepticism was missing in every other report on climate change this week, as other network reporters continued to parrot Al Gore’s warnings that the Earth is catastrophically warming.

The sole dissenter from the party line was ABC News Science Editor Michael Guillen. “The earth does things in cycles,” Guillen noted. “Everything from the 24-hour day-night cycle, to a woman’s 28-day menstrual cycle, to the yearly seasonal cycle, what goes up must come down and what goes down must come up. And from a geological point of view, we were in an ice age not so long ago, and what we’ve been doing for the last 10,000 years, if you take a really big picture, is warming up since then, rebounding from that ice age. So this might be just part of that.”

According to Guillen, “Even diseases are cyclic” and can’t necessarily be blamed on global warming. He further pointed out the absurdity of “scary headlines” about the hottest weather in 120 years of record-keeping. “It would be like this,” Guillen said, “If I watched you for 70 seconds, monitored your body for 70 seconds, and used that information to determine what your body’s going to do for the rest of your life, that’s pretty much what we’re doing right now with [temperature] records.”

For other reporters, it was business as usual. Of the evening news broadcasts on ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC, only the NBC Nightly News didn’t trumpet Al Gore’s August 10 press event on global warming.

Dan Rather, on that night’s CBS Evening News, also showed traces of the symptoms Guillen diagnoses as hysteria. “Worldwide, July was the hottest month ever on record,” Rather claimed in a brief story. “Once more, it was the seventh month in a row that global temperatures hit an all-time high.”

Other reporters went further. Jim Moret, anchor of CNN’s The World Today, told August 10 viewers that July “was the hottest month ever recorded on earth.” Reporter Sharon Collins then claimed that “this year’s extreme weather adds to the body of evidence that climate change is not only real, it’s already here.”

She did note that there are skeptics of global-warming theories, and even ran a quote from Fred Smith of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, but then proceeded to taint the credibility of skeptics: “The oil and coal industries bankrolled a multi-million dollar campaign to throw cold water on predictions of a warming earth.” Collins then falsely claimed that “most climate scientists agree with Al Gore’s general assessment.”

Guillen’s ABC colleagues at World News Tonight were equally alarmist. “Some scientists, like Harvard’s Paul Epstein, take the issue further,” correspondent Ned Potter warned on August 10. “There’s plenty of argument over this, but they say we’re getting a taste of global warming, the changes in world weather caused by industrial pollution trapping heat in the atmosphere. That could bring more heat waves, droughts in some places, more floods in others, with more infectious rodents or insects as a result.”

Despite Potter’s admission that there is “plenty of argument” about global warming’s impact on human health, he didn’t find time to present the arguments of the other side.

“Unfortunately, there’s a lot of political hype” surrounding global warming, ABC’s Guillen noted in closing his segment. Yes, and much of it comes from his fellow journalists.

Kyotos Regulatory Burden II; Joint Implementation to Offset CO2

by William Yeatman on August 9, 1998

in Small business

Kyotos Regulatory Burden II

In our last issue, we discussed a new study by Mark P. Mills of Mills-McCarthy Associates. It demonstrates that if the Environmental Protection Agency classifies carbon dioxide as a pollutant, over a million small businesses would become regulated stationary sources. This would include 28 percent of all schools and 25 percent of all health-care buildings.

Mills has now looked at the actual monetary costs of compliance. To comply, small businesses would have to hire staff “who will install, identify, evaluate, and operate emissions monitoring equipment; some other people to undertake record-keeping and documentation control; yet another team to become expert in and monitor regulatory compliance; still others to consider and implement engineering solutions to the problem of complying with emissions reduction.” Finally, legal staff will also be needed to “consider the entire trajectory of legal exposure and compliance under current rules as well as the interpretations of the regulations as they evolve through inevitable legal battles.”

Mills estimates that these compliance activities will require one person-year of effort. He assumes for the sake of his calculations that a small firm can meet its compliance needs by contracting one-half of a person-year of effort. This, Mills conservatively estimates, will cost about $30,000. Since the threshold for coming under the regulatory purview of the EPA is $8,000 in fossil fuel purchases this means that the cost of fossil fuel for small businesses will jump from $8,000 per year to $38,000 per year.

For firms that purchase $100,000 of fossil fuel their cost will rise by 30 percent. Assuming that a firm would need to use one person-year to comply (a far more realistic assumption) would raise costs by 60 percent. Mills calculates that the total collective cost to American businesses could reach $100 billion. The article is at www.nhes.com/current_issue/fueling.html.

