Guest post by Indur M. Goklany
In this Reuters story (15 December 2009) they report: “Describing a ‘runaway melt’ of the Earth’s ice, rising tree mortality and prospects of severe water scarcities, Gore told a UN audience: ‘In the face of effects like these, clear evidence that only reckless fools would ignore, I feel a sense of frustration’ at the lack of agreement so far.”
Now to most people, “rising tree mortality” raises the specter of a world with less greenery. But how does real world data compare with the virtual modeled world? Is the world getting less greener? Is there any hint of the virtual world in the real world data?
Satellite data for the real world (not the one Mr. Gore lives in) can help give us an idea.
Global
Globally net primary productivity (NPP) has increased. As the IPCC’s WG II report (p. 106) says:
Satellite-derived estimates of global net primary production from satellite data of vegetation indexes indicate a 6% increase from 1982 to 1999, with large increases in tropical ecosystems (Nemani et al., 2003) [Figure 1]. The study by Zhou et al. (2003), also using satellite data, confirm that the Northern Hemisphere vegetation activity has increased in magnitude by 12% in Eurasia and by 8% in NorthAmerica from 1981 to 1999
Figure 1: Climate driven changes in global net primary productivity, 1982-1999. Source: Myneni (2006), p. 5. This is the same figure as in IPCC AR4WGII, p. 106, but with a different color scheme.
Amazonia
In a synthesis of long term ecological monitoring data across old growth Amazonia, Phillips et al (2008) find that from approximately 1988 to 2000 not only that the biomass of these tropical forests increased but that they have become more dynamic, that is, they have more stems, faster recruitment, faster mortality, faster growth and more lianas. These increases have occurred across regions and environmental gradients and through time for the lowland Neotropics and Amazonia. They note that the simplest explanation for this suite of results is that improved resource availability has increased net primary productivity, in turn increasing growth rates, which can all be explained by a long-term increase in a limiting resource. They suggest that this no-longer-limiting resource might be CO2, although other factors (e.g., insolation or diffuse radiation) may also play a role.
Gloor et al. (2009), based on analysis of data from 135 forest plots in old growth Amazonia from 1971 to 2006 show that the observed increase in aboveground biomass is not due to an artifact of limited spatial and temporal monitoring. They conclude that biomass has increased over the past 30 years (p. 2427).
These findings are consistent with satellite data that indicate that the net primary productivity of the Amazon increased substantially from 1982–99, a period that experienced considerable global warming (see Figure 1).
Sahel
Satellite Imagery shows that parts of the Sahara and Sahel are greening up consistent with the trend recorded in Figure 1 (Owen 2009). The United Nations’ Africa Report (Figure 2) notes:
“Greening of the Sahel as observed from satellite images is now well established, confirming that trends in rainfall are the main but not the only driver of change in vegetation cover. For the period 1982-2003, the overall trend in monthly maximum Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is positive over a large portion of the Sahel region, reaching up to 50 per cent increase in parts of Mali, Mauritania and Chad, and confirming previous findings at a regional scale.” (United Nations 2008: 41). Figure 2: Source: United Nations (2008),
Australia
Similarly, an Australia-wide analysis of satellite data for 1981–2006 indicates that vegetation cover has increased average of 8% (Donohue et al. 2009).
Figure 3: Australia, 1981-2006. Change in vegetation cover, as described by the fraction of Photosynthetically Active Radiation absorbed by vegetation (fPAR). Source: Donohue et al. (2009)
Canada
With respect to the northern latitudes, 22% of the vegetated area in Canada was found to have a positive vegetation trend from 1985–2006. Of these, 40% were in northern ecozones (Pouliot et al. 2009; see Figure 4).
Figure 4: Long term changes in vegetation for Canada, 1985-2006. Source: Pouliot, D A; Latifovic, R; Olthof (2009).
References
Donohue, Randall J.; Tim R. McVIcar; and Michael Roderick. (2009). Climate-related trends in Australian vegetation cover as inferred from satellite observations, 1981–2006. Global Change Biology doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01746.x.
Gloor, M.: O. L. Phillips, J. J. Lloyd, et al. (2009). Does the disturbance hypothesis explain the biomass increase in basin-wide Amazon forest plot data? Global Change Biology 15: 2418–2430.
Phillips, Oliver L; Simon L Lewis, Timothy R Baker, Kuo-Jung Chao and Niro Higuchi (2008). The changing Amazon forest. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series B 2008 363, 1819-1827.
