Baby, it’s cold outside

Pegsnow.jpg In the make-believe world of Climate Debate Daily, where there are two sides to a great “debate” on the reality of climate change (there aren’t), a great gulf is opening between the opposing teams. Cranks are investing a great deal of (wasted) time and effort into spreading the idea that the world is cooling, while climate scientists think a new record high global temperature can’t be far away.

In The Australian today, The Great Communicator (for it is he!) runs the cooling argument for all its worth:

Thus, using several fundamentally different mathematical techniques and many different data sets, seven scientists all forecast that climatic cooling will occur during the first decades of the 21st century. Temperature records confirm that cooling is under way, the length and intensity of which remains unknown. […] Perhaps a reassessment will finally occur when two-metre thick ice develops again on Father Thames at London Bridge, or when cooling causes massive crop failure in the world’s granary belts.

Meanwhile, in an interview with Robin McKie in The Observer, Jim Hansen nails his colours to the mast:

Deniers should show caution, Hansen insisted: most of the planet was exceptionally warm last year. Only a strong La Niña – a vast cooling of the Pacific that occurs every few years – brought down the average temperature. La Niña would not persist, he said. “Before the end of Obama’s first term, we will be seeing new record temperatures. I can promise the president that.”

There’s a collision coming…

Continue reading “Baby, it’s cold outside”

The heater

global_energy_budget_in.png While some on the crank fringe fixate over a “global cooling” (that ain’t happening), the imbalance in our planet’s heat budget has inevitable — and inexorable — consequences for our climate. More heat’s coming into the system than can leave, as this excellent new article at NASA’s Earth Observatory spells out. It’s an easy to follow, but not dumbed-down explanation of how the earth and its atmosphere respond to energy arriving from the sun, with some superb illustrations — and astronaut photographs. Well worth a read, and a useful reference on the complex reality of the “greenhouse” we live in.

[Mutton Birds]

Fixing Climate

Fixing Climate: The Story of Climate Science - and How to Stop Global Warming

Wallace Broecker is a distinguished scientist in the field of climate history, and he’s been at it for over 50 years. He was one of the first scientists to warn of the dangers of global warming, as long ago as 1975. In a book published last year he teamed up with science journalist Robert Kunzig.  Fixing Climate: The Story of Climate Science – and How to Stop Global Warming is a highly readable narrative of how the modern scientific understanding of climate change has developed since it dawned on a few 19th century observers that there was evidence in the Swiss mountains of vast areas of past glaciation.  The book makes it very apparent that understanding climate in the past is the key to realising what is happening in the present and what it will lead to.

It’s a packed book, though it rarely seems so in the reading.  It ranges from relaxed stories about the scientists at work to closely explained accounts of the processes they investigate or uncover. The work of Broecker himself is often of considerable significance.  He was early engaged in the field of carbon dating, which proved a useful tool in establishing the abrupt (geologically speaking) end of the last ice age. He did recalculations of Milankovich’s theories on the earth’s orbital cycles and established their importance in affecting ice age climates, but only as part of the explanation – feedbacks must also be at work. He is known for his idea that ocean currents might rapidly change climate by switching on and off, and he came up with the name of conveyor belt to describe the ocean’s globe-spanning thermohaline circulation which transports heat into the North Atlantic and salt out. The section of the book explaining this is a model of clarity and interest for the general reader.  As indeed are many other sections like those on CO2 and on what portion of the carbon in the atmosphere goes into the sea or is taken up on land – so far at least.

New Zealand is there. A six-page section of the book begins with the words: “Outside the little town of Methven…”  George Denton and his team have spent a decade identifying and dating moraines all over the Southern Alps and recording their results on detailed maps.  Denton had spent decades working in Antarctica and Alaska when Broeckner convinced him to move his fieldwork into mid-latitude New Zealand.

Do we need to worry about what is happening?  The authors think so. They dissociate themselves, albeit respectfully, from the arguments of Al Gore and other environmentalists that it is a threat to western civilisation, considering that western civilisation is more resilient than that and that such “grandiose rhetoric” converts many reasonable people into sceptics. Their logic escapes me here, but never mind, for they go on to identify two dangers which strike them as particularly urgent – prolonged, catastrophic drought in some regions, and a rising sea level. Both dangers are explained in illuminating detail.

The last fifty pages of the book swing between pessimism and hope.  Although the authors recognise that we need to stop the increase in atmospheric CO2, they see no sign that we are capable of weaning ourselves from fossil fuels and are pessimistic of that obvious solution being applied. They sympathetically canvass the various green technologies but dismiss them as inadequate to the magnitude of the task and as too expensive in relation to cheap fossil fuels. For some time adaptation seemed the only option.  But then Broecker met Klaus Lackner, a theoretical physicist who considered that it was possible to scrub CO2out of the atmosphere, not just capture it in the industrial settings where it is produced. By 2001 Lackner was on the staff at Colombia, Broecker’s university. He has worked with engineer partner Allen Wright on designing a carbon scrubber which can work anywhere taking CO2 from the air for sequestration.  The process is described in some detail and estimates made of the number of extractors required to have a substantial effect on the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. It would be a large undertaking but by no means beyond our capacity.

