PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet CLIMATE SCARES & CLIMATE CHANGE, 4 July 2001
--------------------------------------------------
"All computer models fail to factor in the (inevitable)
invention of
newer, better technologies, changing social customs, or the
discovery of
new resources. The notion that a system as complex as a single
storm
can be meaningfully modelled with a Pentium chip, or even a bank
of
Crays, is absurd; to claim to have modelled the entire biosphere
is to
declare oneself a fool, one short step above someone who thinks
Myst is a
real world."
--Spider
Robinson, The Globe and Mail, 30 June 2001
"The best we can do is to see how global climate and the
environment
are changing, keep comparing that with predictions, adjust the
models
and gradually increase our confidence. Only that will distinguish
our
predictions from those of fortunetellers."
-- Syrukuro Manabe, The New York Times, 3 July 2001
"A team of researchers led by the Georgia Institute of
Technology
has found a surprisingly high level of an air-purifying chemical
(or
oxidizing agent) in the near-surface atmosphere over the South
Pole.
The finding has implications for interpreting historical global
climate records stored in Antarctic ice cores."
--Jane Sanders, National Center for Atmospheric Research
"The importance of the facts presented in these papers
resides in
the demonstration that the warming of the earth since the
termination of
the Little Ice Age is not at all unusual or different from other
climate changes of the past millennium and beyond, when
atmospheric CO2
concentrations were quite stable, much lower than at present, and
obviously
not responsible for the observed variations in climate, which
suggests
that the warming of the past century or so need not be due to the
contemporaneous increase in atmospheric CO2. In this regard,
Tyson
et al. make a point of noting that the Little Ice Age coincided
with a
period of low solar activity, while the Medieval Warm Period
coincided with
a period of high solar activity, suggesting that there may be a
solar
forcing involved in the development and sustaining of these
climatic
regimes."
--CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
(1) NASA SELECTS PROPOSALS TO STUDY CARBON CYCLE & CARBON
SINKS
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(2) NEW FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT ICE-CORE RECORDS MAY BE FLAWED
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(3) PIONEERING EXPERIMENTS TESTING EFFECTS OF GREENHOUSE GASES ON
CROPS
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(4) WATER VAPOUR AND CLOUDS COUNTERACT GLOBAL WARMING
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(5) CLIMATE RESEARCH: THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL
The New York Times, 3 July 2001
(6) TROPOSPHERIC OZONE AND CLIMATE FORCING
CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
(7) TEMPERATURE TRENDS: AFRICA
CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
(8) RAINFALL TRENDS IN EAST ASIA
CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
(9) EFFECTS OF INCREASED ATMOSPHERIC CO2 ON GRASSLAND
CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
(10) CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH AT ARMAGH OBSERVATORY
Armagh Observatory, 15 June 2001
(11) HOW FORESTS, CROPLAND AND PASTURE RECYCLE CARBON
Greening Earth Society, 29 June 2001
(12) COMMENTARY OF THE WEEK: THE ISLE OF THE DEAD - 160 YEARS ON
John-Daly.com, 1 July 2001
(13) METHANE & SNOWBALL EARTH
S. Fred Singer <singer@sepp.org>
(14) AND FINALLY: GLOBAL WARMING - COMPUTER MODELS ARE JUST
SLEIGHT OF HAND
The Globe and Mail, 30 June 2001
=========
(1) NASA SELECTS PROPOSALS TO STUDY CARBON CYCLE & CARBON
SINKS
From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
David E. Steitz
Headquarters, Washington,
DC
July 3, 2001
(Phone: 202/358-1730)
RELEASE: 01-129
NASA SELECTS PROPOSALS TO STUDY EARTH'S ENVIRONMENT
What element do some researchers jokingly call the "triple
whammy" or the
"complete trifecta"? It's carbon -- not only the very
basis of life, but
also the principal source of fossil fuel energy supporting the
economy and a
key factor in controlling global climate.
NASA will learn much more about the global carbon cycle through
80 research
grants valued at approximately $50 million over the next three
years that
will look at everything from forest health in the U.S. to the
role oceans
play as the planet's "air filters."
Carbon-containing molecules are a key factor in global warming --
carbon
dioxide and methane are the two most important "greenhouse
gases" that can
affect temperatures around the world. Combustion of fossil fuels,
use of
land for agriculture or industry, and human interaction with the
environment
all play a part in how Earth's climate "behaves."
Through these awards,
researchers will take advantage of the unique vantage point of
space and
space-age technology to look at the planet and how the global
climate works.
"These proposals represent the leading edge of research on
the carbon cycle
and how it affects our climate. The Administration is committed
to providing
sound science to government and industry leaders upon which
decisions about
human stewardship of the Earth can be made," said Dr.
Ghassem Asrar,
Associate Administrator for Earth Science, NASA Headquarters,
Washington,
DC.
"We know that about half of the carbon dioxide released by
humans is
absorbed by Earth's oceans and lands. These investigations will
help
scientists and policy-makers better understand if this will be
true in the
decades to come," Asrar said.
"A solid understanding of how carbon cycles act among land,
atmosphere and
oceans will provide a vital key to reliable projections of carbon
levels of
the future, and hence a better understanding of what role humans
are playing
in Earth's climate system. Combined with advances in
computational-modeling
capabilities, and in teaming with other government agencies and
international partners, NASA will advance short-term and seasonal
weather
forecasting capabilities and create an accurate projection of
longer-term
climate change around the globe. This research also will benefit
our
short-term weather and seasonal-prediction capabilities,"
Asrar said.
The grants will go to researchers at universities, government
laboratories
and other organizations and will investigate virtually all
aspects of the
carbon cycle. Scientists will use everything from advanced
computers,
satellites and lasers to aircraft and other conventional tools to
carry out
these studies. Applications scientists will extend the benefits
of this
research to a variety of end users. NASA received 288 proposals
in response
to the research announcement made in 2000.
A complete listing of the research projects and their principal
investigators can be found on the Internet at: http://research.hq.nasa.gov/
More information on NASA's Earth Science Enterprise, a long-term
research
effort dedicated to understanding how human-induced and natural
change
affects the global environment,
can be found at: http://earth.nasa.gov
=============
(2) NEW FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT ICE-CORE RECORDS MAY BE FLAWED
From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
RESEARCH NEWS & PUBLICATIONS OFFICE
Georgia Institute of Technology
430 Tenth Street, N.W., Suite N-116
Atlanta, Georgia 30318 USA
MEDIA RELATIONS CONTACTS:
Jane Sanders
404-894-2214 Fax: 404-894-6983
E-mail: jane.sanders@edi.gatech.edu
or
John Toon
404-894-6986 Fax: 404-894-4545
E-mail: john.toon@edi.gatech.edu
TECHNICAL CONTACTS:
Doug Davis
Georgia Tech School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
404-894-4008; E-mail: douglas.davis@eas.gatech.edu
or
Fred Eisele
National Center for Atmospheric Research
303-497-1483; E-mail: eisele@ucar.edu
Writer: Jane Sanders
June 18, 2001
Another Antarctic Atmosphere Surprise: Scientists Find Evidence
of Highly
Oxidizing Environment Over the South Pole
More than 15 years after the discovery of an ozone hole in the
stratrosphere
over the Antarctic, the remote continent is yielding another
atmospheric
surprise.
A team of researchers led by the Georgia Institute of Technology
has found a
surprisingly high level of an air-purifying chemical (or
oxidizing agent) in
the near-surface atmosphere over the South Pole. The finding has
implications for interpreting historical global climate records
stored in
Antarctic ice cores.
The summertime 24-hour average value of the primary atmospheric
oxidant --
known as the hydroxyl (OH) radical -- at the South Pole is higher
than that
estimated from OH measurements recorded at the equator. The
researchers will
report their findings this fall in the journal Geophysical
Research Letters.
The OH radical is widely recognized as vital to scrubbing
pollution and
naturally occurring chemicals from the air throughout the globe;
it prevents
a buildup of toxic levels of these substances.
