Climate ‘Tipping Points’ May Arrive Without Warning, Says Top Forecaster
From a UC Davis press release
A new University of California, Davis, study by a top ecological forecaster says it is harder than experts thought to predict when sudden shifts in Earth’s natural systems will occur — a worrisome finding for scientists trying to identify the tipping points that could push climate change into an irreparable global disaster.
“Many scientists are looking for the warning signs that herald sudden changes in natural systems, in hopes of forestalling those changes, or improving our preparations for them,” said UC Davis theoretical ecologist Alan Hastings. “Our new study found, unfortunately, that regime shifts with potentially large consequences can happen without warning — systems can ‘tip’ precipitously.
“This means that some effects of global climate change on ecosystems can be seen only once the effects are dramatic. By that point returning the system to a desirable state will be difficult, if not impossible.”
The current study focuses on models from ecology, but its findings may be applicable to other complex systems, especially ones involving human dynamics such as harvesting of fish stocks or financial markets.
Hastings, a professor in the UC Davis Department of Environmental Science and Policy, is one of the world’s top experts in using mathematical models (sets of equations) to understand natural systems. His current studies range from researching the dynamics of salmon and cod populations to modeling plant and animal species’ response to global climate change.
In 2006, Hastings received the Robert H. MacArthur Award, the highest honor given by the Ecological Society of America.
Hastings’ collaborator and co-author on the new study, Derin Wysham, was previously a postdoctoral scholar at UC Davis and is now a research scientist in the Department of Computational and Systems Biology at the John Innes Center in Norwich, England.
Scientists widely agree that global climate change is already causing major environmental effects, such as changes in the frequency and intensity of precipitation, droughts, heat waves and wildfires; rising sea level; water shortages in arid regions; new and larger pest outbreaks afflicting crops and forests; and expanding ranges for tropical pathogens that cause human illness.
And they fear that worse is in store. As U.S. presidential science adviser John Holdren (not an author of the new UC Davis study) recently told a congressional committee: “Climate scientists worry about ‘tipping points’ … thresholds beyond which a small additional increase in average temperature or some associated climate variable results in major changes to the affected system.”
Among the tipping points Holdren listed were: the complete disappearance of Arctic sea ice in summer, leading to drastic changes in ocean circulation and climate patterns across the whole Northern Hemisphere; acceleration of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, driving rates of sea-level increase to 6 feet or more per century; and ocean acidification from carbon dioxide absorption, causing massive disruption in ocean food webs.
The new UC Davis study, “Regime shifts in ecological systems can occur with no warning,” was supported by the Advancing Theory in Biology program at the U.S. National Science Foundation and was published online today by the journal Ecology Letters, in its Early View feature: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123276879/abstract.
======================
FYI The image is by Anthony, and of course, it’s a spoof.
OT to Max Hugoson (11:10:01) :
I agree with what you say about the financial rewards for engineers who follow a technical career path. I’m also a Chem E (1990) and saw the writing on the wall within the first few years so I jumped over to business/project management and am now self-employed. I’ve not lost my love of technical problem-solving and the AGW issue has been one of intense personal interest. A rather pleasurable hobby of mine is engaging environmentalists in debate on the science of global warming. I’ve never had any repeat engagements with the same person though I run into them from time to time. The topic is studiously avoided.
I’ve found the missing equation!: (encoded in a limerick!)
A mathematician named Hall
Had a hexahedronical ball.
The cube of its weight, times his pecker plus eight
Equaled four fifths of five eights of f—- all.
That describes it all!
The tipping point ocurred sometime in 2005 as WUWT poited out:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/09/solar-geomagnetic-activity-is-at-an-all-time-low-what-does-this-mean-for-climate/
Now, as a consequence of that…..lower magnetic fields, less protection to earth under current CME’s from the sun…
@Chance N (11:14:44) :
“Just when I thought I’d seen it all – Apparently we need to lower temps to 2C by 2017 (Assuming he meant by 2C) and half of the dry land will be flooded/water-covered by 2020. Wow!!!! Hope I have a beach house here in CO.
