From Radio Voice of Russia:
Russia’s Pulkovo Observatory: “we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years”
Scientists at Russia’s famous Pulkovo Observatory are convinced that the world is in for a period of global cooling.
Graph by David Archibald
Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless. Some experts warn that a change in the climate may affect the ambitious projects for the exploration of the Arctic that have been launched by many countries.
Just recently, experts said that the Arctic ice cover was becoming thinner while journalists warned that the oncoming global warming would make it possible to grow oranges in the north of Siberia. Now, they say a cold spell will set in. Apparently, this will not occur overnight, Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory, says.
“Journalists say the entire process is very simple: once solar activity declines, the temperature drops. But besides solar activity, the climate is influenced by other factors, including the lithosphere, the atmosphere, the ocean, the glaciers. The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%. This means that sun’s activity could trigger certain changes whereas the actual climate changing process takes place on the Earth”.
Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle. Yuri Nagovitsyn comments.
“Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040 but it won’t be as pervasive as in the late 17th century”.
Even though pessimists say global cooling will hamper exploration of the Arctic, experts say it won’t. Climate change and the resulting increase in the thickness of the Arctic ice cover pose no obstacles to the extraction of oil and gas on the Arctic shelf. As oil and gas reserves of the Arctic sea shelf are estimated to be billions of tons, countries are demonstrating more interest in the development of the Arctic. Climate change will also have no impact on the Northern Sea Route, which makes it possible to cut trade routes between Europe, Asia and America. Professor Igor Davidenko comments.
“The Northern Sea Route has never opened so early or closed so late over the past 30 years. Last year saw a cargo transit record – more than five million tons. The first Chinese icebreaker sailed along the Northern Sea Route in 2012. China plans it to handle up to 15% of its exports”.
As Russia steps up efforts to upgrade its icebreaker fleet, new-generation icebreakers are set to arrive in the years to come. No climate changes will thus be able to impede an increase in shipping traffic via the Northern Sea Route.
Read more: http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_04_22/Cooling-in-the-Arctic-what-to-expect/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The number of books written by American journalists taking what the Russians are saying about global cooling seriously remains at: one. It happens to have been written by yours truly, and there is a chance that I published it three to five years too early. There are worse mistakes one can make journalistically, but not necessarily in terms of marketing, lol.
If you’ve yet to read your first book about solar-induced global cooling that may very well be on the table, and would like to, it’s available in paperback and Kindle, the latter linked here:
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Sell-Your-Coat-ebook/dp/B0072VSQFQ
Leif will not approve.
I recall reading something like this way back in the early 2000’s. The prediction was a “cooling trend” would start around 2015.
I assume that the scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St. Petersburg are not part of the “overwhelming scientific consensus” on climate change.
With all apologies to Yakov Smirnoff, in Soviet Russia, climate changes you.
In the long term, it is clear that climate change is driven by things greater than small changes in the partial pressure of a trace gas. It is unlikely to be one thing and is probably a combination of factors that are ordinarily randomly out of phase that come together for major events.
Back in the days before early home pregnancy tests, my mom used to tell me not to worry, if I was pregnant it’d become obvious sooner or later. The same goes for this…sooner or later we will know which way the climate goes, even if we’re not around to witness it.
“The first Chinese icebreaker sailed along the Northern Sea Route in 2012…..”. With all the ice-breaking that goes on these days, it’s no wonder Arctic sea ice is retreating!
We know from history what previous cooling cycles have meant (famine, wars, etc.). With the power of today’s destructiveness, I wonder if man is wise enough to survive the next round.
Is there a publication that makes this prediction, or is this just an opinion expressed by the scientist?
Confusion: isn’t 24 coming in about 65? And the graphed “25” looks like a sudden onset Maunder Minimum. Since we couldn’t predict a 24 the way even 5 years ago, a collapse to a Maunder seems a stretch. A stepdown from last two would give us a Dalton, though.
