Bright future in sales

2009iPredict.png iPredict, the NZ-based “prediction market” has offered two new contracts based on global temperatures: will 2009 be warmer than 2008, and will 2009 set a new record for warmest year? TV3 News featured the offerings last night. In iPredict’s market, buying and selling contracts — the equivalent of stock trades in a traditional market — establishes what the market (ie, the collective wisdom of the buyers and sellers) considers to be the most likely outcome, and expresses that view in the price. At the time of writing, the $1 contract “2009 warmer than 2008” (TEMP.2009) was trading at $0.7041, indicating that the market view is that it will be. On the other hand, a new record (TEMP.2009.HIGH) was trading at $0.1840, suggesting that the market deems it unlikely.

iPredict’s blog explains the thinking behind the contracts:

2009 is shaping to be an interesting year for climate science. There are, as I understand it, two camps in the climate change community. One says that greenhouse gases is a major driver of changes in climate. The second says changes in the Sun’s energy output is responsible. What makes 2009 interesting is that these drivers are expected to head in opposite directions – greenhouse gas concentrations will continue their inevitable march upwards, but the Sun’s energy is expected to continue falling. So which driver will temperatures tend to follow in 09?

Unfortunately, whether 2009 is warmer than 2008 tells us nothing about long term climate “drivers”, because there’s too much noise in the system (the variation from year to year is bigger than the signal we’re looking for — an approximate 0.2ºC per decade increase – so we need to look at long time periods to establish its existence). The swing from El Niño to La Niña — a natural oscillation — has more effect in the short term than any annual increase in CO2 forcing.

The “new record” contract is potentially more interesting, because if there is a long term upward trend (and there is) then eventually there will be a new record. That could take some time to happen, though, as Tamino demonstrated in this excellent post at Open Mind.

For what it’s worth, here’s my take. 2008 began with a very strong La Niña, which has a cooling impact on global temperatures, so unless there’s an equally strong cooling event 2009 should be warmer. On the other hand, the latest prognostication from NIWA suggests that “moderate La Niña conditions are expected to prevail into [SH] autumn”, so perhaps things may not be clear cut until much later in the year. For 2009 to set a new record, ENSO would need to swing into an El Niño early in the year, and that now looks very unlikely — hence, I would guess, the price for that contract.

To measure the market confidence in the two views on climate drivers, iPredict would need to offer longer term contracts — 2009-18 average warmer than 1999-2008, for instance, but that might not be good for active trading. There are other climate-related contracts they could offer, though, and a new record minimum for Arctic sea ice in 2009 might be a good one. That might persuade me into the market…

[Fountains of Wayne]

Cry me a river

marbles.jpgI missed out on the field trip to the Waipara Gorge to look at the evidence for tropical temperatures around Eocene New Zealand, laid low by the dreaded lurgy, but TVNZ sent a film crew so that I could see what I missed. Plenty of big hammers on display… Meanwhile, GNS have sent along more details of the conference symposium on Wednesday next week (Jan 14), and it looks fascinating. One highlight (from the GNS release):

The symposium will conclude with a public lecture by Professor James Zachos from the University of California, Santa Cruz, on “Rapid global warming and ocean acidification 55 million years ago: Lessons for the future” in Oceania at Te Papa, 5.30-6.30 pm.

I don’t often wish that I lived in Wellington, but this is one occasion… 😉

Coppiced willow farming here

This column appeared in the Waikato Times in August 2008.  I have altered some of the wording to update it for this Hot Topic post.

The change to renewable energy sources can seem daunting. Those with stakes in fossil fuels are often negative, claiming change will be too expensive, too difficult, or not yet necessary. Cries of economic doom have greeted even the modest emissions trading scheme which may or may not be carried forward by the new government.

It was encouraging therefore to read a few months ago of the plans of renewable energy company Pure Power to launch a variety of shrubby willow as a biofuel crop in New Zealand. Biofuels which use food crops or destroy rainforests have had a justifiably bad press. But not all biofuel crops are equal. Coppiced woody plants like the willow Pure Power plans to use have a very good ratio of energy output to the energy put into converting them; they can be grown on poorer soils not used for food production; they require little fertiliser or irrigation; using new technologies they will produce not only biofuel but also a range of products for making paints, resins, adhesives and bioplastics.  Pure Power will have nursery stock ready for planting this year and hopes for a rapid expansion of planting in subsequent years.

Continue reading “Coppiced willow farming here”

Take me to the river

marbles.jpg Climate news doesn’t just turn up in an RSS feed; sometimes it jumps right into your lap. A day or two ago, I discovered that a new paper about sea temperatures around New Zealand during the Eocene (50 million years ago) has significant implications for climate modelling and is based on fieldwork done very close to my home. Stuff reports:

Using sedimentary rocks from the bed of the Waipara River in North Canterbury, an international research group led by GNS Science palaeontologist Chris Hollis has reconstructed ancient sea temperatures. They found surface sea water exceeded 30 degrees Celsius, and water at the sea floor hovered around 20ºC during an episode of greenhouse gas-induced global warming that lasted for between two million and three million years. “These temperatures are at the extreme end of modern tropical water masses,” Dr Hollis said. Year-round sea surface temperatures of 25ºC to 30ºC are today found only at the equator.

