Willis and I are presenting at AGU’s fall meeting – assistance requested from WUWT readers

The 2016 AGU Fall Meeting is coming up in December. With nearly 24,000 attendees, AGU Fall Meeting is the largest Earth and space science meeting in the world. I hope to attend so that I can cover what is being presented in the world of climate science, while keeping tabs on the antics of people like Michael Mann, John Cook, Peter Gleick, and some of the other players. As some people may or may not know, I am a full member of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in good standing. For the last three years when I attended, I produced several reports and videos in 2013, 2014,and 2015 plus many, many, live Twitter entries that kept tabs on the politics and the science. This year I hope to do the same. But this year, I’m going to be more than that – Willis and I will be the only climate skeptics invited to give a scientific presentation. 

Last year, my presentation was well received, and even made the AGU press release feed. You can view it here.

The presentation this year came right out of the pages of WUWT, inspired by these two blog posts.

Precipitable Water and Precipitable Water Redux  I expect it will be contentious to some.

It will be at AGU on Wednesday, Dec14th.


agu2016

Abstract ID: 190899

Final Paper Number: A33B-0226

Abstract Title: Observational Quantification of Water Vapor Radiation Forcing

Session Date and Time: Wednesday, December 14th; 1:40 PM – 6:00 PM

Presentation Length: 19:10 – 19:25

Session Number and Title: A33B: Climate Sensitivity and Feedbacks: Advances and New Paradigms I Posters

Observational Quantification of Water Vapor Radiation Forcing

Authors
Anthony W. Watts, Willis Eschenbach

 

Abstract:

An investigation was conducted utilizing the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) 1°x1° gridded total precipitable water (TPW) dataset to determine the magnitude of upwelling long-wave infrared radiation from Earth’s surface since 1988. TPW represents the mass of water vapor in a 1 meter by 1 meter column from the surface to the top of the atmosphere. As referenced in IPCC AR5 WGI Box 8.1, the radiative effect of absorption by water vapor is roughly proportional to the logarithm of its concentration. Therefore it is the fractional change in water vapor concentration, not the absolute change, that governs its strength as a climate forcing mechanism. A time-series analysis utilizing a Loess decomposition filter indicated there is a clear upward trend in the RSS TPW data since 1988. The observed total change over the period is ~ 1.5 kg/m^2, centered around the long-term mean of 28.7 kg/m^2. Utilizing the observed relationship between water content and atmospheric absorption, the RSS TPW data indicates an increase in downwelling longwave radiation of 3.3 W/m2 over the period 1988 – 2015.


As in years past, here’s the problem. It is VERY expensive to attend, and more so in previous years due to my dual role as news media as well as presenting AGU member. The reason is that I’m told that while in previous years I could register for free as a member of the news media, this year (and last year) due to the fact that I’m presenting, I’m also required to register like any other attending member. I also have to register Willis.

The cost of registration is $480, and the deadline is November 3rd at 1159PM EDT to get that rate. That’s TONIGHT.

Add a hotel for 5-6 days at the typical $150-250 per night rate in SFO, plus incidentals, printing/publication costs, parking, etc. and the cost to attend easily tops $3000.

While many attendees get the taxpayers (via their Universities) or their NGO’s via donors to pay for such things, WUWT has no such resources, and despite the claims common from detractors, like the last few years, we are still waiting for that “big oil check” to arrive. I’ll drive down to save money rather than take a plane. Willis will drive (and maybe take BART) too.

So, like I have done before (and many of you graciously responded), I thought I’d ask the readership if they can help out so that there will be somebody at AGU to report on climate science that can do so from the skeptic side. It is very important that at least one climate skeptic reporter attend. Otherwise, the media coverage will be completely one-sided. As they have before, AGU approved my media pass for 2016, so now I’m set to attend for that at least, but in order to present, I need to pay the member registration fee (for myself and for Willis) and hotel in advance.