Scrubbing the carbon is one matter, but how is it to be disposed of?  The book covers a range of possibilities for sequestration: deep in the ocean; old oil wells; saline aquifers; layers of volcanic basalt; and eventually, because Lackner does not consider these forms adequate in the long term, mineral sequestration – accelerated geochemical weathering made possible by reducing immense quantities of igneous rock to a fine powder and reacting it with CO2.

Scrubbing CO2 from the air would not supplant capturing emissions from stationary sources, such as power plants, directly at the smokestack. It is an additional means of capture. It has the great advantage of being able to be carried out close to the intended place of sequestration.

The authors are very serious about the prospects for this technology. One can almost hear their sigh of relief that it has turned up. I notice they have just published an article in New Scientist further exploring it not only in relation to Lackner but also to teams working on lab-scale units at the University of Calgary in Alberta and at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. In this article they allow themselves a little more room for hope in alternatives — solar, wind or nuclear — than is apparent in their book. But if we can’t avert a climate crisis through a massive switch to those means then air scrubbers could be the last-ditch lifeline.  I was mollified by the New Scientist article because I thought their book’s assertion that green technologies wouldn’t be adequate was reached too quickly, as was their belief that humankind would not turn from fossil fuel use while it remained available. At this point they had moved from science to politics and policy where it seems to me premature to declare failure — though of course it looms as a possible outcome.  But in any case the technology of removing CO2 directly from the atmosphere could meanwhile have a very useful function as one of the means by which we battle climate change and which can be rapidly scaled up if necessary. If it is a feasible process it must surely have a significant part to play.

In the final section of the book, Broecker and Kunzig examine some of the more drastic geo-engineering possibilities, such as putting sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere or iron in the ocean, and express reservations about them. The process of  taking CO2out of the atmosphere they do not see as geo-engineering. It is much more conservative. It is merely cleaning up after ourselves. They conclude, sounding something of a recurrent theme in recent writing, that the planet has become ours to run, and we can’t retreat from the responsibility to run it wisely. This might seem an overweening claim: nature has hardly surrendered the reins.  But there is at least a metaphorical truth to it. It highlights the immensity of the effect on Earth’s climate of our releasing so much extra CO2 into the atmosphere, and the concomitant responsibility we bear for managing that. Sequestration schemes seem a sensibly modest approach which respects the natural cycles.  The authors are too respectful of the complexities of the Earth’s systems to want to go further than that.

Nice weather for ducks

Duck.jpg A couple of days ago, NIWA published its climate summary for 2008 — a comprehensive overview of all the weather events that went together to make last year what it was. In general, 2008 was sunny and warm for New Zealand, but with many notable extreme weather events — a “rollercoaster” of a year, according to NIWA principal scientist Jim Renwick (who’s been a guest poster here). The Herald picked up on the rollercoaster reference, but Stuff latched on to something else Jim said:

[…] Renwick said the extremes could be a preview of how global climate change would affect New Zealand weather. “I am not saying 2008 was a result of climate change, but we should expect to see more years like that,” he said. “The idea of a sunny year, but with some pretty violent storms, is consistent with climate change. We should expect to see more of those rainfall extremes.”

The last time I looked at my weather records was last February. After musing on a heavy rain event, my comment then was “if you were to ask me what will Canterbury’s climate be like in 2030, I’d have to answer – just like this summer…” For our property in the Waipara Valley, 2007 was a dry year — only 496 mm of rain. 2008 was much wetter: 809 mm in the year, 10% over the average for the last 11 years, and the second wettest in my record. That’s been good news.

However, when I look back at the year, nearly 40% of that rain came in just three events — a big fall in February to break the dry spell, and then two big storms in late July and August, the latter severe enough to cause dramatic flooding in the region. Roughly 320 mm fell in those three events. I had to wash mud out of the garage three times, dig a drainage trench through the truffiere (truffles don’t like drowning), gullies eroded, the road slumped, and the Waipara River lowered its bed by half a metre in places.

Take away those big storms, and we had only 489 mm for the year — a dry year by my standards. Over the ten years up to 2008, we had a total of three comparable heavy rain events (Aug 2000, Jan 2002 and Sept 2003), and then like London buses, three came along at once.

What does this prove? Precisely nothing. I don’t have records going back far enough to know whether there’s any sort of statistical significance in 2008’s North Canterbury rainstorms. But… remember what Jim said earlier? The impact of global warming on the east coast of NZ is expected to increase the frequency of drought, but because warming also means more water vapour in the atmosphere — more “fuel” for weather — when rain does fall, it could come in floods. So if you were to ask me what Canterbury’s climate will be like in twenty year’s time, I’d have to answer – just like last year.

[Lemon Jelly]

Games without frontiers

ClimCity.jpg

Jeux sans frontières realised in Clim’ City, an interesting learning game with obvious antecedents from Bordeaux’s Cap Sciences centre: reorganise the energy sources and economy of this French city and its surroundings – from ski field to beach resort – to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without crippling the economy. According to the Technology Review story, it’s not easy to “win”, but if you don’t speak at least a little French it’s impossible… 😉

I hope one of the English-speaking science centres does a translation: I can see this being a great teaching tool. Now, do I create an association des citoyennes or go straight to shifting the centrale thermique to burning biomass, but that means expanding the forestry sector, and perhaps I should make sure that the forests are protected against forest fires, what with the warming in the pipeline…

[Peter Gabriel]