Hah! A warning about a Maunder equivalent is the “coldist” version of CAGW ….. Do you think there are any grants available to prepare for another LIA?
@ur momisugly Harold Ambler
You might want to hit the “refresh” button on “your first” with the new ice age claim. Robert Felix published “Not by Fire, but by Ice” in Aug 1999. I’ve heard Robert in a number of radio interviews, and noticed some science discrepancies. His unwillingness to reply to email questions and fact corrections limited my interest in his book. His website, IceAgeNow.com does have good information, and like us all, with effort, knowledge improves over time. Of course, Hansen predicted pending Ice Age, before he predicted the pending Greenhouse Steam Age, if covering all the bases some how makes you “correct”.
“Jenn Oates says:
April 29, 2013 at 7:40 am”
Yes. But we know the cause. Unless it was immaculate, of course.
Drill,baby drill. Thorium Reactors, we can weather anything-if we stop our ridiculous navel gazing.
More energy is a way to stop wars and famine. Not less…
‘Happiness is a warm fast breeder’-Old Hanford area T-shirt..
“The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040” I am sure I don’t live until that day LOL
Hansen and McKibben along with others have said that 350ppm is the “safe” level for CO2. Since we know what the weather or climate was like at 350ppm, why haven’t they gone back to 1988 and prior and compare that to today’s weather?
Reblogged this on The Next Grand Minimum and commented:
It has aways been the sun!
JDC says:
April 29, 2013 at 7:32 am
Leif will not approve.
_____________________________________________________________
Because it is against his pet theory. Time will show who is right. I believe Svensmark’s theory and research is going to get more support very soon. It’s the SUN stupid. 🙂
If we enter a cooling period, it will be hard to not see it as the end of the Holocene. It is about time. Many look at the ice core proxies as a good example of why it gets warm. That loses its sheen with a time lag between temperature and CO2 levels, and becomes an effect rather than a cause. I’m worried about the other end of the proxies, the maximum CO2 levels occur just prior to re-glaciation.
“Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle.”
I thought we were also on the cooling side of a 60-year cycle: warming from (roughly) 1970-2000, cooling for the next 30 years. I seem to recall a Russian article on the cycle.
“Some experts warn that a change in the climate may affect the ambitious (STUPID, UNINFORMED, POLITICAL, HALF-ASSED) projects for the exploration of the Arctic”
There, I fixed it.
Phineas Fahrquar said on April 29, 2013 at 8:14 am:
“I thought we were also on the cooling side of a 60-year cycle: warming from (roughly) 1970-2000, cooling for the next 30 years. I seem to recall a Russian article on the cycle.”
We are on a 30-year cycle, but there are bigger cycles making themselves felt at this point.
I would also venture that the size of solar cycle 24 in the graph is actually a bit smaller than depicted here and thus the cooling is entering the stage earlier than indicated.
So, the West is suicidally hamstringing its ability to produce cheap energy, while the Russians are building icebreakers.
Let’s see if I can predict the response to global cooling: We have to tax energy production to redistribute the money to the poor countries, after passing it through unelected bureaucrats fingers of course, and we have to further increase funding to the IPCC so they can determine what mankind is doing to cause the cooling, as it just has to be our fault.
Thorium Fission reactors will never happen, as they will be overtaken and replaced by the now rapidly developing Fusion reactor technology. ITER was suppposed to be the LAST Physics experiment and also the FIRST Engineering exercise to try to scale up Fusion reactors to commercial size.
In the long period of ITER uncertainty and construction, every one of the Physics problems have ALREADY been solved elsewhere. ITER is now purely an engineering activity to scale up Fusion to comercial plant size. That engineering design activity is essentially completed; and the construction effort using those designs, is in flower.
We are witnessing the coming end of the “Energy Problem” amid enormous new Petroleum and Natural Gas discoveries, and the arrival of Fusion technology.
“The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%.”
This statement, taken alone, just can’t be true, and I wouldn’t know how to qualify it to make it true.