Due to the fact that water vapor seems to be generally ignored in favor of CO2 as a climate driver, I suspect this presentation won’t be all that well received, and may raise some eyebrows. If we are lucky, some people might actually leave their comfort zone and pay attention.

Willis and I need your help to get it done.. Thanks for your consideration, and most of all thanks for reading WUWT.

Donations toward this effort will be gratefully accepted: here

See update below.

P.S. This year, with all the activists trying to get AGU to boot out the oil and gas sponsors – unsuccessfully, one wonders if we will see this poster on display again:

AGU_Thanks_sponsors

 

UPDATE: The funding goal has been reached and actually exceeded. I offer my sincerest thanks to everyone who contributed ! It is amazing how those $10 and $20 donations add up quickly. Bothe Willis and me thank you. I’m reminded of a quote from an old movie:
“Dear George, remember no man is a failure who has friends. Thanks for the wings. Love, Clarence.”
I offer my humble thanks on behalf of myself and Willis -Anthony
Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
179 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eric S. Elsam
November 3, 2016 10:53 am

Done. I know your contributions will be ill-received by some, but that’s science, and so be it. Safe trip.

November 3, 2016 10:55 am

I’m in. Accounting for water vapor is BIG.

Don V
November 3, 2016 11:00 am

Glad to donate!
The paper looks to be an excellent presentation of hard data. Can’t argue much with that.

Felix
November 3, 2016 11:05 am

Here’s my tuppence.
Since I did contribute, let me wish you both well, and encourage each of you to continue to remain above the base behavior evinced by some others holding views at odds with yours.
Felix

Steamboat McGoo
November 3, 2016 11:09 am

Another $100 in the can. Hours ago, actually, but … well … I fell asleep. *Glares – Daring anyone to laugh*

Frederik Michiels
November 3, 2016 11:11 am

is there a way to donate through international bank transfer? If so i would gladly do so!

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  Frederik Michiels
November 3, 2016 3:35 pm

Not sure about that, but I think you can use a credit card (either through PayPal, or I think there’s a separate choice you can click for it).

Janice Moore
Reply to  Frederik Michiels
November 3, 2016 4:16 pm

Good idea, Ms. Skolaut. I used my VISA card.
Also, Mr. (M.?) Michiels, another option to support Anthony is to buy something from his business, The Weathershop
here: http://weathershop.com/
(and also linked via the “Monitor Your Own Climate” link on the right sidebar of this page.

rd50
November 3, 2016 11:12 am

Donated

Mike Robinson
November 3, 2016 11:13 am

Here’s a small contribution. Thank you very much for the site.

Joe Crawford
November 3, 2016 11:20 am

Done…. I wish you and Willis good luck since you are destined to run into a rather large gaggle of deniers (i.e., those that are unwilling to listen to much less accept anything that conflicts with the Gospel according to InterPanClimChan). They really don’t like someone forcing them into thinking. It is markedly uncomfortable.

Michael Brown
November 3, 2016 11:23 am

donated 20 bucks Thanks for all you do!

Coldish
November 3, 2016 11:34 am

That’s $20 from Munich, Germany. Thanks for all the hard work

AllanJ
November 3, 2016 11:48 am

in for $100. Have a good time and show them what real science looks like.

Resourceguy
November 3, 2016 11:50 am

Done

Clyde Spencer
November 3, 2016 11:52 am

Anthony,
Do me a favor and while you’re there, ask around why we have seen so little about the results of the OCO-2 satellite program. I’m beginning to think that they are embarrassed to show the results.
Clyde

Smokey (Can't do a thing about wildfires)
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 4, 2016 3:36 am

https://co2.jpl.nasa.gov/#mission=OCO-2
No idea if the data sets actually work, but there’s the place NASA’s distributing them publicly. Like you, I wouldn’t mind seeing an update on it! (Anthony did one last year, but other than that article & the Wikipedia page on the mission I haven’t seen anything new about the project in a while.)