Joint Implementation to Offset CO2

A new report by the Government Accounting Office states that the 32 joint implementation (JI) projects that were approved under a U.S. pilot program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will offset 200 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and 1.3 million tons of methane over the next 60 years if fully implemented. JI allows developed countries to earn emission credits by funding projects in developing countries that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The reliability of the estimates are not known, according to the GAO. “Standard methods for estimating projects emissions reduction benefits specific to the U.S. initiative have not been developed,” the report said.

Seventeen of the approved projects would reduce emissions directly by, for example, reducing methane leakage in the natural gas distribution system in Russia. The other 15 would reduce emissions by planting trees or protecting forests from logging in developing countries (BNA Daily Environment Report, July 21, 1998).

Satellite Data Verified; IPCC Findings Disputed; Support Grows for Sun-Climate Link

by William Yeatman on August 9, 1998

in Science

Satellite Data Verified

In a new study to be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research, Roger Pielke, along with four other scientists, uses barometer data from weather balloons to construct a temperature record. Temperatures can be determined by measuring barometric pressure (weight of the air above) as weather balloons ascend through the atmosphere. At the ground average barometric pressure is 29.92 inches and halfway through the atmosphere is 14.96 inches. When the air is colder the balloon doesnt have to go as high to reach the midpoint. For every 195 feet farther that the balloon has to rise to reach the atmospheric halfway point, the mean temperature will go up 4.95 degrees Fahrenheit.

Using global barometer data taken from weather balloons Pielke, et al, compiled a temperature record and found no global warming trend since 1979, in agreement with the satellite data. The barometer data goes back to 1973, however. The 1973-1996 data show a statistically significant warming though it is six times lower than predicted by the NASA climate model. An article summarizing the research can be found at www.nhes.com/currnet_issue/feature.html.

IPCC Findings Disputed

The actual impact of carbon dioxide on the atmosphere is 15 percent less than estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, according to a study in Geophysical Research Letters (July 15, 1998). The UN panel also underestimated the effects of other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.

Jerry Mahlman, director of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, commented that the studys findings may reduce the range of uncertainty from 1.5 degrees and 4.5 degrees warming to 1.35 and 4.3 degrees. Gunnar Myhre of the University of Oslo, Norway, who participated in the study said that “Our results will only change the IPCC estimate of radiative forcing, not the IPCC estimate of temperature change” (AP Online, July 10, 1998).

Support Grows for Sun-Climate Link

A striking correlation has been found between changes in the suns brightness and changes in global temperatures. One of the problems with any explanation that attributes climate changes to changes in the suns energy output is that the output is not large enough by itself to account for change on earth. Several theories have been advanced to explain how changes in the sun can translate into large climate changes on earth.

The New Scientist (July 11, 1998) discusses the recent work of Eigil Friis-Christensen and Knud Lassen of the Danish Meteorological Institute. Their theory says energetic particles from space known as cosmic rays assist in cloud formation. The more clouds, the cooler the earth becomes. Solar winds, according to Friis-Christensen and Lassen, block cosmic rays leading to less cloud cover and a warmer planet.

The article advances two other theories about the correlation between solar activity and climate change. Joaana Haigh, a physicist at Imperial College, London, believes that fluctuations of ultraviolet radiation are the culprit. UV radiation fluctuates three times as much as total radiation throughout a solar cycle. At the point during the solar cycle where UV radiation peaks there is a 2 percent jump in stratospheric ozone levels, raising stratospheric temperatures by 0.5 degrees C. This causes the stratosphere to sink, pushing the hot tropical weather toward the middle latitudes, causing global warming.

Niel Arnold and Terry Robinson, physicists at the University of Leicester, believe that the thermosphere, the earths outer atmosphere becomes heated by absorbing both ultraviolet and X-rays from the sun. Fluctuations in the suns output could double the temperature of the thermosphere. This warming effect can be carried to lower altitudes speeding up the jet stream by up to 20 percent, changing stratospheric temperatures by several degrees, say the researchers. So far these theories have only been tested using computer models. Empirical tests for some of these theories are being considered.

Etc.

  • David Letterman, of CBS Late Show, devoted a July 15 monologue to Vice President Al Gores recent musings over the causes of the warm weather. “You know,” said Letterman, “Vice President Al Gore held a press conference yesterday, and I thought this was interesting, Al Gore said the reason hes blaming now, global warming he says, global warming is the reason were presently having a heat wave, he says. The heat wave right now; global warming. And Im thinking, Yeeeaaah it could be global warming or,” Letterman shouts, “maybe it has something to do with the fact that its the middle of July, its supposed to be hot.” The crowd erupted with cheers and laughter.

  • The Green lobby has stepped up the political war raging around global warming. The National Resources Defense Council is running ads in Florida accusing Republican U.S. Representatives Bill Young and Dan Miller of “fiddling while Florida burns” by voting to prevent the Clinton Administration from illegally implementing the Kyoto Protocol (The Tampa Tribune, July 15, 1998).

