Global Warming - How Valid and Serious?

[Smurf1976]

Agreed that Australia should be more of a leader with alternative energy technologies.

We were leaders in hydro for years (still are via consulting).

We were leaders in brown coal until the 1980's.

Geothermal is where the new potential for technical leadership exists IMO. Solar too though geothermal has the greatest potential in my view.

Trouble is we're absolutely lacking the vision that made the hydro and brown coal industries happen. Both were done not as simply a means of keeping the lights on but as the basis of a much larger economic strategy. Indeed hydro was Tasmania's only real economic strategy for half a century, a situation that differed in Victoria only due to Melbourne's role as a service centre and the Bass Strait oil fields.

What's stopping us now is the focus on competition and short term costs. Nobody's going to invest in some uncertain capital-intensive project in that environment. Indeed most won't even invest in capital-intensive proven technology that is economically competitive. Everything comes down to capital and especially risk minimisation - they want plants that can literally be packed up and sold, not R&D or something that is fixed in place. Hence all those gas turbines that are cheap to build, expensive to run but able to be relocated without too much fuss.

 

[wayneL]

It's snowing in Cheltenham, right now... late March.

 

[2020hindsight]

In addition to IPCC of course, there is Hadley Centre (= UK Met Office) . They employ 1500 people including 200 scientists working on global research.
Heaps of information. - there's a reference there to the gulf stream ( mustve mentioned this one a few times) - that UK temp increase could well be moderated by a partial slow down of the Gulf Stream .

Hence UK is a bit unique. (though that doesn't mean it isn't experiencing increasing temps.

Also they put out that graph I posted back there - with the red and the green graphs - and man responsible for the difference. .

........................

ferret
I challenge you to find some bias, or reason for bias in the UK Met Office.

The Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Change — named in honour of George Hadley — is part of, and based at the headquarters of the Met Office in Exeter. The Hadley Centre provides a focus in the United Kingdom for the scientific issues associated with climate change.

The Centre’s has several major aims:

To understand physical, chemical and biological processes within the climate system and develop state-of-the-art climate models which represent them
To use climate models to simulate global and regional climate variability and change over the last 100 years and to predict changes over the next 100 years
To monitor global and national climate variability and change
To attribute recent changes in climate to specific factors
To understand, with the aim of predicting, the natural inter-annual to decadal variability of climate
In 2005 the centre hosted the international scientific conference Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change.

The Met Office employees over 1500 staff, with approximately 200 working in its climate research unit. etc
.....

The climate models (termed Global Climate Models) developed by the centre are used for climate change research purposes across the world.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/
thence to faq's :-
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/faqs/#faq

Questions about climate change
3.1 How do we know that the climate is changing? Although several aspects of climate are changing, temperatures provide the clearest evidence. For many decades, temperature near the surface has been carefully measured at thousands of locations on land and at sea. There are a large number of measurements of temperature close to the Earth's surface which are global in extent, from which we can form a global average, going back to 1860. These all show temperatures higher in the past few years than at any time during the instrumental period, even allowing for measurement uncertainties and gaps in the data.

Global average land and sea temperatures (see chart above) show considerable variability from year to year, but a clear underlying trend which shows rising temperatures until about 1940, a slight downward trend from about 1940-1975, and a rise of about 0.5 °C between 1975 and the present day.

....

3.14 How likely is the Gulf Stream to stop flowing? Will this make Europe colder? The Gulf Stream (or North Atlantic Drift, to give it its proper title) brings warmer water from lower latitudes to the north-east Atlantic, and gives north-west Europe a milder climate than it would otherwise have.
The mechanism driving circulation in the North Atlantic, of which the Gulf Stream is a part, is shown in the below image.

This mechanism could be affected by man-made global warming in several ways, for example by increased rainfall over the N Atlantic, and hence there is the potential for the Gulf Stream to be reduced, or even switched-off, by man's activities.

When we use the Hadley Centre climate model to look at the response of the N Atlantic ocean circulation to future man-made emissions, shown in the above image, we see that reductions of about 20% by 2100 are predicted, rather than a complete shutdown. Other good climate models see greater or lesser reductions, but none produces a shutdown over the next 100 years..