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=548421&publicationSubCategoryId=75”
17: And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
18: But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee.
(Genesis 6; King James Version.)
Who’ll be Noah this time? Pachauri? Hansen? Ah well, better go find a couple of polar bears I suppose. Might get me in. Then I’ll be saved.
What the heck is a “theoretical ecologist”?
If something can’t be predicted and any combination of factors can cause it to happen, how can it be scientifically tested?
What the heck is a Department of Environmental Science and Policy? Is it a science department? Or is it policy department?
What the heck does the Advancing Theory in Biology program at the U.S. National Science Foundation have to do with climate science?
This paper is just a bunch of psychobabble written by a couple of mathematicians with interests in biology and ecology.
The Arctic is melting… from 1957: click
And from 1922: click
So we probably have, may have, could have, entered the next Ice Age beginning about 10 years ago and didn’t see the ‘tipping point’. Oh dear! What shall we do now? Who is left in Climate Science from the 1970’s that will be fully prepared to jump on this and ask for yet another grant?
David Middleton (13:13:00) :
What the heck is a “theoretical ecologist”?
If something can’t be predicted and any combination of factors can cause it to happen, how can it be scientifically tested?
Ideally if repeatably at the lab as electric and magnetic fields which can be reproduced cheaply and analogically exactly.
@ur momisugly Rob (07:27:52) :
“Flexi-fuel drivers left high and dry after Government subsidy U-turn
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7021180.ece”
I thought this was an interesting little story. My immediate reaction to it was that it was a typical NuLiebour cynical promise-breach/dim, useless cockup, not, it must be said, either a unique or unusual event in oligarchic, post-modern Britain, as it struggles to attain full GDR status and a comparable economy. Then, though, I wondered whether this could be just a little signal that they’re going to start pulling back on some of the AGW barminess and gently ease themselves out without having to lose too much face. Hmm. Well, we can all dream.
And then I read that MP’s early day motion climategatestuff posted earlier, signed by 400 of GB’s best and greatest.
http://blackswhitewash.com/2010/02/10/uk-parliament-we-need-to-watch-the-back-door/
“”” Paul Coppin (10:12:39) :
Time-variable pricing can be used to create an economic incentive for individuals and business to vary their usage patterns (assuming the same or perhaps even more usage) so as to reduce the peaks and troughs.”
As someone whose meter goes on this “scheme” in the next billing cycle, I can tell you the above statement is plain hogwash. Time-cycle schemes are concocted by brain-dead people who have no idea what the necessary usage cycles are for most folks below 100k a year annual income, and appear to be concocted by people who believe that the wife stays home all day, or the nanny is available anytime of the day to do the laundry or nobody needs any sleep. Really what these billing cycles do is subsidize the cost to industry, as my average homeowner’s cost will be several cents/kw-hr above what industry will pay, even though I’m a minor user. Meanwhile, the cities in which I live and work remain lit up with megawatts of frivolous architectural and high cut-off lighting. “””
If that were true, and if energy conservation was the intended aim (which I would go along with), then the Utilities would have launched their program by sending each and every subscriber a complete catalog of their rates versus usage hours, so that everybody could plan to not use any energy during the most expensive hours.
Big Surprise; so far; our local energy company (PG&E) have not even suggested that these “smart meters” are even capable of monitoring what hours the power is being used; they are just “smart meters” and we will love them; I have the literature that they sent me to announce that they sent someone to tresspass on my property to install their gadgets; without telling me when that would happen, so I could arrange to be there when this minimum wage person came to case the joint. There’
s not a word in their literature, that they even monitor when power is being used, let alone that we will be billed by their state sectret pricing schedule.
Wait till California’s State mandated 20% of Electric vehicles mandate kicks in; we already don’t have sufficient electric capacity to supply the State’s needs; so we buy it from out of State suppliers, who burn coal. Meanwhile the State sitsa on huge untapped reservoirs of natural gas and offshore oil; but we prefer to pollute somebody else’s place rather than use our own abundant resources.
Meanwhile, our tax dollars are being wasted funding a $100,000 tinkerer’s toy car, being built by someone who just got bored with being rich and idle.
