Oh dear, another alarming press release from Stanford’s Noah Diffenbaugh. Apparently according to his super duper climate model, climate change is going to affect only premium wine grapes. So it appears Ripple, Franzia Box wine, and MD 20/20 are safe from climate change. Winos everywhere are rejoicing.
Diffenbaugh must not get his data from GISS, because they show the temperature as significantly higher in Napa, CA over 100 years ago and the last 7 years of data is downtrending sharply.
It seems the hottest annual temperature in Napa since 1900 was during the 1998 El Niño peak. Hmmm. Of course even that might be elevated a bit, since I found the USHCN station is sited next to an air conditioner vent and a large parking lot.
And in Walla Walla, Washington, another area studied, there appears to be no century scale trend in the data:
But what effect do observations have over the power of models and worrisome press releases sounding the alarm? Apparently none. Thank goodness we can safely exclude the last 110 years of data in favor of the model.
From Stanford University – Global warming could alter the US premium wine industry in 30 years, says Stanford study
Higher temperatures could significantly impact California and other premium winegrowing regions of the United States in the next 30 years, according to a new study led by Stanford University climate scientists.
Writing in the June 30 edition of Environmental Research Letters, the scientists report that by 2040, the amount of land suitable for cultivating premium wine grapes in high-value areas of northern California could shrink by 50 percent because of global warming. However, some cooler parts of Oregon and Washington State could see an increase in premium grape-growing acreage due to warming, according to the study.
These results come on the heels of the researchers’ 2006 climate study, which projected that as much as 81 percent of premium wine grape acreage in the U.S. could become unsuitable for some varietals by the end of the century.
“Our new study looks at climate change during the next 30 years – a timeframe over which people are actually considering the costs and benefits of making decisions on the ground,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, an assistant professor of environmental Earth system science and a center fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford, who co-authored both studies.
Climate change, from global to local
Most U.S. wine comes from the West Coast. California alone produces on average more than 5 million gallons per year, accounting for about 90 percent of the nation’s total wine production, according to the Wine Institute, a trade organization representing California winemakers. The institute estimated the retail value of the state’s wine industry in 2010 at $18.5 billion.
The new study focused on premium wines – the 25 percent most expensive wines on the market – and how global warming could affect growing conditions in four premium wine-producing counties by 2040: Napa and Santa Barbara counties in California, Yamhill County in Oregon’s Willamette Valley and Walla Walla County in Washington’s Columbia Valley.
“We focused on these counties because their mild climates have made them major sources of high-quality grapes, and because they represent both cool and warm growing conditions,” Diffenbaugh said.
But that could change, and soon.
“There will likely be significant localized temperature changes over the next three decades,” Diffenbaugh said. “One of our motivations for the study was to identify the potential impact of those changes, and also to identify the opportunities for growers to take action and adapt.”
Climate change for lovers of fine wine
The study was based on the assumption that there will be a 23 percent increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases by 2040, which could raise the average global temperature by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) – a conservative scenario, according to Diffenbaugh. “World governments have said that to reduce the negative impacts of climate change, global warming should be limited to an increase of 1 degree Celsius,” he added.
To predict how much land area will be suitable for premium wine grape cultivation in coming decades, Diffenbaugh and his colleagues used a very high-resolution computer model that incorporated local, regional and global conditions, including factors such as coastal wind speeds and ocean temperatures. The researchers compared their simulations to actual weather data collected between 1960 and 2010 to see if their model could accurately “predict” past temperatures.
Using the climate model and the historical weather data, the researchers predicted that by 2040, all four counties are likely to experience higher average temperatures during growing seasons, along with an increase in the number of very hot days when the thermometer reaches 95 F (35 C) or above.
In the experiment, the scientists divided premium grape varieties into separate categories based on their tolerance to different temperature ranges. For example, Napa Valley – widely known for its pinot noir, cabernet sauvignon and other premium wines – has historically experienced growing seasons with an average temperature of less than 68 F (20 C) and fewer than 30 very hot days. Grapes that thrive in that climate have done well there.
