1. Climate Science Sense and Nonsense Keith Burrows
Prepared by Keith Burrows, ‘Science Teachers for Climate Awareness’ and ‘Beyond Zero Emissions’, for Science Teacher conferences Feb Copyright KB, but teachers are encouraged to use and adapt to suit their situation. Commercial use prohibited.
Keith Burrows
Australian Institute of Physics
Education Committee

2. Nothing could be further from the truth!
“… the global warming theory itself is based on just 16 years of warming – from 1980 to 1996.”
Easy to pick out a few alarming predictions that haven’t worked out as claimed, but many more have and are. Many have exceeded predictions (Arctic ice, permafrost, SLR)
Bolt text: Climate not behaving as warmists insist Andrew Bolt October Global warming - dud predictions
How many more years of no warming before global warmists admit their theory is broken?
New data released two weeks ago shows the pause in global warming has now lasted 16 years.
This is despite man’s carbon dioxide emissions – blamed by warmists for causing the world to overheat – soaring nearly 50 per cent over the past two decades.
More emissions, but no warming. This is not what was meant to happen.
“The data confirms the existence of a ‘pause’ in the warming,” confirmed Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology .
Leading global warming scientists agree, even if they disagree on what the pause means.
“The hiatus was not unexpected,” said Kevin Trenberth of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research.
“Variability in the climate can suppress rising temperatures temporarily…
“In any case, one decade is not long enough to say anything about human effects on climate; as one forthcoming paper lays out, 17 years is required.”
Wow. So 16 years of no statistically significant warming (just 0.08 degrees per decade) is too short a time to doubt man is dangerously overheating the planet.
But 17 years will be. Can’t wait.
But the global warming theory itself is based on just 16 years of warming – from 1980 to 1996.
It wasn’t too soon then for warmists to demand carbon taxes, solar panels, wind farms and power bills through the roof.
What’s more, the leaked Climategate s show the Climatic Research Unit’s head, Professor Phil Jones, already discussing the pause with other warmist scientists in 2009, reassuring them: “Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.”
Yet with the pause now lasting 16 years, Jones is still pleading for more time to see if his theory holds out.
This lack of warming does not disprove the theory that man is heating the world dangerously.
But nothing the world’s climate is doing confirms it, either.
Nothing could be further from the truth!

3. It is basic science that has been known for almost 200 years!
Earth’s temperature is a balance between energy coming IN from the Sun and going OUT as IR
Its pretty simple really – if more heat is coming in than going out the Earth’s temperature must increase. As it gets hotter, the amount of IR radiation radiated will increase. Once the incoming and outgoing are equal the temperature will remain relatively stable.

4. Climate Science 101 “The Earth should be a lot colder than it is”
Joseph Fourier ~1820
Could use the term “Earth’s energy balance” here if appropriate to explain that energy in from the Sun can be calculated and energy out must balance this – but energy out is dependent on the average temperature. From AIP: Beginning with work by Joseph Fourier in the 1820s, scientists had understood that gases in the atmosphere might trap the heat received from the Sun. As Fourier put it, energy in the form of visible light from the Sun easily penetrates the atmosphere to reach the surface and heat it up, but heat cannot so easily escape back into space. For the air absorbs invisible heat rays (“infrared radiation”) rising from the surface. The warmed air radiates some of the energy back down to the surface, helping it stay warm. This was the effect that would later be called, by an inaccurate analogy, the "greenhouse effect." [The Discovery of Global Warming - Spencer Weart, AIP]

5. Climate Science 101
Tyndall found that water vapour and carbon dioxide in the air keep the Earth warm and habitable.
John Tyndall ~ 1860
Even though they compose only less than 1% (H2O) and 0.04% (CO2).
Tyndall set out to find whether there was in fact any gas in the atmosphere that could trap heat rays. In 1859, his careful laboratory work identified several gases that did just that. The most important was simple water vapor (H2O). Also effective was carbon dioxide (CO2), although in the atmosphere the gas is only a few parts in ten thousand. Just as a sheet of paper will block more light than an entire pool of clear water, so the trace of CO2 altered the balance of heat radiation through the entire atmosphere. [The Discovery of Global Warming - Spencer Weart, AIP]

6. Climate Science 101
Refer to ‘Earth’s energy balance’ again. And his analysis was pretty much correct.
Svante August Arrhenius figured it out in He also found that doubling the CO2 in the atmosphere would increase the Earth’s temperature around 5oC

