Posted on by Anne Minard

‘Climate Change Satellite’ Gets its Day in the Sun — Finally

Artist concept of the Glory spacecraft in Earth orbit. Credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

[/caption]

NASA is launching an Earth-orbiting satellite called Glory tomorrow that will tackle a highly charged question: How much can the sun contribute to climate change?

The lull in solar activity between solar cycles 23 and 24 lasted for two years, twice as long as expected. By mid-2009, well into the second year, predictions of global cooling — another Little Ice Age — dominated global warming skeptic blogs. Now Solar Cycle 24 is safely underway, but aside from the dramatic flare and rash of sunspots that erupted last week, it’s been wimpy. Tom Woods, a solar physicist at the Boulder, Colo.-based Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, says he expects a subdued maximum for Solar Cycle 24 (around 2013) and generally, weak solar cycles come in threes. Each known set of sluggish solar cycles in the past has coincided with bitterly cold winters in parts of the globe — especially Europe and North America.

The question is, with the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels, would we even feel an extended solar minimum? That’s exactly what Glory will aim to find out.

Glory will launch shortly after 2 a.m. local time on Wednesday, Feb. 23 from the Vandenberg Air Force Base north of Santa Barbara, Calif. The six-foot (1.9 meter), 1,100-pound (525 kg) satellite will orbit for at least three years in Earth’s upper atmosphere, where it will monitor both the total solar energy that’s reaching Earth, and the airborne aerosols greeting the energy it when it gets here.

Aerosols include salt, mineral dust, soot, and smoke and come from a variety of sources – such as vehicle exhaust, campfires, volcanoes and even desert winds and sea spray. They can influence climate by absorbing and scattering light, and NASA scientists have said the range of uncertainty about their role in climate change is far greater than any doubt about greenhouse gases from fossil fuels. Raytheon’s Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor, an instrument mounted on the Earth-facing side of the spacecraft, will observe the movement of aerosols through the atmosphere over time, especially on a seasonal scale.

Glory’s sun-facing side will sport the Total Irradiance Monitor, which will measure the intensity of solar radiation at the top of Earth’s atmosphere, adding to a 32-year data set, to record the solar radiation reaching Earth.

Watch a short video on the data: Solar Variability and Total Solar Irradiance (LASP)

Four solar irradiance instruments are currently flying, including VIRGO, launched in 1995, and SORCE, sent into orbit in 2003. Three of those, though, have long exceeded their designed mission lifetimes and are deteriorating. The European PICARD mission, launched in 2010, and NASA’s Glory mission are the new guard.

Greg Kopp, a researcher also at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, is principal investigator on the Glory mission. He says the existing data has already helped researchers understand variations on the scale of the sun’s 11-year activity cycles. But in order to capture longer trends, observations must continue. And solar researchers are increasingly eager to quantify the sun’s role, given the global importance of the question.

“I’m fond of saying we should get closer to the votersphere,” says Daniel Baker, director of Boulder’s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics. “I can think of no problem that is more significant to humanity than understanding climate change.”

Follow the mission:

On Feb. 23, NASA TV coverage of the countdown will begin at 3:30 a.m. EST (12:30 a.m. PST). Liftoff is targeted for 5:09:43 a.m. EST (2:09:43 a.m. PST). Spacecraft separation from the Taurus occurs 13 minutes after launch. The briefings and launch coverage also will be streamed online.

Launch coverage of Glory countdown activities will appear on NASA’s launch blog starting at 3:30 a.m. EST (12:30 a.m. PST). Real-time updates of countdown milestones as well as streaming video clips highlighting launch preparations and liftoff will also be available.

See also NASA’s Glory page and the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

Study: Thawing Permafrost Could Accelerate Global Warming

From a press release from the University of Colorado Boulder:

Up to two-thirds of Earth’s permafrost likely will disappear by 2200 as a result of warming temperatures, unleashing vast quantities of carbon into the atmosphere, says a new study by the University of Colorado Boulder’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES).