"What we now know is that the near-surface atmospheric zone
called the mixed
layer (from the surface upward to between 20 to 200 meters) is a
highly
oxidizing environment at the South Pole," says Doug Davis,
one of the lead
researchers and a professor in the Georgia Tech School of Earth
and
Atmospheric Sciences. "Equally exciting, we are beginning to
see evidence
that a lot of this oxidizing chemistry is also occurring down in
the
snowpack. Thus, once things get buried in the snow, there
continues to be
active chemistry -- including oxidation -- that could further
modify
chemical species before they are trapped in the ice in their
final chemical
forms."
This finding suggests that glacio-chemists -- who study climate
change based
on an analysis of trace chemicals trapped in polar ice -- have to
be far
more careful in their interpretation of Antarctic ice cores, says
Davis,
whose research team is funded by the National Science Foundation.
Changes in
some chemical species buried may continue for another five to 10
years after
they are trapped in the snowpack. Davis expects that scientists
will soon
focus more attention on this topic.
"Snow release of nitric oxide, which leads to the formation
of OH, can in
principle occur anywhere globally where there are accumulations
of nitrate
ions in ice and there is also solar radiation," Davis says.
"Other
researchers have found evidence of this phenomenon in Summit,
Greenland, and
Alert, Canada. What makes the South Pole unique is that the
levels of nitric
oxide and other nitrogen oxides are nearly an order of magnitude
higher than
anywhere else.
"But any significant elevation of nitric oxide at any
snow-covered location
should result in an enhancement of OH," Davis adds.
"And, anytime you are
producing higher levels of OH, it means this chemistry is having
some local
or regional impact. The final global impact from this chemistry,
however, is
still unknown."
At the South Pole, researchers recorded OH radical levels over a
24-hour
period; the average measurement was about 2 X 10**6 molecules per
cubic
centimeter of air several days during their December 1998 to
January 1999
expedition and again from December 2000 to January 2001. These
measurements
are nearly an order of magnitude higher than what they originally
expected
to find based on their Antarctic coastal measurements of nitric
oxide, Davis
says.
To measure OH, the scientists used the selected-ion
chemical-ionization mass
spectrometer (SICIMS) technique, which in the early 1990s became
the first
sensitive method for measuring this radical. Georgia Tech Adjunct
Professor
Fred Eisele, the other lead researcher for this project,
developed the
SICIMS technique at Tech. Eisele is also a senior research
associate at the
National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.
To measure nitric oxide (NO), researchers used the
well-established
chemiluminescence technique with modifications to improve its
sensitivity by
an order of magnitude. Nitric oxide, also a radical, is a
byproduct of
internal combustion engines. But Davis and his co-workers believe
NO is
formed at the South Pole when ultraviolet radiation interacts
with nitrate
ions. Scientists are not certain about the source of the nitrate,
but it
could originate from stratospheric denitrification processes and
the
long-range transport of nitric acid formed at low latitudes
during
electrical storms.
Although the factors that cause NO levels at the South Pole to
exceed 550
parts per trillion by volume of air (pptv) are still under
investigation,
Davis believes the most important factor is the atmospheric
mixing depth at
the South Pole. This depth seems to be highly variable at the
pole and is
sometimes no more than 25 meters above the surface. The Davis
team's latest
results indicate large fluctuations in atmospheric levels of NO
without
major changes in NO levels within the snowpack.
Elevated levels of NO (20 to 550 pptv) in the near-surface
atmosphere react
with the hydroperoxyl radical -- a less reactive oxidizing agent
than OH --
and are converted to OH and nitrogen dioxide. The latter reacts
with OH to
produce nitric acid, which can return to the snow, thus forming a
closed
cycle.
"It's not that this is new chemistry," Davis explains.
"Most of the time in
the background remote atmosphere where NO levels are typically
less than 10
pptv, a large fraction of the hydroperoxyl radical reacts with
itself and
creates hydrogen peroxide, which is lost to the surface. But at
the South
Pole, in the presence of this large source of nitric oxide, the
hydroperoxyl
radical predominantly reacts with NO to generate the more
reactive OH
radical. Everybody tends to associate nitric oxide levels with
combustion,
thus the South Pole is one of the last places on earth that you
might expect
to find nitric oxide in such large concentrations."
Davis and his colleagues discovered the high NO and OH radical
levels in
their funded research project to study sulfur chemistry. The
project, called
ISCAT, for the Investigation of Sulfur Chemistry in the Antarctic
Troposphere, began in 1994 with an expedition to Palmer Station
on the
Antarctic Palmer Peninsula. Specifically, the scientists are
working to more
fully understand the oxidation of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) under
the cold
conditions and high latitudes of Antarctica. This information
will also help
glacio-chemists better interpret sulfate and methane sulfonate
concentrations incorporated into the continent's 400,000-year-old
ice
records, Davis says.
Sulfate is a chemical signature for both southern hemispheric
volcanic
activity and major fluctuations in phytoplankton populations in
the Southern
Ocean that surrounds Antarctica. Phytoplankton lead to the
release of DMS
from the ocean, part of which is oxidized by OH to sulfate.
Methane
sulfonate is formed only from DMS.
Antarctic ice cores have revealed clear evidence of major
volcanic activity
in the Southern Hemisphere, and together with methane sulfonate,
evidence of
glacial and interglacial periods in the earth's climate history.
The level
of DMS is a chemical indicator of biomass production in the
Southern Ocean,
which, in turn, reflects both water temperature and solar
radiation, Davis
explains. So a more comprehensive understanding of DMS chemistry
around and
on the Antarctic should provide valuable information in studying
past
climate changes, he adds.
Based on the results of the sulfur chemistry studies led by
Eisele and
former Georgia Tech Research Institute scientist Harald
Berresheim at Palmer
in 1994, Davis and his colleagues moved their ISCAT research to
the South
Pole. They expected to record significant atmospheric transport
of sulfate
and DMS from the coast to the pole, which is 10,000 feet above
sea level.
"Well, our initial hypothesis was wrong, and we found out
why when went to
the South Pole," Davis explains. "There was very little
unreacted DMS that
reached the South Pole because of the very high levels of OH in
the
near-surface air at the South Pole -- and perhaps more
importantly -- over
the entire polar plateau."
Elevated NO maintains a highly oxidizing environment on the polar
plateau 24
hours a day, Davis says. The OH radical oxidizes most of the DMS
before it
reaches the South Pole.
"The oxidizing environment at the South Pole is truly
astounding," Davis
says. "We didn't expect it. And, initially, it made no
sense. Nobody had the
foggiest notion what was going on.... It was like finding some
distant
planet's atmosphere plugged into Earth's atmosphere, but having
it limited
to only the Antarctic polar plateau."
The researchers hope to make more sense of their data as they
analyze
measurements from their 2000-01 trip during the next year.
Already, Davis'
colleague, Associate Professor Greg Huey, may have identified a
new
atmospheric nitrogen oxide species in the Antarctic troposphere.
The
research team hopes to return to Anarctica in 2003 to continue
its study.
Other institutions represented in the ISCAT team are the National
Center for
Atmospheric Research, New Mexico State University, the University
of
California at Irvine, Drexel University, the University of
Minnesota, the
University of New Hampshire and Arizona State University.
[NOTE: Images supporting this release are available at
http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/SPOLE.html]
==========
(3) PIONEERING EXPERIMENTS TESTING EFFECTS OF GREENHOUSE GASES ON
CROPS
From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
News Bureau
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
807 South Wright Street. Suite 520 East
Champaign, Illinois 61820-6219
Telephone 217 333-1085, Fax 217 244-0161
Contact:
Jim Barlow, Life Sciences Editor
(217) 333-5802; b-james3@uiuc.edu
7/1/2001
Pioneering experiments testing effects of greenhouse gases on
crops
CHAMPAIGN, Ill. -- Portions of 40 acres of University of Illinois
farmland
this summer are sprouting soybeans grown in the presence of
carbon dioxide
levels forecast for the year 2050. Next summer, elevated levels
of ozone
will join the mix in a first-of-its-kind experiment called
SoyFACE.
"When you consider the importance of the Midwest in terms of
global food
security, it is important to do this research here," said
Stephen P. Long, a
photosynthesis expert and the Robert Emerson Professor of Plant
Biology at
the UI. "Up to now, experiments related to global warming on
many crops have
been done in locations on the periphery of major food production
areas."