THIS IS A "WHAT IF" regarding the Gulf Stream / North Atlantic Drfft - driven by THC = thermohaline circulation (salt concentrations etc ) :-

The Hadley Centre model has also been used to investigate the impact on climate of a hypothetical shut-down of the THC. It predicts that the whole of the northern hemisphere would be cooled, especially the north Atlantic; the UK might see a cooling of 3–5 °C. Daily minimum temperatures in central England in winter could plunge by 10 or 20 °C, and this would likely have a bigger effect on UK society than global warming. However, as was pointed out above, this is a 'what-if' scenario and not a prediction.

The model predictions of only partial shut-down of the THC seem reassuring, but we do not fully understand the reasons for the stability of the ocean circulation, and there have been recent measurements in the N Atlantic which seem to be at variance with model simulations. Hence, research continues to quantify the risk of this potentially high-impact outcome of climate change.
.....

3.22How will climate change impact on our lives in the UK? Climate change will have impacts not only on the environment, but also on society and the economy. To find out more about these, please contact the UK Climate Impacts Programme, which is based at the University of Oxford.

 

[2020hindsight]

Furthermore they put out these two graphs :-
One if we start now - where we can limit the increase in global temp to 2 deg C by reducing CO2 output by 1.9% per annum....

and one if we wait for 10 years (start around 2017) - and then we have to reduce by 2.5% per annum .

PS Obviously there are various scenarios.
There is an entire thread around here somewhere that discusses the various options in that regard.

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/U/ukweather2080/9_winter_t.html

Predicted Weather Report for 2080 = 72 years hence :-

UK Weather 2008 - Global warming predictions

Winter 2080
Based on the outcome of the high emissions scenario from the Hadley climate models, here is a sample of the weather that we might experience in winter 2080. The modelers call the high emissions scenario the 'business as normal' scenario. In other words, this is what the weather will be like if we make no effort to curb our effect on global warming.

The onset of global warming has considerably shortened the British winter. In the Midlands and southern Britain, the first frosts typically occur a week or two before Christmas, with the number of cold and frosty mornings fewer. In parts of the Southwest, you'll have difficulty finding someone who can remember when they last scraped ice from the windscreen of their car. However, at least higher average winter temperatures have cut down on the number of days that the heating needs to be switched on for.

The old tradition of laying a bet on a white Christmas has become an almost pointless exercise. In southern England, snow during the Christmas season is a rare event – perhaps occurring once in 20 years. So is skiing in the Scottish Highlands; that industry packed up years ago as snowfall fell by 75% over 80 years. The heather has been replaced by arable grasslands, grazed by cattle for most of the year.

One aspect of the weather during winter which has become problematic is rainfall. Compared to 80 years before, winter rainfall is more frequent (up by around 30%) and severe downpours are more common. As a result, flash flooding is also more common and many low-lying areas along Britain's major rivers flood regularly. The London basin and the Thames and Severn estuaries have become particularly prone to flooding. The combination of higher sea levels, storm surges and heavy run-off during prolonged downpours has caused havoc over the last few decades. You've given up on your holiday cottage on the Somerset Levels since flooding became too frequent. It's caused house insurance prices for properties in low-lying areas adjacent to rivers to sky rocket.

Repeat - this is a theoretical prediction for 2080 = 72 years hence.

PS THis last stuff is allegedly from the Hadley Centre , but relayed through Channel 4 - who did that scurrelous report (by Durkins) on the Great Global Warming Swindle. - so much for that little exercise in deception

PS The final graph ( as I mentioned in last post) is from the Hadley Centre website - in fact it's what you get if you click on FAQ #3.2 - and it is exactly what David Attenborough ( or Sir David to his mates) - says in that youtube.
Remember now, 1500 employees, including 200 on global climate change. - and they conclude that man is causing the difference between the green and the red graphs.

 

[spooly74]

It's snowing in Cheltenham, right now... late March.

Very unusual ... more evidence of climate change perhaps

 

[2020hindsight]

I mean whilst Johnny Howard has been stuffing around on this , UK has had an office like this (Hadley Centre), helping businesses (and governments, and the public) understand, mitigate effects, etc .

Obviously with knowledge comes opportunity. Rule of business is " FIND A NEED AND FILL IT " isn't it?