7. Greenhouse Effect = +33oC
Climate Science 101
It’s a bit like a greenhouse...
So it is called the “Greenhouse Effect”
It keeps the Earth at a warm +15oC (average) instead of a freezing –18oC
Greenhouse Effect = +33oC
It is VERY IMPORTANT to realise that the greenhouse effect is well understood and is responsible for keeping the Earth 33 deg warmer than it would otherwise be. THIS IS CENTRAL TO OUR STORY! Do we really want to interfere with the greenhouse effect which is so crucial to life on Earth?
Note that in a real greenhouse the glass traps some IR, but the biggest effect is the trapping of the warmed air, so the atmosphere does not really work the same way as a glass greenhouse. Some deniers exploit this difference to suggest that the atmosphere does NOT act like a greenhouse – true, but irrelevant. (Photo KB)

8. Although we add ‘only’ about 4 gtn per year, this has thrown out the balance. Only about half of our emissions are absorbed so we are adding C at the rate of ~4 gtn/yr or 400 gtn per century. Deniers like to say that our emissions are only about 3% of ‘natural emissions’. What they forget (?) is that our 4 gtn is an ADDITION to the total not part of it. As well, because we are clearing land for crops the amount of C going into the atmosphere is increasing, while the amount going into the ocean from the atmosphere is decreasing as it warms up (less gas dissolves in warm water) – but the total going into the ocean is INCREASING because of our emissions – making the ocean more acid. Notice that volcanoes are a tiny percentage of human emissions.

9. ie. 40% increase
Although we add ‘only’ about 4 gtn per year, this has thrown out the balance. Only about half of our emissions are absorbed so we are adding C at the rate of ~4 gtn/yr or 400 gtn per century. Deniers like to say that our emissions are only about 3% of ‘natural emissions’. What they forget (?) is that our 4 gtn is an ADDITION to the total not part of it. As well, because we are clearing land for crops the amount of C going into the atmosphere is increasing, while the amount going into the ocean from the atmosphere is decreasing as it warms up (less gas dissolves in warm water) – but the total going into the ocean is INCREASING because of our emissions – making the ocean more acid. Notice that volcanoes are a tiny percentage of human emissions.

10. From 280 ppm pre-industrial to 400 ppm last year ie. 43% increase
Although we add ‘only’ about 4 gtn per year, this has thrown out the balance. Only about half of our emissions are absorbed so we are adding C at the rate of ~4 gtn/yr or 400 gtn per century. Deniers like to say that our emissions are only about 3% of ‘natural emissions’. What they forget (?) is that our 4 gtn is an ADDITION to the total not part of it. As well, because we are clearing land for crops the amount of C going into the atmosphere is increasing, while the amount going into the ocean from the atmosphere is decreasing as it warms up (less gas dissolves in warm water) – but the total going into the ocean is INCREASING because of our emissions – making the ocean more acid. Notice that volcanoes are a tiny percentage of human emissions.
From 280 ppm pre-industrial to
400 ppm last year ie. 43% increase

11. The more CO2 the higher the radiation has to get before it escapes to space – the thicker the ‘insulation’ blanket. It also means the radiation has to escape from a colder part of the atmosphere and so it takes more energy. See ‘saturation’ argument. [KB diag] SO THE QUESTIONS ARE: HOW MUCH MORE WARMING? and WILL THAT BE DANGEROUS? Well we are going to find out, because we are performing …..

12. Climate Science 101
So by how much will adding 40% more CO2 in the atmosphere add to the +33oC Greenhouse Effect?
It is VERY IMPORTANT to realise that the greenhouse effect is well understood and is responsible for keeping the Earth 33 deg warmer than it would otherwise be. THIS IS CENTRAL TO OUR STORY! Do we really want to interfere with the greenhouse effect which is so crucial to life on Earth? IT is also important to point out that water vapour is also an important ghg, but that while CO2 stays in the air for hundreds of years water vapour goes in and out with evaporation and precipitation. CO2 is a FORCING ghg while H2O is a FEEDBACK ghg. Fortunately because of these and other feedbacks we won’t increase the 33 degrees by 40% !!!!
Note that in a real greenhouse the glass traps some IR, but the biggest effect is the trapping of the warmed air, so the atmosphere does not really work the same way as a glass greenhouse. Some deniers exploit this difference to suggest that the atmosphere does NOT act like a greenhouse – true, but irrelevant. (Photo KB)

13. The denier view
And the temperature is doing just what we expect it to do!!! Note that the spike in 1998 (strong El Niño) was way above the surrounding years. A temperature that high now would just be a ‘normal’ high year. Next time we get a strong El Niño it is going to be off this chart!
KB graph based on HadCRUT3 (-1990) and 4 ( ) and CDIC
Clearly many factors affect annual temperatures, but the trend is very clear! AND IT IS WHAT THE SCIENCE PREDICTS!