Researchers want to know how soybeans may be affected, and what
scientists
might do to assure the integrity of yields and quality as the
climate
changes. By 2050, carbon dioxide levels are expected to be about
1.5 times
greater than the current 370 parts per million, while daytime
ozone levels
during the growing season could peak on average at 80 parts per
billion (now
60 parts per billion).
SoyFACE (Free Air gas Concentration Enrichment) is the first test
of crop
growth in the presence of both increased carbon dioxide and
ozone. Five UI
departments, the USDA-ARS and Illinois State Water Survey, as
well as
researchers from four other nations and two other U.S.
universities are
participating this summer. Four control and four experimental
70-foot-diameter rings currently surround 24 varieties of
soybeans. The
experimental rings have ABS plastic pipes that deliver at crop
level a
precisely regulated flow of carbon dioxide, based on wind speed
and
direction, pumped from a 50-ton solar-powered tank.
Next summer, soybeans will grow on an adjacent 40 acres dotted
with 24 of
the octagon-shaped rings. Four rings will pump carbon dioxide,
four will
provide just ozone and four will provide ozone and carbon
dioxide. Natural
conditions will exist in an equal number of control rings for
each test.
Also next summer, eight more rings, including four experimental
rings
delivering carbon dioxide, will be placed among corn, which will
be rotated
into the 40 acres being used this year for soybeans.
Soybeans are sensitive to ozone. In August 1999, for instance,
levels in
central Illinois exceeded the crop threshold for damage on 28
days.
Greenhouse experiments suggest a 50 percent loss in crop yield
under
constant 2050 levels. Greenhouse work has shown increases in
yields under
elevated carbon dioxide. This experiment, Long said, will provide
insight as
to what happens in real field conditions.
Long, crop scientist Donald R. Ort and plant biologist Evan H.
DeLucia head
the project. Tim Mies, a research engineer in crop sciences who
led the
SoyFACE construction, is site manager. Tai Tran, an undergraduate
student,
designed the ozone system with a grant from the UI Environmental
Council, a
program that coordinates and supports environment-based research,
teaching
and public service. The Illinois Council for Food and
Agricultural Research,
Archer Daniels Midland Co., USDA-ARS and the U.S. Department of
Energy
provided initial funding for the work.
[NOTE: An image supporting this release is available at
http://www.news.uiuc.edu/scitips/01/07co2.html]
==========
(4) WATER VAPOUR AND CLOUDS COUNTERACT GLOBAL WARMING
From: Andrew Yee [mailto:ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca]
[ http://www.nature.com/nsu/010705/010705-7.html
]
Tuesday, 3 July 2001
The Earth's climate depends less on the Sun than we might think.
By PHILIP BALL
If the Sun got hotter, would we care? Probably not, according to
Hsien-Wang
Ou of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New
York. Water, he
suggests, minimizes the climatic effects of a cooler or warmer
sun [1].
The Sun has got about 30 percent hotter since the world began.
Four billion
years ago it was a younger star, and burned less brightly.
Geological
imprints of global temperatures at that time indicate that our
planet was
then warm enough to support liquid water. Global average
temperatures seem
not to have varied much in either direction since then.
Somehow the planet has stayed indifferent to the Sun's changes.
Some explain this so-called 'faint young sun paradox' by assuming
that the
early atmosphere contained more greenhouse gases such as carbon
dioxide,
which trapped a greater proportion of solar heat. Ou thinks that
such
considerations may not be necessary.
Water alone is enough to buffer the global temperature against
reduced or
increased solar heating, he says. Water establishes lower and
upper
boundaries on how far the temperature can drift from today's.
Water vapour is, in fact, the most important greenhouse gas,
although unlike
carbon dioxide it is not produced directly in large amounts by
human
activity. Most water vapour in the atmosphere is the result of
evaporation
from the oceans. As long as the oceans do not freeze, says Ou,
there will
always be plenty of water vapour in the air, mitigating the
effect of a
dimmer Sun.
As the Sun warms, we might expect the effects of water vapour to
increase,
as more water will evaporate and enhance the greenhouse effect.
In Ou's
model, however, clouds counteract such warming. More water vapour
in the air
enhances cloud formation; clouds reflect sunlight, and so can
offset an
increase in solar output.
Some previous studies have argued that clouds can act as a kind
of climate
thermostat. Ou's model treats the climatic effects of clouds in
much more
detail.
He takes into account the fact that there are, crudely speaking,
two
different kinds of cloud -- high and low -- which affect climate
differently. Strong updrafts of warm, moist air form high clouds
close to
the top of the troposphere (at a height of about 15 kilometres).
Flat, low
clouds form closer to the ground.
In a warmer climate caused by a hotter Sun, high clouds become
less
extensive and the amount of low cloud increases, Ou calculates.
Overall,
this counteracts warming because of sunlight reflection.
Even if the Sun became 50 percent more intense, the average
temperature
would rise by only 10 degrees -- a significant change, but not
nearly as
great as that without water's moderating influence.
However, this is unlikely to be the whole story. Some researchers
believe
that all or most of the oceans froze over at some time in the
past. Ou's
model does not apply to an ice-bound planet, and he has not
looked at how
increases in other greenhouse gases would effect global warming.
References
[1] Ou, H.-W.Possible bounds on the Earth's surface temperature:
from the
perspective of a conceptual global-mean model.
Journal of Climate, 14,
2976 - 2988, (2001).
© Nature News Service / Macmillan Magazines Ltd 2001
==========
(5) CLIMATE RESEARCH: THE DEVIL IN IN THE DETAIL
From The New York Times, 3 July 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/03/science/03CLIM.html?ex=995172097&ei=1&en=10bf2eec79babea8
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
In 1922, Dr. Lewis Fry Richardson, a British physicist with a
penchant for
grand ideas, described how to forecast the behavior of the
atmosphere.
He had details wrong but the basic concept right: a suite of
equations that,
when applied to measurements of heat, cloudiness, humidity and
the like,
could project how those factors would change over time.
There was one grand problem. To predict weather 24 hours in
advance, he
said, 64,000 people with adding machines would have to work
nonstop - for 24
hours.
Dr. Richardson pined for a day "in the dim future" when
it might be possible
to calculate conditions faster than they evolved. That dim future
is now.
But while much has changed, much remains the same.
Supercomputers have answered Dr. Richardson's plea. Weeklong
weather
forecasts are generally reliable. But long-term climate
predictions are
still limited by the range of processes that affect the earth's
atmosphere,
from the chemistry of the microscopic particles that form cloud
droplets to
the decades-long stirrings of the seas.
With its oceans, shifting clouds, volcanoes and human emissions
of
heat-trapping gases and sun-blocking haze, earth remains a
puzzle, said Dr.
Michael E. Schlesinger, who directs climate research at the
University of
Illinois at Urbana- Champaign.
"If you were going to pick a planet to model, this is the
last planet you
would choose," he said.
So even as the evidence grows that earth's climate is warming and
that
people are responsible for at least part of the change, the
toughness of the
modeling problem is often cited by those who
oppose international action to cut the emissions of heat-trapping
gases.
And while American research centers once dominated this effort,
they have
recently fallen behind others overseas.
By many accounts, the dominant research effort is now at the
Hadley Center
for Climate Prediction and Research, 30 miles west of London.
More than 100
scientists there are using extremely powerful computers just to
explore
long-term questions. Several recent studies by the National
Academy of
Sciences found that other countries had provided superior
supercomputers for
advanced climate research.
The academy found that efforts in the United States were hurt in
the 1990's
by a Commerce Department tariff of 450 percent on Japanese
supercomputers.
The tariff was lifted this spring.
The results are vexing for American scientists, said Dr. Maurice
Blackmon,
director of climate studies at the National Center for
Atmospheric Research
in Boulder, Colo.
Last week, Dr. Blackmon said in an interview, he met a
climatologist from a
Swiss university who was preparing to run a copy of the Boulder
laboratory's
most sophisticated model on a supercomputer in Bern "six to
eight times
faster than we can here."
"That's the definition of frustration," Dr. Blackmon
said.
Even with the best computers, though, important parts of the
climate puzzle
still elude both the machines and the theoreticians, although
progress is
being made.
