Regional Climate Information: Real-world use (2)

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 3:03 PM GMT en Noviembre 02, 2010

Share this Blog
1
+

Regional Climate Information: Real-world use (2)

There is, perhaps to an outsider, a curious contradiction evolving in the climate-science community. On one hand we have concluded that the warming of the planet is unequivocal, attributable to the release of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel consumption, and that we need to do things to limit the warming – which most simply is to reduce emissions from fossil fuels. Therefore, we feel that there is enough confidence in climate change projections to warrant changes in the very foundation of our energy consumption; hence, the foundation of our economic success.

On the other hand, when we talk about the need for climate projections to contribute to planning for adaptation to climate change, there are many in the community who will make the argument that the projections are so uncertain that it is not possible to provide such information. An example of this sort of decision might be the size of the drain pipes in the urban flood controls or the need for a barrier to protect city water supplies.

This contradiction, we know enough to say we have to do something, but not enough to say what to do, is not a comfortable situation. To some, it raises issues of basic credibility; it is definitely fuel for the political position that it is too risky to our economic well being to take action on climate change. This sort of contradiction is, however, not so unusual. Think about the floods in Pakistan. We knew for 2-3 weeks that the water was flowing down the Indus Valley, but in a general way, it was not clear what to do downstream. It is still flooded in the Sindh.

Those people most interested in developing adaptation plans often want numbers, digital data, for the year, say, 2040. Their intuition is to ask for data that looks like today’s weather station observations. The reason for this is relatively simple – there are present-day tools for design and warnings that have been developed to use weather data and weather forecasts. This recognizes the implicit fact that weather is how climate interacts with people.

Though we have developed some skill in seasonal prediction, largely based on our ability to predict the El Nino-La Nina cycle, we have not developed much skill in actual climate prediction (see for instance, here and here). By climate prediction I mean, for example, will there be a flood at the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers in June of 2019? The conclusions that are drawn from climate models, with varying degrees of confidence, that there will be more intense floods and droughts use the models to provide guidance. This guidance is used in combination with understanding of basic theoretical knowledge like warm air holds more water; hence, it can support more intense storms. In some cases, we can use observations from the past to provide circumstantial evidence to support the robustness of our conclusions. With this information it is possible to provide guidance for those trying to make decisions, but it is a complex process that requires inputs from a variety of people who are knowledgable in the circumstances of a particular problem. This expert guidance or advice is sometimes referred to as translation, and more and more, we understand the need to have translators at the interfaces of all of the different types of expertise needed for problem solving. We understand the need to cogenerate solutions, and that one field of study, climate science, handing off information to another field of study, city wastewater managers, does not work so well. We simply do not have the ease of providing weather-like data without qualification.

I threaten to digress. A comprehensive climate model can provide a set of numbers that are time stamped with every hour of any year at every point on Earth. It is relatively straight forward to provide a bunch of numbers that look like the Wunderground Personal Weather Station network in Chicago for the year 2043. In fact, we have talked about this as a cool thing to do for the climate page. Most Wunderground devotees would immediately recognize that such a set of numbers may only constitute a party trick. There is not enough skill to pick out in which years there will be regional droughts, much less, whether or not it will rain in Naperville on July 4, 2043.

Nevertheless, there has grown up in the past few years a huge industry which not only takes archived climate model output and tries to increase the effective resolution through a variety of methods, but also use weather generators to generate daily high and low temperatures. This is called downscaling, the process of taking coarse resolution information and adding fine resolution information to customize it for a particular application. As you might imagine, there are widely varying opinions about this process. Some scientists think that this is a waste of time and resources, and others think it is a critical process in developing necessary climate adaptation plans. (For those who want to know more: a whole bunch of downscaling references from my class.) (and for your pleasure ClimateWizard and Canadian Climate Change Scenarios Network)

From a market perspective, there are many customers who want downscaled information and the basic information to feed downscaling algorithms is readily available through the CMIP-3 archive. Therefore, whether or not a subset of climate scientists think that downscaling makes sense, there will be downscaling of climate projections and use of that information.

Early in the 1990s I was involved in ozone research, and in particular, the development of weather-resolving global ozone models. These models challenged not only the computational resources of the time, but the human resources to evaluate their quality and interpret their results. In a meeting in the Damon Room of the National Center of Atmospheric Research, we were discussing the use of this new generation of model in official United Nations’ assessments of ozone depletion. I was on the side that it was too early to use these models, and that we needed months if not years to assess their quality and assure their robustness. On the other side was the argument that these new generation models WOULD be used; they existed, and someone would use them. One stream of the argument was that it was the responsibility of those most knowledgeable of both the strengths and weaknesses of the models to try them out in the assessment studies.

I was on the wrong side of that argument in the Damon Room. It was true that new generation models would be used for a whole variety of reasons, ranging from scientific reasons to reasons of one research group trying to make their mark relative to another group. Not only was there a responsibility for the leading research groups to participate, but there was also a lot to be learned from trying to do those assessments.

In the discussion about whether or not model projections are ready for applications, there are arguments made that addressing applied problems are not really science. That a focus on applications diverts resources from needed science and diverts the most trained minds away from needed research. Such a position, however, does not recognize the challenging research problems of how to use climate information in real-world applications. Neither does it recognize that the demand for information is there, and that that demand will be met in some way.

