1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

It’s official: 2014 was the hottest year in recorded history

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by cyclopathic, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. austingreen

    austingreen Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    13,525
    4,057
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX, USA
    Vehicle:
    2018 Tesla Model 3
    Model:
    N/A
    Say I boil 1/5 of the water in a bowl, and freeze the remaining 80%, if I average the temperature by volume of this divided water (steam and ice) I will see very little temperature change. But we will have had drastic changes in temperatures. Certainly averaging out big changes especially those that are out of phase as the younger dryas make the changes seem smaller, but back to my water example imagine if we had fish in that water. We would have cooked some and frozen others depending on where they were in the bowl. If we are talking catastrophic change reginional change matters a great deal. The younger drias coincided with a mass extinction event (although more minor than the big 5) If all the heat gained was say put in the middle of australia where population is low, it would not be nearly as scary as the younger drias tipping point.

    I figured we would not get more "neutral" than NOAA that at least attempts to keep the politics out of paleo reconstructions. As stated above it is regional changes that cause catastrophic events not globally blurred ones. The facts are that nature can indeed have rapid temperature changes. Some predict man will cause similar changes, but we really don't know. Will there be a tipping point like there was in the younger dryas? Will man push us to the tipping point? I don't know but it would be wised to do more productive to A) Find out scientifically (launch satellites, which the us has just done), and invest in technologies that may mitigate the changes and slow ghg accumulation. The world seems to be underinvesting here.


    I don't think the younger dryas reconstruction should give anyone comfort. That along with higher sea levels in the last 2 interglacial point to the strong possibility that even if man stopped using any fossil fuel today, but continued agriculture and cities, sea levels would rise and the tipping point may have been hit.

    It should though make you look at any single year as a big so what, it is a large group of years that make the trends, and natural variation likely had a lot to do with how hot 1998 was (at least according to the IPCC). I am optimistic that this 8 degree F prediction in the next century is way off, as most of the models have been. I am less optimistic that man invests in technology to mitigate and lessen changes.
     
  2. SageBrush

    SageBrush Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    11,627
    2,530
    8
    Location:
    Southwest Colorado
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Two
    Much more worrisome than the temperature per se, is the rapidity of change.
     
    telmo744 and Jeff N like this.
  3. Jeff N

    Jeff N The answer is 0042

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    2,382
    1,304
    0
    Location:
    California, USA
    Vehicle:
    2011 Chevy Volt
    Sure, 1998 was a little hotter than usual because the big El Niño that year drew warmer ocean water to the surface but that just enhanced the underlying upward temperature trend that was man-made via fossil fuel burning. That's why the climate change deniers love to use it as a comparison point for later year warming trend graphs.

    There is no similar El Niño event responsible for pushing up this year's temperatures.

    I'm certainly not denying the severity of the climate changes, rapidity of change, and the extinctions that followed during the younger dryas. I'm just saying the present rapidity of onset is nearly as sudden as far as the evolutionary adaptability of many species when compared to the usual and long-term rate of natural climate change.

    And, the global impact of our present course of climate change is looking far more severe.
     
    #23 Jeff N, Jan 21, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2015
  4. spiderman

    spiderman wretched

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    7,543
    1,558
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    The saga continues...
     
  5. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    this is probably due to weakened jet stream or jet pattern changes. We are getting more moist air from Atlantic. More clouds, more rain, less sun.

    It is to be questioned if it is result of GW or part of el Nino/la Nina and NAO cycling changes.

    that's what happens when you are in hell and they turn the fire up.
     
  6. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    There was no single factor but following reasons were brought forth..

    Andropogenic:
    - Black plague
    - Discovery of America (which also killed millions of natives)
    Both via re-forestation and reduced agricultural activity

    Non-andropogenic:
    - volcanic activity
    - cyclic change due to Gulfstream weakening

    EDIT: corrected as below ;)
     
    #26 cyclopathic, Jan 26, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015
  7. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,972
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Better stick with 'anthropogenic'. Androgenic refers to boy-chemicals.

    Little Ice Age also included about 5 or 6 missed sunspot cycles.
     
  8. spiderman

    spiderman wretched

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    7,543
    1,558
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    lol. Wow, good thing it was a misspelling, I thought it was re-branded and I missed it. ;)
     
  9. Mendel Leisk

    Mendel Leisk Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    54,473
    38,104
    80
    Location:
    Greater Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    Touring
    It's strange. New York area is bracing for a blizzard. My wife and I went for a walk today, sunny and 14C. A caretaker at a church was running the mower. Yeah, in a couple of weeks it could all come crashing down, but nice today. ;)
     
  10. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Yeah it's good it is a misspelling..
    The Mediveal Plague toll estimates ra(n)ge from 75 to 200 million; there were 100mil death in New World due to deseases brought from Old World. Enough to reforest California size territory...
     