Dozens of mathematical models of the atmosphere and things that
affect it
are being applied to the problem. The most ambitious of these -
about 20 or
so around the world - simulate not only the air but also the
oceans and,
increasingly, other dynamic features of the planet: its shifting
sea ice and
glaciers, its cloak of vegetation, its soils.
These imagined earths are generated by supercomputers that tear
through
decades in a day, creating a compressed view of how the climate
might behave
if one influencing force or another changed.
The biggest models have improved substantially in the last few
years, with
many no longer requiring "flux adjustments" -
essentially fudge factors -
that were once needed to prevent the machine-generated,
theoretical climates
from drifting out of the realm of the possible.
The signal achievement in recent years has been the accumulation
of
evidence, much of it from advanced models, that rising levels of
greenhouse
gases in the air have discernibly warmed the planet. But moving
beyond that
general conclusion presents enormous problems.
"We will of course improve our models," said Dr. Mojib
Latif, the deputy
director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg,
Germany,
"but I don't really see the biggest or most important
results changing in
the next 10 years."
"In terms of policy," Dr. Latif said, "the models
have done their job."
But the models have not clearly answered a pivotal question: how
sensitive
is the climate to the intensifying greenhouse effect? In other
words, how
big is any coming climatic disruption likely to be?
The models still predict essentially the same wide range that was
calculated
nearly 30 years ago: roughly an average rise of 3 to 8 degrees
Fahrenheit if
greenhouse gases double from the
concentrations measured before coal and oil burning and forest
cutting
significantly altered the atmosphere.
And that is a global prediction. When asked to predict local
effects of
global warming - say, on the Southwest or Europe - the margins of
error
grow, and competing models stray far and wide.
For example, the change in climate in particular places in the
models still
varies markedly depending on how programmers start the simulation
- what
values they pick for the initial conditions on earth.
The first set of numbers plugged into the matrix of equations is
always an
educated guess, said Dr. Curtis C. Covey, a physicist at the
Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory who compares the performance of
various
models.
"Can you tell me what the initial conditions were in 1850?
Can anybody?" Dr.
Covey asked.
In fact, some top modelers say even the most powerful simulations
can be
pushed only so far before they reach limits of usefulness.
Dr. Syukuro Manabe, who in 1969 helped create the first model
coupling the
atmosphere and oceans, said in an interview that the most
advanced versions
had already gone too far.
"People are mixing up qualitative realism with quantitative
realism," said
Dr. Manabe, who did most of his work at the Commerce Department's
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton,
N.J. He is now helping Japan create a $500 million supercomputing
center in
Yokohama that is expected to dwarf all the other climate research
efforts.
He explained that models incorporating everything from dust to
vegetation
looked more and more like the real world but that the error range
associated
with the addition of each new variable could result in nearly
total
uncertainty. Speaking of some climate models, he said, "They
are more caught
up in trying to show what a great gadget they have than in
showing how
profound their study is in understanding nature."
Of course, Dr. Manabe said, the models still play a vital role in
earth
science, providing practically the only means of looking into the
future,
albeit through a cloudy lens. And there are still many ways to
sharpen the
picture, he and other climate experts said.
First, there is improving resolution and speed. Though climate
modelers use
the same machines that help nuclear weapons designers and
astrophysicists,
they still face a big trade-off between detail and time.
The most advanced models consist of several hundred thousand
lines of
computer code that divide the air, land and oceans into a grid of
hundreds
of interacting boxes. As conditions change in one box, the
changes ripple
through neighboring boxes.
Until now, modelers had been forced to dice the atmosphere into a
grid where
each box was about 185 miles on a side. The best ocean models
right now are
composed of cubes about 85 miles across. The Hadley Center is
creating a new
model that will take the ocean resolution to cubes about 20 miles
on a side,
which is detailed enough to capture the important eddies that
shunt heat and
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the depths.
But Dr. Geoff Jenkins, the director of climate prediction at the
center,
noted that the three-dimensional nature of the problem meant that
each
doubling of resolution required a 16- fold increase in computing.
In tests,
Dr. Jenkins said, the new model "completely clogged up"
one of the center's
supercomputers.
Many features of the earth that are critical to climate change
remain much
smaller than the model boxes so must still be approximated.
Dr. Blackmon, at the National Center for Atmospheric Research,
said features
as important as California's Central Valley and the mountain
ranges around
it remained invisible.
"We can't tell you anything about what's going to happen
there," he said. To
do so would require a grid of boxes 19 miles on a side, he said.
To achieve
that detail would require computers 1,000 times as powerful as
those at the
research center.
Dr. Manabe said the goal of the Japanese project, the Frontier
Research
System for Global Change, was to use vastly greater computer
power to
accelerate model runs, doing more work in less time and providing
a much
finer-scale view of what lies ahead.
The center will have 5,120 linked high-speed processors, able to
perform 40
trillion calculations per second. The most powerful computers
currently used
for climate modeling have about 1,000 slower processors and
crunch numbers
at about a hundredth of that speed.
But more brute computing power is only part of the solution.
Ronald J. Stouffer, a senior meteorologist at the fluid dynamics
laboratory
in Princeton, said that the key to progress was to move ahead in
three
realms at once: in the models, in the basic research into the
processes that
are mathematically represented in models and in the measurements
of
environmental change that will allow the testing of models.
"It's a triangle," Mr. Stouffer said.
"Observations, modeling and theory.
Any one can lead the other two for a while but can't lead much
before you
get stuck." That leads the climate scientists inevitably
back from their
simulated worlds to the real one.
The modelers have been lobbying for more money, not just for
their work but
also for ongoing measurements of change in the oceans,
atmosphere, polar ice
and forests. The value of this work was illustrated this spring,
many say,
when 50 years of ocean temperature measurements showed warming
that matched
the models' projections.
Other large mysteries still confront the researchers when they
look
earthward. Within clouds, for example, the chemistry and physics
of the
particles like soot and sea salt that form droplets
are only slowly being revealed, scientists say.
A small change in the way droplets form could have a large impact
on the
climate, said Dr. Jenkins, in Britain. He said that Dr. Anthony
Slingo,
another scientist there, found a decade ago that in theory, a
decrease or an
increase in the size of water droplets of just 10 or 20 percent
"could
either halve or double the amount of climate change you'd
get."
Eventually, laboratory work and observations should narrow that
range, many
climate experts say, but uncertainty will always remain.
"The best we can do," said Dr. Manabe, in Yokohama,
"is to see how global
climate and the environment are changing, keep comparing that
with
predictions, adjust the models and gradually increase our
confidence. Only
that will distinguish our predictions from those
of fortunetellers."
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company
==============
(6) TROPOSPHERIC OZONE AND CLIMATE FORCING
From CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2001/v4n27c1.htm
Reference
Mickley, L.J. and Jacob, D.J. 2001. Uncertainty in preindustrial
abundance
of tropospheric ozone: Implications for radiative forcing
calculations.
Journal of Geophysical Research 106: 3389-3399.
Background
Tropospheric ozone is an important greenhouse gas that absorbs
both longwave
(terrestrial) and shortwave (solar) radiation. Produced by
the
photochemical oxidation of CO and hydrocarbons in the presence of
NO and
NO2, large increases in tropospheric ozone have been observed
over the past
century, as anthropogenic emissions of its precursors have risen
dramatically.
The resultant effect on climate since preindustrial times has
typically been
estimated to be a radiative forcing between 0.3 and 0.5 watts per
square
meter. However, as Mickley and Jacob note, there is
"considerable
uncertainty about ozone levels in preindustrial times," and
current models
"overestimate systematically the late nineteenth and early
twentieth century
observations." As a result, climate models may currently be
significantly
underestimating the contribution of tropospheric ozone to the
global warming
observed since the end of the Little Ice Age.
What was done
The authors used a global three-dimensional model of tropospheric
chemistry
to explore "to what extent uncertainties in natural sources
for the
nineteenth century can accommodate the low levels of ozone
observed."
Furthermore, they examined the consequences of such uncertainties
on model
assessments of the radiative forcing increase from tropospheric
ozone since
preindustrial times.
