From our climate panel in Grand Junction on August 4:
Our Forest, Our Water, Our Land: Local Impacts on Climate Change. Sponsored by Conservation Colorado, Mesa County Library, Math & Science Center
Sensual Call Girls in Surajpur { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girls Near 5 St...
Climate Change Effects -- Grand Junction
1. Global Climate Facts
• The “Greenhouse Effect” (interaction of sunshine, atmosphere and surface) is
responsible for a habitable climate on Earth
– Average temperature of deep space (distant from any sun) is:
-520 F
– Average temperature on earth is:
+57 F
– Max Temp. range of objects in near-earth orbit (above the
atmosphere) is:
+500 F to -150 F (in direct sun or in earth’s shadow) 650 F range
– Record seasonal range of earth’s surface (summer to winter in
Siberia) is:
+98 F to -90 F 188 F range
– Record daily range of earth’s surface (Montana) is:
+44 F to -56 F 100 F range
3. Global Climate Facts
• The “Greenhouse Effect”
From: National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder
http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_3_1.htm
30% of sun’s energy
Is reflected back into space.
19% is absorbed by the
atmosphere
51% is absorbed by the
earth.
4. Global Climate Facts
• The “Greenhouse Effect”
– Man made emissions of total CO2 into the atmosphere are
increasing
Estimated Total Carbon Dioxide
emitted by human activity
5. Global Climate Facts
• The “Greenhouse Effect”
– Water vapor dwarfs all other greenhouse gases
• As much as 95% of the greenhouse effect on earth is due to water vapor and
clouds.
• As little as 3.6% of greenhouse effect is due to CO2
From: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
6. Global Climate Facts
• The “Greenhouse Effect”
– Man-made gases account for as little as 1/3 % of the greenhouse effect.
From: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
8. Global Climate Facts
http://homepages.ius.edu/kforinas/ClassRefs/Climate/greenhouseeffect.htm
9. Surface Temperature Records
Trend for about the last 150 years shows an overall warming trend
From: http://www.seed.slb.com/en/scictr/watch/climate_change/change.htm
10. Surface Temperature Records
Trend for about the last 150 years shows an overall warming trend
From: http://www.seed.slb.com/en/scictr/watch/climate_change/change.htm
11. Surface Temperature Records Compared at the same scales
Proxy data about the last 450,000 years shows warm and cold trends about evenly spaced
From: http://www.seed.slb.com/en/scictr/watch/climate_change/change.htm
12. 400
350
300
250
200
150
Surface Temperature Records Compared to CO2 and Airborne Dust Concentration
Data over the last 450,000 years shows temperature positively correlated to C02
(CO2 increases lag temperature increases by about 300-400 years, not so with dust)
-350
-360
-370
-380
-390
-400
-410
-420
-430
-440
-450
+10 F
+5 F
0
-5 F
-10 F
-15 F
1
800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0
10
100
1000
CO2
Temp.
Dust
13. Surface Temperature Records Compared to atmospheric dust-concentrations
Detailed study of the last 23,000 years shows temperature tracking dust concentration
(1-5 micron size range)
Cooling
Older
From: Albani, S. “Interpreting last glacial to Holocene dust changes at Talos Dome (East Antarctica): implications for
atmospheric variations from regional to hemispheric scales” (2012)
14. Atmospheric Chemistry and
Biology Through Time
Origin of
Photosynthetic
Cellular Activity
First Metabolic
Cells
(Prokaryotes)
Multicellular
Oganisms
First Land
Plants
40. U. S. Climate Reference Network
114 state-of-the-art ultra-reliable triple redundant
weather stations placed on pristine environments
Now operational for almost 10 years
41. U. S. Climate Reference Network
114 state-of-the-art ultra-reliable triple redundant
weather stations placed on pristine environments
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/national-temperature-index/time-series
42. Average Temperature
Contiguous U.S. over 100 years
51
51.5
52
52.5
53
53.5
54
6/1/1911
12/1/1913
6/1/1916
12/1/1918
6/1/1921
12/1/1923
6/1/1926
12/1/1928
6/1/1931
12/1/1933
6/1/1936
12/1/1938
6/1/1941
12/1/1943
6/1/1946
12/1/1948
6/1/1951
12/1/1953
6/1/1956
12/1/1958
6/1/1961
12/1/1963
6/1/1966
12/1/1968
6/1/1971
12/1/1973
6/1/1976
12/1/1978
6/1/1981
12/1/1983
6/1/1986
12/1/1988
6/1/1991
12/1/1993
6/1/1996
12/1/1998
6/1/2001
12/1/2003
6/1/2006
12/1/2008
6/1/2011
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/us
Average temperature (degrees F)
47. The radiative forcing due to clouds and water vapor (2006)
V. Ramanathan and Anand Inamdar
Center for Atmospheric Sciences, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California,
San Diego, CA
“Cloud feedback. This is still an unresolved issue. The few results we have on the role
of cloud feedback in climate change is mostly from GCMs.