According to the study, the average temperature in Napa Valley during the growing season could increase as much as 2 F (1.1 C), with the number of very hot days increasing by 10. As a result, the amount of land with historically hospitable growing conditions could shrink by half over the next three decades, the study found. In Santa Barbara County, the amount of suitable grape-growing acreage with similar climate conditions is projected to decline by more than 20 percent as temperatures rise.
“I was surprised that local temperature changes could have such a big impact on an important industry with only 1 degree Celsius of global warming.” Diffenbaugh said.
The study also predicted higher temperatures in Oregon and Washington by 2040, but with potentially different outcomes for winegrowers. Oregon’s Willamette Valley could see a slight increase in the amount of total suitable acreage and a large increase in area suitable for more valuable varieties, according to the study. But in Washington’s Columbia Valley, varietals that are sensitive to severely hot days could see a 30 percent reduction in suitable land area, the results showed.
Risky business
The researchers also looked at how much land could be available to growers who adapt to warmer conditions, such as by planting heat-tolerant vines or altering their cultivation practices. The study found that suitable acreage in Napa and Santa Barbara counties could actually be increased if growers are able to produce quality grapes that can tolerate up to 45 very hot days and average temperatures of 71 F (22 C) in the growing season. However, varieties currently grown in those conditions tend to produce considerably lower wine quality and value, the authors noted.
Winegrowers, with their knowledge of which cultivation techniques are most appropriate in a given climate, could benefit from the study’s forecasts of temperature conditions, Diffenbaugh said.
“Climate change over the next few decades is of particular relevance for the wine industry,” he said. “It’s a big investment to put plants in the ground. They’re slow to mature, and once they mature they’re productive for a long time.”
Some decisions growers make now could affect their vineyards in 30 years, he added, whether they consider the potential effects of local climate change or not. Moving a vineyard to a cooler location or planting different varietals could be costly for winegrowers, the study said. But in areas where less drastic temperature change is likely, growers may be able to maintain the quality of their grapes by using existing cultivation and winemaking techniques, Diffenbaugh said. Possible strategies include special trellis systems that shade vines, using irrigation to cool plants and adjusting fermentation processes in the winery.
“It’s risky for a grower to make decisions that consider climate change, because those decisions could be expensive and the climate may not change exactly as we expect,” Diffenbaugh said. “But there’s also risk in decisions that ignore global warming, because we’re finding that there are likely to be significant localized changes in the near term.”
“Humans are amazingly resilient, and individual growers will of course make decisions as they read the signs on the ground,” he added. “We’re trying to understand how the climate that works so well for growing great wine grapes right now might be affected by even modest global warming. We can’t know the future before it happens, but if we don’t ask the question, we may be surprised when reality unfolds.”
Other coauthors of the study are Michael White of Utah State University, Gregory Jones of Southern Oregon University and Moetasim Ashfaq of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a former postdoctoral researcher at Stanford.
The study was supported in part by a National Science Foundation CAREER award to Noah Diffenbaugh.
This article was written by Sascha Zubryd, a science-writing intern at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University.
Mosher
Stick to drinking the stuff. Or come over here and have a look. Hottest year here 2003. Wine, best red for many years, best white in memory. Temperature that summer averaged 35°C.
You people need to read the right literature. Grapes love it hot but they need water at specific stages in the growing season and absolutely NO FROST.
In my experience it is not hot and dry that hurts the grapes, it is cool and wet. If you get mildew on the grapes, it can damage a crop. Hot and dry is better than cool and wet for grapes.
Who needs data when we have models to rely on ?
1976, one VERY hot year in Europe. Drought dries up the Thames and the Seine. 2003 was nearly as bad. Both years were very good years for wine. A lot of sunshine (makes sugars), little rain (made few berries) creating a scarce wine of tremendous quality. When I live in Germany in the late ’70s and early 80’s, the 1976 vintage was the one to buy for white wines.
For some wines, 1976 was considered “the vintage of the century”.
Doug in Seattle
What do you make of this graph showing a station not far way, superimposed on Sunnyside?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=425727840020&data_set=0&num_neighbors=2
stephen richards says:
July 2, 2011 at 1:03 pm
“The man is a complete, absolute, bloody idiot. Get a life numbscull. Mon dieu!!”
