We got climate change wrong says IPCC - global warming estimates revised down; Global temperatures less sensitive to atmospheric carbon dioxide than previously thought
Probably? The storm had the highest winds for a hurricane on record. As for you childhood memories....
There were storms measured in the 1950's and 1960's with equal force, and there were more of them. It's not that easy to determine since the measuring equipment today is more advanced. Prior to WW2 they were taking wild guesses compared to the latter day.
It's total nonsense to run around in public claiming that peculiar daily weather conditions are a scorecard for GW. Also the amount of heat that Earth retains can vary from year to year.
Science is about science, not about being a dipstick with a messiah complex, preaching an apocalypse.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
There were storms measured in the 1950's and 1960's with equal force, and there were more of them. It's not that easy to determine since the measuring equipment today is more advanced. Prior to WW2 they were taking wild guesses compared to the latter day.
Exactly. Until quite recently there was no accurate way to measure wind speeds of most of the big ones.
Storm surge traces in the rainforests of north qld do suggest that we ain't seen nothing yet. The 1600s seem to have had some extremely wild weather as well as pretty terrible droughts.
The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off. --Gloria Steinem AREPS™
An uneven set of measurements has resulted in a bias towards cold in global average temperature records, helping create a seeming hiatus in global warming
By Stephanie Paige Ogburn and ClimateWire
Keeping track of our planet's temperature is no easy task.
The keepers of such long-term data sets, usually government institutions, know they have to account for numerous variations to keep a consistent measurement of temperatures through time. Without that, it is impossible to know how our world is changing.
Yet today's thermometers are not the same as those 100 years ago. The time of day that temperature measurements are taken has changed. Then there's the issue of coverage -- where, exactly, those thermometers are located. In more remote places, there are fewer measurements.
A new study finds that some of those missing measurements, particularly in the Arctic, which has recently warmed faster than any other part of the world, may have affected the trajectory of global temperatures in a key temperature data series.
"Our best measurements only cover about five-sixths of the globe," said Kevin Cowtan, a computational scientist at the University of York.
The data series Cowtan examined is put out by the United Kingdom's Met Office Hadley Centre and referred to as HadCRUT4. At first glance, a graph of HadCRUT4 temperature anomalies over the past 130 years or so seems to show a clear trend.
From about 1910 onward, the Earth gets warmer. And warmer. And warmer.
Then, right around 2000, the steadily marching black line of temperature anomalies reaches a plateau. It's stayed there until now, sometimes even appearing to trend in a negative direction.
This is what is commonly referred to as "the pause" (ClimateWire, Nov. 1).
While most climate scientists agree that 15 years is too short a time to draw any meaningful conclusions about the direction of global temperatures, and that the oceans have continued to take up ever more of the Earth's heat, they'd also like to know more about why this slowdown is occurring.
Turning to satellites The new study, accepted for publication in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, suggests one of the reasons for the apparent slowdown in warming might lie in the fact that the Arctic, which has been warming much, much faster than the rest of the world, is under-represented in the HadCRUT4 temperature series.
In order to figure this out, the researchers found a clever way to take satellite observations, which measure temperature all over the Earth, including the poles, and put them into the global surface temperature data set in places where it lacked good coverage.
"The satellite data gives us a sort of geographical distribution of temperatures. It's got very good coverage, just a tiny little hole at each pole," Cowtan said.
Doing this is not easy, though.
While surface temperature is measured at about 6 feet above the ground, the satellite temperature measurements the researchers wanted to use came from higher up in the atmosphere and gave different readings.
That lack of a one-to-one correspondence meant the scientists couldn't simply add that data into the global surface data sets.
Instead, they had to figure out the relationship between what satellites measured and what a ground-based instrument would measure, and use that to fill in the missing Arctic temperatures.
"The best way of putting it is simply that we calculated an offset between the satellite data and the observed data, and we used that to guide the interpolation," said Robert Way, a cryospheric scientist and doctoral student at the University of Ottawa who was a co-author on the paper.
The researchers tested whether this approach worked by removing measured temperatures from the data set, replacing them with the altered satellite temperatures and making sure their results were the same.
"So with this satellite method, we had then proven that it seems really good at projecting what the temperature is going to be at a given location if we had taken away the observations," Way said.
Finding a 'cold bias' Once they filled in temperature data for the Arctic and other poorly measured locales, the HadCRUT4 temperature lost what the researchers call its "cold bias."
"There's lots of sources of evidence for a fast-warming Arctic, but no one had a good method of combining that information with the surface temperatures to create a global record before," Cowtan said.
In their new version of the HadCRUT4 temperature series, the average warming trend per decade jumps from 0.05 degree Celsius in the period of 1997-2012 to 0.12 C per decade, the same as it has been since the 1950s.
Another temperature data set by NASA also bears out this finding, the researchers said.
NASA's global temperature series, known as GISTEMP, has its own way of adding back in Arctic temperatures that are not measured due to the lack of temperature stations.