And the biggest laugh of all, is that the most vocal opponents of free clean green renewable energy are the environmentalists, who don’t want any of that in their favorite hiking area.
If renewable energy was practical, we would already have it; without any government bribery scheme with money stolen from earners.
A letter sent to the President on the danger of climate change:
Dear Mr. President:
Aware of your deep concern with the future of the world, we feel obliged to inform you on the results of the scientific conference held here recently. The conference dealt with the past and future changes of climate and was attended by 42 top American and European investigators. We enclose the summary report published in Science and further publications are forthcoming in Quaternary Research.
The main conclusion of the meeting was that a global deterioration of climate, by order of magnitude larger than any hitherto experience by civilized mankind, is a very real possibility and indeed may be due very soon.
The cooling has natural cause and falls within the rank of processes which produced the last ice age. This is a surprising result based largely on recent studies of deep sea sediments.
Existing data still do not allow forecast of the precise timing of the predicted development, nor the assessment of the man’s interference with the natural trends. It could not be excluded however that the cooling now under way in the Northern Hemisphere is the start of the expected shift. The present rate of the cooling seems fast enough to bring glacial temperatures in about a century, if continuing at the present pace.
The practical consequences which might be brough by such developments to existing social institution are among others:
(1) Substantially lowered food production due to the shorter growing seasons and changed rain distribution in the main grain producing belts of the world, with Eastern Europe and Central Asia to be first affected.
(2) Increased frequency and amplitude of extreme weather anomalies such as those bringing floods, snowstorms, killing frosts, etc.
With the efficient help of the world leaders, the research …
With best regards,
George J. Kukla (Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory)
R. K. Matthews (Chairman, Dept of Geological Sciences, Brown U)
2010? Nope. [source]
Nothing new under the sun.
This is what happens when children aren’t allowed to play with magnets and iron filings or feel mercury dribble through their fingers. All that red colouring in the “safe” play dough has produced highly energetic “scientists” ungrounded in reality.
JWDougherty (11:14:53) :
wayne (01:17:06) : … What tipping points? Please give me a few examples of tipping points that have occured in the past …
I just wanted an actual, scientifically verifyable example of earth going over a tipping point in the past and what that tipping point was.
As I was going down the stair
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish to hell he’d go away.
Anon
@ur momisugly Jordan (05:05:41) :
“My son is convinced there are crocodiles under his bed.
Although we have no evidence for them (and I can promise you, we do continue to keep an eye out for them), the harsh reality is that nobody can rule out crocodiles under his bed as a real physical possibility.”
Damned if I can find the link, but I have a distinct recollection of a relatively recent MSM article which suggested that the alligator population in subterranean New York would increase at an enormous rate as AGW took hold. So if you’re from NY, watch out, your son may be absolutely right.
@TerrySkinner (04:11:59) :
“If the Yellowstone Supervolcano goes off we’re doomed, doomed!…..
I think this is like UFO’s and Nuclear Holocast in the 1950’s”
Mmm, not so sanguine about that nuclear myth myself. I’m old enough to remember what I thought was my last night alive when I was a 14 year-old schoolboy in October 1962.
@ur momisugly Jordan (05:05:41) :
“My son is convinced there are crocodiles under his bed.
Although we have no evidence for them (and I can promise you, we do continue to keep an eye out for them), the harsh reality is that nobody can rule out crocodiles under his bed as a real physical possibility.”>
When my sone was very young he had the exact same issue and couldn’t sleep because of it. We tried everything, but could not disprove the crocodiles. One day I changed strategies and accepted the existence of the crocodiles. I crawled under the bed, made a heck of a racket, and screamed gotcha! as I captured one croc after another. I then marched them to the front door, threw them outside, and shouted Don’t Ever Come Back! as I slammed the door. My wife put bandaids on me in a few places where the crocs bit me. The kid never had a problem with crocs under the bed again.
Now if I can just figure out how to adapt this technique to AGW reports… after all, they’re crocs too…
Bob (Sceptical Redcoat) (08:10:03) : You wrote, “The main thrust of the climate change story seems to be based on ATMOSPHERIC “anomolies”; so why do NASA GISS, UAH, HADCRUT, RSS all include SST into the equations.”