What was learned
Model simulations revealed that uncertainties associated with
natural
emissions of NOx and hydrocarbons led to decreases in
preindustrial ozone
concentrations of 10-20 parts per billion relative to the values
state-of-the-art models use in making calculations of
tropospheric ozone
radiative forcing. Test simulations using these new
estimates yielded "a
global mean radiative forcing from ozone added to the atmosphere
since
preindustrial times of 0.72-0.80 watts per square meter, well
above the
range of forcings (0.3-0.5 watts per square meter) obtained by
standard
models."
What it means
In considering their results, the authors acknowledge there are
uncertainties in their estimates that could account for the
higher global
radiative forcing produced by the model they used. However,
they note that
"the test simulations represent our best reconstructions of
the global
preindustrial ozone fields constrained by the 1870-1910 surface
air
observations." Thus, they conclude that "tropospheric
ozone may have
contributed a much larger fraction of total greenhouse forcing
since
preindustrial times than is generally assumed." Such a
result is very
important, for if correct, it amounts to about half of the
estimated
increase in CO2-induced radiative forcing during the same time
period, which
would suggest that estimates of CO2-induced radiative forcing
since
preindustrial times are considerably overstated.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===============
(7) TEMPERATURE TRENDS: AFRICA
From CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
http://www.co2science.org/subject/a/summaries/africa.htm
One constant about climate is that it is always changing.
In this respect,
Africa is no different from the rest of the globe, having
experienced the
waxing and waning of temperatures for centuries on end.
Consider the findings of Rietti-Shati et al. (1998), who examined
climate
fluctuations on Mount Kenya in east Africa from 1200 to 4200
years before
present, as derived from oxygen isotope analysis of biogenic opal
extracted
from a lake sediment core. Numerous small-scale fluctuations in
temperature
were inferred from the record throughout its 3000 year's
duration. Most
notable, however, was a significant warming that occurred between
2,300 and
2,000 years ago when temperatures rose about 4°C over the span
of three
centuries.
Moving closer to the present, several researchers have
demonstrated that
temperature fluctuations associated with the Medieval Warm Period
and Little
Ice Age were prevalent in Africa as well. Based on the
temperature and
water requirements of the crops cultivated by the first
agropastoralists
that lived in southern Africa, Huffman (1996) was able to
construct a
climate history for the region based on archaeological evidence
related to
the locations and sizes of various Iron Age settlements uncovered
there.
The results of his analysis demonstrated that much of southern
Africa is
presently neither as warm nor as wet as it was from approximately
AD
900-1300. Furthermore, Tyson et al. (2000) have determined
that "maximum
warming [in this region of Africa] at around 1250 produced
conditions up to
3-4°C hotter than those of the present." In contrast,
temperatures in
Africa during the Little Ice Age event of the 16th through 19th
centuries
have been estimated to have been around 1°C cooler than they are
presently
(Johnson et al., 2001; Nicholson and Yin, 2001; Tyson et al.,
2000; Huffman,
1996).
The importance of the facts presented in these papers resides in
the
demonstration that the warming of the earth since the termination
of the
Little Ice Age is not at all unusual or different from other
climate changes
of the past millennium and beyond, when atmospheric CO2
concentrations were
quite stable, much lower than at present, and obviously not
responsible for
the observed variations in climate, which suggests that the
warming of the
past century or so need not be due to the contemporaneous
increase in
atmospheric CO2. In this regard, Tyson et al. make a point
of noting that
the Little Ice Age coincided with a period of low solar activity,
while the
Medieval Warm Period coincided with a period of high solar
activity,
suggesting that there may be a solar forcing involved in the
development and
sustaining of these climatic regimes.
References
Huffman, T.N. 1996. Archaeological evidence for
climatic change during the
last 2000 years in southern Africa. Quaternary
International 33: 55-60.
Johnson, T.C., Barry, S., Chan, Y. and Wilkinson, P.
2001. Decadal record
of climate variability spanning the past 700 yr in the Southern
Tropics of
East Africa. Geology 29: 83-86.
Nicholson, S.E. and Yin, X. 2001. Rainfall conditions
in equatorial East
Africa during the Nineteenth Century as inferred from the record
of Lake
Victoria. Climatic Change 48: 387-398.
Rietti-Shati, M., Shemesh, A. and Karlen, W. 1998. A
3000-year climatic
record from biogenic silica oxygen isotopes in an equatorial
high-altitude
lake. Science 281: 980-982.
Tyson, P.D., Karlen, W., Holmgren, K. and Heiss, G.A.
2000. The Little Ice
Age and medieval warming in South Africa. South African
Journal of Science
96: 121-126.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
=============
(8) RAINFALL TRENDS IN EAST ASIA
From CO2 Science Magazine, 4 July 2001
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2001/v4n27c2.htm
Reference
Kripalani, R.H. and Kulkarni, A. 2001. Monsoon rainfall
variations and
teleconnections over south and east Asia. International Journal
of
Climatology 21: 603-616.
What was done
Seasonal summer monsoon (June-September) rainfall data from 120
east Asia
stations were examined for the period 1881-1998.
What was learned
A series of statistical tests revealed the presence of short-term
variability in rainfall amounts on decadal and longer time
scales, the
longer "epochs" of which were found to last for about
three decades over
India and China and approximately five decades over Japan. In
spite of
year-to-year fluctuations and the decadal variability in the
rainfall
records, no significant long-term trends were observed in the
data.
What it means
The observational history of summer rainfall trends in east Asia
does not
support climate alarmist claims of intensified monsoonal
conditions in this
region as a result of CO2-induced global warming. As for the
decadal
variability inherent in the record, it "appears to be just a
part of natural
climate variations."
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===========
(9) EFFECTS OF INCREASED ATMOSPHERIC CO2 ON GRASSLAND
http://www.co2science.org/subject/g/summaries/grasslandsbiomass.htm
Grasslands (Biomass -- Individual Species) -- Summary
As the CO2 content of the air increases, most plants exhibit
modifications
in their physiology. One common change is increased
photosynthesis. With
greater amounts of CO2 in the air - and greater amounts of CO2
thus
diffusing into leaves - the primary carboxylating enzyme of most
plants,
i.e. rubisco, performs its biochemical functions more
efficiently, leading
to reductions in photorespiratory carbon losses and increases in
carbohydrate synthesis; and with additional carbohydrate
production, most
plants exhibit enhanced rates of growth and biomass
accumulation. In this
summary we thus review the effects of elevated atmospheric CO2
concentrations on biomass production in individual grassland
species.
In two related studies, perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) was
grown in
controlled environmental chambers receiving atmospheric CO2
concentrations
of 350 and 700 ppm for approximately 14 weeks. After
assessing plant
growth, the authors reported CO2-induced increases in shoot (van
Ginkel and
Gorissen, 1998) and root (van Ginkel et al., 2000) biomass of 28
and 41%,
respectively. Hodge et al. (1998) also reported, for the
very same species,
that plants grown at an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 720 ppm
for a mere
21 days exhibited total biomass values that were a whopping 175%
greater
than those observed for control plants exposed to air of 450 ppm
CO2.
In the study of Cotrufo and Gorissen (1997), three grasses
(Lolium perenne,
Agrostis capillaries, and Festuca ovina) were grown at
atmospheric CO2
concentrations of 350 and 700 ppm for approximately two months
before
harvesting. On average, atmospheric CO2 enrichment
increased plant biomass
by approximately 20%, with greater carbon partitioning to roots,
as opposed
to shoots. Also, in a much shorter two-week study performed
on tall fescue
(Festuca ovina), Newman et al. (1999) reported that twice-ambient
levels of
atmospheric CO2 increased plant biomass by 37% relative to plants
grown in
ambient air.
To investigate the possible interactions of elevated CO2 and soil
nitrogen
on biomass production, Ghannoum and Conroy (1998) grew one C3
grass (Panicum
laxum) and two C4 grasses (Panicum coloratum and Panicum
antidotale) in
controlled environments subjected to atmospheric CO2
concentrations of 360
and 710 ppm and low and high soil nitrogen contents for about two
months.