Thanks Stephen for summarizing my thoughts on this press release so succinctly.
Everyone should understand that as long as the Climate Ca$h keeps flowing to academia seemingly without any control, we will continue to see this kind of drivel…
A question for CAGW true believers: red whine or white whine? Which goes best with panic attacks?
Wine alternatives such as Coca-Cola go well with cheese and crackers.
Sunnyside is pretty much in the bottom of a bowl. One would have to know where the neighbors are when comparing temperatures. It is also a drop-dead georgeous place to visit.
Sorry, perhaps you should read what I wrote again. I said nothing about getting hotter.
What I pointed out was that looking at an ANNUAL graph tells you nothing about the salient
factor; temperatures during the growing season. As some here noted, getting cooler can be an issue, getting too warm can be an issue. But posting the ANNUAL temps doesnt really address the point. Change the temps ( up or down) and you’ll get a different output. it all depends on details that are not captured by an annual chart. So, dont mistake my correction as an endorsement of the study. Just a nit. Annual isnt what you want to look at. unless its -20C.
As Anthony suggests, if Diffenbaugh’s model predicts temperatures rise in Napa, California from emissions of CO2 then this model is falsified by the temperature record at Napa. However, while Stanford’s press release implies that “predictions” are made by Diffenbaugh’s model, Diffenbaugh’s journal article ( see http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/2/024024/fulltext ) makes it clear that Diffenbaugh’s model makes “projections” instead of “predictions.”
While predictions make falsifiable claims, projections do not do so but the falsifiability of its claims is the mark of a model that is “scientific” in structure. Thus, while Anthony drew the proper conclusion from Stanford’s press release the conclusion that must be drawn from Diffenbaugh’s journal article is not that Diffenbaugh’s model is falsified by the temperature record at Napa but rather that the methodology of Diffenbaugh’s study was not a scientific one.
“Of course even that might be elevated a bit, since I found the USHCN station is sited next to an air conditioner vent and a large parking lot.”
Indeed. The rather large looking asphalt parking lot/roadway seems even closer.
I thought Walla Walla was in Australia. There’s one in Washington State too?
http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&rlz=1R2RNSN_enCA410&q=walla+walla+australia&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x6b217f003f81f757:0x40609b49043d2b0,Walla+Walla+NSW,+Australia&gl=ca&ei=4JwPTrzBFuWnsALjg_CtCg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBoQ8gEwAA
If red wine is too acidic/fruity and leaves not that warm glowing caramel aftertaste but a burning gut instead, cut it with a good sherry. It improves bad red wine tremendously. I’m not a fan of white so I don’t know how to improve a bad bottle of that stuff.
“The researchers compared their simulations to actual weather data collected between 1960 and 2010 to see if their model could accurately “predict” past temperatures.”
There is no journal paper yet, so Mosh, we don’t know the confidence, as the above illustrates. No data there. Regardless, in grapes while growing, warmer absolute and average tempsindicated here increase tannins, flavonoids, cyans, and actually most of the flavor components in fine wines. Obviously, after extraction, you need to keep it cool.
My point—folks at Stanford must drink pink ripple, and too much while doing research.
CRS, Dr.P.H. says:
July 2, 2011 at 10:48 am
Bah!! My client, Ernest & Julio Gallo Winery… …When the climate changes, we’ll still be there, better than ever. If we can’t sell our wine, we’ll use it for biofuel.
I’ve been using it for biofuel for ages, it works beautifully! 🙂
Diffenbaugh’s research could also be called “whining” and Climate Change in California. He needs to get a real job in the wine industry to get a correct sense of what temperatures grapes grow best.
Effects of Temperature on Anthocyanin Biosynthesis in Grape Berry Skins
Tuesday, September 07 2010 13:58
Effects of Temperature on Anthocyanin Biosynthesis in Grape Berry Skins
By: T. Yamane, S. Jeong, N. Goto-Yamamoto, Y. Koshita and S. Kobayashi
In: American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 57(1):54-59. 2006
G. V. Jones, A. A. Duff, A. Hall, and J. W. Myers
Spatial Analysis of Climate in Winegrape Growing Regions in the Western United States
Some references from those not on the Ripple. Note: I like red wine. White wine can be adversely affected by high temps (higher then those cited as catastrophic).
