Showing posts with label About. Show all posts
Showing posts with label About. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 23, 2018

A Half Century of Climate Change: Personal Perspective

On the occasion of the 50th reunion of the Class of 1968:

I aspire to be "a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers, but borrowed from his children" [Wendell Berry].

During the more than 70 years we have borrowed the world, fossil fuels have steadily increased global atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration. In 1946 it was 310 parts/million (ppm), 9% above pre-industrial levels, rising continually to above 400 ppm today for the first time in human history, over 40% above pre-industrial levels.

CO2 is a colorless, odorless gas. At 0.04% of the total atmosphere, it might seem insignificant. What does this have to do with a 50th reunion? Actually, it enables our existence and ability to celebrate this occasion. Understanding it also had a profound impact on my own life so far.

Almost a century before we were born, in 1859, John Tyndall discovered that CO2 and water vapor absorb heat (infrared radiation). Paraphrasing Tyndall:
The atmosphere admits of the entrance of the solar heat, but greenhouse gases check its exit; and the result is a tendency to accumulate heat at the surface of the planet.
Otherwise, Earth would be a lifeless ice ball with an average temperature below –19°C/-2°F.
With each decade since 1968, climate science research has become more conclusive, but U.S. national policy reaction has become more resistive. Shortly after our 10th reunion, a National Academy of Sciences report (1979) concluded that increasing atmospheric CO2 would likely cause climate changes. In the summer of our 20th reunion in 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen confirmed that observations showed human activity was in fact increasing global temperatures. In the 30th reunion year of 1998, Yale PhD Michael Mann published the famous "hockey stick" graph that showed an unprecedented rise in global temperatures over the last century compared to the previous millennium. The Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions was also adopted that year, but the U.S. Senate rejected it. While 35th reunion classmates celebrated with White House selfies, yet another decade was squandered as a presidential administration run by fossil fuel advocates actively worked to suppress climate research and its policy implications. In the latest decade, the Paris climate agreement pledged 195 countries to non-binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but the U.S. repudiated it in 2017.

Yale’s role in my involvement with the climate issue was tangential, but tangible. Far more important than long-forgotten math theorems were the critical thinking skills sharpened through rigorous study of subjects as varied as: history of the novel, causes of the Civil War, roots of tragedy and comedy (food, sex, and money!).

My interest in weather, math/physics major, and threat of the draft led to a NOAA Corps commission in 1969. I spent a year of that service programming weather models at the National Weather Service (NWS). Following my meteorology MS at MIT in 1974, I returned to NWS for 5 years, before wandering off to the computer industry at IBM and AOL. Through the miracle of stock options, I retired early and taught computer programming at the University of Maryland. After the internet bubble burst, I rediscovered my first love of weather by blogging on local weather and climate. I have become more concerned with climate science and policy the more I learned.

Every decade that passes without major CO2 emissions reduction makes the climate change problem more difficult. I'm trying to communicate this issue (twitter.com/capital_climate) for the benefit of my daughter (Duke '00), son (Yale '03), and granddaughter (Yale '38?). What are we doing to preserve the world we’ve borrowed from the children and grandchildren we all cherish and those yet unborn?

Sunday, August 1, 2010

Featured Question

"Featured Question" is an irregular feature in which we highlight interesting questions asked by blog visitors. If your question is interesting enough, you might get a T-shirt. Or not. Other questions have previously been highlighted here.

The Goog is a wonderful resource; it's used almost continuously here at the CapitalClimate Capitol. However, contrary to popular belief, it can't read your mind. Sometimes, you don't get what you're looking for, even though the information is out there somewhere. From looking at our traffic statistics, it seems that some users are getting to CapitalClimate with what we would call "drive-by Googling". If they don't find the exact phrase they wanted staring them directly in the face, they go away. There are a multitude of carefully vetted links on this site, along with over 5 years of archives. If you don't immediately get your question answered, look around a little or even pose the question directly as a comment; we'll do our best to respond promptly.

Today's featured question comes from Rocky Ford, Colorado, where a user was searching for "average aug 28 temp in wash d.c.". For some reason known only to the gnomes of Googleland, the link which came up was to a recap of January 2010 monthly temperatures. The phrase "average aug 28 temp in wash d.c." is what is technically known as a Googlenope. In all the vast reaches of the Galactic Internet, this particular phrase doesn't exist. (Or at least it didn't until this blog post.)

The data, however, are readily available. Here's how. (Follow along in a separate browser tab or window so you don't get lost.)
  • Look at the top of this page. Right below the title header, there's a header called "Climate Data Links".
  • Right below that, there's a large blue header "Local:".
  • The very first link is called "Washington, DC climate data." Click on it.
  • It takes you to a page where we've conveniently collected up some National Weather Service (NWS) links (Your tax dollars at work!) on Washington, DC climate.
  • Look at the header "Daily Means and Extremes". There's a link for each of the 12 months. Click on "August".
  • It takes you to a NWS page which handily includes just about everything you might want to ask about August weather for each day in Washington.
  • Looking down the rows to the one labeled "28" in the first column, you can see that the average high is 84 (in the next column) and the low is 67.
  • What could be easier than that? You're welcome.
If you've made a reasonable effort to look around and still don't find what you need, please leave a comment and the Googling Monkeys of CapitalClimate will do their best to help.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Thoughts on Climate Science and Skepticism

