Arctic methane scare already 'disproven' 'impossible' & 'implausible'

DON'T PANIC - '$60 Trillion' Arctic METHANE SCARE is already DISPROVEN

Emissions 'not caused by warming sea,' 

By Lewis Page, 25th July 2013  The Register

Three academics have written an opinion piece in hefty boffinry mag Nature, saying that humanity must reduce carbon emissions hugely or methane belching from the Arctic seabed will do $60 trillion of economic damage. But the latest research suggests that Arctic methane emissions are nothing to do with rising temperatures.

Gail Whiteman (professor of "sustainability, management and climate change"), Chris Hope (an economist) and Peter Wadhams (an oceanologist) present their arguments in the Comment section of Nature, here (pdf). They start off by suggesting that disappearing ice and warmer seas in the Arctic (caused by human carbon emissions, they say) are already causing methane emissions, and that further warming - with associated ice loss - will see these emissions increase hugely.

As methane is a vastly more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, the trio contend that this will mean still more warming and so on in a runaway feedback loop of doom. Using a modified version of the famous 2006 Stern climate economics theory (which was later dubbed "wrong, but for the right reasons") Hope suggests that the result might be economic damage to the tune of $60tn this century - equivalent to one year's gross domestic product for the entire human race.

There are several problems with this, but the first one is the most basic. Whiteman, Hope and Wadhams base their suggestion that current Arctic methane emissions are caused by recent, human-driven warming - and so might be expected to accelerate hugely, perhaps - on published calculations from 2010 and last year. This theorising began when airborne surveys discovered that methane was being emitted from the Arctic at various locations along the Siberian continental shelf in recent times.

Nobody at that time knew how long this had been going on, or what its cause might be. However it was known that a good deal of methane lay stored along the shelf in the form of hydrates, which are only stable at very low temperatures and high pressures. It seemed reasonable to suppose that warming seas in recent times were causing hydrates to break down into gas, which was then bubbling up into the atmosphere: but this was just a guess.

It turns out to be a guess which was wrong, however. Last year a German research vessel set out for the Arctic to find out more about the mysterious seabed methane emissions. Underwater robots were sent down at promising locations, automatic equipment left on earlier expeditions was recovered, and ground truth was established. Because of the lengthy scientific publishing cycle there aren't yet any published papers, but the results were so clear - and so important - that the scientists aboard the ship were happy to reveal them publicly.

A statement from Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung (Centre for Ocean Research, aka GEOMAR), the organisation whose ship was used, revealed the "surprising result" that methane emissions from the Arctic seabed are "no new thing". It went on:

Above all the fear that the gas emanation is a consequence of the current rising sea temperature does not seem to apply.

“The observed gas emanations are probably not caused by human influence," comments Professor Doktor Christian Berndt, the expedition leader. "At numerous emergences we found deposits that might already be hundreds of years old ... On any account, the methane sources must be older."

So there you have it. Humans did not cause the Arctic methane emissions, which have been happening for hundreds of years. There's no real reason to believe that they will suddenly accelerate as Wadhams, Hope and Whiteman suggest they might.



[remainder at The Register]



See also: Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry calls Arctic time bomb claims ‘impossible’: ‘Each of these assumptions is highly implausible, based upon my understanding; the combination of these two assumptions into a single scenario seems impossible to me’



See also: NYT: Arctic Methane Credibility Bomb Warmist Gavin Schmidt: 'implausible'

Read More

New paper finds 2012 US extreme heat wave was due to natural variability, not AGW

A new paper by a team of NOAA scientists published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society finds that the US extreme heat wave of March 2012 was due to natural variability, not AGW. According to the authors, "Several lines of evidence strongly implicate natural variations as the primary cause for the extreme event," and "We conclude that the extreme warmth over the central and eastern U.S. in March 2012 resulted primarily from natural climate and weather variability, a substantial fraction of which was predictable." Back in March 2012, however, the news headlines alleged that man-made climate change was responsible, including these sensational headlines:

1. 
   

   
   With Blow-Out March Heat Wave, Meteorologist Masters Says 'This is not the atmosphere I grew up with'

   
   
   
   


2. 
   

   
   The 2012 Heat Wave: "Almost Like Science Fiction" | Popular Science

   
   
   
   

1. 
   

   
   Record Heat Wave Pushes U.S. Belief in Climate Change to 70%

   
   
   
   


2. 
   

   
   US heatwave may have been made more likely by global warming ...

   
   
   
   

Global Warming May Have Fueled March Heat Wave Odds

Now that the truth is out, will there be followup headlines?