While the NASA series's temperature increases are a little lower than the adjusted ones from Way and Cowtan, that can be explained by the fact that the series has not yet added in an ocean measurement adjustment that would shift the temperatures up slightly, Way explained.
In the climate science blog RealClimate.org, researcher Stefan Rahmstorf, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, praised the paper for showing that the trend of a warming pause is almost nonexistent.
This, Rahmstorf said, should shed light on the public debate about whether global warming has paused.
"Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years is nothing unusual," he wrote.
From about 1910 onward, the Earth gets warmer. And warmer. And warmer.
I don't think that one is true, because there was a previous "pause" from WW2 to 1980. However what is at question here is atmospheric temperature. That can store in other places than besides the atmosphere
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
It has taken just 7 days, but already the reputation of Australia as a constructive force in international climate policy has been completely trashed – both in terms of its domestic actions and in the wrecking ball tactics it has sent to Warsaw.
Australia is now seen as an “anti-climate” nation that is actively working against any consensus at these talks, as its domestic policies are translated onto the international stage.
Australia has – many times over the 20-plus years of UN-led climate talks – been seen as an outlier, courtesy of its huge reliance on coal power and exports. But its actions in Warsaw have come as a shock to negotiators who are dealing with familiar faces who had been constructive, if not progressive, at previous conferences.
As mentioned in our report yesterday, the most common refrain being heard by Australian representatives is: What is going on down there? Even a Bush-era US negotiator found Australia’s negotiating position to be extreme. Its opposition to a climate finance position paper prepared by other “climate fiscal conservatives” such as US, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada, has dumbfounded participants.
Actually, what is going on is that Australia is simply taking its domestic sloganeering to the international stage, regardless of diplomatic sensitivities. As Tony Abbott told The Australian today: “We are determined to say what we mean and do what we say, so we will never say one thing at an international conference and another thing at home.” He may be consistent, but he’s failing Diplomacy 101.
His comments came as Australia made the unprecedented step of dissenting on the final communique at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka, joining with Canada in refusing support for the UN-sponsored green climate fund, which he dubbed the “green capital fund”. He also dubbed the Clean Energy Finance Corp, which he also wants to dismantle, the “Bob Brown Bank.” (Brown is the former leader of the Australian Greens).
Back in Warsaw, observers are simply aghast. The refusal to back the green climate fund (which has a similar function to the CEFC or even Abbott’s proposed emission reduction fund, apart from the spooky words “green”, “climate” and “clean energy”) is seen as a threat to these talks, because they are a crucial piece of common ground between developed and developing countries.
“There is no intention for Australia to be in any way constructive or really participate in these talks,” said Wendel Trio, European director of the Climate Action Network.
Indeed, he said, Australia seemed to be working deliberately against any agreement. “I think it is evident at these talks,” he said. “I wonder if Australia would be really interested in joining a legal treaty in 2015.” A big test in coming days will be how Australia and other nations respond to a draft text to move the negotiations towards a Paris agreement.
The draft text includes commitments for the green climate fund, and urges countries to “significantly lift” ambition before 2020 and to move to the top of their target ranges. The Climate Change Authority came to the same conclusion, dismissed by the Abbott government, and it is not yet clear that Australia will indicate its support for that range when it makes its speech to the conference on Thursday.
Trio was speaking after an analysts group, known as GermanWatch, released its annual climate change performance index, which shows that Australia has fallen so far down the rankings that it now sits, along with Canada, as the worst performing industrial country in the world. Both countries get a resounding fail, and are only saved from last spot by Iran, Kazakhstan, and Saudi Arabia.
Australia’s position was already poor because of its high emissions levels and limp-wristed renewables policies, but the decision by the Abbott government to repeal the carbon tax and dismantle all climate and clean energy institutions and initiatives sent it down six places to No 57 out of 61 nations.
What is extraordinary, though, is that this is taking place as the researchers declared a “glimmer of hope” that global emissions could actually peak before 2020 – thanks mainly to the slowing down of emissions in developed countries, and decisive action taken by China to limit coal consumption.
The first three places in the index are actually declared vacant, because no country is acting strongly enough to keep global warming below 2°C. Denmark is the top-ranked country, followed by the UK (for its efforts in reducing emissions), Portugal and Sweden. Germany, because of its failure to support more decisive action on emissions trading and energy efficiency fell to 19th spot. China rose to 46th, just behind the US in 43rd.
The decision by Australia not to send a minister has frustrated negotiators, and the EU is bitterly angry about the decision to repeal the carbon price. Even the Chinese are nonplussed, having studied the Australian carbon price with great intensity before launching into their own.
RenewEconomy asked Todd Stern, the US delegation head, about the Australian government’s actions, and whether Abbott was showing the sort of leadership that would help deliver his stated goal (of maybe it’s just Greg Hunt’s) of using Australia’s chairmanship of the G20 to bring the US and China together to forge a climate deal. Stern smiled and said he had not met the new government so wasn’t going to make any judgements.