Their treatment of clouds is so rudimentary that we need an observational basis to
check the model conclusions. We do not know how the net forcing of −18 W m−2**
will change in response to global warming.
Thus, the magnitude as well as the sign of the cloud feedback is uncertain..”
** This study indicates water vapor has a positive forcing of +30 W/m2 (absorption=warming)
and a negative forcing of -48 W/m2 (reflection/scattering =net cooling effect)
IPCC reports a CO2 forcing value of 1.66 W/m2 (absorption=warming only).
This study suggests that C02 is only 5.5 % as effective as water vapor in absorbing heat into
the atmosphere.
48. Attribution of the present‐day total greenhouse effect (2010)
Gavin A. Schmidt et al.
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, New York, USA.
“…With a straightforward scheme for allocating overlaps, we find that water
vapor is the dominant contributor (∼50% of the effect), followed by clouds (∼25%)
and then CO2 with ∼20%. All other absorbers play only minor roles.
In a doubled CO2 scenario, this allocation is essentially unchanged, even though the
magnitude of the total greenhouse effect is significantly larger than the initial radiative
forcing, underscoring the importance of feedbacks from water vapor and clouds to
climate sensitivity..”
49. From IPCC AR5 Physical Science Basis Report (2013)
Water Vapor and Clouds:
“Many of the cloudiness and humidity changes simulated by climate models in warmer
climates are now understood as responses to large-scale circulation changes
…. However, some aspects of the overall cloud response vary substantially among
models, and these appear to depend strongly on sub-grid scale processes in which
there is less confidence.”
Cloud-Aerosol Interactions:
“…The quantification of cloud and convective effects in models, and of aerosol–cloud
interactions, continues to be a challenge. Climate models are incorporating more of the
relevant processes than at the time of AR4 (2009), but confidence in the representation
of these processes remains weak.
…Cloud and aerosol properties vary at scales significantly smaller than those resolved in
climate models, ….Until sub-grid scale parameterizations of clouds and aerosol–cloud
interactions are able to address these issues, model estimates of aerosol–cloud
interactions and their radiative effects will carry large uncertainties….
”
50. Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections
Scientists in this section have made comments that it is not possible to project global climate
accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next
century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or
too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global
climate modeling.
Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study;
Fellow of the Royal Society [16]
Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences[17][18][19]
Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm
University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution
(1999–2003)[20]
Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired
director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian
National University[21]
Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm[22]
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London[23]
Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute [24]
Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry[25]
51. Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes
Scientists in this section have made comments that the observed warming is more likely attributable to natural causes than to human
activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.
Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences[27]
Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[28][29]
Tim Ball, professor emeritus of geography at the University of Winnipeg[30]
Robert M. Carter, former head of the school of earth sciences at James Cook University[31]
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[32]
Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland[33]
David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester[34]
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University[35]
William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State
University[36]
William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University[37]
Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo[38]
Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.[39]
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology[40]
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware[41]
Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri[42]
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[43]
Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[44][45]
Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of Mining Geology, the University of Adelaide.[46]
Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego[47]
Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University[48]
Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University[49][50]
Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo[51]
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia[52][53][54]
Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[55]
Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville[56]
Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center[57]
George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University[58]
Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa[59]
52. Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
Scientists in this section have made comments that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed
rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural. Their views on climate change are usually
described in more detail in their biographical articles.
Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic
Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.[60]
Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).[61]
Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.[62]
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the
University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.[63][64]
Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[65]
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.[66]
Ivar Giaever, professor emeritus of physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.[67]
Vincent R. Gray, New Zealander physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes[68]
Keith Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College
District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change[69]
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of
the World Federation of Scientists.[70]
53. Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
Scientists in this section have made comments that projected rising temperatures will
be of little impact or a net positive for human society and/or the Earth's environment.
Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical
articles.
Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and
founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [71]
Sherwood Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and
adjunct professor, Arizona State University[72]
Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of
environmental science at the University of Virginia[73]