Imagine that you are spending money for bridges or power plants or flood control. These expenditures are expected to last generations. You know that you need to consider climate change. You need to consider climate change in concert with many other issues, and the question might reduce to what incremental change do I need to make to my plans to accommodate climate change. Or the question might be more severe – is salt water intruding into my water supply? As a decision maker you are concerned technically and ethically. You might need to answer to political concerns, and increasingly, you are answering to your insurance company. You need climate data now – you can’t wait until the skill score of decadal predictions improve.

The scientific investigation of climate has revealed the need to do something, and you cannot wait until a certain skill score is achieved in climate models. There are many ways you can get some information. It would be nice to get vetted and branded information, but in the absence of that, you can get some information. Usually the information that you will use with be strongly influenced by ease of access and use. It would be nice to have ease of access and use to the best available data at any given time. It is not a simple manner to define “best available;” it is not a simple thing to manage the logistics of access.

If you examine the problem from the generation of climate knowledge to the use of climate knowledge, then there are research issues all the way along the path. Above, I mentioned the need for cogeneration of solutions to problem. Cogeneration means that all of the information providers are working together in the generation of solution paths. With this participation, the users of climate information learn how to account for the uncertainties of climate projections in their problems and climate scientists learn the requirements that are faced by the users.

We have been studying the use of climate information for, at least, 20 years, and from this experience, we know that it is naïve to image simply providing digital data. There is a need to develop translation services to complement the digital data. We know from experience in the weather community, that the notion that we can make the provision of digital data operational, somehow separated from research, is far from optimal. It sets up barriers between new developments that might improve forecasts, and it sets up barriers on best use of information. The idea that we might wait until the climate projections achieve some undetermined skill level, then pass it off as useful, neglects the fact that the bottleneck in the use of climate data does not lie first and foremost in the quality of the climate projections. This position of wait until the data are better neglects the research from years of learning how to use climate data. In fact, to wait until the data are better serves to fuel a wait and see approach in the development of policy and development of solution paths. We have made the argument that climate projections are robust enough to motivate controlling the emissions of fossil fuels. We need to address with equal energy the problem of determining the size of the levees in Fargo and New Orleans.

r

First Blog in this series

Pakistan: I am certain to maintain an interest in Pakistan far longer than the average disaster attention span. My youngest sister Elizabeth is Counsel General in Peshawar so I keep an eye on the news. Sindh is still flooded. Attention to the Pakistan flood is moral imperative, a humanitarian imperative, and a security imperative. (Pakistan Flooding: A Climate Disaster, Yours truly on Chicago-based Radio Islam, Rood interview)

Here are some places that my sister has recommended for the humanitarian crisis in Pakistan. Organizations she sees.

Doctors Without Borders

The International Red Cross

MERLIN medical relief charity

U.S. State Department Recommended Charities

The mobile giving service mGive allows one to text the word "SWAT" to 50555. The text will result in a $10 donation to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) Pakistan Flood Relief Effort.

Portlight Disaster Relief at Wunderground.com



Figure 1. Despair of Pakistan’s forgotten flood victims: BBC coverage of continuing flood in Pakistan


Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 115 - 65

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog Index

Quoting MichaelSTL:


Did you not see my previous post, which included a study which says that there will be FEWER but stronger storms? Again, FEWER storms - just as observed this year (and actually, the Pacific has shown a decrease for at least several years now; of course, part of this is the AMO, which increases Atlantic activity but decreases Pacific activity when it is in its current phase; when it reverses, we will see the opposite).

Fewer, fiercer tropical cyclones are in our future, study finds

Although global warming could cause the number of tropical cyclones to decrease around the world by the end of the century, the storms that do form probably will be more intense, a study in the journal Nature Geoscience finds.


One classic feature of a denialist is that they continue to spew misinformation no matter how many times facts are shoved into their faces - "Look - scientists predicted that there would be more hurricanes, but they are WRONG!".


Michael I think you and Snowlover123 are exact opposites!
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Did you not see my previous post, which included a study which says that there will be FEWER but stronger storms? Again, FEWER storms - just as observed this year (and actually, the Pacific has shown a decrease for at least several years now; of course, part of this is the AMO, which increases Atlantic activity but decreases Pacific activity when it is in its current phase; when it reverses, we will see the opposite).


Fewer, fiercer tropical cyclones are in our future, study finds

Although global warming could cause the number of tropical cyclones to decrease around the world by the end of the century, the storms that do form probably will be more intense, a study in the journal Nature Geoscience finds.


One classic feature of a denialist is that they continue to spew misinformation no matter how many times facts are shoved into their faces - "Look - scientists predicted that there would be more hurricanes, but they are WRONG!".


So the 2005 Hurricane Season wasn't caused by Global Warming as some desperate doomers want it to be?

Mr. Gore has spread so much desinformation to the public, if the study that was conducted is accurate.

-Snow
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
The advocates here, are certainly more harsher than on another site that I talk about climate change on!

Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting MichaelSTL:


LOL, do you know why it is called "climate change", which is the real term that should be used (since warming by itself is actually a very minor effect)? More rainfall globally does not equal more rainfall at any particular spot - or droughts would never happen in the first place! And many areas that get drought will of course be getting floods some time later - or droughts where there were floods, but more intense droughts and floods (and interestingly, a rise in temperature alone - even with constant precipitation, means more evaporation and less soil moisture, which has the same effects as less rainfall; in fact, a general rule in physics is that for every rise of 10 degrees, chemical processes double in speed, including evaporation, so even a rise of only one degree, as has been observed so far, is significant).


It's called "climate change" because the climate changes. It's quite simple actually. Yet, if all types of extreme weather are observed with Global Warming, then what types of weather does Global Cooling cause?

-Snow
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting MichaelSTL:


LOL, did you see my previous post on this and why it was expected to see low activity (except by delusional denialists like you)? And record low I bet is only for the eastern Pacific, while one of the strongest storms in history occurred in the western Pacific - ask the Philippines.


One storm does not mean that the total season was active.

-Snow
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting MichaelSTL:
I wonder what point Snowlover123 is making in comment 89; seems like he never even read the predictions for Pacific activity this year, which was for below normal activity in both basins (east and west). And he needs to do some reading on the expected influence of climate change on tropical cyclones - the consensus is that intensity of the strongest storms will (and has) increase - but no consensus on frequency. In fact, many studies indicate that activity will... wait for it... DECREASE. Like this:


Fewer, fiercer tropical cyclones are in our future, study finds

Although global warming could cause the number of tropical cyclones to decrease around the world by the end of the century, the storms that do form probably will be more intense, a study in the journal Nature Geoscience finds.


Now, I wonder if the Pacific has produced any significant storms this year?


HURRICANE CELIA DISCUSSION NUMBER 24
NWS TPC/NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP042010
800 PM PDT THU JUN 24 2010

CELIA IS TIED FOR THE STRONGEST EASTERN PACIFIC HURRICANE ON RECORD
IN JUNE
...WITH AVA OF 1973.


Potentially catastrophic Super Typhoon Megi approaching the Philippines

The SFMR surface wind measurement instrument recorded surface winds of 186 mph in regions where heavy rain was not contaminating the measurement, but found surface winds of 199 mph in one region of heavy rain. Now, this measurement is considered contaminated by rain, but at very high wind speeds, the contamination effect is less important than at lower hurricane wind speeds, and it is possible than Megi's surface winds are close to a sustained 200 mph. This is supported by the flight level winds of 220 mph, which support surface winds of 199 mph, using the usual 10% reduction rule of thumb.


Typhoon Megi: The Strongest in the World

According to CNN meteorologist Ivan Cabrera, super typhoon Juan (international codename Megi) is "the strongest storm on the planet since 2005", and it is also the strongest storm that wreaked havoc in the Pacific Ocean since 1990.


Whoops!

Also, I am not sure what point he is making about the ENSO forecast.




The most recent (August-September) MEI value shows a continued drop from earlier this year, reaching -1.99, or 0.18 sigma below last month's value, and 3.39 standard deviations below February-March, a record-fast six-month drop for any time of year, while slowing down a bit at the shorter time scales. The most recent MEI rank (lowest) is clearly below the 10%-tile threshold for strong La Nina MEI rankings for this season. One has to go back to July-August 1955 to find lower MEI values for any time of year.


(previous monthly MEI discussion which I posted here, current has it a bit weaker but still at 2nd strongest)

Oh yeah, and the claims that there is absolutely no connection between climate change and the Pakistan floods, which couldn't be more wrong. But did climate change CAUSE the Pakistan floods? No, and nobody but the deniers (or uneducated) is claiming that it did.

PS: If you deny climate change so much, why are you posting on this site? You realize that Dr. Masters has to put up with constant threats from people like you? And yes, I am not kidding about the threats.


Yale profile of Wunderground.com's Jeff Masters: "The ignorance and greed that human society is showing [on climate change] will be to our ultimate detriment and possible destruction."

Masters reads plenty of other blogs, and is a fan in particular of John Cook's blogs at skepticalscience.com. He also frequents realclimate.org, climateprogress.org, and desmogblog.com, which he thinks does well at unveiling climate deniers%u2019 public relations campaigns intended to counter climate change science%u2026.

Masters considers himself different from most meteorologists, many of whom he says are unreasonably skeptical of climate change science. He says he thinks their skepticism stems in part from bachelors degree meteorology students' not being required to study climatology or climate science as part of their formal degree requirements.

Masters says he believes that the conclusions of the IPCC report are "genuine, valid, and probably understated." And he is critical of what he sees as well orchestrated and well funded climate misinformation campaigns.

"They're able to persuade even intelligent people with a background in meteorology" that climate change isn't occurring, he said. "It's going to be a terrible wake-up call when the climate becomes unstable, and we%u2019ll kick ourselves for being resistant to cutting our use of fossil fuels."

He's shared these views in his blogs, not surprisingly leading to hundreds of "hate e-mails" a year. Critics call him biased and chastise him for defending scientists named or involved in last fall's hacked e-mails controversy at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. While he respects the right of these people to voice their point of view, he doesn't pull punches: "The ignorance and greed that human society is showing in this matter will be to our ultimate detriment and possible destruction," he says.


I wonder what happens to those who threaten him, especially via email, since bans usually only are from the blogs (especially if they are death threats).


