Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

CO2 Forcing: Fact or Fiction Science provides the unambiguous answer George White October 2008 Revised July 2009

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "CO2 Forcing: Fact or Fiction Science provides the unambiguous answer George White October 2008 Revised July 2009"— Presentation transcript:

1 CO2 Forcing: Fact or Fiction Science provides the unambiguous answer George White October 2008 Revised July 2009 co2@palisad.com

2 The Ice Cores > 400K year history from Vostok > 800K year history from Dome C The climate is far from constant CO2, CH4 and Temperature are all correlated The data tells us far more than this What kind of changes are expected? Which came first, the gas or the heat? What are the periodic influences?

3 Many sources of information Ice Core Data Atmospheric Absorption Data Satellite Observations Ground Based Observations Biology Physics

4 Vostok Ice Core Temperatures

5 Ice Core Temp + CO2

6 Temp + CO2 + CH4

7 Last 15K years Temp + CO2

8 Dome C Ice Temp + CO2

9 Data Smoothing Data samples are intrinsically biased Recent samples represent short term averages Ancient samples represent long term averages Different variables have different sample periods Integrate samples over N years Matches short term data to long term data Matches temperature to CO2 and CH4 Isolate long and short term periodicity Isolate long and short term dependency

10 Temp + CO2 1500 year smoothing

11 Dome C Temp + CO2 with smoothing

12 Last 15K years with smoothing

13 Last 15K years Dome C

14 Compare Vostok and Dome C

15 Dome C 15K years + smoothing

16 Correlation Analysis Simple correlation metric for time Δ t from t Plus 1 when t+ Δ t changes in the same direction as t Minus 1 when t+ Δ t changes in the opposite direction Cross correlation identifies cause and effect Auto correlation identifies periodic components Use smoothing to select long or short term Variable window to match Δ t to sample period

17 Cross Correlation Analysis Can identify which of 2 variables changes first Temperature and CO2 Temperature and CH4 CO2 and CH4 Smoothing is required to normalize variability Smoothing does not mask cause and effect Smoothing makes short term dependence apparent

18 Cross Correlate Temp and CO2

19 Cross Correlate Temp and CH4

20 Cross Correlate Temp, CO2 and CH4

21 Dome C Cross Correlation Dome C has finer resolution CO2 measurements Shows apparent correlation of CO2 to future Temp Frequently misinterpreted as a causal dependency Also shows earlier correlation to opposite change This is an aliasing effect which really indicates CO2 increase -> Temp Decrease -> Temp Increase Indicates correlation across a period of unrelated change Indicates interference from a periodic effect When smoothing is applied Same results as Vostok data

22 Dome C Correlate Temp and Co2

23 Dome C Correlate with smoothing

24 Dome C Temp, CO2 and CH4

25 Auto Correlation Analysis Auto correlate temperature Apparent short term periodic behavior 180 year Dome C, 120 Year (25yr bucket), 270 year Vostok Seems to be aliasing of seasonal variability Apply smoothing Unambiguous 22K, 41K period (Vostok and Dome C) Modulated peaks are evidence for other periodicity Related to variability in Earth's orbit and axis Related to sums and harmonics of this variability Common to temperature, CO2 and CH4

26 Short Term Auto Correlation

27 Medium Term Auto Correlation

28 Long Term Auto Correlation

29 Longer Term Auto Correlation

30 An Even Longer Term Effect

31 Combined Effects The change between 96K and 41K ice ages Considered by some to be a mystery When the 41K, 96K and 500K forcing are combined One can cancel or enhance the other 96K is weaker, 500K is weakest, 41K is dominant The pattern is clearly an interference pattern We are entering a new age of 41K ice ages Evidenced by current weaker, but longer interglacial Currently approaching 500K peak 41K and 96K peaks are separated by about 30K years Stretching out the current interglacial

32 Is This Enough Forcing? Some say that these effects are not strong enough The periodicity clearly aligns Magnitudes seem unexpected 96K is weak, but appears dominant recently Several 41K peaks have aligned with 96K minimums This mitigates the magnitude of the 41K effects There is a feedback effect at work Hemispheric asymmetry and ice amplification

33 Atmospheric Absorption An objective review of atmospheric absorption is all that's required to disprove CO2 forcing The atmospheric absorption spectrum is known It has been measured and correlated to theory Water vapor contributes about 2/3, CO2 is 1/3 Relatively transparent window from 8 μ to 14 μ Weak ozone absorption in the middle 7.5 μ CH4 line on one side, 15 μ CO2 line on the other, water vapor continuum absorption throughout

34 Atmospheric Absorption Spectrum

35 CO2 Absorption 15 μ CO2 line absorption Highly saturated Energy limited, not concentration limited Double CO2 Insignificant increase in width Primarily decreases mean distance before absorption Other bands are between 2 μ and 4.3 μ Narrower lines Significant H2O overlap Far less energy available to be absorbed

36 GHG Forcing The Energy Cycle CO2 captures 15 μ surface energy Collisions transfer energy to other gas molecules Some energy gets back to the surface The cycle repeats Delays the release of surface energy GHG flux is a circulating flux Solar flux is an incident flux

37 Satellite Observations 25 year history of detailed weather measurements 10 km surface resolution 3 hour time resolution 100% surface coverage Measurements include Surface temperature Cloud temperature Cloud coverage Reflectivities

