James Hansen Hots it Up Even Higher

New paper from the “father of global warming” argues reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not enough to combat climate change.

From a EurekaAlert press release:

According to a new paper in Oxford Open Climate Change, published by Oxford University Press, the strategies humanity must pursue to reduce climate change will have to include more than reducing greenhouse gases. This comes from an analysis of climate data led by researcher James Hansen.

Scientists have known since the 1800s that infrared-absorbing (greenhouse) gases warm the Earth’s surface and that the abundance of greenhouse gases changes naturally as well as from human actions. Roger Revelle, who was one of the early scientists to study global warming, wrote in 1965 that industrialization meant that human beings were conducting a “vast geophysical experiment” by burning fossil fuels, which adds carbon dioxide (CO2) to the air. CO2 has now reached levels that have not existed for millions of years.

Climate sensitivity

A long-standing issue concerns how much global temperature will rise for a specified CO2 increase. A 1979 study released by the United States National Academy of Sciences concluded that doubling atmospheric CO2 with ice sheets fixed would likely cause global warming between 1.5 and 4.5° Celsius. This was a large range, and there was additional uncertainty about the delay in warming caused by Earth’s massive ocean. This new paper reevaluates climate sensitivity based on improved paleoclimate data, finding that climate is more sensitive than usually assumed. Their best estimate for doubled CO2 is global warming of 4.8°C, significantly larger than the 3°C best estimate of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Aerosols

The authors also conclude that much of the expected greenhouse gas warming in the past century has been offset by the cooling effect of human-made aerosols – fine airborne particles. Aerosols have declined in amount since 2010 as a result of reduced air pollution in China and global restrictions on aerosol emissions from ships. This aerosol reduction is good for human health, as particulate air pollution kills several million people per year and adversely affects the health of many more people. However, aerosol reduction is now beginning to unmask greenhouse gas warming that had been hidden by aerosol cooling. The authors have long termed the aerosol cooling a “Faustian bargain” because, as humanity eventually reduces air pollution, payment in the form of increased warming comes due.

Prediction

This new paper predicts that a post-2010 acceleration of global warming will soon be apparent above the level of natural climate variability. The 1970-2010 global warming rate of 0.18°C per decade is predicted to increase to at least 0.27°C per decade during the few decades after 2010.  As a result, the 1.5°C global warming level will be passed this decade and the 2°C level will be passed within the following two decades.

Policy

In a final section, Hansen describes his perspective based on decades of experience in trying to affect government policies. First, he believes that achievement of rapid phasedown of CO2 emissions requires a rising domestic carbon fee with a border duty on products from nations without a carbon fee, as well as support of modern nuclear power to complement renewable energies. Second, he argues that the West, which is primarily responsible for climate change, must cooperate with developing nations to help them achieve energy paths consistent with a propitious climate for all. Third, even with these efforts, Hansen believes that global warming will reach levels with dangerous consequences; he argues we should also carry out research and development for temporary, purposeful, actions to address Earth’s now enormous energy imbalance.

A decade ago, Hansen noted that Earth was out of energy balance by 0.6 W/m2 (watts per square meter). There was that much more energy coming in (absorbed sunlight) than going out (heat radiation to space). That excess – which is the proximate cause of global warming – is equivalent to 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day, with most of that energy going into the ocean. Now, largely because of decreasing aerosols, the imbalance has doubled to about 1.2 W/m2. This huge imbalance is the proximate cause of accelerated global warming and increased melting of polar ice, which is likely to shut down overturning ocean circulations and cause large, rapidly rising, sea level later this century.

The paper argues that such action will be essential to avoid the greater geotransformation that will occur in the absence of such action. Potential actions include injection of stratospheric aerosols, for which volcanoes provide relevant but inadequate test cases, and spraying of salty ocean water by autonomous sail boats in regions susceptible to cloud seeding.

Hansen suggests that young people focus on an underlying problem that has developed in western democracies, especially the United States: “The ideal of one person/one vote has been replaced by one dollar/one vote,” Hansen argued. “Special financial interests – the fossil fuel industry, the chemical industry, the lumber industry, the food industry, for example – are allowed to buy politicians. It is no wonder that climate is running out of control, environmental toxicity is in the process of exterminating insects including pollinators, forests are mismanaged, and agriculture is designed for profit, not for nutrition and the public’s well-being.”

“We live on a planet with a climate characterized by delayed response, which is a recipe for intergenerational injustice,” Hansen continued. “Young people need to understand this situation and the actions needed to assure a bright future for themselves and their children.”

The paper, “Global warming in the pipeline,” will be available (at midnight on November 2nd) at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgad008.

Direct correspondence to: 
James Hansen
Director, Program on Climate Science, Awareness, and Solutions, 
Earth Institute at Columbia University
475 Riverside Drive (Room 401-O)
New York, NY 10115
jeh1@columbia.edu

1.7 27 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

208 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 3, 2023 7:45 am

He doesn’t mention that the Earth is in a 2.56 million-year ice age, in an interglacial period.