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 2013 ; e-View

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00069.1

The Making of An Extreme Event: Putting the Pieces Together

Randall Dole ¹, Martin Hoerling ¹, Arun Kumar ², Jon Eischeid ^1,3, Judith Perlwitz ^1,3, Xiao-Wei Quan ^1,3,George Kiladis ¹, Robert Webb ¹, Donald Murray ^1,3, Mingyue Chen ², Klaus Wolter ^1,3, and Tao Zhang ^1,3

¹ NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado

² NOAA Climate Prediction Center, Camp Springs, MD

³ University of Colorado, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, Boulder, Colorado

Abstract

We examine how physical factors spanning climate and weather contributed to record warmth over the central and eastern U.S. in March 2012, when daily temperature anomalies at many locations exceeded 20°C. Over this region, approximately 1° C warming in March temperatures has occurred since 1901. This long-term regional warming is an order-of-magnitude [10 times] smaller than temperature anomalies observed during the event, indicating the most of the extreme warmth must be explained by other factors. Several lines of evidence strongly implicate natural variations as the primary cause for the extreme event. The 2012 temperature anomalies had a close analogue in an exceptionally warm U.S. March occurring over 100 years earlier, providing observational evidence that an extreme event similar to March 2012 could be produced through natural variability alone. Coupled model forecasts and simulations forced by observed sea surface temperatures (SSTs) show that forcing from anomalous SSTs increased the probability of extreme warm temperatures in March 2012 above that anticipated from the long-term warming trend. In addition, forcing associated with a strong Madden-Julian Oscillation further increased the probability for extreme U.S. warmth and provided important additional predictive information on the timing and spatial pattern of temperature anomalies. The results indicate that the superposition of a strong natural variation similar to March 1910 on long-term warming of the magnitude observed would be sufficient to account for the record warm March 2012 U.S. temperatures. We conclude that the extreme warmth over the central and eastern U.S. in March 2012 resulted primarily from natural climate and weather variability, a substantial fraction of which was predictable.

Related: New paper confirms 2010 Russian heat wave was result of natural variability

Read More

New paper finds CO2 regulations are becoming 'less effective every year'

A new paper published in Environmental Research Letters finds existing regulations on CO2 are becoming "less effective every year" "due to rapid growth in international trade." According to the authors, "A growing number of countries regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions occurring within their borders, but due to rapid growth in international trade, the products consumed in many of the same countries increasingly rely on coal, oil and gas extracted and burned in other countries where CO2 is not regulated. As a consequence, existing national and regional climate policies may be growing less effective every year." Even if one believes that man-made CO2 has a measurable effect on the climate [it doesn't], advocating for more regulations on CO2 will only serve to shift CO2 emissions [and prosperity] to countries with fewer regulations, via international trade. 

Climate policy and dependence on traded carbon

Robbie M Andrew, Steven J Davis and Glen P Peters

A growing number of countries regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions occurring within their borders, but due to rapid growth in international trade, the products consumed in many of the same countries increasingly rely on coal, oil and gas extracted and burned in other countries where CO2 is not regulated. As a consequence, existing national and regional climate policies may be growing less effective every year. Furthermore, countries that are dependent on imported products or fossil fuels are more exposed to energy and climate policies in other countries. We show that the combined international trade in carbon (as fossil fuels and also embodied in products) increased from 12.3 GtCO2 (55% of global emissions) in 1997 to 17.6 GtCO2 (60%) in 2007 (growing at 3.7% yr−1). Within this, trade in fossil fuels was larger (10.8 GtCO2 in 2007) than trade in embodied carbon (6.9 GtCO2), but the latter grew faster (4.6% yr−1 compared with 3.1% yr−1 for fuels). Most major economies demonstrate increased dependence on traded carbon, either as exports or as imports. Because energy is increasingly embodied in internationally traded products, both as fossil fuels and as products, energy and climate policies in other countries may weaken domestic climate policy via carbon leakage and mask energy security issues.

Read More

New paper finds global warming since the Little Ice Age explained by natural processes, not man-made CO2

A new paper published in Climate explains the halt of global warming due to changes in solar activity and ocean oscillations, and finds most of the warming and recovery from the Little Ice Age during the 19th and 20th centuries was due to natural processes rather than man-made CO2.

For the Full Report in PDF Form, please click here.

[Illustrations, footnotes and references available in PDF version]

Abstract: The rise in global average temperature over the last century has halted since roughly the year 2000, despite the fact that the release of CO2 into the atmosphere is still increasing. It is suggested here that this interruption has been caused by the suspension of the near linear (+ 0.5 °C/100 years or 0.05 °C/10 years) temperature increase over the last two centuries, due to recovery from the Little Ice Age, by a superposed multi-decadal oscillation of a 0.2 °C amplitude and a 50~60 year period, which reached its positive peak in about the year 2000—a halting similar to those that occurred around 1880 and 1940. Because both the near linear change and the multi-decadal oscillation are likely to be natural changes (the recovery from the Little Ice Age (LIA) and an oscillation related to the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), respectively), they must be carefully subtracted from temperature data before estimating the effects of CO2.