At high soil nitrogen, elevated CO2 increased total plant biomass
by
approximately 27% in all three species. However, at low
soil nitrogen,
elevated CO2 had no effect on biomass production in Panicum laxum
and
Panicum antidotale, while it actually decreased growth in Panicum
coloratum.
Taken alone, these results seem to suggest that nitrogen
deficiency may
preclude CO2-induced growth responses in these grasses.
However, the
results of a six-year study of Lolium perenne caution us against
making
hasty conclusions based on the results of short-term
studies. In this much
more lengthy experiment, for example, Daepp et al. (2000)
reported that
plant biomass slowly increased from 8 to 25% over the six-year
period under
conditions of high soil nitrogen and a 250 ppm increase in
atmospheric CO2
concentration. However, under conditions of low soil
nitrogen, they
observed an initial biomass increase of 5%, which dropped to -11%
in year
two, before it slowly began increasing to a final CO2-induced
enhancement of
9% at the close of year six. Hence, low soil nitrogen
levels may preclude
CO2-induced growth responses in the short-term; but in the
long-term,
CO2-enriched plants seem to be able to find the nutrients they
need to
increase their growth.
A few studies have also investigated the effects of elevated CO2
and high
air temperature on biomass production in grassland species.
Norton et al.
(1999), for example, grew ten populations of Agrostis curtisii at
ambient
and elevated (700 ppm) atmospheric CO2 concentrations in
combination with
ambient and elevated (ambient + 3°C) air temperature.
After one year, no
significant effects of elevated CO2 or temperature could be
detected,
although plant biomass tended to be greater under the combined
elevated
CO2/elevated air temperature treatment. Greer et al.
(2000), however, grew
five pasture species for one month at atmospheric CO2
concentrations of 350
and 700 ppm in combination with air temperatures of 18 and 28
°C, finding
that the CO2-induced increase in average biomass rose from 8% at
18 °C to
95% at 28 °C.
Lastly, in the study of Lilley et al. (2001), Trifolium
subterraneum and
Phalaris aquatica were grown in mixed swards exposed to
atmospheric CO2
concentrations of 380 and 690 ppm and air temperatures of ambient
and
ambient + 3.4 °C for an entire year. They discovered that
elevated CO2
increased average plant biomass by 35% at the ambient air
temperature; and
although the high temperature reduced this effect, plants exposed
to
elevated CO2 and elevated air temperature still exhibited a
biomass
enhancement that was 23% greater than that of plants subjected to
ambient
CO2 and elevated air temperature.
The paper of Wand et al. (1999) serves as a good summary of these
findings.
They compiled and analyzed 40 and 80 individual responses of C4
and C3
grasses, respectively, to atmospheric CO2 enrichment, determining
that
twice-ambient levels of atmospheric CO2 increased C4 and C3 plant
biomass by
an average of 33 and 44%, respectively, under a wide range of
experimental
conditions. Hence, as the air's CO2 content continues to
increase, it is
likely that individual grassland species will respond by
exhibiting enhanced
rates of photosynthesis, which invariably enhances their ability
to produce
greater amounts of biomass, the carbon of a portion of which is
almost
always sequestered in the ground.
References
Cotrufo, M.F. and Gorissen, A. 1997. Elevated CO2 enhances
below-ground C
allocation in three perennial grass species at different levels
of N
availability. New Phytologist 137: 421-431.
Daepp, M., Suter, D., Almeida, J.P.F., Isopp, H., Hartwig, U.A.,
Frehner,
M., Blum, H., Nosberger, J. and Luscher, A. 2000. Yield response
of Lolium
perenne swards to free air CO2 enrichment increased over six
years in a high
N input system on fertile soil. Global Change Biology 6:
805-816.
Ghannoum, O. and Conroy, J.P. 1998. Nitrogen deficiency precludes
a growth
response to CO2 enrichment in C3 and C4 Panicum grasses.
Australian Journal
of Plant Physiology 25: 627-636.
Greer, D.H., Laing, W.A., Campbell, B.D. and Halligan, E.A.
2000. The
effect of perturbations in temperature and photon flux density on
the growth
and photosynthetic responses of five pasture species.
Australian Journal of
Plant Physiology 27: 301-310.
Hodge, A., Paterson, E., Grayston, S.J., Campbell, C.D., Ord,
B.G. and
Killham, K. 1998. Characterization and microbial
utilisation of exudate
material from the rhizosphere of Lolium perenne grown under CO2
enrichment.
Soil Biology and Biochemistry 30: 1033-1043.
Lilley, J.M., Bolger, T.P. and Gifford, R.M. 2001.
Productivity of
Trifolium subterraneum and Phalaris aquatica under warmer, higher
CO2
conditions. New Phytologist 150: 371-383.
Newman, J.A., Gibson, D.J., Hickam, E., Lorenz, M., Adams, E.,
Bybee, L. and
Thompson, R. 1999. Elevated carbon dioxide results in
smaller populations
of the bird cherry-oat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi. Ecological
Entomology 24:
486-489.
Norton, L.R., Firbank, L.G., Gray, A.J. and Watkinson, A.R. 1999.
Responses
to elevated temperature and CO2 in the perennial grass Agrostis
curtisii in
relation to population origin. Functional Ecology 13:
29-37.
van Ginkel, J.H., Gorissen, A. and Polci, D. 2000. Elevated
atmospheric
carbon dioxide concentration: effects of increased carbon input
in a Lolium
perenne soil on microorganisms and decomposition. Soil
Biology &
Biochemistry 32: 449-456.
van Ginkel, J.H. and Gorissen, A. 1998. In situ decomposition of
grass roots
as affected by elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide. Soil Science
Society of
America Journal 62: 951-958.
Wand, S.J.E., Midgley, G.F., Jones, M.H. and Curtis, P.S. 1999.
Responses of
wild C4 and C3 grass (Poaceae) species to elevated atmospheric
CO2
concentration: a meta-analytic test of current theories and
perceptions.
Global Change Biology 5: 723-741.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===========
(10) CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH AT ARMAGH OBSERVATORY
From Armagh Observatory, 15 June 2001
www.arm.ac.uk/press/Climate-Change-Research.html
Kieran Hickey of Armagh Observatory has been testing the link
between
increased temperatures in North-West Europe and the frequency of
storms, as
shown in the historical records of climate at Armagh and
elsewhere. This is
part of an on-going research project at Armagh into the nature of
climate
change in North-West Europe using long-term meteorological
records. He
presented his results to the American Geophysical Union at a
conference held
in Boston, USA earlier this month.
Dr Hickey studied the historical storm records from many sites in
Ireland,
Scotland, Iceland and the Faeroe Islands. Some years have
significantly more
winter storms than others, possibly as a result of the North
Atlantic
Climate "Seesaw". This is a weather pattern in which
significantly higher
temperatures in North-West Europe are associated with much lower
temperatures in Greenland, and vice-versa.
The Observatory's work involves collaboration with climate
researchers in
the Universities of Coventry, Cambridge, and Maine, USA. The
research has
shown that some of the warmest winters in North-West Europe are
also the
stormiest. The stormy winters are often associated with low
temperatures in
Greenland, consistent with the North Atlantic "Seesaw".
Dr Hickey has shown that during these warm, stormy winters some
meteorological stations recorded more than twice the expected
number of
storms, and all recorded significantly more storms than average.
Stormy
winters occur about once every 5 years, but tend to occur in
clusters with
long gaps between them. Exceptionally warm winters with storms
have been
identified as far back as 1840.
An unexpected result has been the discovery that warm, stormy
winters are
associated with exceptionally high levels of salt in the
Greenland ice-core
record. This strong correlation provides a new tool to extend
investigations
of the variation of winter temperature and storminess for
North-West Europe
over thousands of years.
More research needs to be done to explore and test these ideas,
but this
finding adds significantly to our understanding of climate change
in the
North Atlantic and North-West Europe, and highlights the value of
the Armagh
climate archive.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Dr Kieran Hickey or John McFarland at the Armagh Observatory,
tel.:
028-3752-2928.