Pamela, I think more research is in order. ☺
AW The SMH has published this. This is a huge change for them as they were staunchly pro AGW. They must be starting to realize how much they’ve been had or are scared of future implications of their past articles concerning this theme LOL
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/the-science-is-not-settled-20110702-1gvy6.html
BTW Bob Carter seems to be getting a respect (in Australia) which was not accorded to him previously. This is a big shift in MSM Australia
Pamela Grey has it right. Very cold winters kill the vines, frost, hail and rain damages the bloom and the fruit. Rain encourages mold growth and unless there is a brisk wind following the rain, fungicide application begins at once. Heat ripens the fruit and it is measured in sun hours. Lots of heat ripens the fruit sooner.
You may have noticed that California table grapes (the cultivation matches that of good wine grapes) the first grapes of the season are thompsons, red flames and rubies. They ripen first in the Coachella Valley (early June) then 2-3 weeks later in the Central Valley and finally in Napa Valley. On very hot days the harvest starts at dawn and finishes in the early afternoon because the sugar and water goes back into the leaves and vines to protect the vine from high heat. Sugar and acid are checked carefully and frequently on days expected to exceed 100 degrees and there are many 100+ days in the southern areas.
Table (and wine) grapes have always been vulnerable to mother nature and while there are ways to mitigate damage, high heat has never been an issue, except at harvest or for irrigation requirements. Vinters who have questions about the need to change varieties, a very lengthy and expensive process, might check first with UCSLO (San Luis Obispo) where the real aggies reside.
How do I know this? That’s one of the perks of being an accountant. We get to learn about quite a variety of business operations 🙂 I had many table grape grower clients, spent several years working exclusively and onsite for two financially troubled growers (1400 acres and a cold storage and 750 acres including specialties such as Italias and experimental varieties) and I spent most of my life living south of Fresno. I’ve known the area’s summers since I was a child in the 1950s and I can tell you it gets HOT every year and always has.
It looks like GISS is comparing similar stations.
What do you think it shows?
Its becoming trendy to be a skeptic
Its a you tube link
youtube.com/watch?v=AybBEuIpy44
Dont think last post worked
I increasingly find myself of two minds in regard to this continuing and seemingly accelerating barrage of PR BS(Bad Science). [ I haven’t gone back to do a count, but my impression is that there have been at least a hundred of these works that have merited a post here at WUWT just since the first of the year .]
On the one hand there is my sense of irritation that I’m being sucked into wasting another piece of my rapidly declining, and therefore increasingly precious, allotment of time in this life to consider this BS. Compounding this irritation is the fact that most of it is publicly funded and therefore it’s costing me money to have my time wasted. There is also the accompanying glut of output from other alarmist propagandists that suggest that because I’m unwilling to be an epistemological mattress back for this nonsense, and to declare myself utterly convinced by it, that I am somehow the moral equivalent of a combination of Adolf Hitler, Atila the Hun, and Jack the Ripper.
On the other hand there is a rising stench of fear and desperation effusing off all this, which indicates that they know that their moment has passed and that the only prospect of regaining their lost power is to adapt an Orwellian strategy of endlessly repeating the Big Lie, in the vain hope that their united front will be able to conceal the growing gap between their failed vision and reality. Unfortunately, as they attempt to expand their panicky narrative to cover virtually every aspect of life on the planet, they find themselves sermonizing about areas where large numbers of the ignorant unwashed actually possess more highly developed specific knowledge than they do and their self presumed superior status is repeatedly revealed as the fantasy it has always been.
So I am torn between wishing that they would just give it a rest for all our sakes and hoping for ever more of this 8th grade science fair level BS, until even the hardcore members of the “consensus” community are forced to admit that the only real catastrophe that we face from AGW is the exploding cost of energy and transportation which along with growing armies of intrusive bureaucrats with shelves full of regulations, restrictions and rules will wreak more havoc on the world than even the most panicked alarmist’s worst nightmare of impending climatic doom could envision.