As a response to a discussion at the Canadian political blog BigCityLib (BCL), a CapitalClimate visitor left a comment yesterday regarding the state of climate science as depicted in the 20 "Climate Tutorials" links in the left margin of this page. In essence, he said,
I find that the evidence is still underwhelming. . . Primarily, what Im looking for is empirical evidence (which excludes computer models) which links human CO2 with catastrophic warming.
I started to write a comment in reply, but I found that it raises a number of issues about the relationship of science, skepticism, and political policy, so I decided to make a separate post out of it:

Well, thanks for stopping by. I'm sorry you couldn't find what you were looking for. I'm sure the thousands of scientists who have worked for over a century on this problem are even more disappointed. The simple fact is that the science is what it is, whether or not you or anyone else likes it (or more importantly the policy implications). Like any branch of science, there are always some uncertainties involved. Whether those uncertainties are sufficient to preclude policy action is, however, a political question, not a scientific one. Although there are some legitimate scientific concerns, by and large these have been hijacked and used dishonestly for political purposes. (That was behind the original point of the BCL post.)

I have personally paid country club prices to see Lindzen present his position. FWIW, I'm confident he's sincere, but his "iris" hypothesis is just that, a proposal subject to testing. His theory, however, has been widely found by objective observers to be not supported by the evidence (one recent example here).

The Roger Pielkes (there are 2 of them, Jr. and Sr., although some might argue that there are in fact more), have made careers out of self-referential contrarianism. In the case of Jr., this has frequently taken the form of reckless charges of plagiarism, theft, bias, and fraud, all the while cloaking himself in the presumably infallible role of TheHonestBroker™. Their latest effort is meeting with legitimate skepticism on scientific grounds, but that has certainly not deterred the deniosphere from attempting to make political hay out of it.

As a degreed scientist with a minimal knowledge of physics, I find modern particle physics to be too complicated, confusing and counter-intuitive. However, I'm not wasting my time going around to physics forums denouncing the science and its practitioners as commie-pinko-enviro-nazis. Why is it, then, that climate science does provoke such reactions, even among Meteorologists Who Should Know Better? One of the meanings behind the name of this blog is that climate science, through its policy implications, has been inextricably linked to financial and economic issues. Once money comes into the picture, people get very crazy very quickly, and if large amounts of it are involved, even crazier; just look at the recent financial market insanity for proof.

So, the bottom line here is that anyone is entitled to their own opinion, but that doesn't make it science, even if the proponent has the outward trappings of a scientist. Given the economic and political subtext of the discussion, it's not only fair but necessary to ask, "What are the financial and ideological motivations behind what is being said?"

Global warming theory is based on the CO2 greenhouse effect which was discovered over a century ago. I have a more-than-50-year-old atmospheric physics text on my shelf which describes and quantifies it quite well. The development of the computer models the deniosphere so loves to hate (Not Computer Models) has simply added more support to the underlying principles. These and other subsequent analyses have continued to improve confidence in the theory to the point that many scientists involved in the field have called for policy actions to limit the potential negative effects of increased greenhouse gas emissions. They have done this not only individually in some cases, but also through such organizations as scientific societies (including the AMS and AGU), the IPCC, and various national science academies. That has provoked a strong reaction from some who have a vested interest in inaction. A realistic debate about policy choices is one thing, but fraudulent smearing of the science and its practitioners is something else again. The proper response to those tactics is what BCL was discussing. I would call that true skepticism.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Attention Duke Searcher!
And Attention Other Climate Data Searchers

Attention user searching from duke.edu: Even though we seldom agree with anything published by the Pielkes, as a public service, here's the reference you've been searching for in Google several times today (most recently at 9:03 pm):
Nicola Scafetta Comments on “Solar Trends And Global Warming” by Benestad and Schmidt

Attention any other searchers for climate data and/or information:
Google is an excellent tool, and the Googling Monkeys here at the Climate Capitol have been using it since well before there was a CapitalClimate. However, sometimes it can be a little frustrating to click on a search result and not get what you're really looking for. If that's the case when you end up here, please ask your climate data question as a comment to this post, and we'll do our best to find you the answer, or point you to a possible source if we can't find it.

To kick things off, here's a question via Yahoo search from Kennewick, Washington:
"what is the all time record high temperature in wenatchee wa" 
Sorry you couldn't find the answer directly when you came to the site a little while ago, but here's some data from the National Weather Service based on the last 50 years (apparently the full period of official records there):
Highest Daily Maximum Temperature (degrees F)
Days: 1/1 - 12/31
Length of period: 1 day
Years: 1959-2009

Rank Value Ending Date
1 109.0 8/4/1961
2 108.0 7/27/1998
3 107.0 8/1/2009, 7/23/2006, 7/22/1994, 7/19/1979, 8/3/1961
8 106.0 7/26/1998, 7/18/1960
10 105.0 7/28/1998

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

CapitalClimate Adds Custom Search Feature

Frustrated with all the trash strewn around the Web on the subject of climate change? Through the support of Google Custom Search, CapitalClimate now provides a feature which will search CapitalClimate and any of the sites linked from it. The search box is located in the upper left corner of the page. Try it out here:




Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Welcome Visitor 10,000!

At 1:38 pm today, visitor number 10,000 since CapitalClimate split off in mid-2008 from CapitalWeather.com's sellout to corporate media arrived at this site. The 10,000th visit came from Washington, DC via verizon.net to view our Presidential Inauguration weather forecast. Thank you and all of our previous visitors for your interest in unfiltered reporting and commentary on weather, climate, and related policy issues.

Please let us know in the Comments section what topics you would like to see covered in future posts.

Seasonal Outlook

Latest seasonal forecast: Click here.


Latest 3-month temperature outlook from Climate Prediction Center/NWS/NOAA.