That's quite a strong assertion to claim that 'I never read something.' That's technically impossible, as I went onto the same page that had the forecasts. The forecasts were to have below normal Accumulated cyclonic energy, because of the La Nina, and the cold PDO.

Now I'm wondering something- have you heard of the term "cherry picking?" It's a term that perfectly describes what you just did. You can't cherry pick one storm. Why not take a look at the total number of Major Hurricanes? Celia only made up 33% of the average number of Pacific Major Hurricanes. The real killer though is when you look at Accumulated Cyclonic Energy for the Pacific Basin.

The Total Accumulated Cyclonic Energy was 48. The average is a little more than 90.

Keep on making your claims about one system that didn't even affect any land areas, but one can easily see what you're doing, and it's blatently obvious.

Once again, you cherry picked in the Western Pacific as well. The season there runs year long, yet you can cherry pick only one storm? LOL!

"I'm not sure what he's talking about in the ENSO forecast."

I think you know perfectly what I'm talking about. The precious climate models that the advocates hug frequently just didn't get it right!

Here's a quote from Buzz Bernard's Weather Blog... the date is April 2010. This is when the climate models show "Neutral Conditions" at this time.

[QUOTE]
There is, however, a caveat. And that is that the current El Niño (higher than normal tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures) doesn't suddenly relent and shift to La Niña (lower than normal tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures). That doesn't seem likely. The current forecast is for El Niño to continue through the northern hemisphere spring and then transition to neutral conditions.

[/QUOTE]
http://www.weather.com/blog/weather/8_21692.html?from=blog_comment_month#comment

Thanks for that graph, by the way.



It looks like as if the only time that the cool phase of the El Nino Southern oscillation was stronger than it is now, was during the 60s and 70s, when Global Cooling was observed!

I have not attacked Dr. Masters- I think he is a very nice man, so I'm not sure why you're bringing up generalizations to fit your cause.

Unfortunately, you claim that Global Warming caused the Pakistan floods, and just left it there. Please provide a source that documents and states that the floods in Pakistan were because of Global Warming.

And thank you for posting the Doctor's opinion! I respect that. But, however he is in fact with the minority on this one.



Only 24% of meteorologists actually agree with the IPCC! It's a consensus Indeed, especially when only 54 people signed the IPCC report.

I like it how Micheal pretends that his advocate side is purely innocent. Here's a death threat on one Skeptic: "You will not live to see Global Warming."

Makes it no different, you're just making generalizations again.

Have a Great Day.

-Snowlover123
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Is that so? Is that why we may make it to the "A" storm again this hurricane season? Perhaps, second time in five years?


We will not make it to Alpha again. The conditions are unfavorable for Tropical Cyclonic Activity to form. And if you believe that the Global Forecasting System can predict this, 16 days out, then that's a load of crock.

Why has there been record low activity in the Pacific for October and November, and there has been record high activity for the Atlantic? Is the Globe trying to balance itself out?
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting cyclonebuster:


That's a bunch of crock more moisture IS more water.



Then why are droughts blaimed on Global Warming?
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
100. cyclonebuster
3:19 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
I am also trying to convince Climate Progress to do a blog on the Tunnels! How about you Ricky?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
99. cyclonebuster
3:17 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Just curious, what do you think is causing the Arctic to warm, when all natural cycles say otherwise, and the globe is also warming overall - if the Arctic was warming due to some unknown natural cycle, or one that scientists are for some reason covering up (I absolutely do not buy into any of this conspiracy BS), then it has to be cooling somewhere else to compensate, but that isn't happening (except when real natural cycles act on short timescales, like the record negative Arctic Oscillation last winter, which resulted in a very warm Arctic but with extreme cold in mid-latitudes, not that it was cold overall).

PS: Cyclonebuster, you need to edit your last comment, which has messed up the page (stretched wide); no idea what happened there, but your quote turned into a bunch of nonsense.


I don't know why that happens when you quote things?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
98. cyclonebuster
3:13 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
The Tunnels are everything Jeff wants in order for us get control of our run away train that is currently happening with our climate! I am trying to convince him to do a blog on them.
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
95. cyclonebuster
12:31 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting Snowlover123:


cyclonebuster,

Great to see you again. Are you glad to see me?
This is pure cherry picking. Why? The Global Accumulated Cyclonic Energy for the Paciic basin, which provides 2/3 of the World's Tropical Cyclones is at Record Lows! You guys were hyping last year about how "global warming" is causing the Pacific to produce more hurricanes! Once that cold PDO came back on, stifling hurricane activity, the advocates became quite quiet...

NOAA Average[4] 15.3 8.8 4.2
NOAA 1995-2008 average[4] 14 7 3
NOAA 27 May 2010[4] 9 - 15 4 - 8 1 - 3 actual activity
(Up to November 8) 7 3 2

The actual activity is roughly 50% compared to normal.

BTW, how's ATHiker doing? Could you tell him I say hi, and that I was right about the monster La Nina that came on?

It just proves to you how cruddy Climate Models are.



here is the model forecast in May of 2010. Where's the Super La Nina that's happening right now?