At the time, New Zealand was much closer to the South Pole — below 50ºS — yet supported tropical flora and fauna. (GNS press release here).

Continue reading “Take me to the river”

Plows, Plagues and Petroleum

Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum: How Humans Took Control of Climate

William Ruddiman’s book Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum: How Humans Took Control of Climate has attracted a good deal of interest in the climate history world since it was published in 2005.

His major thesis is that even before the industrial revolution, human activity over a period of 8000 years was responsible for a significant rise in carbon dioxide and methane levels in the atmosphere.  After explaining orbital changes and their effect on ice-age cycles and monsoon cycles he turns to what he considers an anomalous rise in methane concentration in the atmosphere which began 5000 years ago – anomalous in that the naturally declining solar radiation would be expected to result in gradually lowering methane levels as wetlands diminished in size.   He patiently works his way through what can be inferred of early agriculture to a hypothesis that increasing rice irrigation was mainly responsible for the methane increase, with lesser contributions also from domestic grazing animals and biomass burning.  His next step is to look at CO2 changes, where he detects a similar anomaly beginning 8000 years ago when the natural downward trend was interrupted at around 260 parts per million to rise to around 280 ppm by the start of the industrial revolution.  In the case of CO2 he attributes the rise to deforestation for agriculture, aided perhaps by some peat and coal burning. This attribution is tested against the population levels and likely amount of deforestation resulting from agricultural activities; he explains the calculations which he undertook to establish its credibility.

If he is correct this would mean that the warm and stable climate of the last 8000 years has been due to unwitting human intervention which offset a natural cooling that would otherwise have gradually developed.  He sets out reasons for the conclusion that a degree of glaciation may by now have been occurring in Canada were it not for human farming activities.

His hypothesis has been challenged, as he expects and, as a scientist, welcomes. He responds in his book to two of the challenges, both of which he acknowledges to have merit.  One is that he did not go far enough back in the sequence of ice-age cycles when looking at the pattern of previous interglaciation periods for a comparison of what might be expected from natural processes today. The other is that humans could not possibly have cleared and burned enough forest to account for such a large CO2 anomaly.  He considers that with some adjustment his hypothesis survives these challenges.

He then considers the “wiggles” that have occurred in the CO2 increases over the 2000 years prior to the industrial revolution, particularly the so-called Little Ice Age, when the CO2 level dropped somewhat.  He doubts natural causes and looks instead for processes that might have reversed the slow deforestation which he has suggested responsible for the gradual CO2 increase.  He rules out war and famine as not disastrous enough on a large enough scale and settles on disease, especially the plague.  He theorises that as epidemics and pandemics caused major drops in population, reforestation occurred in abandoned farmland, there was a slowdown in new deforestation, and in China a decrease in the amount of coal burning.

The question Ruddiman then proceeds to address is why the relatively modest rise in greenhouse gases caused by humans before the Industrial Revolution led to so relatively large an increase in temperature – 0.8 degrees – while the relatively large rise in greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution has been accompanied by a still relatively small increase in temperature.  His answer lies in the response time required for the full effects to be felt and he explores this in some detail in relation to both land and ocean, showing how response times vary in different environments.

Ruddiman’s hypotheses continue to be debated by climate scientists.  In fact Wallace Broecker, one of the world’s leading experts on climate history describes them as “total and utter nonsense”, according to a September 2008 New Scientist article.  The article reports Broecker reckoning there’s a natural explanation for the CO2 rise. Deep-sea sediments record a drop in carbonate concentrations that could account for the rise in atmospheric CO2.  But others find Ruddiman at least worthy of further consideration.  His book is certainly a fascinating detective science story, readily accessible to a general reader.

But I enter a caveat in relation to his closing chapters where he looks at future warming prospects as the full effect of the large post-industrial revolution rise in greenhouse gases begins to be felt. His prognostications are more optimistic than many climatologists would be willing to offer today. He gives us a century or two to melt much of the world’s sea ice and mountain glaciers and push back the seasonal limits of snow cover, but considers the two great ice sheets will be largely intact. The book was published over three years ago. One wonders whether he would be as sanguine now.

When he wrote the book he was certainly disinclined to see climate change as an overwhelming challenge. In fact he is quite testy about what he describes as the alarmism of extreme environmentalists and their organisations. He doesn’t name them, but he accuses them of oversimplifying the complexities of the global warming issue. He should have identified the organisations he refers to. Maybe he has noticed more alarmist predictions than I have. Major environmental advocacy groups such as Greenpeace and WWF seem to me to stay well within the bounds of responsible science on climate change.

He finally states that the depletion of precious resources – naming water, topsoil and fossil fuel – poses a greater threat to the human future than the threat of global warming does.  There are certainly many serious threats to the continuance of human society, but he provided me with no grounds for relegating global warming to a secondary rank.