===============
Further reading
One recent WUWT post that also sheds some light on this issue:
Cosmic Rays and tree growth patterns linked
These next two are particularly relevant, because they show that trees have recently begun to respond positively to increased CO2 in the atmosphere:
EPA about to declare CO2 dangerous – ssshhh! – Don’t tell the trees
Surprise: Earths’ Biosphere is Booming, Satellite Data Suggests CO2 the Cause
How does the “greening” study square with the widespread “bark-beetle” infestation. Last time I was in Alaska, there were dead trees as far as the eye could see all the way down from Anchorage south. While it may not have had anything to do with global warming, the well-known infestation all over the North American continent certainly causes me to question “greening” findings for that region in the late 20th century.
Al may be an idiot, but I’m sure he’s heard senators from the western U.S. states bemoaning bark-beetle devastation. The way his simple mind works, anything bad that happens is due to AGW. That said, however, anyone with eyes to see is aware there are lots of newly dead trees out there.
CH
Wait a minute. What happened to rise of the killer trees from the EPA thread?
And using real satellite data is just plain low. Surely the object is to simply pull “factiods” out of your ass whenever you need them to illustrate your political point. Deserts greening, deserts expanding, deserts staying much the same all causes for alarm for somebody somewhere – just pick one. Science eh..
The other day while walking through the forest alone, Al recited this poem to the trees-
From swaying Cyprus,
To unbending Oak,
I stand before thee,
Most think me a joke.
My name is Al Gore,
And money’s my game,
Your death is rising,
By wit I proclaim.
The facts matter not,
For it’s wealth I seek,
And end to end,
With falsehoods I reek.
I tell this to you.
Oh trees of ring fame,
As you have no voice,
Me, you can not name.
So what do I care,
your reality,
Makes no difference,
your mortality.
So proudly I shout,
Al Gore is my name,
You trees are just pawns,
As wealth is my game.
And as for the joke,
It’s on them, not me,
I laugh all the way,
To the bank you see!
Al Gore is my name – – –
And money’s my game.
Sadly, everyone is underestimating Gore’s command of statistics.
As Gore appreciates, a massive destruction of trees will be required to find the subset which eliminates the MWP _and_ agrees with the instrumental measurements.
Great Al Gore cartoon: click
Copenhagen: click
Copenhagen, current: click
Copenhagen sign: click
Methane, more dangerous than CO2: click
CRU methodology: click
Obama arrives to save the conference: click
Why not take some polar bears to the sahara desert for pictures for power point presentations Al?
The AGW folks are in panic. Their current surge includes unsupported claims and prophesies on ocean acidification, trees, sickness and even plane accidents. This is a symptom of wasting too many billions on too many grants to fund global warming scientists.
I enjoy this web site. It shows such a huge amount of science that plays out experimential bias in non scientific approaches.
This mess from algore is not scientific. He has no control group or environment to comare with.
AdderW (07:38:18) :
For those nations that need water – build desalination plants – there is a lot of sea water out there.
Only one small problem there – you need electricty to desalinate water and Big Al won’t let anyone build efficient power generation facilities (hydro, nuke, coal – all are forbidden in Al’s perfect world).
Hold on. This post supports Gore. In the section on Amazonia, it states “the biomass of these tropical forests … have … faster mortality“. What’s the difference between “rising tree mortality” and “faster mortality”?
/sarcasm
CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY
HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why climate change is natural and not man-made:
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138
“SYDNEY (AP) – Australian scientists have discovered an octopus in Indonesia that collects coconut shells for shelter – unusually sophisticated behavior that the researchers believe is the first evidence of tool use in an invertebrate animal.
The scientists filmed the veined octopus, Amphioctopus marginatus, selecting halved coconut shells from the sea floor, emptying them out, carrying them under their bodies up to 65 feet (20 meters), and assembling two shells together to make a spherical hiding spot.”
Possibly, perhaps, potentially incontrovertible proof of AGW– I was hoping to get this out before Al does.
Slightly OT but .. “procedural” resignations? May not be possible to get a new deal and rioting. Busy day at the BBC.
I don’t know how trees will react to the following news: Nov 09 was globally the hottest november ever recorded by GISS, just like UAH. The Nasa also announced 09 is going to have the hottest sea surface temperatures ever measured.
So why all these records? The sun? Nah…
Bicycle powered desalination plants? Will also keep people warm – but then they will produce CO2 – hmmm…
Doug (07:50:44) That is what has happened to the forests in Colorado as well. We used to manage our forests, now we just let them burn or be destroyed by pine beetles, can’t let those evil humans into the forests. On a lighter note, I suppose Algore is correct re: rising tree mortality; if we have more trees, more will die.
Since when have “progressives” allowed facts to get in the way of rhetoric?