Is that so? Is that why we may make it to the "A" storm again this hurricane season? Perhaps, second time in five years?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
94. cyclonebuster
12:28 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting Snowlover123:
This is a complete lie! There is no scientific evidence to back up that the Pakistan Floods are conncected to Global Warming in any way shape or form!



That's a bunch of crock more moisture IS more water.

Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
93. cyclonebuster
12:27 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting DontAnnoyMe:


Makes sense, if one assumes that tropical convection's main purpose is to cool down the tropics and warm up the poles. Since the poles are getting warmer - supposedly due to GW- the tropics would respond accordingly with fewer storms due to the higher formation threshold.


That's a bunch of crock!
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
92. Snowlover123
12:01 PM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
JFLORIDA,

Since apparently your comment got deleted somehow, I am forced to reply without a quotation box.

"Before you make yourself look bad, read about the Pakistan Floods."

JFLORIDA,

Why would there be a picture of Pakistan Floods on a Climate Change Blog, if it has nothing to do with Global Warming?

Don't even get me started about the advocate's appalling 10:10 Campaign, where they are teaching little kids that anyone who disagrees with AGW should be blown up.

-Snow
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
91. martinitony
10:36 AM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Campaign Against Skeptics

I
Member Since: Julio 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
89. Snowlover123
3:09 AM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:
Tunnels reverse this! No wonder we have been breaking the records for number of hurricanes in a season!


Researchers find ocean temperature threshold for hurricanes is rising
University of Hawai%u02BBi at M%u0101noa
Contact:
Gisela E Speidel, (808) 956-9252
Outreach Specialist, International Pacific Research Center
Nat Johnson, (808) 956-2375
Researcher, International Pacific Research Center
Posted: Nov. 8, 2010

Tropical ocean thunderstorms. Image courtesy NASA
Tropical ocean thunderstorms. Image courtesy NASA
Average observed tropical (black) and estimated SST (blue) rose together in the last 30 years.
Average observed tropical (black) and estimated SST (blue) rose together in the last 30 years.
Scientists have long known that atmospheric convection in the form of hurricanes and tropical ocean thunderstorms tends to occur when sea surface temperature rises above a threshold. So how do rising ocean temperatures with global warming affect this threshold? If the threshold does not rise, it could mean more frequent hurricanes. A new study by researchers at the International Pacific Research Center (IPRC) of the University of Hawai%u02BBi at M%u0101noa shows this threshold sea surface temperature for convection is rising under global warming at the same rate as that of the tropical oceans. Their paper appears in the Advance Online Publications of Nature Geoscience.

In order to detect the annual changes in the threshold sea surface temperature (SST) for convection, Nat Johnson, a postdoctoral fellow at IPRC, and Shang-Ping Xie, a professor of meteorology at IPRC and UH M%u0101noa, analyzed satellite estimates of tropical ocean rainfall spanning 30 years. They find that changes in the threshold temperature for convection closely follow the changes in average tropical sea surface temperature, which have both been rising approximately 0.1%uFFFDC per decade.

%u201CThe correspondence between the two time series is rather remarkable,%u201D says lead author Johnson. %u201CThe convective threshold and average sea surface temperatures are so closely linked because of their relation with temperatures in the atmosphere extending several miles above the surface.%u201D
The change in tropical upper atmospheric temperatures has been a controversial topic in recent years because of discrepancies between reported temperature trends from instruments and the expected trends under global warming according to global climate models. The measurements from instruments have shown less warming than expected in the upper atmosphere. The findings of Johnson and Xie, however, provide strong support that the tropical atmosphere is warming at a rate that is consistent with climate model simulations.

%u201CThis study is an exciting example of how applying our knowledge of physical processes in the tropical atmosphere can give us important information when direct measurements may have failed us,%u201D Johnson notes.

The study notes further that global climate models project that the sea surface temperature threshold for convection will continue to rise in tandem with the tropical average sea surface temperature. If true, hurricanes and other forms of tropical convection will require warmer ocean surfaces for initiation over the next century.




Link


cyclonebuster,

Great to see you again. Are you glad to see me?
This is pure cherry picking. Why? The Global Accumulated Cyclonic Energy for the Paciic basin, which provides 2/3 of the World's Tropical Cyclones is at Record Lows! You guys were hyping last year about how "global warming" is causing the Pacific to produce more hurricanes! Once that cold PDO came back on, stifling hurricane activity, the advocates became quite quiet...

NOAA Average[4] 15.3 8.8 4.2
NOAA 1995-2008 average[4] 14 7 3
NOAA 27 May 2010[4] 9 - 15 4 - 8 1 - 3
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––
Actual activity
(Up to November 8) 7 3 2

The actual activity is roughly 50% compared to normal.

BTW, how's ATHiker doing? Could you tell him I say hi, and that I was right about the monster La Nina that came on?

It just proves to you how cruddy Climate Models are.



here is the model forecast in May of 2010. Where's the Super La Nina that's happening right now?
Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
88. Snowlover123
3:02 AM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
This is a complete lie! There is no scientific evidence to back up that the Pakistan Floods are conncected to Global Warming in any way shape or form!

Member Since: Abril 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
87. DontAnnoyMe
2:43 AM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:
If true, hurricanes and other forms of tropical convection will require warmer ocean surfaces for initiation over the next century.