14. BUT! This does NOT include delayed and feedback effects.
560 ppm 2oC
560 ppm
BUT! This does NOT include delayed and feedback effects.
Which are considerable!
Even if we stopped emitting ANY CO2 now the temperature would continue going up by about another degree.
KB graph based on HadCRUT3 (-1990) and 4 ( ) and CDIC
Clearly many factors affect annual temperatures, but the trend is very clear! AND IT IS WHAT THE SCIENCE PREDICTS!
280 ppm

15. Best guess is between 2oC and 4oC
BUT there are many unknowns including possible ‘tipping points’ that will see us go beyond a point of no return.
Best guess is between 2oC and 4oC

16. NOTE: The figure is trillion tonnes of CARBON not CO2. It is 3
NOTE: The figure is trillion tonnes of CARBON not CO2. It is 3.7 trillion tonnes of CO2. See the following for clarification of this:
Also see: Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne - Myles R. Allen1, David J. Frame1,2, Chris Huntingford3, Chris D. Jones4, Jason A. Lowe5, Malte Meinshausen & Nicolai Meinshausen in Nature Vol 458|30 April 2009| doi: /nature08019

17. Note that the figure is 1000 Gt of Carbon (not CO2)
It is equivalent to 3700 Gt of CO2
Limiting cumulative CO2 emissions to 2050 to 1,000 Gt CO2 yields a 25% probability of warming exceeding 2oC
As 2000–2006 CO2 emissions were 234 Gt CO2 , less than half the proven economically recoverable oil, gas and coal reserves can still be emitted up to 2050 to achieve such a goal.
As 2000–2012 CO2 emissions were 500 Gt CO2 , less than quarter of the proven economically recoverable oil, gas and coal reserves can still be emitted up to 2050 to achieve such a goal.

18. From Meinshausen et.al. Nature (April 2009)
2014
Simple Figure Manuscript Meinshausen et al. (2009) "Greenhouse gas emission targets for limiting warming to 2°C", Nature
Caption: Two possible futures. One in which no climate policies are implemented (red), and one with strong action to mitigate emissions (blue). Shown are fossil CO2 emissions (top panel) and corresponding global warming (bottom panel). The shown mitigation pathway limits fossil and land-use related CO2 emissions to 1000 billion tonnes CO2 over the first half of the 21st century with near-zero net emissions thereafter. Greenhouse gas emissions of this pathway in year 2050 are ~70% below 1990 levels. Without climate policies, global warming will cross 2°C by the middle of the century. Strong mitigation actions according to the blue route would limit the risk of exceeding 2°C to 25%.
Background information: For more details, see Figure 2 in Meinshausen et al. (2009).
Copyright information: This figure can be freely used as long as the source is stated; licensed under the creative commons attribution license Attribution: M. Meinshausen et al. (2009).

19. A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years
Shaun A.Marcott,* Jeremy D. Shakun, Peter U. Clark, Alan C. Mix Published 8 March 2013, Science 339, 1198 (2013)
A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years S.Marcott, et.al. 8 March 2013, Science

20. And the next 100 years?
Earth has not been this hot for MILLIONS of years
A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years
Shaun A.Marcott,* Jeremy D. Shakun, Peter U. Clark, Alan C. Mix Published 8 March 2013, Science 339, 1198 (2013)

21. Earth’s climate

22. July
2009
“Paul Blanchon's team at the National University of Mexico has been studying 121,000 year old coral reefs in the Yucatan Peninsula, formed during the
Abrupt climate changes have occurred in the past. We should not think that it can’t happen again. 3 m this century would be absolutely catastrophic. And that’s just the sea rise – add to that the changes in land fertility and ecosystem collapse. SEE New Scientist: Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought * 01 July 2009 by Anil Ananthaswamy New Scientist issue 2715.
last interglacial period when sea level peaked at around 10 metres higher than today. His findings suggest that at one point the sea rose 3 metres within 50 to 100 years.”
Temperatures in that interglacial were only a degree or so warmer than the 20th C.

23. Earth’s climate – looking at the past
Pliocene
CO2 drops from >400 ppm to ~300 ppm
+3°C
Pliocene – a few degrees warmer, but sea level about 25 m higher, little polar ice, …. Etc!! ??
Pliocene: Temperature around 3oC warmer, sea level around 20 – 30 m higher

24. http://ngm. nationalgeographic
But I think this is eventual sea level rise of ~50 metres? But the point is that once it starts it will be virtually impossible to stop the sea level rising at an accelerating rate due to feedback effects and the inherent long delay times.

27. Melbourne with ~ 20 m sea level rise.

28. And we think we have a “boat people” problem now?!!!!

29. 2012 – Record low September Arctic sea ice
Yellow line 20th C average

30. Now about HALF what it has been for tens of thousands of years!
We are not talking about anything like ‘normal variation’. This is extreme loss of ice. Instead of wondering if it will all be gone by 2100, scientists are now debating whether it will be 2015 or 2030!
This data from: Reconstructed changes in Arctic sea ice over the past 1,450 years Christophe Kinnard, Christian M. Zdanowicz, David A. Fisher, Elisabeth Isaksson, Anne de Vernal, & Lonnie G. Thompson Nature 479, (24 November 2011) doi: /nature Published online 23 November 2011

31. Climate extremes
The RATE at which high temperature records are being broken is INCREASING
In a steady climate the rate at which all records are broken should be decreasing – it gets harder to break records.