Reply to  Smokey (Can't do a thing about wildfires)
November 4, 2016 6:22 am

Here’s a very recent press release, http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?CFID=d11df51f-403f-45c7-b1a2-7c9fab0f37f3&CFTOKEN=0&feature=6666
It talks about a new global map, but only includes an image of Europe and northern Africa.
I don’t have time to hunt it down, the paper is probably paywalled:

The team of scientists from the Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, produced three main maps from OCO-2 data, each centered on one of Earth’s highest-emitting regions: the eastern United States, central Europe and East Asia. The maps show widespread carbon dioxide across major urban areas and smaller pockets of high emissions.
“OCO-2 can even detect smaller, isolated emitting areas like individual cities,” said research scientist Janne Hakkarainen, who led the study. “It’s a very powerful tool that gives new insight.”
The results appear in a paper titled “Direct Space-Based Observations of Anthropogenic CO2 Emission Areas from OCO-2,” published Nov. 1 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

The New Horizons team (Pluto et al probe) have a much better understanding of letting the public know what’s going on.
The last post here may be mine from exactly a year ago, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/04/oco-2-orbiting-carbon-observatory-2-the-mission-has-released-an-animation/
Hey Anthony, if you see a bureaucrat involved with OCO-2 at the meeting, give him a dope slap for me.

Smokey (Can't do a thing about wildfires)
Reply to  Smokey (Can't do a thing about wildfires)
November 4, 2016 7:07 am

@Ric Werme: Thanks very much! Also, yes, your article does post-date the one I saw by Anthony by about a month, & yes, all but the abstract of the paper you reference is currently pay-walled (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL070885/full).
Regarding that paper, I love that its abstract opens with an unqualified, unsupported assertion: “Anthropogenic CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion have large impacts on climate.”
The end, full stop, thanks for playing; it offers no references, footnotes, examples or qualifiers, just a bald assertion from which everything else follows. It’s a bit sad when a peer-reviewed paper needs a Wikipedia-style [citation needed] tag in the very first sentence, but that’s the state of the field I suppose.
Dear Authors: I just want to see the data you obtained, not slog through your editorials, please.
Kthxbai,
Smokey

fred J
November 3, 2016 11:54 am

A point that needs to be emphasised is that quoted concentrations of atmospheric CO2 are measured on a dry air basis. This is because H2O is exceedingly variable and very difficult to measure.

Reply to  fred J
November 3, 2016 12:37 pm

NASA/RSS does it by satellite and reports on line

Reply to  fred J
November 6, 2016 2:41 pm

What? Satellites are used to estimate vapor and precipitable water.

JJB MKI
November 3, 2016 12:17 pm

PayPal links not working from surfacestations.org here (wonder why?) – anyone have the surfacestations PayPal address to make a donation via the app?

Roger Hird
November 3, 2016 12:40 pm

My $20 is on the way.

Reed Coray
November 3, 2016 12:41 pm

I’m in. Good Luck.

Steve (Paris)
November 3, 2016 1:03 pm

Donation done. I hope there’s some beer money in there too. Thirsty work telling the truth.

November 3, 2016 1:12 pm

Happy to help. Thanks for everything you do.
In a (very) weird way, it’s ok that the giant climate tanker will take some time to turn around. WUWT is a fantastic source and would be sorely missed if the sceptical silver bullet happened tomorrow.
Best of luck from South West England.

November 3, 2016 1:23 pm

Donated with thanks for all you do.

Javert Chip
November 3, 2016 1:23 pm

Feels good to support this…

JR
November 3, 2016 1:26 pm

Donated. Have fun!

Barbara Skolaut
November 3, 2016 1:27 pm

Done!
Give ’em hell. 😀

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  Barbara Skolaut
November 3, 2016 3:32 pm

And by the way, thanks for the opportunity to participate in some small way.

lee_jack01
November 3, 2016 1:32 pm

done. keep up the good work.