The carbon resides in permanently frozen ground that is beginning to thaw in high latitudes from warming temperatures, which will impact not only the climate but also international strategies to reduce fossil fuel emissions, said CU-Boulder’s Kevin Schaefer, lead study author. “If we want to hit a target carbon dioxide concentration, then we have to reduce fossil fuel emissions that much lower than previously thought to account for this additional carbon from the permafrost,” he said. “Otherwise we will end up with a warmer Earth than we want.”
Continue reading “Study: Thawing Permafrost Could Accelerate Global Warming”

Posted on by Tammy Plotner

Sun Plays A Major Role In Climate Change

Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM)

[/caption]

It’s not often I voice my opinion on climate change without sounding like a tree-hugger or a total kook. However, in this circumstance I had an opportunity to read about some findings that hit home with my own personal thoughts and I figured you might like to know, too.

According to the latest American Astronomical Society Press Release, “Scientists have taken a major step toward accurately determining the amount of energy that the Sun provides to Earth, and how variations in that energy may contribute to climate change. In a new study of laboratory and satellite data, researchers report a lower value of that energy, known as total solar irradiance, than previously measured and demonstrate that the satellite instrument that made the measurement — which has a new optical design and was calibrated in a new way — has significantly improved the accuracy and consistency of such measurements. The new findings give confidence, the researchers say, that other, newer satellites expected to launch starting early this year will measure total solar irradiance with adequate repeatability — and with little enough uncertainty — to help resolve the long-standing question of how significant a contributor solar fluctuations are to the rising average global temperature of the planet.

“Improved accuracies and stabilities in the long-term total solar irradiance record mean improved estimates of the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate,” said Greg Kopp of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) of the University of Colorado Boulder. Kopp, who led the study, and Judith Lean of the Naval Research Laboratory, in Washington, D.C., published their findings today in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union. The new work will help advance scientists’ ability to understand the contribution of natural versus anthropogenic causes of climate change, the scientists said. That’s because the research improves the accuracy of the continuous, 32-year record of total solar irradiance, or TSI. Energy from the Sun is the primary energy input driving Earth’s climate, which scientific consensus indicates has been warming since the Industrial Revolution.

Lean specializes in the effects of the Sun on climate and space weather. She said, “Scientists estimating Earth’s climate sensitivities need accurate and stable solar irradiance records to know exactly how much warming to attribute to changes in the Sun’s output, versus anthropogenic or other natural forcings.” The new, lower TSI value was measured by the LASP-built Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM) instrument on the NASA Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) spacecraft. Tests at a new calibration facility at LASP verify the lower TSI value. The ground- based calibration facility enables scientists to validate their instruments under on-orbit conditions against a reference standard calibrated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Before the development of the calibration facility, solar irradiance instruments would frequently return different measurements from each other, depending on their calibration. To maintain a long-term record of the Sun’s output through time, scientists had to rely on overlapping measurements that allowed them to intercalibrate among instruments.

Kopp said, “The calibration facility indicates that the TIM is producing the most accurate total solar irradiance results to date, providing a baseline value that allows us to make the entire 32-year record more accurate. This baseline value will also help ensure that we can maintain this important climate data record for years into the future, reducing the risks from a potential gap in spacecraft measurements.” Lean said, “We are eager to see how this lower irradiance value affects global climate models, which use various parameters to reproduce current climate: incoming solar radiation is a decisive factor. An improved and extended solar data record will make it easier for us to understand how fluctuations in the Sun’s energy output over time affect temperatures, and how Earth’s climate responds to radiative forcing.” Lean’s model, which is now adjusted to the new lower absolute TSI values, reproduces with high fidelity the TSI variations that TIM observes and indicates that solar irradiance levels during the recent prolonged solar minimum period were likely comparable to levels in past solar minima. Using this model, Lean estimates that solar variability produces about 0.1 degree Celsius (0.18 degree Fahrenheit) global warming during the 11-year solar cycle, but is likely not the main cause of global warming in the past three decades.”

I think the new findngs are awesome. For one, we really haven’t been studying our weather with any great accuracy or scientific instruments for that long – only about 5 decades. For those of us who enjoy viewing sunspots, you also might have noticed that when sunspot activity is high, it really does seem to affect our weather – especially cloud cover. Global warming is real, and there is no doubt that mankind has contributed to it. However, take solar findings very much to heart because my opinion is the Sun plays a more important role in our climate than we could have ever dreamed possible.