Excerpts:



It is at least problematic, therefore, to consider this near linear increase in temperature during the 19th and 20th centuries as mainly due to CO2.



A halt and even a slight decrease in the rising trend after 2000 can therefore be expected, on the basis of this spectral analysis.



It is quite likely, therefore, that the near linear increase due to LIA recovery has been temporarily overwhelmed by the multi-decadal oscillation, which had reached a positive peak in about the year 2000.



Conclusion:



It is likely that both the near linear increase and multi-decadal oscillation are primarily natural changes. Thus, in order to estimate the effects caused by CO2 over the last two centuries, it is important to isolate these natural components of climate change from real temperature data.

Read More

Delingpole: 97 per cent of climate activists in the pay of Big Oil shock!

97 per cent of climate activists in the pay of Big Oil shock!

By James Delingpole Last updated: July 23rd, 2013

Unless you're a reader of the Guardian Environment's recently added section "Sacrifice your children to Mother Gaia. It's the only way!", you'll probably never have heard of the man who co-edits it, Dana Nuccitelli. But you'll certainly be familiar with his most famous bogus statistical artefact: the one he created with fellow climate alarmist John Cook to prove that 97 per cent of climate scientists really DO believe in global warming.

The claim has been roundly debunked. Apart from the problems with its statistical methodology, its findings are essentially meaningless. As Ben Pile points out in this characteristically measured, thoughtful piece,

"Nuccitelli’s survey results are either the result of a comprehensive failure to understand the climate debate, or an attempt to divide it in such a way as to frame the result for political ends."

Indeed, adds Pile, they represent:

"a cartoonish polarisation of positions within the climate debate."

How so? Well, as (climate sceptical) Bishop Hill once asked on Twitter: "Isn't everyone in the 97 per cent? I am." When the question was repeated at the Bishop's website by Met Office's Richard Betts, almost all those present agreed that they were. I would have done too, depending, of course, on precisely how you interpret the "consensus position" that "humans are causing global warming."

Well of course they are. Even if it's only down to the Urban Heat Island effect or the methane from beef cattle, humans almost certainly have an influence on climate. But so what? It always astonishes me when I see climate alarmists – even nice, well-meaning ones like Richard Betts – get all excited about this, as if somehow it represents a sudden concession by sceptics to the cause of warmism. If the alarmists spent any time paying attention to Watts Up With That, Bishop Hill or any of the myriad other sceptical websites out there, they would realise that this is what we've always thought. Our beef with the alarmists is not over the issue "Do humans contribute to climate change?" It's over "Do humanssignificantly contribute to climate chnage?" "Is there any evidence that this climate change is catastrophic or unprecedented?" "Do we need to do anything about it?" "Can we do anything about it?" "And are we sure that the cures currently being proposed aren't worse than the problem they're supposed to solve?"

But see, here we go again: here I am getting bogged down in a tedious and irrelevant non-argument of the kind the Warmists are always setting up in order to distract lay readers from more pertinent issues: like the fact that wind farms are just crap; that the evidence for catastrophic man-made global warming just hasn't materialised; that the polar bears aren't endangered; and so on.

Props to Dana Nuccitelli – he is, like his fellow climate activist Bob Ward – an absolute master of this straw man distraction technique. The term for it is "Clown Dancing" and Nuccitelli is the veritable Coco-and-Ronald-McDonald-in-a-sticky-embrace-with-Nureyev of the coulroterpsichorean art.

Anyway, all this is by the by. Another of the techniques used by Nuccitelli and his ilk is the "funded by Big Oil" meme. This is the silly notion, popularised by the likes of Al Gore and Michael Mann, that the main reason we climate sceptics say the pesky sceptical things we do is because we're paid to say so by various oil interests. Here is Nuccitelli in his Guardian column only last week on sceptical stalwart Pat Michaels:

"Michaels has admitted that his funding comes heavily from the fossil fuel industry"

In truth, the exact opposite more commonly the case. Few corporate interests are quite so heavily in bed with Big Green as Big Oil – as you'll shortly be seeing when I do a number on Shell and its highly dubious behaviour re the UK shale gas industry – and it seems the hypocritical and disingenuous clown-dancer extraordinaire Nuccitelli is no exception.

He has tried to keep it quiet. But there's no – what's the word? Oh yeah…. – denying it: green activist Dana Nuccitelli is in the pay of Big Oil.

More on Nuccitelli's & Cook's bogus 97% consensus study

Read More

New paper finds 5 non-hockey-sticks in the Southern Ocean

A paper published today in Quaternary Science Reviews shows 5 non-hockey-sticks from reconstructions of sea surface temperatures [SSTs] in the Southern Ocean, each of which demonstrates a long-term cooling of the Southern Ocean over the past 8,000 to 10,000 years.