Screen Shot 2013-11-19 at 12.12.09 amAustralia, of course, is a coal nation – along with COP19 host nation Poland. (It should be noted that coal exports were not included in Australia’s ranking. Had they been, it may well fallen to last place).
And coal is seeking to extend its influence by hosting a major summit at the Polish Ministry of Economy, where environmental groups held a demonstration this morning. (They unfurled a banner which asked: Who runs Poland? Coal industry or the people? Silly question, really).
The line being trotted out by the coal industry here is that ultra-efficient coal plants are a “low-emissions” solution to climate change. A group of 27 scientists joined together to dismiss this as absolute nonsense, arguing that achieving climate change targets was not possible with unabated coal.
Dr Bert Metz, a former co-chair of the IPCC’s working group on climate change mitigation, said alternatives to fossil fuels are already available and afford. (see the graph below).
This was a point underlined by UNFCCC executive director Christiana Figueres, who told the coal industry that it must change rapidly and dramatically and needed to “look past next quarter’s bottom line and see the next generation’s bottom line.”
“The coal industry faces a business continuation risk that you cannot afford to ignore. Like any other industry, you have a fiduciary responsibility to your workforce and shareholders,” she told the World Coal Summit. “And by now it is abundantly clear that further capital expenditures on coal can only go ahead if they are compatible with the 2 degree Celsius limit.”
To do that, she suggested that the industry should close all existing subcritical plants, implement carbon capture and storage on all new plants, even the most efficient, and leave most existing reserves in the ground. All suggestions that the coal industry shows now the least sign of wanting to adopt.
Figueres made it clear later that the coal industry was facing a huge challenge and it needed a “major rethink” and a major shift in the deployment of their capital. If technologies such as CCS could not be deployed to reduce emissions and stay within the 2°C limit, then coal reserves would have to be left in the ground.
But she also said it made “an extraordinary amount of sense” to invest in renewables, particularly solar, which was becoming competitive in a growing number of countries. “There is no doubt that these are the energies of the future,” she said.
Country's growing greenhouse gas emissions draw criticism of 'anti-climate' influence at UN climate talks in Warsaw
Graham Readfearn in Warsaw theguardian.com, Tuesday 19 November 2013 00.13 AEST
Australia has become an "anti-climate" influence on international efforts to slow global warming after dropping close to the bottom of a ranking of the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters.
Australia's ranking on the climate change performance index fell from 51 to 57 out of 61, as the United Kingdom became the second highest ranked country behind Denmark.
The index, developed by thinktank Germanwatch and Climate Action Network Europe, was released on Monday at the start of the second week of the United Nations climate change negotiations in Warsaw, Poland.
The ranking combines five different areas covering the types and levels of emissions, renewable energy supply, trends in energy efficiency and climate policy.
The UK moved to second highest after emissions fell 15% and improvements were made in energy efficiency. Denmark led the ranking thanks to low levels of emissions and "exceptional" policies to keep emissions down.
Launching the report, Wendel Trio, director of CAN Europe, said: "We have now an Australian government that is more looking at the anti-climate policy development than in furthering the climate policy development of the previous government."
He cited Australia's attempts to repeal carbon price legislation and the change of government as the reason for its falling status.
"There are many signs where the Australian government shows it's not very keen on developing climate policy. I think it is evident at these talks. They are not sending any ministers so they're not giving it any importance."
He said Australia now had "no intention … to be in any way constructive" in Warsaw, and doubted the country would want to sign a new legally binding agreement which it is hoped will be developed in time for a key UN meeting in Paris in 2015.
Christoph Bals, policy director at Germanwatch, said between 2002 and 2011, the world's largest emitter China had been responsible for 80% of the rise in global annual emissions. But he said growth in renewable energy in China was currently outstripping growth in coal.
He said there was a possibility that sometime in the next decade, global emissions could plateau, but only if the world's countries could agree a "meaningful outcome" from climate change negotiations.
We had a government that believed in the sciences. We voted them out to get a group of religious nut jobs.
There is now, after 82 years, no science minister. We've cut funding for a large portion of research.
We used to be a leader in science and technology, we used to have a drive, a vision.
It was an Australian who created the first refrigerator, the first electric drill, the feature film, the military tank, the pacemaker, the clapperboard, zinc cream, solar hot water, plastic spectacle lenses, black box flight recorder, ultrasound, the power board, bionic ear, dual flush loo, freezing embryos, multi-focal contact lenses, spray on skin, Wi-Fi, Scramjet, Blast Glass, the Quantum Bit.
These are just a few, I'm sure you can find more.
I am sometimes truly embarrassed to call myself Australian and that makes me angry. Why is it so hard for a person to believe a group of people, when they clearly already believe in invisible sky friends and talking snakes?
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy