A World 29 degrees F Hotter!!!

The title linked article by Jeffrey Kiehl from the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), states that if we continue burning fossil fuels at the current rate, atmospheric CO2 will reach 1,000 ppm by 2100. Based on studies of Earth's past, between 35 and 100 million years ago, Earth's atmosphere contained this level of CO2, and the Earth's temperature was roughly 29 degrees F warmer than pre-industrial temperatures (27 deg F above present).

Now this does NOT mean Earth's temperature is forecast to rise 27 degrees by 2100, even if CO2 rises to 1,000 ppm. The rise will take centuries longer because of delayed effects, like glaciers and ice sheets melting. Kiehl points out that as the Earth warms and ice cover melts, less of the sun's radiation is reflected back into space, and so the warming effect of more CO2 is amplified. Additional amplification comes from more water vapor (a greenhouse gas) in the atmosphere, and release of other greenhouse gases, like methane.

'If emissions continue on their current trajectory, “the human species and global ecosystems will be placed in a climate state never before experienced in human history,”..........'

Note: To learn more about UCAR and NCAR, and their broad stated goal of, Fostering a deeper understanding of the atmosphere, Earth, and Sun, click here.

Melting Arctic and Global Warming

East coast of Greenland on April 14, 2010. Photo by Bill Fintel

The title link is to a Los Angeles Times article reporting on research studies published in the journal Nature Geoscience. The bottom line is that melting arctic sea ice, northern hemisphere glaciers and snow cover have a larger effect on global climate than previously calculated. From the article:

'The "albedo" effect, in which the blinding white cover reflects sunshine, has been calculated in numerous computer-generated climate models. But the new study goes beyond those theoretical calculations. Using field measurements and satellite observations, a team led by University of Michigan researcher Mark Flanner found that the warming effect of the loss of snow and ice is "substantially larger" than was predicted in the estimates of 18 climate models.'

Tied for Warmest

Actually, 2010 was the warmest year ever, but not by a statistically significant amount, so it gets ranked as tie with 2005. The above graph is from the NASA press release in the title link.

GMOs and Feeding the World

"The continuing distaste for  GMOs and their consequent absurd over-regulation means that the most up-to-date, environmentally benign crop protection strategies are used almost exclusively for the mega-crops that are profitable for biotech companies. The public agricultural research sector remains largely excluded from using modern molecular technology. Will this change soon? I don’t think so, although there are signs of movement here and there. India’s getting there with brinjal, China seems to be creeping up on biotech rice." Nina Fedoroff, a life sciences professor at Pennsylvania State University.

Now compare that statement with the title link's lead photo:

Definitely some controversy about the GMO approach to improving plant yields through genetic engineering. Note: Brinjal is eggplant, a major food crop in India.

Feeding a World of 9 Billion People

"The problem is not so much that we don’t have or can’t develop the technology to increase food and feed production, it’s that urbanization has rendered an ever increasing fraction of humanity unable to produce its own food — and more than that — totally unaware of what it takes. (What’s the problem? I just run over to the grocery store.)" - Nina Fedoroff, a life sciences professor at Pennsylvania State University. This quote was part of Andrew Revkin's Dot Earth Jan 10, 2011 blog titled "Varied Menus for Sustaining a Well-Fed World" (title link).

What I find so interesting is that Bill McKibben in his excellent book, EAARTH, believes that a key means of increasing food supplies will be the return of backyard vegetable gardening, like the Victory Gardens of WWI & II. McKibben points out that this is already occurring in the U.S. to a significent degree, ".... serious people have begun to rethink small-scale agriculture" (p. 166). He further states that this is a far better and safer approach to a warming climate, because it permits a faster, more fine-tuned response to changes in temperature, rainfall, and pests, which accompany climate change. Bill Mckibben has convinced me, and I am currently planning a major expansion of my "edible garden". Bill is also the founder of 350.org, a web site dedicated to "building a global movement to solve the climate crisis", with a specific goal of getting CO2 levels back down to 350 ppm.

The world population will almost certainly reach 9 billion by 2050, AND, if the present growth rate continues unchanged, the world population will grow from a current 6.9 billion, to 11 billion in 2050. The source for this last alarming figure is  Population Connection, an organization which "works to ensure that every woman around the world who wants to limit her childbearing has access to the health services and contraceptive supplies she needs in order to do so. Typically, when woman have access to affordable birth control, they have fewer children, regardless of income or educational levels."Also see the FAQ's on the About Us page of their web site.