Makes sense, if one assumes that tropical convection's main purpose is to cool down the tropics and warm up the poles. Since the poles are getting warmer - supposedly due to GW- the tropics would respond accordingly with fewer storms due to the higher formation threshold.
Member Since: Septiembre 21, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 3690
86. cyclonebuster
2:33 AM GMT en Noviembre 09, 2010
Tunnels reverse this! No wonder we have been breaking the records for number of hurricanes in a season!


Researchers find ocean temperature threshold for hurricanes is rising
University of Hawai%u02BBi at M%u0101noa
Contact:
Gisela E Speidel, (808) 956-9252
Outreach Specialist, International Pacific Research Center
Nat Johnson, (808) 956-2375
Researcher, International Pacific Research Center
Posted: Nov. 8, 2010

Tropical ocean thunderstorms. Image courtesy NASA
Tropical ocean thunderstorms. Image courtesy NASA
Average observed tropical (black) and estimated SST (blue) rose together in the last 30 years.
Average observed tropical (black) and estimated SST (blue) rose together in the last 30 years.
Scientists have long known that atmospheric convection in the form of hurricanes and tropical ocean thunderstorms tends to occur when sea surface temperature rises above a threshold. So how do rising ocean temperatures with global warming affect this threshold? If the threshold does not rise, it could mean more frequent hurricanes. A new study by researchers at the International Pacific Research Center (IPRC) of the University of Hawai%u02BBi at M%u0101noa shows this threshold sea surface temperature for convection is rising under global warming at the same rate as that of the tropical oceans. Their paper appears in the Advance Online Publications of Nature Geoscience.

In order to detect the annual changes in the threshold sea surface temperature (SST) for convection, Nat Johnson, a postdoctoral fellow at IPRC, and Shang-Ping Xie, a professor of meteorology at IPRC and UH M%u0101noa, analyzed satellite estimates of tropical ocean rainfall spanning 30 years. They find that changes in the threshold temperature for convection closely follow the changes in average tropical sea surface temperature, which have both been rising approximately 0.1%uFFFDC per decade.

%u201CThe correspondence between the two time series is rather remarkable,%u201D says lead author Johnson. %u201CThe convective threshold and average sea surface temperatures are so closely linked because of their relation with temperatures in the atmosphere extending several miles above the surface.%u201D
The change in tropical upper atmospheric temperatures has been a controversial topic in recent years because of discrepancies between reported temperature trends from instruments and the expected trends under global warming according to global climate models. The measurements from instruments have shown less warming than expected in the upper atmosphere. The findings of Johnson and Xie, however, provide strong support that the tropical atmosphere is warming at a rate that is consistent with climate model simulations.

%u201CThis study is an exciting example of how applying our knowledge of physical processes in the tropical atmosphere can give us important information when direct measurements may have failed us,%u201D Johnson notes.

The study notes further that global climate models project that the sea surface temperature threshold for convection will continue to rise in tandem with the tropical average sea surface temperature. If true, hurricanes and other forms of tropical convection will require warmer ocean surfaces for initiation over the next century.




Link
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
85. cyclonebuster
8:54 PM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
I think HRD needs to answer my questions directly and stop beating around the bush don't you think?

Hurricane Research Division of AOML/NOAA
Doppler radar quick-looks from 4 PM P-3 flight into Tropical Storm Tomas, 6 November 2010
Filed under: HFIP-Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project, IFEX-discussion Tagged: #P3, Doppler radar, hurricane, hurricane research, tropical storm
Source:Hurricane Research Division of AOML/NOAA
Published:2010-11-07 13:59:30 GMT
Yesterday at 8:00am via Comment View Feedback (2)Hide Feedback (2) Share

*
*
Todd Ferebee likes this.
*
o
Have you guys computer modeled the Underwater Suspension Tunnel idea yet to see the effects it has on hurricanes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6O6UHpKT_E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fh_RXiEinU


Link
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
83. cyclonebuster
6:27 PM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:
If you are wondering, this is what the recent increase in SST looks like as an anomaly (base period is 2003-2010):



Also, for the lower tropospheric temperatures:



Both show a pretty large increase in recent days, especially the latter, which has more than doubled in anomaly (note also that October was much cooler than the official UAH data, although warmer than RSS which oddly cooled down a lot more than UAH or the daily satellite data would suggest).


Michael is that global or Northern hemisphere?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
82. cyclonebuster
5:30 PM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
"Regional Climate Information: Real-world use (2)

There is, perhaps to an outsider, a curious contradiction evolving in the climate-science community. On one hand we have concluded that the warming of the planet is unequivocal, attributable to the release of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel consumption, and that we need to do things to limit the warming – which most simply is to reduce emissions from fossil fuels. Therefore, we feel that there is enough confidence in climate change projections to warrant changes in the very foundation of our energy consumption; hence, the foundation of our economic success."

If you guys are really interested in limiting Fossil fuel GHGs you must tap the gulf streams Kinetic energy with Tunnels! What is wrong with you people?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
80. cyclonebuster
5:12 PM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Tunnels prevent this!


(CNN) -- Scientists have found evidence of "dramatic" damage to deep-sea coral near the site of the Gulf oil disaster, with one biologist describing it as a shocking find that "slapped you in the face."