Prior posts on non-hockey-sticks

Second through 6th graph from the top show sea surface temperature reconstructions from the Southern Ocean, each of which show a cooling over the Holocene [past ~11,000 years]. Horizontal axis is years before the present.

A review of the Australian–New Zealand sector of the Southern Ocean over the last 30 ka (Aus-INTIMATE project)

• H.C. Bostock et al

• http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.07.018, How to Cite or Link Using DOI

• 
  Permissions & Reprints
  
  

---

Abstract

The Australia/New Zealand region of the Southern Ocean is influenced by several of the major global water masses of the oceans and is the prime entry point for cold deep waters into the Pacific basin. During the last glacial there was increased sea-ice extent around Antarctica (as far north as 55°S), as well as increased iceberg presence inferred from ice-rafted debris. Evidence from microfossil assemblages suggests that sea surface temperatures (SST) were up to 7 °C cooler, consistent with recent estimates of cooling for New Zealand derived from glacier modelling and other terrestrial proxies. The Subtropical Front (STF), Subantarctic Front (SAF) and Polar Front (PF) had migrated north, except where the position of the fronts were controlled bathymetrically. Despite the potential for iron fertilisation by increased dust input into the ocean during the glacial, there is limited evidence for higher total biological productivity in the Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean. The altered oceanic circulation during the glacial also decreased nutrients in the surface waters and affected the outgassing of CO₂. This contributed to an increased storage of CO₂ in the deep waters and lowering of the carbonate lysocline.

During the deglaciation, sea-ice retreat and SST increased rapidly at ∼18 ka, roughly synchronous with the reinvigoration of deep water circulation in the Southern Ocean and the release of CO₂ stored in the deep waters. The gradient in carbon isotopes (δ¹³C_benthic) between Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW) and lower Circumpolar Deep Water (LCDW) was greatest at the start of the deglaciation, suggesting that the AAIW ventilation preceded LCDW ventilation, or there was a significant change in air-sea fractionation of δ¹³C. There was a slight enrichment in δ¹⁸O_planktic, decrease in SSTs and a reduction in intermediate and deep water circulation between ∼14 and 12.5 ka BP during the Antarctic Cold Reversal (ACR), coincident with glacier advances in the New Zealand Southern Alps and other terrestrial records of cooling. Following the ACR, there was a second, more minor, release of deep water CO₂, most likely related to reinvigoration of North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW). From 10 ka onwards the modern intermediate and deep water circulation was established.

Air temperatures and SSTs reached a maximum in the early Holocene, with the STF located at its most southerly position, and there was a widespread retreat of Antarctic ice sheets to their modern position. A decline to modern SST and air temperatures in the mid to late Holocene followed. While millennial cycles overprinted on the SST and δ¹⁸O_planktic records, may be the result of subtle changes in the position and strength of the westerly winds during the Holocene.

Read More

New paper finds mechanism by which the Sun controls floods in the European Alps

A new paper published in Geophysical Research Letters reconstructs floods in the European Alps over the past 2000 years and finds flooding increased during periods of solar minimums. The authors find, "The all-season flood frequency...increased during solar minima, suggesting solar-induced circulation changes resembling negative conditions of the North Atlantic Oscillation [NAO] as controlling atmospheric mechanism." The paper corroborates several other published papers finding that flooding is more common during cool periods with low solar activity in comparison to warm periods, the opposite of claims by climate alarmists. The paper adds to many others finding amplification mechanisms by which small changes in solar activity can have large amplified effects on climate, via ocean oscillations such as the North Atlantic Oscillation, atmospheric oscillations such as the Madden-Julian Oscillation, Quasi-biennial Oscillation, Aleutian Low, and Eurasian pattern, as well as via stratospheric ozone, and sunshine hours/clouds.

A 2000-year long seasonal record of floods in the southern European Alps

Stefanie B. Wirth et al

Abstract: Knowledge of past natural flood variability and controlling climate factors is of high value, since it can be useful to refine projections of the future flood behavior under climate warming. In this context, we present a seasonally resolved 2000-year long flood-frequency and -intensity reconstruction from the southern Alpine slope (North-Italy) using annually laminated (varved) lake sediments. Floods occurred predominantly during summer and autumn, whereas winter and spring events were rare. The all-season flood frequency, and particularly the occurrence of summer events, increased during solar minima, suggesting solar-induced circulation changes resembling negative conditions of the North Atlantic Oscillation as controlling atmospheric mechanism. Furthermore, the most extreme autumn events occurred during a period of warm Mediterranean sea-surface temperature. Interpreting these results in regard to present climate change, our dataset proposes for a warming scenario a decrease in summer floods but an increase in the intensity of autumn floods at the South-Alpine slope.

Read More