==============
(11) HOW FORESTS, CROPLAND AND PASTURE RECYCLE CARBON
From Greening Earth Society, 29 June 2001
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/Articles/2001/ga1.htm
For the past quarter-century, many scientists have assumed - even
feared -
the atmosphere's carbon dioxide content will rise in direct
proportion to
the magnitude of humans' ever-increasing emissions of CO2. This
assumption
is at the root of the climate change issue. It is what drives the
predictions of climate apocalypse emerging from computer-based
models of
future climate. U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory scientist
Sherwood Idso
disagrees. As early as 1991, he predicted the air's CO2 content
would rise
at a rate that would represent a declining percentage of
anthropogenic
(human-caused) CO2 emissions. Idso believes the productivity of
earth's
plant life will rise in response to the ongoing increase in the
air's CO2
content as a consequence of the well-known aerial fertilization
effect of
carbon dioxide. In this way, Idso believes, ever more CO2 will be
removed
from the atmosphere each year. Now, comes real-world data, as
reported in a
Climate Change article in Science magazine by Wofsy (2001), which
reveals
that "emission rates of CO2 from combustion of fossil fuel
have increased
almost 40 percent in the past 20 years, but the amount of CO2
accumulating
in the atmosphere has stayed the same or even declined
slightly."
What is it that is forestalling the global warming apocalypse
scenario? In a
word, our living earth itself - the biosphere. Much like Rodney
Dangerfield,
however, it "don't get no respect," despite
near-reverence for nature across
a broad cross-section of society. Environmental organizations,
since at
least 1972, have conducted fund-raising campaigns on the premise
that
earth's biosphere is fragile. In many cases involving specific
species or
ecosystems, this view has scientific credibility. But, in its
totality, the
biosphere is much more resilient than it popularly is given
credit for
being.
As atmospheric CO2 - the lifeblood of nearly all living things on
our planet
- gradually has risen since the dawn of the Industrial
Revolution, plant
life has grown more robust and profuse. Plants have expanded
their range
over the face of the earth and, at the same time, have begun to
extract
increasing quantities of CO2 from the air, sequestering its
carbon in their
tissues and in the soil into which they sink their roots (Idso,
1995).
A case in point is vegetation here in the United States. Pacala
et al.
(2001) report in Science magazine that estimates of vegetative
carbon
sequestering power, in what Alaskans call "the lower
48" states, has grown
significantly over the past several years, from a range of
0.08-0.35 x 1015
grams of carbon per year (Pg C yr-1) in the 1980s to a range of
0.37-0.71 Pg
C yr-1 today, with some evidence suggesting values as high as
0.81-0.84 Pg C
yr-1 (Fan et al., 1998). To put these values in perspective,
Wofsy notes
they are equivalent to 20 to 40 percent of the world's fossil
fuel
emissions.
Another report in the same edition of Science explains how carbon
sequestration in China is growing like gangbusters, too (Fang et
al., 2001).
With a little help from government-sponsored "ecological
restoration
projects" primarily aimed at afforestation and
reforestation, the world's
most populous nation has turned around what had been a losing
proposition
with respect to carbon capture by forests. China has been
increasing its
forest carbon sequestration rate by an average of 0.021 Pg C yr-1
for about
the last two decades.
This research is important because it indicates we aren't headed
for a
runaway atmospheric CO2-induced greenhouse effect, or even a
runaway
atmospheric CO2 concentration. The biosphere - with humans' overt
husbandry
of its plant life (croplands and forests, in particular) and our
unintentional fertilization of the air with carbon dioxide
emissions from
energy production - is exerting a powerful brake on the rate of
rise in the
atmosphere's CO2 content. How powerful? The large increase in
anthropogenic
CO2 emissions over the last twenty years has not resulted in any
increase in
the rate of CO2 accumulating in the atmosphere.
This observation suggests that judicious application of
management
techniques designed to foster carbon sequestration in earth's
terrestrial
ecosystems might actually stabilize the atmosphere's CO2
concentration, in
the not too distant future. The feedback effect is this: plants
grow more
robustly because of the aerial fertilization effect of
atmospheric CO2
enrichment and, in doing so, flex their muscles and constrain the
air's CO2
content to a new equilibrium level that forestalls any threat of
CO2-induced
global warming. At the same time this is happening, earth's plant
life
achieves the higher productivity necessary to feed the planet's
burgeoning
population (Idso and Idso, 2000).
* * * * *
This is the first in a series of "greening alerts" that
Greening Earth
Society intends to periodically publish online in response to
news coverage
of research concerning the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on
earth's
biosphere, especially as it relates to plant life's ability to
sequester
carbon. These alerts are prepared by Drs. Craig D. Idso and Keith
E. Idso of
the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change in
Tempe,
Arizona (www.co2science.org).
References
Fan, S., Gloor, M., Mahlman, J., Pacala, S., Sarmiento, J.,
Takahashi, T.
and Tans, P. 1998. A large terrestrial carbon sink in North
America implied
by atmospheric and oceanic carbon dioxide data and models.
Science 282:
442-446.
Fang, J., Chen, A., Peng, C., Zhao, S. and Ci. L. 2001. Changes
in forest
biomass carbon storage in China between 1949 and 1998. Science
292:
2320-2322.
Idso, C.D. and Idso, K.E. 2000. Forecasting world food supplies:
The impact
of the rising atmospheric CO2 concentration. Technology 7S:
33-55.
Idso, S.B. 1991a. The aerial fertilization effect of CO2 and its
implications for global carbon cycling and maximum greenhouse
warming.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 72: 962-965.
Idso, S.B. 1991b. Reply to comments of L.D. Danny Harvey, Bert
Bolin, and P.
Lehmann. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 72:
1910-1914.
Idso, S.B. 1995. CO2 and the Biosphere: The Incredible Legacy of
the
Industrial Revolution. Special Publication, Department of Soil,
Water &
Climate, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
Pacala, S.W., Hurtt, G.C., Baker, D., Peylin, P., Houghton, R.A.,
Birdsey,
R.A., Heath, L., Sundquist, E.T., Stallard, R.F., Ciais, P.,
Moorcroft, P.,
Caspersen, J.P., Shevliakova, E., Moore, B., Kohlmaier, G.,
Holland, E.,
Gloor, M., Harmon, M.E., Fan, S.-M., Sarmiento, J.L., Goodale,
C.L.,
Schimel, D. and Field, C.B. 2001. Consistent land- and
atmosphere-based U.S.
carbon sink estimates. Science 292: 2316-1320.
Wofsy, S.C. 2001. Where has all the carbon gone? Science 292
(5525): 2261
online.
Copyright 2001, Greening Earth Society
About GES (http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/about.htm):
Greening Earth
Society is a not for profit grassroot organisation created by
Western Fuel
Association to promote the viewpoint that humankind is part of
nature,
rather than apart from nature. Greening Earth Society believes
that
humankind's industrial evolution is good, and using fossil fuels
to enable
our economic activity is as natural as breathing. We promote the
benign
effects of carbon dioxide (CO2) on the earth's biosphere and
humankind. Our
message is that CO2 is required for life on earth and that the
earth is
actually getting greener thanks to increasing CO2 levels.
Greening Earth
Society provides sound information about CO2 and fossil fuels to
educators,
students, business and media representatives, community leaders
and
policymakers. Information is provided to the public through the
biweekly
World Climate Report, the annual State of the Climate Report, the
video "The
Greening of Planet Earth" and "The Greening of Planet
Earth Continues" and
this Web site. By doing this, we enable our citizens to make
decisions that
benefit both humankind and the planet.
==================
(12) COMMENTARY OF THE WEEK: THE ISLE OF THE DEAD - 160 YEARS ON
From John-Daly.com, 1 July 2001
http://www.john-daly.com/
Today, 1st July, is the 160th anniversary of the striking of the
sea level
benchmark in 1841 on the Isle of the Dead, Tasmania, by Captain
Sir James
Clark Ross and his associate Thomas Lempriere.
As of the time of writing, there has still been no published
analysis of the
benchmark by the various scientific institutions which have been
researching
this old sea level mark for several years. The reason seems to be
that
however it is analysed, the Ross-Lempriere sea level benchmark
contradicts
the IPCC view that sea levels have risen 10 to 25 cms in the last
100 years.
So, the issue has been swept under the carpet.
The benchmark currently stands 30 cms above present-day mean sea
level as
measured by an acoustic tide gauge a mile away at Port Arthur
(installed for
the express purpose of researching the Ross-Lempriere benchmark).