"This was the first time that anyone has seen a visually compelling indication of impact to deep sea animals in the vicinity of this deep-sea event," said Charles Fisher, a Penn State University biologist and the leader of a government-funded research expedition.

"We have some very compelling circumstantial evidence and that came from this expedition where we were out studying deep sea coral communities we know about, and exploring for new communities."

The research team encountered an apparently "unhealthy" colony of Madrepora -- a hard coral species -- on November 2 at a depth of 1,400 meters. While some in the coral colony appeared normal, others were covered in a "brown material" and were producing "abundant mucous," he said.

The scientists also encountered a community of soft corals nearby that also appeared to be affected. Extensive portions of the coral colonies were either recently dead or dying.

The discovery was made more than six months after an explosion aboard an oil rig sent crude spewing from a BP-owned well deep below the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers found the coral about seven miles southwest of the site of the spill.

Fisher, who called the discovery a "smoking gun," said researchers can't say for certain that the coral died from the oil, noting that dispersants could have been the culprit.

"The next step is to go back out there and look for direct evidence that the oil caused this damage. We're looking for hydrocarbons that could have been fingerprinted," Fisher said.

BP officials could not immediately be reached for comment Saturday.

Ian MacDonald, a professor of oceanography at Florida State University, said the damage is significant because "this is the first indication of just how widespread the damage is."

He wondered whether there is damage that has not yet been discovered.

Link
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
79. cyclonebuster
3:36 PM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
From Jeffs main blog! I agree with this. However, I also think the season needs to be extended another month until Jan.1st now as SSTs are much warmer now due to GHGs warming our oceans since the industrial revolution. What other explanation is there for so many actives seasons the past dew years and this season isn't over yet we may see one in December or January yet!


"So, judging by the recent history of late season tropical storms, there is about a 50% chance that we are all done this season. The odds of a significant storm that causes loss of life are much lower, less than 15%. The oceans are certainly warm enough to support continued development of tropical cyclones. Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) in the Atlantic's Main Development Region for hurricanes had their warmest October on record, according to an analysis I did of historical SST data from the UK Hadley Center. SST data goes back to 1850, though there is much missing data before 1910 and during WWI and WWII. SSTs in the Main Development Region (10°N to 20°N and 20°W to 80°W) were 0.95°C above average during October, beating the previous record of 0.93°C set in October 2003. Wind shear will also be low enough in the Caribbean to support tropical storm formation over the coming two weeks, according to the latest run of the GFS model (Figure 2.) However, the subtropical jet stream is forecast to slowly edge southwards over the next few weeks, in keeping with its usual seasonal cycle. The Caribbean will gradually see wind shear increase, until only the extreme southern Caribbean near the coast of Panama can support tropical storm formation. Taking all these factors into account, I believe we are all done this hurricane season with dangerous storms capable of causing loss of life. The latest long-range runs of the GFS and ECMWF models don't hint at anything developing over the next seven days, and I give a 30% chance we will see one more inconsequential named storm, which will not cause loss of life if it forms.

I'll have a new post Tuesday or Wednesday morning.

Jeff Masters"
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
78. cyclonebuster
3:00 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:


No idea, but probably something like coal ash or whatever the residue left over is (not sure how they convert the coal to gasoline or oil, and they'll certainly have to remove all of the nasty stuff found in low-grade dirty coal).


I can see another beautiful sludge pond overflowing again like the one in Tennessee can't you?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
76. cyclonebuster
2:52 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:
Yep, it looks like we will just burn up all of our coal by turning it into gasoline - which is exactly what we shouldn't be doing:

US Coal to Gasoline Plant Will be the Largest in the World

Written by Al Fin
Monday, 01 November 2010 14:33

TransGas Development Systems, LLC announced an agreement with SK Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd (SKE&C) leading to engineering, procurement and construction of its first US coal-to-gasoline plant%u2014Adams Fork Energy%u2014to be located in Mingo County, West Virginia. _GCC

US coal deposits contain 12 X as much energy as all known oil in Saudi Arabia. The gasification process to be used in the new West Virginia CTL plant could cleanly utilise coals of any grade -- including the cheapest and dirtiest coal. By moving US coal reserves into the liquid fuels arena, the prospects for peak oil continue to remain slight -- unless the Obama administration decides to shut down all coal, even clean coal projects. Obama has promised to bankrupt coal companies, and all his other policies are consistent with an "energy starvation" approach to shutting down US industrial production. Time will tell.

The Adams Fork Energy project will convert regional coal into premium-grade gasoline, producing 18,000 barrels per day (756,000 gallons US, 2.86 million liters). When fully developed, the Adams Fork project will be the largest coal-to-gasoline project in the world, according to Adam Victor, President and CEO of TransGas Development Systems.


Yes, and it supposedly gets rid of "peak oil" - not; conventional oil isn't the same as unconventional oil, nor is it as environmentally harmful. And why concentrate resources on stuff like this, and not renewable energy? Oh yeah, and the remarks about Obama shutting down the U.S. are total bunk.




BTW? What nasty byproducts do we get from this process?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
75. cyclonebuster
2:34 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
"I thought it was interesting that SSTs have been rebounding over the past week, since I expected it to keep on falling for another month or two; in 2007 (blue line that is the lowest on the right), they bottomed out at the end of November (absolute temperature, not anomaly):"


Michael?