He doesn’t mention that 4.6 million people die from the cold every year compared to 500,000 dying from the heat. The cold makes our capillaries contract to conserve heat, that makes our blood pressure rise increasing strokes and heart attacks. ‘Global, regional and national burden of mortality associated with nonoptimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study’
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext

He also doesn’t mention that a Grand Solar Minimum has just started that may significantly cool the planet.

The cost of stopping warming according to Blumberg’s green energy research team to stop warming by 2050 is $US200 trillion. That comes out to about $1 million per household or about a $35,000 extra payment per year for 27 years. Household in the US and other developed countries can’t afford that.

Plus the historical data is not consistent. The different historical datasets of Solar Irradiance and temperature reading at various places can be used to show anything from all natural caused warming to all human caused warming. It is currently unknown whether CO2 causes warming although we do know that the oceans absorb less and release more CO2 as they warm.
Climate
The Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Land Surface Warming (1850–2018) in Terms of Human and Natural Factors: Challenges of Inadequate Datahttps://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/11/9/179

E. Schaffer
November 3, 2023 8:45 am

Riding a dead horse again..

From the start the CO2 theory was about explaining ice age cycles, not predicting some future global warming. That is why climate sensitivity was pushed to align with paleoclimate data (or rather assessments back then), plus some fancy theories as to why CO2 was cyclical. Plass (1956) is a nice read on this. Once ice core data became available (70s onward), it looked like the theory was confirmed, because the correlation of CO2 and ice age cycles.

Today however we know this theory was nonsense. CO2 is following the temperature, not leading it. There is no instrinsic CO2 cycle, making it increase and decrease on its own. Most of all however, those calculations on climate sensitivity were all wrong.

Those earlier calculations have been replaced with something more transcendental, making the logical mistakes less obvious and concealing them behind “way too complex” considerations. Just incidentally climate sensitivity remained roughly the same..

Anyway, these ice age cycles are NOT caused by CO2 and we can all agree on that. But one could still argue they were enhanced by CO2, but that is loose end argument. If you can not define what forced those cycles and how much that forcing was, there is no way to tell how much CO2 feedback then occured.

It is like saying a + b = 10, where a is the unquantified forcing and b is the CO2 feedback. Unless you can tell a, you can assume ANY value for b. And that is what all climate scientists do when deriving climate sensitivity from paleoclimate. They pick any value for b and rightfully claim it was consistent with the data. True, because there is no b for which it will not work, as long as a is unknown. Some sorcerers, like Hansen, go one step further and claim they could even derive b from the above equation. That would be the art of cartomancy..

Reply to  E. Schaffer
November 3, 2023 10:34 am

“CO2 is following the temperature, not leading it. There is no instrinsic CO2 cycle, making it increase and decrease on its own.”

Good point.

What has caused CO2 to increase and decrease in history?

CO2 amounts increase when temperatures get warmer, and decrease when temperatures cool. CO2 can’t be leading this parade.

Bruce Cobb
November 3, 2023 8:46 am

“Climate Change” – the grift that keeps on grifting.

Mr Ed
November 3, 2023 9:17 am

Thank you Anthony for your focus on the climate propaganda. Reading this Hansen story brings to mind my first exposure to these radical academic’s over 50yrs ago with Paul Ehrlich’s doom and gloom Population Bomb BS. With the current direction of our country at this point the climate change doom’ism is more than ever a political lever than a scientific fact IMO…
As a AG producer my issues are not weather/climate related but the political and economic realities
such as markets and thing like fertilizer, fuel , energy rates for pumps. Very sobering times.

Reply to  Mr Ed
November 3, 2023 10:08 am

Given your pen name and statement “As a AG producer my issues are . . .”, can we assume your comments come straight from the horse’s mouth? 🙂

November 3, 2023 9:41 am

According to Dr. Hansen, everything stinks. “The fossil fuel industry, chemical industry, the lumber industry, the food industry” — they ALL stink! And nothing we’re doing, or are likely to do is enough to avert disaster. Committing economic suicide, overwhelming future generations with debt, moving back to the Stone Age, hunting and gathering organic nuts & berries, eschewing fart-happy ruminants — none of that stuff is going to help much.

What’s left? Appease the climate gods by throwing virgins into bonfires? Except you’re not allowed to start bonfires anymore.

Maybe we oldsters who’ve had so much fun ruining everything, should just browbeat the young until they lose all hope. Eventually, they’ll go back to bed and never get up. Then the world will become paradise.

November 3, 2023 9:43 am

This new paper predicts that a post-2010 acceleration of global warming will soon be apparent above the level of natural climate variability.”

They’d have to quantify natural variability before they can say anything is man-made.

Dennis Gerald Sandberg
November 3, 2023 9:43 am

Give the old guy a break, he’s way out on a limb with his “support modern nuclear” statement. He needed a little huff and puff about evil fossil fuels to get past the censors.

Bruce Cobb
November 3, 2023 9:45 am

The “global warming is in the pipeline”. Riiiiiiight. Uh-huh. Sure it is.

Martin Brumby
November 3, 2023 9:50 am

The eggregious, mendacious Hansen is often credited with coining the “denier” tag for scientists who pointed out the obvious weaknesses of his hypotheses.

Deliberately chosen to suggest a parallel with “Holocaust Deniers”. And, in case the allusion was missed, he certainly was the guy who described coal trains as “death trains” and coal power stations as “death factories”. Professor Richard Lindzen, possibly the greatest genuine atmospheric scientist is of course, Jewish.

No wonder this disgraceful “activist”- scientist turns up again today.

Reply to  Martin Brumby
November 3, 2023 10:16 am

. . . turns up as the rough equivalent of a cow pie, that is.

Reply to  Martin Brumby
November 3, 2023 10:48 am

Yes, well, Hansen makes chicken little look like an optomist.

gyan1
November 3, 2023 10:41 am

Simplistic TOA energy balance calculations that ignore internal dynamics are used by simpletons to support their myopic fixation on CO2.

Missing from his analysis is that most of modern warming was from fewer clouds that allowed more of the suns energy to heat the oceans to depth.

barryjo
November 3, 2023 10:44 am

So what is the optimum temperature for planet earth? And when will we reach it? Or will we ever?

MarkW
Reply to  barryjo
November 3, 2023 4:51 pm

One somewhat older environmentalist once told me that the optimum climate was the one he remembered from his childhood.

Kevin Kilty
November 3, 2023 11:16 am

Didn’t Hansen proclaim 99% certainty back in 1988?

Another decade or two to really prove the point, though. Always. A decade or two…

November 3, 2023 11:31 am

Hansen should publish a video of him driving up the West Side Highway in a 16-ft Lund (with an electric outboard of course). Then we could start to believe him.

November 3, 2023 12:16 pm

Why is it the climate mongers always claim it’s the other side that is corrupted by money? Projection or smokescreen?

Bob
November 3, 2023 1:13 pm

James Hansen is embarrassing. He needs to just go eway.

November 3, 2023 1:38 pm

 are allowed to buy politicians.

Fair comment.

So deal with that problem instead of concocting a problem, that isn’t a problem, to deal with the real problem.

The problem with these types is they are utterly incapable of dealing with a problem in case they offend someone by confronting them about the problem.

Need I say problems are real problems?

Edward Katz
November 3, 2023 5:54 pm

It would be a good idea for Hansen and the rest of the climate alarmists to look at the US Energy Information Administration’s latest forecasts regarding fossil fuel demand during the next three decades; then they’d get a more realistic and sobering picture of what’s likely to transpire and never mind the IEA’s wishful thinking. The EIA predicts that fossil fuel use won’t peak until 2050, not just 2030, and only because of lower coal demand, not natural gas or oil. Until then it may start to decline, but will still be 18% higher than it was in 2022 and will still provide 70% of global energy demand. As for renewables, the IEA is putting too much faith in them since that sector because they’re facing much higher installation costs than originally estimated, higher interest rates, and more public dissatisfaction with deployment expenses, and dependability issues.

neutronman2014
November 4, 2023 12:30 am

Some paper to line the Parrot cage with.
In the70’s, Human activities were causing a New Ice age according to Misanthrope James Hansen.
Perhaps wide spread Sepuku would be a solution to him.

November 4, 2023 1:34 am

UK Met office data shows an increase in sunlight over the century, particularly post 1980, when the UK cleaned up its air a lot.

MET_office_sun_temp.png
son of mulder
Reply to  zzebowa
November 4, 2023 4:52 am

Thanks for finding these 2 charts. More focus needs to be put on the impact of the clean air acts. I can remember in the late 70’s / early 80’s the sun starting to feel hotter on my skin as can Mrs Mulder. So not only sunlight duration but also strength of sunlight reaching the surface needs more attention.

son of mulder
Reply to  zzebowa
November 4, 2023 5:28 am

Is there any pattern in Tmax and Tmin that would indicate such a fingerprint eg Tmax rising faster than Tmin?

morfu03
November 4, 2023 8:34 pm

Wow, amazing! Another proxy based article.. How do they keep getting those through peer review?
The editor and reviewer must be asleep since more than 10 years..

Is it really possible that people do not know about the rejoinder by McShane and Wyner?
(it can be found here and ended a discussion involving Mann, Schmitt, Amman and others quite conclusively.. very well worth the read as well as their initial paper and the commetns it drew.
https://projecteuclid.org/journals/annals-of-applied-statistics/volume-5/issue-1/Rejoinder–A-statistical-analysis-of-multiple-temperature-proxies/10.1214/10-AOAS398REJ.full )

One of several key points McShane and Wyner made quite impressively, was that any data analysis MUST include uncertainties which might arise from the proxy selsection

“””
Consequently, the application of ad hoc methods to screen and exclude data in-
creases model uncertainty in ways that are unmeasurable and uncorrectable.

“””

If it was common sense before McShane and Wyner, it is now an official publsihed answer to any proxy reconstruction article and any paper not addressing it isworthless, Hansen or not!

Verified by MonsterInsights