Since
Captain Ross in his account of his visit to Tasmania in 1841
stated clearly,
and several times, that the mark was struck at "zero point,
or the mean
level of the sea", the mark should now be around 20 cms
below MSL, not 30
cms above it.
Since Tasmania is stable geologically, land uplift cannot explain
why the
benchmark fails to support the IPCC. Even worse, the benchmark
suggests a
sea level fall.
The lead author of the 2001 IPCC Report on sea levels is Dr John
Church of
the University of Tasmania, whose office is only 40 miles from
the
benchmark, and who is fully familiar with it. In spite of a
dearth of
historical sea level data from the southern hemisphere, and
indeed from the
whole world pre-1900, the IPCC silence on the Isle of the Dead is
quite
deafening.
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(13) METHANE & SNOWBALL EARTH
From S. Fred Singer <singer@sepp.org>
Dear Benny
Re: Snowball Fight In Edinburgh, CCNet 29/06/01
I am sorry I missed all the fun at the Edinburgh meeting of
geological
societies. But let me add a few comments to the fascinating
discussion on
Snowball Earth.
A number of authors have speculated on the role of methane
in terminating
the frozen earth episode. [In quite a different context, other
authors have
discussed the role of methane releases from ocean sediments by an
asteroid
impact.]
In all of these discussions it is essential to consider the
complete
atmospheric chemistry involved. Here are a few problems for
ambitious PhD
candidates:
1. If there is a massive release of CH4, will oxidation to CO2
proceed
rapidly or will the oxidizing agent OH become depleted?
2. If CH4 persists in the troposphere, won't this increase the
greenhouse
effect by a large factor for some decades?
3. For CH4 leaking into the stratosphere oxidation will proceed
rapidly. But
now it is the resulting water vapor that becomes important,
through its
direct radiative effects on climate and its indirect effects on
the
destruction of ozone.
4. But if stratospheric ozone becomes depleted, how will this
affect
tropospheric OH?
Best Fred
[I have discussed some of these issues in Nature, Vol. 233,
pp. 543-545,
October 22, 1971, and more recently in various AGU abstracts
published in
Eos]
=========
(14) AND FINALLY: GLOBAL WARMING - COMPUTER MODELS ARE JUST
SLEIGHT OF HAND
From The Globe and Mail, 30 June 2001
http://www.globeandmail.com/gam/Commentary/20010630/COSPIDERY.html
By SPIDER
ROBINSON [Consider the source here. Did you include this as a
joke Benny? Ecology is
certainly a science and has developed primarily from fieldwork.
Computer modeling is an important adjunct to
many fields of investigation when direct experimentation is not
possible; this is particularly true for impact studies! bobk]
Let me explain why I grind my teeth hard enough to generate
sparks whenever
someone -- invariably a person with something to sell -- speaks
sonorously
of "what science now knows about global warming."
I have a deep and abiding respect for science. It earned that
respect, with
several trillion man-hours of tedious, painstaking work. Science
is
basically The Facts. The Anti-Crap. For millenniums, the only
definitive way
to settle any argument was with force. Most beliefs were
religious beliefs,
matters of opinion, subject to error, endless debate or monarch's
whim.
Finally came science, which simply means knowing (Latin scio,
"I know").
Really knowing, for certain -- even if someone bigger and
stronger
disagrees.
"Look," said one early scientist, "there are
countless things I don't know
and never will. But this thing I do know: If you drop a coin and
a
cannonball from the same height at the same time, they'll hit the
ground
together. Look, I can prove it." And by golly he did -- and
anyone else who
tried got the same result unless they cheated.
How'd you figure that out? one bystander asked. "Well,"
he said, "there's
this method I use. I wonder why something is so, and I think up a
theory,
and then I test the theory." By the sword? "By
experiment. I make a
prediction based on my theory, and test it. A test so clear that
even
someone with a different theory has to admit I'm right."
That's it? "Well, I
keep really good records, so I don't have to keep repeating the
test every
time a skeptic shows up." That basically is science. Clever
folks frowning
at each other and saying, "Oh yeah? Prove it," until
finally they know a few
things for sure.
Well, once you actually know a few things, you can finally start
getting
somewhere, and after a while, people were living past 30, and
more than half
their babies lived to grow up, and a lot of them had cable and
high-speed
Internet access and time to worry about the fate of Mother Gaia
or even read
a Spider Robinson novel. Pretty cool. So I have great respect,
not only for
the sciences, but even for those newer fields, like psychology or
sociology
or nutrition, that are still striving earnestly to achieve that
noble status
-- and there are a lot these days.
But planetary ecology is one of the feeblest.
It has only just begun the long difficult process that elevates
an area of
intellectual interest to the level of a science -- not surprising
when you
reflect that, only 50 years ago, nobody had ever heard of it.
Today, it is
-- at its best, when it isn't just a way to be heroic without
actually doing
anything brave -- largely good intentions, wishful thinking and
pious hopes
in search of significant data and meaningful experiments.
Acupuncture has a far better-established claim to be called
science.
Here is what ecologists know, so far, that they didn't basically
cop from
some pre-existing science: the whole biosphere is interconnected,
such that
a butterfly flapping its wings in Borneo may cause a tornado in
Calgary.
An admirable insight. But as to how the butterfly does this, or
what Calgary
might one day do to locate and dissuade it, we are nearly as
clueless today
as we were in 1950, or in the Stone Age.
Theories we got. Boy, have ecologists got theories. So do
handicappers and
other theologians. Predictions we have aplenty, too. It sometimes
seems
ecologists produce little else -- all, interestingly, long term:
The
predictors will be safely dead before the results are in.
And isn't it a funny coincidence that not one single
ecoprediction seems to
be a cheerful one? Almost as if they'd noticed that "We're
doomed!" is a
grabbier headline than "We're hangin' in there ..."
What they don't have, and won't any time soon, are many
experiments. We only
have the one planet (so far). To make perceptible changes to
something so
vast requires forces as powerful, and hard to control, as a
meteorite or an
industrial civilization. No matter what scale you work on,
results take
decades or centuries to show up. People who live on the planet
may object to
your tinkering.
So what do ecologists actually study, and base most of their
apocalyptic
predictions on? What is the fundamental basis of their
"science," as
currently constituted? Computer models.
Computer models are caca. Forget facts, or even theories: They
don't deserve
the status of a guess. Computer models are games one plays with
oneself, as
meaningful as throwing knucklebones or fashioning a voodoo doll,
oracles
only slightly more sophisticated than a Magic Eight-Ball.
The greatest programmer who ever lived cannot write a computer
model that
accurately describes a single cell, much less a stem cell. The
most powerful
computer ever built cannot reliably predict the behaviour of a
single
five-year-old, let alone an electorate of adults. Nortel's model
of the
telecommunications business -- a single industry -- turned out to
have major
predictive shortcomings, about $19-billion worth.
All computer models fail to factor in the (inevitable) invention
of newer,
better technologies, changing social customs, or the discovery of
new
resources. The notion that a system as complex as a single storm
can be
meaningfully modelled with a Pentium chip, or even a bank of
Crays, is
absurd; to claim to have modelled the entire biosphere is to
declare oneself
a fool, one short step above someone who thinks Myst is a real
world.
A great many such fools currently claim -- demand, actually --
the moral
right to direct and constrain the actions of every government,
industry and
society on Earth, to micromanage the entire atmosphere, on the
basis of
their computer-game scenarios.
Fair enough; everybody has a right to his hustle.
They may even turn out to be right, for all I -- or they, or
anybody --
know. It just makes me crazy when they or their fans call them
"scientists,"
that's all. That ain't right. It's a term that shouldn't be
debased, like
"veteran." In the immortal words of Leiber and Stoller,
"If a cat don't know
. . . he just don't know."
Three Spider
Robinson novels are out in paperback this month: Callahan's
Key, Starmind, and Telempath.
Copyright 2001, The Globe and Mail
-------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational use
only. The attached information may not be copied or reproduced
for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders. The
fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on, can be
found at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html
DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles
and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not
necessarily reflect the
opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the moderator of this
network.