Solar PV versus Solar Thermal

As a Chemical Engineer, I have always had a kindred feeling for solar thermal because, other than the computer-controlled mirrors, the rest of the technology is well established engineering, i.e., high pressure boilers, heat exchangers, steam turbines, electric generators, etc.

However, I also believe in the simple approach to solving a problem, and what can be more simple than having sunlight impinge on a silicon wafer and come out as electricity?

So who is winning? Well the linked news story from The Street indicates the simple approach just took a quantum leap ahead. You be the judge. I am guessing it will still take a lot more time to really sort this out, and maybe both approaches will have a place in our future.

Some Science Behind the Recent NE Blizzard

The title link is to a NY Times blog article by Andrew Revkin. In it he cites work by Judah Cohen, a weather analyst who has been studying the relationship between Oct snow cover in Siberia with winter severity in the NE US and Europe.

It is all rather complicated, but in Cohen's defense, he makes predictions based on his theory. He has also looked at past weather patterns versus Siberian snow cover and states his theory offers a better explanation for what has happened versus the theories of others. Also see Cohen's comments to Revkins post.

There are a lot of links in Revkin's post, but be sure you watch the short video on how to differentiate weather from climate.

Geoengineering with Nanoparticles

The linked article by Andrew Maynard provides a fascinating overview of how incoming sunlight might be reduced using specially designed nanodiscs dispersed in the upper atmosphere. The idea is described in detail by David Keith in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

The abstract for David Keith's article: "Aerosols could be injected into the upper atmosphere to engineer the climate by scattering incident sunlight so as to produce a cooling tendency that may mitigate the risks posed by the accumulation of greenhouse gases. Analysis of climate engineering has focused on sulfate aerosols. Here I examine the possibility that engineered nanoparticles could exploit photophoretic forces, enabling more control over particle distribution and lifetime than is possible with sulfates, perhaps allowing climate engineering to be accomplished with fewer side effects. The use of electrostatic or magnetic materials enables a class of photophoretic forces not found in nature. Photophoretic levitation could loft particles above the stratosphere, reducing their capacity to interfere with ozone chemistry; and, by increasing particle lifetimes, it would reduce the need for continual replenishment of the aerosol. Moreover, particles might be engineered to drift poleward enabling albedo modification to be tailored to counter polar warming while minimizing the impact on equatorial climates."

In Andrew Maynard's article, he addresses the safety concerns of such an approach, and cites a paper about what he feels is much needed nanothechnology safety studies.

Dec 2010 Cold in Eastern US and Europe

The linked Earth Observatory image from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Aqua satellite shows clearly Dec 2010 temperature anomalies. Basically, we in the NE U.S. and most of Europe have been experiencing significantly below normal temperatures, while the Canadian high artic and Greenland have been experiencing significantly above normal temperatures.

And this continues, especially in the UK, even after the Dec 10 end date for the satellite image. An obvious question is: Could this temperature flip-flop be due to greenhouse gas induced climate change?

Clouds of Uncertainty

                                                                                                                              Bill Fintel photo

The title link is to a USA Today article reporting on cloud studies from 2000 to 2010 by Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M. Dessler says his study shows clouds will have a positive feedback on greenhouse gas induced global warming. In other words, more warming will occur than just that caused by greenhouse gases.

The article cites a rebuttal to Dessler's study by climate change skeptic, Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama. Spencer believes clouds will provide a negative feedback and moderate greenhouse gas induced global warming. Overall, an interesting article from which you can draw your own conclusions.

Geoengineering support moving ahead...cautiously

The title link is to an AP article about geoengineering, and why it is receiving more support, including research funding. Following are some quotes from the article:

"The taboo is broken," Paul Crutzen, a Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric scientist, told The Associated Press.

Whatever the doubts, "we are amazingly farther up the road on geoengineering," Crutzen, who wrote a 2006 scientific article that sparked interest in geoengineering, said by telephone from Germany.

In September, the U.S. Government Accountability Office recommended in a 70-page report that the White House "establish a clear strategy for geoengineering research" within its science office.

Perhaps most significantly, the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, the global authority on climate science, agreed in October to take on geoengineering in its next assessment report. Its hundreds of scientists will begin with a session next spring."