38 Anomaly Analysis

39 Anomaly Fix

40 Anomaly Partial Fix

41 Observed Variability Global mean temperature varies significantly +/- 2.1 ˚ C seasonal variability +2.1 ˚ C in June, -2.1 ˚ C in December Sun is closest in early January, farthest in July Global mean temperature changes oppositely Indicates dramatic hemispheric asymmetry Unambiguously supports Milankovitch forcing Data calibration error around 2001-2002 This has been misinterpreted as 'evidence' of warming

42 Global Average Temperature

43 Hemispheric Differences Southern Hemisphere 8 ˚ C peak to peak variability 276 ˚ K absolute mean temperature (=3 ˚ C) Northern Hemisphere 24 ˚ C peak to peak variability 280 ˚ K absolute mean temperature (=7 ˚ C) Equatorial Small 6 month periodic variability Clearly illustrates 2001/2002 calibration error

44 Hemispheric Differences

45 Surface Reflectivity Northern Hemisphere Higher mean More land, less water More variability Greater range in albedo – whiteness of snow and ice More time spent during higher reflectivity More persistent snow and ice coverage Consequences Sun closer in Northern summer -> cooler climate Sun closer in Southern summer -> warmer climate

46 Reflectivity Asymmetries

47 Temperature and Reflectivity

48 Where is the Sun Now? Sun is closest in early January 3.4% more incident energy than average Sun is farthest away in early July 3.4% less incident solar energy than average Nearly 7% total solar variability over a year Corresponds to a 4 ˚ C difference in temperature Peak aphelion/perihelion differences are > 20%

49 Temperature and Energy

50 Implications of Sun-Earth distance? When Sun is closest during North winter (now)‏ Warmer seasons, ice shrinks Ice shrinks, -> less reflected energy -> even warmer Positive feedback stops once minimum ice is reached When Sun is farther away during Northern winter Colder seasons, ice grows Ice grows -> more reflected energy -> even colder Southern hemisphere climate is more stable Equatorial climate is even more stable

51 Ice Amplification A popular hypothesis is that CO2 forcing amplifies periodic influences of orbit and axis As evidenced by hemispheric differences, small changes in reflectivity have big consequences This is confirmed by energy balance modeling Surface ice and snow reflects a lot of energy Positive feedback reinforces this effect Models show that the ebb and flow of northern hemisphere surface snow and ice provides all of the required amplification

52 Ground Based Observations Thermometers, tree rings, etc. Must be very careful here It's invalid to compare short term changes to changes in long term averages The most common mistake in climate alarmists arguments  The 'Hockey Stick'  Claims that temperatures are rising faster than ever Mauna Loa CO2 measurements Yes, CO2 is increasing, but...

53 Mauna Loa CO2 Overlay Mauna Loa CO2 with global temperature Temperature decreases as CO2 increases Actually CO2 decreases as temperature increases Clear biological response More warmth, more plants, more CO2 is consumed As it cools, plants die, decomposing into CO2 and CH4 Very fast acting Responds to temperature changes immediately Removing trend bias, the response is relatively linear Short term response

54 Mauna Loa CO2 and Temperature

55 Biology The CO2 and CH4 record reflects biology Short term More warmth -> more plants -> less CO2 Less warmth -> more decomposition -> more CO2 Long Term Plants require Sun energy + CO2 Build up of CO2 required to support more biomass More biomass -> more decomposition -> more CO2/CH4 More CO2 and Energy -> more biomass Animals slowly catch up, increasing CH4/CO2 ratio

56 Physics Conservation of Energy Precludes runaway greenhouse effects Atmospheric absorption has no effect on the energy budget, i.e. Energy in == Energy out Clouds and greenhouse gases, warm surface Clouds trap far more energy than greenhouse gases Greenhouse gases redistribute atmospheric energy Greenhouse gas effects are primarily diurnal

57 Is CO2 Forcing Plausible? Ice cores  The recent rate of temperature change is exceeded in the data  Past temperatures were warmer with far lower CO2 levels  Temperature changes are correlated to orbit and axis variability  There is no correlation of temperature to prior CO2 or CH4 levels  Biology offers a complete explanation for CO2 and CH4 Atmospheric absorption  CO2 absorption is energy limited and not concentration limited  Water vapor is a far larger contributor Mauna Loa  Increasing temperature is associated with decreasing CO2 Satellite  Ebb and flow of ice provides all necessary positive feedback  Hemispheric asymmetry amplifies seasonal differences

58 Politics Unfortunately, politics has subverted the science Many want global warming to man made There are convenient scapegoats It's a self righteous feel good kind of politics to promote man made causes of global warming The issue fits too well as a left/right conflict Guilt/greed Environment/business There's money to be made

59 Conclusion Natural CO2 and CH4 are indicators of biology No forward feedback to temperature is in the record To Solve Global Warming All we need to do is wait In geologic terms, another ice age is eminent It's too bad that anthropomorphic CO2 can't stop it Spending money on CO2 mitigation Absolute worst thing to do No climate change reversal will result Better spent on adapting to the inevitable

60 References Data Hyperlinks Satellite Data Ice Core Data Irradiance Data Atmospheric Absorption Data Science Hyperlinks Milankovitch Weather Satellite Data Black Body RadiationBlack Body Radiation And Stefan-Boltzmann LawStefan-Boltzmann Law


Download ppt "CO2 Forcing: Fact or Fiction Science provides the unambiguous answer George White October 2008 Revised July 2009"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google