32. “The latest estimate is that some 18
“The latest estimate is that some 18.8 million km2 of northern soils hold about 1,700 billion tonnes of organic carbon. [Australia = 7.7 million km2 ] That is about four times more than all the carbon emitted by human activity in modern times and twice as much as is present in the atmosphere now.”

33. International Permafrost Association
In other words there is A LOT OF PERMAFROST!!! In a recent article in Nature, Abbott and fellow researcher Edward Schuur, of the University of Florida, summarised recent findings from experts in the field. About 1700 billion tonnes of organic carbon is held in frozen northern soils, they said– about four times more than all the carbon emitted by human activity in modern times and twice as much as is present in the atmosphere now.
International Permafrost Association

34. Is the Earth warming?
Satellites can measure the heat escaping to space …
We can’t SEE the Earth’s radiation (like we could the molten iron, but we can measure it using instruments on satellites. This is Net radiation from the Earth Scale goes from –180 to +150 W/m^ From Nasa Earth Observatory (NAS-EObs-p20013a28g29001.jpg)
Low radiation High radiation

35. The Earth must warm until they balance!
Is the Earth warming?
… and IT IS LESS THAN THAT COMING IN from the Sun – by about ½ watt per sq metre.
The Earth must warm until they balance!
NOT SURE about the ½ figure as latest forcing (IPCC 2013) suggests more like 2 W/m2 (see SPM Fig 5)
The evidence for the increased greenhouse effect is not just from temperature records. We can actually measure the in and out and see that the Earth is holding on to more heat than it is emitting. See for example: Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and John E. Harries, Helen E. Brindley, Pretty J. Sagoo & Richard J. Bantges Letters to Nature 15 March or Earth’s Annual Global Mean Energy Budget J. T. Kiehl and Kevin E. Trenberth National Center for Atmospheric Research,* Boulder, Colorado in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society Vol. 78, No. 2, February Scientists Confirm Earth's Energy Is Out Of Balance: Earth Institute News Archive posted 04/28/05 Columbia University: Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) measurements show the reflected solar radiation (left) and emitted heat radiation (right) for January 1, In both images, the lightest areas represent thick clouds, which both reflect radiation from the Sun and block heat rising from the Earth's surface. Notice the clouds above the western Pacific Ocean, where there is strong uprising of air, and the relative lack of clouds north and south of the equator. Credit: NASA
Reflected visible radiation Emitted IR radiation

36. Is the Earth warming? Half a watt per square metre! That’s about:
20 times ALL the power being used by humanity
or 400,000 Hiroshima
bombs EVERY DAY
This MUST heat
the Earth
From Jim Hansen TED presentation: That is ~20 x power used by all humanity or 400,000 Hiroshima bombs every day

37. Is the Earth warming?
Most of the ADDED heat is going into the ocean, not the atmosphere or the ground. The ocean has a huge thermal mass and so heats slowly. This causes a time lag which means that if we stopped adding CO2 now the ocean would continue to warm for decades yet – with the consequent spill over to the air, the ice and land. Remember that the heat from the ocean is what drives the weather (storms) and eventually warms the polar ice.

38. Is the Earth warming? The Ocean
Note that even the increase in World Ocean Heat Content is not even. Patterns such as ENSO etc. mean that heat flows differently from year to year. From : Global ocean heat content 1955 – 2008 in light of recently revealed instrumentation problems. S.Levitus et.al. Geophysical Research Letters Vol 36, 2009

40. HOW many more manufacturing workers must be sacked, thanks to green policies that only pretend to stop global warming? How many of the jobless won’t be able to heat or cool their homes, with these same mad policies helping to hike power prices by 110 per cent in only five years?

42. “Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Brendan Pearson said the 19 per cent recommendation showed the CCA needed to be abolished. He said it would destroy jobs and living standards and was the equivalent of shutting down the electricity sector for five years.”
The Australian is always heavily biased toward down-playing the climate science. Claims it “accepts the science” and yet always takes the side of the deniers and virtually never publishes articles from genuine climate scientists.

43. What to do? AND – spread the GOOD NEWS!
By all means change the light bulbs (etc!)
But the most important thing missing at present is political will
So we must TELL PEOPLE!
Write to papers and politicians
Join with others to spread the word
AND – spread the GOOD NEWS!
(See the next presentation: And now the good news
Don’t know this group, but sounds like a good idea. Plans to encourage neighbourhood get-togethers to spread climate science understanding and encourage action. Just starting up now (Feb 2014)