  11. fuzzy1

    fuzzy1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    17,035
    10,010
    90
    Location:
    Western Washington
    Vehicle:
    Other Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    Records highs around Seattle three days running. Great bicycling, rotten skiing.
     
  12. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,972
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Cyclo, you may enjoy reading

    Dark ages and dark areas: global deforestation in the deep past
    Michael Williams
    Journal of Historical Geography, 26, 1 (2000) 28-46
    doi:10.1006/jhge.1999.0189

    There is less forested area than 'way back when', but that remaining is also much 'younger'. It is a testament to the resilience of biological carbon cycling that atmospheric CO2 did not increase earlier than it actually has. Time scales. Dump CO2 to the atmosphere over centuries, and it gets absorbed. Dump over decades (like now) and half gets absorbed. Seems clear to me that we have hit the 'speed limit'.
     
    telmo744 likes this.
  13. austingreen

    austingreen Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    13,525
    4,057
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX, USA
    Vehicle:
    2018 Tesla Model 3
    Model:
    N/A
    Above corrected as tochatihu sugested and cyclopathic agreed.

    Nice I mean we have theories but not much agreement of causes, certainly not enough to predict these will happen again.
    What caused the Little Ice Age? | Earth | EarthSky
    Little Ice Age was global: Implications for current global warming -- ScienceDaily
    What caused the Little Ice Age? - Bad Astronomy : Bad Astronomy

    We have the paleo reconstructions that say the little ice age was only europe, which have been discredited. These were the ones that claimed yeah it must have been man and agriculture and disease. Who knows but anthropogenic factors could have contributed even though the reconstructions were garbage.

    Then we have reconstructions that say the cold in the southern hemisphere was out of phase with the northern, and others that say they were in phase. IMHO this is key to understanding as it is hard to know what happened if you have a poor model in the past.

    We know 4 volcanos erupted, we know there were less sunspots, and we know it got colder. But what caused it. Why did we have 4 major eruptions, was it predictable, or random. Most eruptions have short lived changes to weather, why did these change climate for centuries? Do fewer sunspots mean less solar radiation? Why would this cool the earth if they don't. Do they change other things in climate? If it was sunspots can we predict other periods of low sunspots? What effect did changing ocean currents and the jet stream cause, and what caused them to change. What about cloud cover did this contribute, and help explain changes in rainfall?

    We do also have a possible human/carbon feedback loop. It got cold and and perhaps dark with volcanic emissions-> People and animals died ->co2 and land use by people and animals changed.

    Without answering these questions it is difficult to really model the recent (500 year) past, which makes it hard for climate models to be predictive. Still satellites and a cooperative sun should help us solve sunspot questions, and hopefully better palo reconstructions can help answer the other questions. IMHO it will take another decade of research for good answers.
     
    #33 austingreen, Jan 27, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
  14. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Thanks, I'll take a look when I get a chance.

    With respect to LIA and short term heating/cooling cycles, IMHO we look too much into CO2 and not enough in CH4 cycle.

    The whole Methane/Permafrost/Gulf Stream/forestation connection in northern hemisphere with both Siberian and Canadian forests and permafrost, shell methane belches, etc has far more reaching impact then it is being given credit for. CO2 is a good indicator for century/millennia time span, but perhaps not as good for annual/decade predictions.
     
    austingreen likes this.
  15. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,972
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Assuming a volcano has enough vertical push to get sulfur dioxide to the stratosphere, the duration of its cooling effect is related to the availability of hydroxyl radicals. A really big volcano has the longer effect because the hydroxyl radical 'system' gets overwhelmed.

    Methane is a better infrared absorber than CO2. But its lifetime (before conversion to plain old CO2) is also controlled by the availability of hydroxyl radicals.

    Both of those processes are reasonably well understood. The following is purely my speculation. As it is the same hydroxyl radicals involved in both processes, methane may have a different dynamic during times of intense volcanism. Volcanic 'winters' may have a different dynamic during times when methane reaches unusual levels (high or low, from any source).

    There are reasons why such a linkage would be difficult to explore. First, the central figure, hydroxyl radicals, are extremely difficult to measure. Second, transfers between troposphere and stratosphere are highly variable in time and space, and beyond that, we basically know squat about them.

    I don't know what all that amounts to, beyond saying that the overall system is full of non linearities and context-specific responses. I am most glad to not be in the occupation of trying to model such a climate system.