Obviously also, with knowledge, comes the ability to mitigate effects on the environment and on the critters under our charge. !

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/ar4/interpret.html

The planet is already committed to a certain level of climate change over the next 50 years. As well as giving help in understanding the core aspects of the science, the Met Office provides advice on adaptation and mitigation for planning purposes. Is your organisation ready to face the challenges that a changing climate will bring?

The information the Met Office can provide helps organisations make the right decisions now in planning for the future.

The production of this report requires a huge effort that spans the world and involves the leading research centres from around the world. From the UK, the Met Office is the single biggest scientific contributor and after the publication of this report, is ideally placed to comment on the science and its impacts.

For the full report see the IPCC website

For business
We advise across all the major business sectors, helping organisations understand and manage risk in relation to climate change. We provide climate change audits for businesses and organisations. Met Office experts work with businesses, enabling more effective long-term planning and giving far greater confidence that the likely impacts of climate change have been taken into account.
More about Consulting

For government
The Met Office advises the UK Government in terms of the science, we also offer advice internationally to other governments and administrations to help understand and deal with the changing climate. Although the Met Office Hadley Centre is the body responsible for advising Government on climate change science, it is the responsibility of Defra to direct UK Government policy on this matter.

For public
It is important that individuals are aware of the issues and are best placed to make the right decisions for themselves and their families. To help with this, key sources of information are: Met Office Hadley Centre, IPCC, Defra, UKCIP, Environment Agency, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Tyndall Centre.

 

[metric]

what happened to the hole in the ozone layer? how do you put a hole in gas?

sunspots have more influence over the earths temp than GG.

 

[2020hindsight]

what happened to the hole in the ozone layer? how do you put a hole in gas?

sunspots have more influence over the earths temp than GG.

imagine it's the air inside a car tube

metric - that leads on to a good parallel question though.. Did Regulation work on that occasion? - Was it brought in in a timely manner? i.e. before or after it was "too late"?

ok -
We find ozone being depleted
There was a good chance (NOT CERTAIN note) that CFC's were responsible
1978 - Sweden decides to act - human intervention - to protect the planet from deadly UV radiation
followed by USA, Canada, Norway
BUT the rest of Europe refused to act.
"until after the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole in 1985"
CFC's production phased out completely in 1996.
(? - used under licence in critical applcations)

So give it a few lifetimes, it'll all be pristine again
Moral of the story - It's come to the point where man and his dabbling in unusual concentrations of strange chemicals and gases - must be equally proactive in monitoring and combatting their effect on climate !
Either that or learn how to lather up a shave instead of using a pressure pack can etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_layer

Ozone depletion
The ozone layer can be depleted by free radical catalysts, including nitric oxide (NO), hydroxyl (OH), atomic chlorine (Cl), and atomic bromine (Br). While there are natural sources for all of these species, the concentrations of chlorine and bromine have increased markedly in recent years due to the release of large quantities of manmade organohalogen compounds, especially chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and bromofluorocarbons. - Cl and Br radicals are liberated by the action of ultraviolet light. Each radical is then free to initiate and catalyze a chain reaction capable of breaking down over 100,000 ozone molecules.

Ozone levels, over the northern hemisphere, have been dropping by 4% per decade. Over approximately 5% of the Earth's surface, around the north and south poles, much larger (but seasonal) declines have been seen; these are the ozone holes.

Regulation
On January 23, 1978, Sweden became the first nation to ban CFC-containing aerosol sprays that are thought to damage the ozone layer. A few other countries, including the United States, Canada, and Norway, followed suit later that year, but the European Community rejected an analogous proposal. Even in the U.S., chlorofluorocarbons continued to be used in other applications, such as refrigeration and industrial cleaning, until after the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole in 1985. After negotiation of an international treaty (the Montreal Protocol), CFC production was sharply limited beginning in 1987 and phased out completely by 1996.

