Comments on: Lessons from an Angry Planet

By: Hal Levin

Hal Levin — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 14:17:44 +0000

Living among the fires of California reinforces concern for climate change. I have heard Joe lecture on the contribution of climate change to increased frequency of wildfires. It has been a very dry spring here, and California is even more of a tinder box than usual, earlier than usual in our usually dry six month summer period. A fire here in Santa Cruz 2 weeks ago reached within four miles of my house, making all this far more real. The reports one reads on the news from a distance lack the force of the plume of smoke of that fire or the gray, smokey skies all over this region of the past five days.

Thanks Joe for making me aware of wildfire connection to climate change.

By: John Johnson

John Johnson — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:39:48 +0000

This discussion on Global Warming is crazy. It seems that you are offering “scientific data”, but in reality it is not accurate. The Earth is always changing there have been cycles of warmth, and cold throughout this planets history. Everything is not centered on the earth. The biggest generator of heat is the sun. The oceans if you can believe compromise 75% of the earth’s surface. It takes a significant amount of energy to raise, or lower the temperature of the earth’s oceans. Can you imagine heating water at a depth of 4000 feet or greater. This all has an impact on the atmosphere. The current “global warming movement” is really a political movement to control people. Look at the price of gas, food, and energy. For years the powers that be have been trying to convince people to move closer to the cities, and develop public transportation. Humm – looks like the mew tactic is working. The theme seems to center it self around live in an agrarian society, but let me keep my 30,000 sq ft mansion with all the amenities. Conservation for the masses, and affulence for the few.

By: John Johnson

John Johnson — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:29:51 +0000

This is all hog wash. Wind, Geothermal, Hydro Thermal are all viable sources of energy especially at the current prices of oil. However this is all about exaggeration, and fraud. Global warming is not being caused by cars, or trucks. Volcanoes spew out more carbon dioxide that all the cars in the world combined. The sun is in a solar cycle, and is heating up. All the planets in the solar system have increases in temperature. The surface is heating not the atmosphere. This is all about money. How can we fool the people into accepting a new tax, and governance. The IEA (i.e. UN is pushing Global Warming along with a number of environmental groups on “computer models” that model whatever data you put in. This data is highly subjective – meaning you have to guess what you think the number should be, not what they actually are.

By: llewelly

llewelly — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:54:34 +0000

Please note that '1577' was the number of reported tornadoes (now the number of reports is up to 1631), not the number actual tornadoes. It is normal for almost a third of the reports to be eliminated as duplicates after further analysis has taken place. The current total of confirmed reports - that is, those which are not duplicates or errors - is 832 - but the process lags well behind the most recent tornado events. The estimate for the number of actual tornadoes is a little over 1000. This is still record-smashing tornado activity so far this year. NOAAs graph of tornadoes and tornado reports .

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:54:59 +0000

Also angry in China just now.

By: exusian

exusian — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:47:14 +0000

Or like venturing into the ‘death zone’ above 8000 meters. The longer you stay, the lower your chance of surviving.

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:51:19 +0000

Lou Grinzo said, “How close are we to that global tipping point?”

How do you define “tipping point”?

If you mean when does the feedback cause runaway warming, then we are very far from that point. The earth survived 1500±500 ppm CO2 approximately 50 million years ago without runaway warming (though the sun was slightly weaker then). It did of course get very very warm as a result, but without turning the Earth into Venus.

If you define “tipping point” as simply leading to major damage to humanity and Earth’s ecosystems, then I opine that there may be multiple tipping points. The permafrost is one that is either imminent or we have already crossed (time will tell). Once the permafrost kicks in, it will accelerate warming until the carbon stored there is fully released. Then things slow down again, until the next tipping point is reached (unless it overlaps with the permafrost). When that next carbon store is used up, things slow down again, and so on. Similarly, there is a boost to warming when the temperature reaches a point at which polar ice melts. When that ice is gone, the rate falls back. The Earth’s sensitivity to CO2 is nonlinear.

Hansen’s analysis suggests that there is a tipping point at 425±25 ppm based on the observation that as the Earth reduced from 1500±500ppm at 50 million years ago (Mya) down to 425±25 ppm at 35 Mya, the Antarctic ice sheet started to form. Returning CO2 back above the 425±25 ppm point should begin to reverse that process (though it might take a while). Given that the permafrost has 500-1000 Gt of carbon to release, which is sufficient to raise atmospheric CO2 well above 450 ppm, it looks like these two feedback mechanisms overlap. That is unfortunate for us.

Hansen suggests that we eventually need to return CO2 to 350 ppm to keep things sane. We may temporarily exceed that (as we already have), but the longer we remain above 350 ppm, the worse the danger to us.

Bill McKibben likens the 350 ppm limit to a medical threshold. It isn’t instantly fatal to have a high test result, but if you don’t do something to return to the safe range, you’re likely to suffer severe consequences before too long.

By: Pangolin

Pangolin — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:10:23 +0000

I believe the game we are playing is Siberian permafrost roulette and judging by the data the bullets have already left the gun and are in route to the ecosystem control chamber. The permafrost is melting and releasing far more methane than any of the models show.

Accelerated feedback is here.

By: John McCormick

John McCormick — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:01:27 +0000

Lou, you said:

[How close are we to that global tipping point? I don’t think anyone knows (even if we all have guesses), which is why I keep saying not only are we playing Russian roulette, but we don’t even know how many bullets are in the gun.]

At atmosphere’s CO2 concentration of 388 ppm plus the CO2 eq. gases (about 12% of CO2), climate forcing is about 434 ppm CO2 eq.

We are playing Russian roulette and we do know how many bullets are in the gun; bullets in all chambers.

John McCormick

By: hapa

hapa — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:22:18 +0000

what are we looking at for la niña in future? i vaguely remember seeing a couple people’s slides somewhere about the little girl possibly lengthening and strengthening by virtue of ocean temp changes. shudder.

anyway this is my third choice for the tantrum/coincidence duality: a higher severity of a periodic event. maybe there will be a respite, the droughts and storms will relax, or maybe we’ll find out that el niño 2.0 sux worse.