Hmmm – watching the Copenhagen circus, I can’t help but think that:
1) COP15 will go down in history as the “Woodstock” of a barely remembered global panic. Many will claim to have been there that weren’t, but most will claim NOT to have been there that were.
2) AGW will soon be remembered as fondly as Pet Rocks, Mood Rings, Disco, and Leisure Suits. Count on it.
3) Al Gore, Prince Charles (GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!!), et. al will simply morph their messages, and claim they never ACTUALLY said what they’re saying now. In spite of video evidence to the contrary, they’ll successfully claim they are being taken out of context.
4) In 20 years, people will be claiming that there never actually WAS a common belief on overhyped global warming, just as they’re claiming there never was a common belief on overhyped global cooling in the 70s.
I sincerely, fervently hope that COP15 is the pinnacle, the peak, the LAST giant 170-ring circus of its type.
Afternoon entertainment
It was global cooling here overnight at 31F but today went to 33F so we hit a patch of global warming this afternoon with snow turning to rain. The global cooling may start again this evening.
It reminds me of last February when snow covered London and brought it to a standstill, so walking through Hyde Park -it was very rare to see it snow covered (It hardly snows in London even during global cooling times). Anyway, I thought i’d come across a patch of grass, which I thought was an area of global warming – on the slope toward the serpentine -only was dismayed to find that it was children making snowmen and digging down to the grass to make igloos. 2 weeks later during the thaw, we all took at as a sign of global warming doom returning
Al Gore’s melting Arctic claim unites scientist and sceptic alike
but perhaps not the unity he was looking for…
and a small protest is in order: some skeptics are also scientists. So the “attracting a storm of criticism from scientists and sceptics alike. ” does not apply.
C’mon, picking on Algor’s whoppers is just too easy. Don’t you know it’s mean to pick on the mentally handicapped?
This could fit in here. A new study from the German Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut in Brunswick:
More CO2 in the atmosphere: plants grow faster and need less water
(Sorra, only a google translation of the German text)
The Goracle gets a beating in this pdf by Burt Rutan.
http://rps3.com/Files/AGW/Rutan.AGWdataAnalysis%20v11.pdf
Scaled Composites, founded by Burt Rutan, is also the company that created Space Ship One.
This document neatly packages the various arguments against AGW.
and sorra for the taping error…
It might be that it is the internal global scorching that is burning off the trees’ roots, which then kills the trees? I think he scientifically proved that the earth’s internal temp. is millions of degrees + (F or C ?).
@fFreddy
“It’s snowing in Central London !”
Yup. More proof of Climate Change. I predict that the weather in London will get steadily colder for a short while, perhaps only a few months, then it will get warm again at a rate which, if it continues, would result in the streets being the temperature of molten lead in as few as 8 years.
Here is the maths:
Av Temp London in Jan – 5C
Av Temp London 5 months later – 22C
17C in 5 months = app 40C per year
327/40 = app 8 years
Who can argue with that? Only a denier!
Barry Foster (06:42:38) : “Jimmy Haigh, more like Prince Charles is ON something when he talks to his plants. 100 years ago and more, the royals were regular drug abusers.”
Chemtrails in Their Arteries
AGW activism displays a level of lunacy equal to the Crusades, Salem witch hunts, and other historical mass delusions. AGW “science” was largely a desperate attempt to turn theoretical warming into actual data. When the data didn’t show warming, it seemed expedient to alter the data. This is like first stating that heavier than air craft cannot fly, and then shooting down any that do.
What would explain this insanity? Politics? Only partially. It is as if some madness-inducing chemical has been released world-wide. Chemtrails? Nonsense. But what? Alcohol? Alcoholism isn’t wide-spread enough to explain Warmism. Also, for every alcoholic Warmist, there may be an alcoholic Skeptic. It can’t be alcohol. (Except in the case of one prominent Warmist).
God or Nature has equipped humans with (1) a semi-autonomous brain core that can take over in an emergency, (2) adrenaline to enhance performance.
I believe that it is adrenaline addiction that turns [name suppressed] from a mild-mannered, kindly academic into a ranting, spittle-spraying jerk. It is no accident that Warmists’ first resort, despite university training in logic, is ad hominem attack. They lose the ability to reason, venting their adrenaline-fueled rage in personal vilification. There is even a Warmist website mostly devoted to such binges–a pusher, in drug terminology.
Thus Warmists, God bless them, can’t easily adapt to reality, even in the face of Climategate and a huge body of contrary evidence. Addicted to adrenaline and its accompanying endorphins, they are in denial. They need Global Warmists Anonymous, a program for recovery similar to other well-known anonymous groups. Coffee will be served.