    Those who are (as summarized by IPCC) I suppose that AustinGreen would accuse of some degree of hubris. Perhaps that's fair. But we recently took a look at a much more simplified climate model, Monckton et al., purported to blow those other models out of the water. Now you're talking hubris raised to a very high exponent.
     
  16. austingreen

    austingreen Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    13,525
    4,057
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX, USA
    Vehicle:
    2018 Tesla Model 3
    Model:
    N/A
    It seems current volcantic models are short lived, what was unique in the 2012 paper was the theory that these short lived changes set about a chain reaction to become a global cooling (whether it was synchronous or asynchronus is still debated with some paleo reconstructions going one way while others go a different way) that unfolded over hundreds of years.

    Well some professions require a big ego, it just is sad many of those in this field don't do all that well. You read IPCC 3, and it turns IPCC 2 on its head when it comes to the LIA, then IPCC 4 came out with a lot of studies that said, oops maybe 2 was better than we thought and IPCC 3 was out of line. Hopefully for IPCC 6 the reconstructions will be accurate enough to test the theories.;) One problem with climate science is it takes a very long time to do any experiments, so we have to try to find past events that are interesting and try to understand what happened, with very incomplete data.
     
  17. cyclopathic

    cyclopathic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    3,292
    547
    0
    Location:
    2014 Prius c
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    I didn't mean the chemical side of this.. more of the climatic(?) /hope it is a proper word which is not related to climax/

    The permafrost, bogs at high latitude accumulate organic matter, and small increase in avg temp, time above melting point have considerable impact on annual methane production. While methane in the atmosphere has a half life of seven years, the greenhouse effect potency is x90? as I recall.

    Also is all marine methane seepage accounted for?

    Seepage off East Coast:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/science/methane-is-seeping-from-seafloor-off-east-coast-scientists-say.html

    Arctic methane belch:
    Seven facts you need to know about the Arctic methane timebomb | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | The Guardian

    Lake Superior:
    Methane Belches in Lakes Supercharge Global Warming, Study Says
     
  18. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,972
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Some sources of methane are poorly quantified. Beyond those Cyclo mentioned, the fossil-fuel industry (including fraking and pipeline transport), wetlands and freshwater impoundments, termites and ruminant animals.

    For sinks, well-aerated soils host bacteria that consume methane, and the hydroxyl radical in the atmosphere does what it does. Both are also poorly quantified. Overall the situation would be called 'a tip' in England. It is, in the sense that our knowledge to predict methane fluxes next year (etc.) is inadequate.

    The good news (best available news) is that methane concentrations are more or less trivial to measure, to accuracy much better than parts per billion. This is because it is such a strong absorber of particular infrared wavelengths, that anyone (with appropriate technology) can measure it. Even an orbiting 'look down' satellite can measure it, and those gadgets work in very difficult environments.

    Methane is much easier to measure (with high accuracy) than water vapor in the atmosphere, even though the latter is much more concentrated. Physics rules chemistry. Gotta say it.

    Time to make this a little more fun, though. We are PriusChat, not some egghead journal. Human flatulence is dominated by hydrogen, not methane gas (unless you eat a very unusual diet). H2 is not much of an IR absorber, so let 'er rip.

    Or, don't. The 'held-in' gas will simply dissolve in your blood and you'll later exhale it. Chemical cycles are not affected by those personal decisions.
     
    austingreen likes this.
  19. mojo

    mojo Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    4,519
    390
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Three
    (As posted in the political Forum)
    The big lie is that 2014 is the hottest year ever.The raw thermometer data has been adjusted mainly to give this spurious headline.Even after using fake data,they still can only get the temp 0.02 degrees above the previous high.
    The big lie is in the margin of error which is not disclosed by Pinocchio Schmidt.

    Gavin Schmidt gives data with a 38% confidence level. (0.02 degrees warmer with a
    0.1 degree margin of error.)
    Only in climate science do you declare something as fact with the same confidence level as there is that Santa Clause exists.
    This is pure con man territory and Icarus,it cannot be "debunked"
     
  20. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,972
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    I agree with mojo that a trivial new annual high is not important. I disagree that the best way to talk about it is by invoking Disney cartoon characters. Had 2014 been something less, perhaps mojo would have advised us again about the upcoming ice age.

    Instead, what we have here, consistently, is years when air T has not gone down since 1998 big El Nino. This is new territory at least during the instrumental T record. Something is afoot. One is obliged to wonder what that is.

    Hypothetically, all independent groups analyzing global air T could be conspiring to cook the books. All of the independent, concordant evidence from biological patterns, ice melt and sea-level rise argues against that hypothesis. Including new equatorial-lake sediments and ocean heat-flux studies I have not troubled you with. Y'all can keep up with this stuff just as well as I can.
     
    austingreen and mojo like this.