On August 2, 2003, scientists announced that the depletion of the ozone layer may be slowing down due to the international ban on CFCs.[3] Three satellites and three ground stations confirmed that the upper atmosphere ozone depletion rate has slowed down significantly during the past decade. The study was organized by the American Geophysical Union. Some breakdown can be expected to continue due to CFCs used by nations which have not banned them, and due to gases which are already in the stratosphere. CFCs have very long atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from 50 to over 100 years, so the final recovery of the ozone layer is expected to require several lifetimes.

http://www.ec.gc.ca/ozone/docs/archives/en/phaseout/surplus3.cfm

Australia has phased-out the import, export and manufacturing of Halons since 1992 and CFCs since 1995. Some state governments in Australia also ban the possession of Halons without a license. Australia has also decommissioned all of its non-critical Halon fire extinguishing systems.

In Australia, all the states have passed regulations prohibiting the use of Halons in non-critical applications... etc .

As for your second statement - I think that has been addressed in previous posts. - certainly both sunspot activity and greenhouse gases affect temp. - but there's only one of those we can affect right?

 

[2020hindsight]

I'll drag this post here from another thread for a quick comment...

PS - it's apparenly the rule of oops 69.3 (100 log(2))
but 72 is a neat one having so many factors.
just like a bank account -
6% per annum will double your money in 12 years (6x12=72)
7% in 10 years (7x10)
12% in 6 years etc

and
3% per annum in parts of Africa will double their population (ignoring change to the underlying factors) in 23 years

Here's another way to look at the origin of that "rule of 69.3" - ALLEGEDLY this just happens to be the US life expectancy - down sharply from 77 etc
(sorry Kim , i know you didn't claim that , but I'm gonna take some of the claims on that website with a pinch of iodide - or chemtrail or whatever.) - hey I agree with you that that spraying doesn't look real healthy though! no question.

This is from Kimosabi's post on whatever that is they are spraying into the atmosphere ( weird? - cloud seeding of some sort maybe? - just like they are gonna do in Beijing later this year to guarantee good weather ? )

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=269652&highlight=sunspot#post269652

PS Why don't they call it the rule of 69? - I'm guessing their website would be flooded by inquisitive teenagers
"whaat, yu wan gar-rik prawns and corrifrower?" - lol - one of the best on the joke thread that one. )

PS At birth I notice we have life expectancy of 78 for men and 83 for women) http://www.aihw.gov.au/mortality/data/life_expectancy.cfm

Current world average is 67 yrs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy

 

[metric]

call me cynical if you like, but something just doesnt sit right with me about this sudden GW fanaticism. just for an entertaining exercise let us ask;

IF, GW is a scam;

*who stands to profit from it?
*who is pushing the agenda? (to profit from it)
*are there scientists whom disagree? ( how are they treated by mainstream media)
*what is the single biggest contributor to GW?
*whom is the religion designed to disadvantage? (why)

 

[2020hindsight]

lol -
make it a quick post
I'll call you a cynic

Not sure who is gonna profit by it - probably anyone with the sense to get in on the ground floor with innovative methods to tackle it - like wayne's cars etc.

But we are all gonna suffer if we don't act -
and that goes double for the GBR (great barrier reef)
but Maybe you don't like coral ?
or fish?
or .......

 

[metric]

which one of us is thinking like a trader..?

 

[2020hindsight]

you mean like Nick Stern? I'd say I am.

you mean super short term or medium term?

by the way ..
which one of us is making sense?
which is falling for the likes of Durkins with his Great Global Warming Swindle"?
Try watching the youtube attached to this post back there :-

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=231965&highlight=swindle#post231965

 

[noirua]

Australia provides more money towards the development of UCC coal than any other. Mining companies pay a 20 cent tariff per tonne on all coal produced.
A Link from the "Australian Coal Association" : http://www.australiancoal.com.au/cleantechAus.htm

 

[2020hindsight]

Australia provides more money towards the development of UCC coal than any other. Mining companies pay a 20 cent tariff per tonne on all coal produced.
A Link from the "Australian Coal Association" : http://www.australiancoal.com.au/cleantechAus.htm

which simply means we are being hypocritical when we deny that it's a problem yes?

It's like Johnny Howard: " NO WAY will we sign up to Kyoto and it's goals! - but in any case, just for fun, we've given it a go, and we are doing better"

 

[2020hindsight]

Yep, Global Warming is just an excuse to create a tax for an essential gas for life on the planet.

What they should be doing is taxing pollution, but the priority seems to be destroying the planet as quickly as possible.