  • The Executive Council of the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics has given a name to the brand of science that seems to prevail in the environmental debate.

In their Policy Options (May 1998) they write: “Post-normal science recognizes that scientific facts pertaining to the environment (including climate change) are often uncertain. These need to be supplemented by anecdotal evidence such as traditional and popular knowledge provided by an extended peer community of knowledgeable non-experts. Moreover, the selection of policies is complicated by major conflicts among society’s values … Finally, post-normal science requires an ethic of responsibility from scientists i.e., scientists cannot afford to simply wait for the facts to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to recommend policy action. Rather, the weight of evidence (with a margin of error much larger than the one tolerated for scientific knowledge) should be sufficient ground to recommend policy action. If error there is, the precautionary principle requires scientists to err on the safe side, as would do an engineer building a bridge: safety first because the stakes are high.”

Settled Science? Global Warming Research is All Over the Board

by William Yeatman on August 8, 1998

in Science

Scientific research is all over the board on the global warming issue. Duke University botanists claim the American prairie will expand if the climate warms. But numerous other studies already claim CO2 is causing forests to encroach on the Prairie. Indeed, in the last year two state EPAs have burned off forested areas in an attempt, they said, to “recreate” prairie (1000 acres were torched in Michigan, 40 acres were slated to be torched in Maryland three months ago).

In the July 31, 1998 issue of the journal Science, climatologists at Florida State University say satellite studies of the Sahara indicate desertification– i.e., expansion of the desert–has nothing to do with human activities, global warming or otherwise. As the title explains: “The Sahara is Not Marching Southward: From a satellite perch, the supposed steady encroachment of desert into Africa’s Sahel appears instead to stem from climate variation.” The report, found on page 633, says “the scenario of the Sahara sands marching southward at the hands of humans is wrong” and “that “natural climate variation has shifted the desert’s edge, with no net effect on the amount of vegetation.”

This is “settled” science?

FYI, The Ecological Society of America, mentioned here, is the group administering, with the aid of Oregon State University, the $1.5 million Aldo Leopold Leadership Fellows program to train scientists to work the press on the global warming issue.

Global Warming May Expand Plains

Associated Press
By Joseph B. Verrengia — Tuesday, August 4, 1998

Global warming could yield drier conditions on the northern Great Plains, triggering drastic ecological changes during the next century, a new study shows.

Botanists at Duke University who conducted the study declined to specify exactly what might be in store for one of the nation’s productive grain and cattle regions, which also is a magnet for wildlife, especially migrating birds.

But they said warmer, drier conditions probably would result in grasslands spreading east into areas that now are woodlands, with a corresponding increase in wildfires.

“What’s important is that the sensitivity is there to global warming,” Duke botanist James Clark said. “This system is really responsive, with the grasslands expanding eastward into forests and an increase in burning of this prairie.”

Clark presented his findings Tuesday to the Ecological Society of America meeting in Baltimore. The convention runs through Thursday.

Other grasslands researchers said they generally agree with Clark’s scenario but questioned whether ecological changes would occur in the order he described.

Forests that were established during moist periods can endure for centuries even when the climate turns drier.

“The next fire that comes along to take out the forests is what will allow the grasslands to expand,” University of Colorado ecologist Tim Seastedt said.

The Duke study — which examined peat sediments, fossil pollen, and charcoal deposits from ancient wildfires — encompassed an area that includes eastern Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota and Wisconsin. The region has flip-flopped between grasslands and forests during the past 8,000 years, depending on climatic changes.

Clark said the past 2,000 years have been relatively cool and wet, conditions favorable to woodlands.

That is, until the 20th century — the warmest in recent history, with the past several years being among the hottest on record.

Many researchers believe the rising temperatures are being driven to some extent by heat-trapping air pollution and other byproducts of human activities. Subtle atmospheric circulation shifts caused by global warming and other factors could favor drier weather, Clark said.

If the trend continues, today’s woodlands on the fringes of the Plains could recede to a point where sufficient moisture is available — perhaps hundreds of miles to the east.

“We’ve seen this region getting cooler and moister until this century,” Clark said. “We have seen a trajectory of cooler climate for over 4,000 years and there is good reason to believe it won’t continue.”

Other ecologists said the human-driven changes to the region’s ecology already may be occurring. The Plains have become an intensively managed environment which is now dominated by nonnative plants, including hybrid crops and yard landscaping.

Human activity is adding more carbon dioxide, nitrogen and other gases to the atmosphere, and the environment is considerably different than it was during previous centuries in more ways than just temperature, they said.

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →