I’m traveling today to another city to see a specialist to deal with a significant and ongoing personal health issue, so blogging will be light over the next couple of days. I invite guests authors to submit stories and regular contributors to add stories as well.
I’ve made a kind of general request to commenters at WUWT and at BishopHill at
http://geoffchambers.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/the-conversation/
Please be useful
Take care Anthony–thoughts and prayers are with you.
Wishing you well Anthony.
The phrase the ‘Green Blob’ was coined by former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson after he was sacked from the Cabinet in July.
He was referring to a network of pro-green lobbyists working at every level of the British Establishment, who have helped shape the eco policies sending household energy bills soaring.
But investigations by this newspaper reveal the Blob is not just an abstract concept.
We have found that innocuous-sounding bodies such as the Dutch National Postcode Lottery, the American William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Swiss Oak Foundation are channelling tens of millions of pounds each year to climate change lobbyists in Britain, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.
I believe this is the article in question:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2807849/EXPOSED-shadowy-network-funded-foreign-millions-making-household-energy-bills-soar-low-carbon-Britain.html
All good wishes, Mr. Watts!
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-26/arctic-ice-melt-seen-doubling-risk-of-harsh-winter-in-eu.html
Ha ha. Hot is cold and vice versa.
A few years ago, singer Lily Allen co-launched a “global music petition” to help save everything from glbal warming.
Today she was reported as having treated herself to a new tattoo on her wrist. The tattoo shows a map of the world-minus Antarctica.
🙂
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2808486/Lily-Allen-reveals-new-wrist-tattoo-showing-map-world.html
One little known benefit of tattoos (unknown to the people who have tattoos, that is) is that they identify the person as easily led and tending to make poor decisions. That labelling is quite useful for the rest of us.
My thoughts and prayers are with you and yours.
Get better soon! Prayers and good wishes from all.
http://www.wishafriend.com/getwellsoon/uploads/3972-get-well-messages.jpg
Best wishes for good health, Anthony!
All the best. I am going though some issues withdrawing from some medication which was not helping my situation and I would not wish that experience on anyone.
Can I type that greenhouse gasses are gasses used by greenhouse owners to make their plants grow better and is not how the atmosphere of this planet works? Our atmosphere is gravity bound heavy gasses as we travel through the cold vacuum of the universe.
Thoughts and best wishes for you Anthony.
My thoughts and prayers are with you Anthony. You are a blessing to us all.
Good luck and speedy recovery!
Thanks to all for the kind words.
Do you realise, technically we are not the ‘skeptics.’ We are the holders of the truth when it comes to AGW Climate Change (so called).
The Arctic sea ice extent is climbing rapidly.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
So I have a question on the sea ice freezing process and loss of the latent heat from the salt water as it goes to ice.
1. Is the heat being carried away because below-freezing cold air is blowing across the near-freezing water? And thus the water freezing like the ice cubes in my freezer’s ice maker?
or,
2. Is the near freezing salt water surface radiating heat into the clear night skies as the sun sinks lower and lower and the nights get longer and longer?
Here in the desert SW going into late November and December, nightly condensation forms an ice crust forms as the surface heat radiates to space. Or small shallow water puddles get an ice layer from radiation only on calm clear nights. So as for sea ice, I think the latter process, #2. Is that right?
Which means the heat is radiated to space and not transferred to the atmosphere where it can raise atmospheric temps. Certainly when the strong cold winds blow across the open water, the cold air temp is warmed by the 2-4 deg C marine water to form the moist marine layer that keeps coastal areas warmer than inland areas.
Any way, even if it is both processes, it is encouraging to see the strong growth of autumn sea ice in the Arctic which is very similar to 2013 Arctic sea ice growth, a winter when Arctic Polar vortex southerly incursions began in January.
Heat exchange is instantaneous, complex, and continuous – all at once. By the way, you left evaporation and conduction off of your list…. 8> heat gained, the local environment will (MUST!) cool off. Air heats up and cools much faster than water or ice, so the air gets very, very cold. The air radiates at high, medium, and low altitudes, and radiates more as you go higher up (10,000 meters to 25,000 meters altitude.)
All the while the air is radiating into space, it is also mixing (convective losses) from warmer air at all altitudes, cooling off that air above and below it. If the cooler air is forced across warmer seas or land, they cool off and try to heat the air … unsuccessfully. The air continues to lose heat energy into space but gaining it from the water and land that keep losing their energy to the air touching either surface.
There is no “either – or” situation: Heat is lost from hot surfaces to colder surfaces continuous and by all methods at the same time.
The ocean water keep radiating long wave heat energy at the same time it is convecting energy and evaporating energy. If it is a clear night, the 2 degree ocean water radiated much more energy per second into the clear night sky at -50C than it does into a cloudy night sky at -30 C, or -20 C at very cloudy nights. And, if that open ocean does freeze, the upper surface of the new ice keeps radiating as well: BUT!!!!! The new ice upper surface becomes just 1/2 or 1 degree less than the air temperature because the ice prevents water from radiating. The open ocean is much, much more mixed than the fixed land: Thus, the upper land surface will lose more energy into space than an equal mass of water. into the same air and the same night sky, a good solid high emissivity substance of the same mass and area (a car hood) will lose more energy than a low-emissivity substance. A substance under a tree or shaded by a cover or roof will lose less energy than an open piece.
Thus, when ice covers the open water any time between August 22 through March 22 in the Arctic, heat losses by long wave radiation go DOWN – less heat is lost from ice than from open ocean. Contrast water at 2 deg C to the upper surface of the ice at -20 C. Convert both to Kelvin. 275^4 compared to 253^4 Heat is still lost into the air and into space from ice by radiation, but less heat is lost. (We accurately note that “Ice insulates nature from the cold air.”) Note that some heat is gained into the Arctic Ocean by solar radiation when it hits open water in the Arctic in the five months of April, May, June, July, and August, but not much compared to the many days of increased losses.
Further, when open ocean freezes over, NO energy is lost to the air by evaporation of the water’s upper surface.
You can ONLY discuss heat transfer on an instantaneous, molecule by molecule basis. “Averaging the earth out over a full year by assuming a flat-plate? Yeah – I guess Obola’s catastrophysists don’t believe the earth rotates yet.
There’s also an odd heat loss mechanism as saltier water sinks due to ice formation and heat loss across the ice “shell”. ….. The sinking water is replaced by surface water coming from nearby ice edge open waters. Neat, isn’t it?
All my physics books say “heat” (noun) is a macro property of systems; not a property of individual molecules.
Yes, conduction of “heat” occurs by energy exchange between colliding molecules, in the micro view, but then convection is the mass transport of “heat” energy by moving huge numbers of molecules together, and physically transporting them, and their collisions to somewhere else, so it certainly isn’t a molecule by molecule proposition.
Radiation on the other hand, is emitted (or absorbed) by single molecules in the case of line spectral radiation, or my pairs of molecules during a collision, in the case of thermal (bb like) radiation. Its fundamental source is acceleration of electric charge, as required by Maxwell’s equations.
The global temperature anomaly data HADCRUT4.3.0.0.monthly.ns_avg.txt have been published for Sep 2014 (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk). When I use the absolute temperature data “absolute.nc” published at http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk to transform the anomaly data to temperatures, I find 15.7 °C for Sep 2014. The same procedure for NOOA NCDC global leads to 15.7 °C, and for GISTEMP LOTI to 15.8 °C. On the global scale, July (16.4 °C) is the hottest month, while Jan (12.6 °C) is coldest. This is caused by the unequal distribution of land and oceans on the northern and the southern hemisphere, respectively. Therefore it is better to use annual means for specifying global temperatures. I found for the 201310-201409 interval, 14.5 °C for HADCRUT4, GISTEMP, and for NOOA, respectively. This maximum value was also measured in the corresponding time spans 97/98, 01/02, 04/05, 05/06, 06/07, 08/09, 09/10, 12/13. The 360 month trend from 1984 to 2014 is 0,170 °C/decade for HADCRUT 4, 0,166 for GisTemp, and 0,156 for NOOA NCDC.
As the forecasts made by modeling the climate were not very successful in the recent decades, I have tried to make my own forecasts of the global temperature. My forecast is based on the historical temperature data. The idea behind is that the forcings of the climate (sun irradiation, albedo, GHG, land-use, oceans, etc.) are varying slowly in time and the “inertia” of the global climate is large. Simple least squares fitting is used with several choices of fitting functions. The aim is to find a function with fitting parameters which are stable in time. This means: When I make a forecast from the past to now the best fitting function will have the smallest deviation from the measured data. I determined the time span in the past with a deviation smaller than the error level (0.1 °C). This time interval is assumed to be the time span valid for the forecast.
The best fitting function for the temperature was found to be T(t) = c0+c1*t+c2*t^2+c3*sin(c4*t+c5) The ci are fitting parameters. HADCRUT4 is better than NOOA NCDC and GISS, because this dataset goes back to 1850, while NOOA and GISS start from 1880. The gridded dataset of HADCRUT4 worked better than the published global dataset, when I interpolated or extrapolated missing temperature anomalies in the gridded dataset ( i.e. Arctica and Antarctica) before averaging over the globe.
As a result of my analysis, the 1yr means global temperature is expected to rise from 14.5 to 15.5 °C in the next 60 years. This is a temperature increase of 1.0 °C. For comparison, the temperature rise during the last 60 years was 0.8 °C. I admit that this analysis is a more sophisticated version of saying that the weather tomorrow is the same as today or yesterday. Therefore it can give no answer about the origins of the change. Details of my calculations can be found on my website.
Take care of yourself Anthony.
Don’t push to have so many “breaking news” stories, forget TV days. :o)
More guest articles (get working on one Keith), more moderators (alas I don’t have regular enough access).
Best wishes.
Anthony, just out of curiosity and if you don’t mind the personal question, as I suffer hearing issues too since birth, what was the procedure to restore your hearing?
This just in : the local govt officials in the area affected have just overwhelmingly approved the restart of the local reactor that was the first Japanese nuclear plant that had been certified by the govt nuclear regulators with respect to meeting all of the new safety procedures and equipment required after the Fukushima accident. The vote was 19 out of 26, with 4 opposed and 3 abstensions. This virtually guarantees, I would think, that all 48 of their reactors will win local approval and be restarted. And none too soon – the Japanese economy has suffered with the added expense of importing more coal and LNG. Their nuclear plants produce over a third of their electricity.