Over the Past week? Could that be attributed to the increase in methane you posted?

Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
72. atmoaggie
1:43 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:
It appears that Arctic amplification (warming due to heat being released by ice-free ocean) is currently in full force:




Wonder how warm November will be if this persists (so it is cold around Antarctica and the SE U.S., but compare the extent and magnitude of warm and cold anomalies).
If you want to actually make any sense of extent, I'd not post anything but polar stereographic maps when discussing the Arctic...

Though that map is better than *some*, Africa is 14 times the size of Greenland in real life.
Member Since: Agosto 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
71. cyclonebuster
1:40 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
To pre-industrial revolution conditions?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
70. cyclonebuster
1:18 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:
It appears that Arctic amplification (warming due to heat being released by ice-free ocean) is currently in full force:




Wonder how warm November will be if this persists (so it is cold around Antarctica and the SE U.S., but compare the extent and magnitude of warm and cold anomalies).


How important is it Michael to bring back the Arctic Ice extent/Mass during the summer?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
68. cyclonebuster
1:11 AM GMT en Noviembre 08, 2010
Air Pollution Exposure Increases Risk of Severe COPD

ScienceDaily (Nov. 5, 2010) — Long term exposure to low-level air pollution may increase the risk of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), according to researcher s in Denmark. While acute exposure of several days to high level air pollution was known to be a risk factor for exacerbation in pre-existing COPD, until now there had been no studies linking long-term air pollution exposure to the development or progression of the disease.The research was published online ahead of the print edition of the American Thoracic Society's American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

"Our findings have significance on a number of levels," said lead researcher on the study, Zorana Andersen, Ph.D., post doctoral fellow at the Institute of Cancer Epidemiology of the Danish Cancer Society in Copenhagen. "Patients, primary care physicians, pulmonologists and public health officials should all take not of our findings."

Dr. Andersen and colleagues used data from the Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health Study, which consisted of more than 57,000 individuals between the ages of 50 and 64 who lived in Copenhagen or Aarhus, the first and second largest cities in Denmark, between 1993 and 1997. A self-administered questionnaire provided data on smoking, dietary habits, education, occupational history and lifestyle. They then used the unique personal identifiers to link the cohort to the Danish Hospital Discharge Register to identify hospital admissions and discharges due to COPD, and estimated pollution exposure by linking residential addresses to outdoor levels of NO2 and NOx levels, which were used to approximate the overall level of traffic-related pollutants since 1971. They looked at exposures over 15-, 25- and 35-year periods to assess the effect of different exposure lengths on COPD incidence. Data for more than 52,000 were available from the start 1971 to the end of follow-up in 2006.

"We found significant positive associations between levels of all air pollution proxies and COPD incidence," said Dr. Andersen. "When we adjusted for smoking status and other confounding factors, the association remained significant, indicating that long-term pollution exposure likely is a true risk factor for developing COPD."

These associations were slightly stronger for men, obese patients and those eating less than 240 grams of fruit each day (approximately eight ounces, or just more than a single serving). But notably, the effect of air pollution on COPD was strongest in people with pre-existing diabetes and asthma.

"These results are in agreement with those of other cross-sectional studies on COPD and air pollution, and longitudinal studies of air pollution and lung function, and strengthen the conclusion that air pollution is a causal agent in development of COPD," said Dr. Andersen.

Because the study used hospital admissions for COPD to assess incidence, it is likely that the true incidence was underestimated, and that the cases represented severe COPD, as mild and moderate COPD does not often require hospitalization. This means that the reported increase in risk associated with air pollution is probably an underestimate of the true increase in risk for COPD in general. Furthermore, while smoking is known to be the primary cause of COPD in developed countries, and majority of COPD cases were smokers or previous smokers, the effect of pollution exposure was also observed in the group of non-smokers. "This result refutes the possibility that the observed effect of air pollution was due to inadequate adjustment for smoking in our data and supports the idea that air pollution affects COPD risk, irrespective of smoking status," said Dr. Andersen.

The enhanced association between increased risk of COPD and air pollution in asthmatics and diabetics suggests the possibility of an underlying link. "It is plausible that airflow obstruction and hyper-responsiveness in people with asthma, or systemic inflammation in people with diabetes, can lead to increased susceptibility of the lung to air pollution, resulting in airway inflammation and progression of COPD, but more research is needed in this area." said Dr. Andersen.

"In any case, sufficient data, including the results of this study, provide evidence that traffic-related urban air pollution contributes to the burden of COPD and that reductions in traffic emissions would be beneficial to public health."

Link
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417
67. cyclonebuster
12:08 AM GMT en Noviembre 07, 2010
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Even then, methane (the lifetime is closer to 12 years) is still about 25 times stronger than CO2 on a 100 year timescale, and much higher on shorter timescales, 72 at 20 years. In fact, even over 500 years, it still has 7 times the GWP of CO2.



No, or methane levels would have spiked much more around the Gulf, which hasn't happened:



In fact, virtually none of the methane likely escaped the water, and that has also been degraded by microorganisms:

Methane From Deepwater Horizon Spill Being Consumed by Microbes 100 Times Faster Than Expected


How much methane is released from the microorganisms after they die?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20417

Viewing: 115 - 65

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.