Turns out Sunspot activity has decreased dramatically and apparently the sun is 15-20% dimmer. I'm not sure if the the dimness measurement is a space based measurement or earth based. If it is earth based, I'd be blaming these guys for spraying whatever crap they are spraying into the air, apparently a combination of Aluminium and Barium and a host of other nasty's from Rain based analysis etc

By the way these things aren't contrails because contrails don't hang around for 1 - 2 hours and then dissipate into a smoggy cirrus type cloud.

Anyway, my prediction for winter in the southern hemisphere is that we are going too have a FREEZING COLD, wet winter, and I'm even predicting Perth may get snowed on this winter. If it was good enough for Saudi Arabia to get the first snow in recorded history during their last winter, I reckon it's good enough for little old Perth to get some snow this winter...

wow -
whilst i disagree with most of your post Kim, I sure as hell find that chemtrail website the weirdest damned thing I've ever seen .
http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies?z=3&c=4&n=1&m=-1&w=4&x=0&p=14

Only thing that comes close maybe is the Tasmanian aerial spraying of the forestry (and the Tassie Devils) - (and the people living or bushwalking at the margins etc thereof)

Anyone know what it's all about - this Chemtrail stuff?

 

[noirua]

which simply means we are being hypocritical when we deny that it's a problem yes?

It's like Johnny Howard: " NO WAY will we sign up to Kyoto and it's goals! - but in any case, just for fun, we've given it a go, and we are doing better"

Problem with UCC development is that it's about 4 to 5 years away from development in Australia. This, I feel, is not Australia's fault and as the Great John Howard said, if we don't supply the coal then they will buy inferior coal from the likes of Indonesia.
Australian coal is amongst the very best in the World, don't knock it, fly the :aus:

 

[2020hindsight]

..........
truly dedicated to the cause m8

 

[Smurf1976]

call me cynical if you like, but something just doesnt sit right with me about this sudden GW fanaticism. just for an entertaining exercise let us ask;

IF, GW is a scam;

*who stands to profit from it?
*who is pushing the agenda? (to profit from it)
*are there scientists whom disagree? ( how are they treated by mainstream media)
*what is the single biggest contributor to GW?
*whom is the religion designed to disadvantage? (why)

1. Nuclear power, non-hydro renewables, natural gas, manufacturers of energy saving technologies (especially solar hot water and low energy lighting), hydro.

2. Internationally: Nuclear industry, Green politics, non-hydro renewables, manufacturers of energy saving technologies, natural gas, hydro.

Within Australia: Green politics, nuclear, hydro, non-hydro renewables, natural gas, manufacturers and importers of low energy water heaters and to a lesser extent lighting.

3. Yes (largely ignored by mainstream media).

4. Electricity generation from fossil fuels (globally about 60% of total generation, in Australia about 90%).

5. Industries and countries more reliant on coal (especially coal-fired electricity) than their competitors.

At the country level: Australia, US and any other country first world country with large coal resources. (Transfers manufacturing and economic wealth to other countries, particularly those with large coal resources not bound by Kyoto).

Within Australia: Victoria is the largest loser with NSW and Qld also facing significant losses. SA, Tas and NT are the most likely to benefit (though that depends on what policy actions and developments are taken in the years ahead). WA may gain in the short term but is likely a long term loser under the present approach.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Speaking for myself ... it is hard to look beyond my lifetime, my own self importance, my own existence.To take responsability for the planet beyond my lifetime doesn`t come naturally and i need to be educated.To understand.

I look at the empty packaging of some food just consumed and visualise the rubbish dump ground that it goes to.At the dumping ground i see televisions, furniture, computers, plastic ... lots of plastic, rotting food .... the stench nauseating, toys ... no love anymore.Cover it over and make another rubbish collection place.

My presence as a human contributes to the rubbish in the world.I am only one!

Currently, about 40% of urban solid waste is not treated at all, but is instead
landfilled at sub-standard facilities on the outskirts of cities. In Beijing alone,
10,000 tons of urban solid waste is generated every day, and about 700 solid
waste dumps surround the city. This condition is not unique, as two-thirds
of Chinese cities face similar solid waste treatment problems like Beijing
does.