Clarifications are required. GISS, Hadley Centre, and NCDC produce global SURFACE temperature products that consist of Land Surface Temperatures and Sea Surface Temperatures. UAH and RSS produce temperature products for different levels of the atmosphere based on satellite data, the most commonly referenced of those levels being Lower Troposphere Temperature (TLT).
You continued, “Surely, the temperatures of these very different elements should be seperately monitored and compared, not homogenised?”
They are monitored and presented separately. The vast majority of the posts at my website are about Sea Surface Temperature (SST).
You asked, “I have always believed that the oceans are the greatest force on Earth that can effect weather, climate change, coastal glaciers, sea ice growth and decline, hurricans, etc. Is this correct?”
Coupled ocean-atmosphere processes (natural processes) such as El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) dominate annual, decadal, and multidecadal variations in global temperatures. The only other natural variable that is stronger than ENSO is a strong explosive volcanic eruption. The solar radiation-blocking aerosols they emit into the stratosphere can and do overwhelm the strongest of El Nino events and inhibit the recharge mode of ENSO, which is the La Nina phase.
You asked, “The historic plots that I have seen of Ice Age/Interglacial periods to my mind indicate that, although the time spent in each phase is measured in millenia, the time to change back to an Ice Age is very short, perhaps measured in decades.”
I haven’t looked at a plot Vostok (Antarctic) ice core data for a number of years, so I really cannot reply. My posts are more concerned with the errors in the belief that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are responsible for the warming over the past 30 years, about how climate scientists misrepresent the effects of ENSO, etc.
Regards
Someone above asked me for an example of a “tipping point”. The canonical events of this time are the Dansgaard Oeschger events. See the usual font of misinformation (Wikipedia) for a description.
My considered comment on this made-up field of science, “Theoretical Ecology”, is — it’s crap-tastic !!
Alan Hastings. A theoretical ecologist! What kind of wank is that? Has there ever been a proven “tipping point” in climate history? Well no, but they might exist and here is a computer model of some of the horrific results of “tipping point” I made up. Send more grant money so I can do some more.
Willis Eschenbach (16:05:10) :
Someone above asked me for an example of a “tipping point”. The canonical events of this time are the Dansgaard Oeschger events. See the usual font of misinformation (Wikipedia) for a description>
So now I am seriously confused. The article says that before the last ice age during the last interglacial period:
1. It was warmer than it is now.
2. Global temperatures rose by as much as 5 degrees C over a few decades
3. The causes were either changes in solar forcing or natural cycles in the earth system
Clearly the above cannot be correct given all the climate science on the current interglacial which clearly proves that it was never warmer than it is now and that global temps are going up faster than ever before and they are because of, and ONLY because of human activity which the previous interglacial didn’t have. Oh wait. I get it. There were humans and their activity caused all those things and they went extinct because of it. Caused an ice age. By making it warmer. All making sense now. Bourbon. Need more bourbon. Can cure almost anything with bourbon.
“all the climate science on the current interglacial which clearly proves that it was never warmer than it is now”
When you have to JUST MAKE STUFF UP to make your point, doesn’t it suggest anything to you?
When you have to JUST MAKE STUFF UP to make your point, doesn’t it suggest anything to you?
Was my sarcasm not evident? 🙂
LeoG, dust storms that large happen after the Earth gets very cold, thus very dry, whilst the wind blows, which started the whole thing. The wind begins to die down and even settle into a breeze in the opposite direction, but nothing to write home about. Once the dust completely settles, you know the wind has died down to a sticky windless condition and it has been warm and wet, because the dust has been washed out of the air by rain. Evidence of dust layers tells me that the oldest edge on the bottom is when the air was coldest and the top most edge of the layer tells me the air was warmest.
Now about the phrase “tipping point”. It really gets my dander up when people take over a completely good word and turn it into something else. I will never consider that phrase to be anything other than my Friday night measure of when I have had enough. Which nearly always starts the rounds of free beers.