Original Source: American Geophysical Union – Image Courtesy of NASA

Posted on by Ken Kremer

2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record say NOAA and NASA

World map with global temperature changes from 1880 to 2010. Credit: NASA GISS

[/caption]

Newly released scientific data shows that 2010 equals 2005 as the Earths warmest year on record over the last 131 years, say researchers from NOAA and NASA. Temperature measurements from instrumented monitoring stations date back to 1880.

The past decade from 2001 to 2010 was the warmest on record and includes 9 of the 10 hottest years. A NOAA ranking of the 15 hottest years globally shows they all occurred in the last 15 years since 1995.

2010 was the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average of 57.0 F (13.9°C), according to NOAA data. 1976 was the last year with a below average global temperature. Updated.

Global surface temperature anomalies for 2010. Credit: NOAA

Overall, the combined global land and ocean surface temperatures for 2010 and 2005 has risen 1.12 F (0.62 C) compared with the 20th century average, according to NOAA. The average global temperature in 2010 was 58.12 degrees compared to 57.0 F (13.9°C) as the average for all of 20th century. 2010 was also the wettest year on record.

The rise in Earths’ global temperature has been accompanied by a decline in arctic sea ice. Specifically, surface air temperatures in the arctic were warmer than normal during the summer of 2010. The sea ice extent measured in September 2010, was the 3rd lowest on record since accurate monitoring began in 1979, states NOAA in the annual Arctic report card. See Video below.

Scientists from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) in Asheville, N.C. and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City announced the findings on Jan 12. The temperature data are collected by weather stations that span across the globe.

Global measurements by independent researchers in the UK at the Met Office Hadley Centre and at the Japanese Meteorological Agency closely match the trend of warming temperatures gathered by NOAA NCDC and NASA GISS.

The graphic below combines the actual temperature data collected independently by the four research agencies. The temperature trend lines are remarkably consistent.

Multiple institutions monitor global surface temperatures. Despite subtle differences in the ways the scientists perform their analyses, these four widely referenced records show remarkable agreement. Credit: NASA Earth Observatory/Robert Simmon

Much of the rise in global temperatures has taken place since the late 1970’s, says NASA. The rate of increase has been about 0.36 F per decade. The NASA GISS weather data were collected using over 1000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperature and Antarctic research station measurements.

2010 average annual temperature ranks by state in the US. Credit: NOAA

The data are fed into a computer program which then calculates temperature anomalies — the difference between surface temperature in a given month and the average temperature for the same period during 1951 to 1980. NASA GISS uses that three-decade period as the baseline for analysis against which climate change can be tracked. NOAA uses the entire 20th century.

For the contiguous United States, NOAA analysis shows that “2010 was the 14th consecutive year with an annual temperature above the long-term average. Since 1895, the temperature across the US has increased at an average rate of approximately 0.12 F per decade.”

More at these press releases from NOAA and NASA

There are large areas in the Arctic without weather stations. NASA GISS approaches the problem by filling in gaps with data from the nearest land stations. The Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, which works jointly with the Met Office Hadley Centre, leaves much of the region out of its global temperature analysis. Credit: NASA Earth Observatory/Robert Simmon
2010 Global Significant Weather and Climate Events. Credit: NOAA
Global Temperatures.
The year 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year since records began in 1880. The annual global combined land and ocean surface temperature was 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average. The range associated with this value is plus or minus 0.07°C (0.13°F). The 2010 combined land and ocean surface temperature in the Northern Hemisphere was also the warmest on record, while the combined land and ocean surface temperature in the Southern Hemisphere was the sixth warmest such period on record. Credit: NOAA

NOAA Arctic Report Card 2010

Posted on by Tammy Plotner

Red Sky In The Morning…

“Red sky in the morning… Sailors take warning!” How many of you have heard of that old phrase? Just look at this beautiful panorama of Cairns, Australia done by Joe Brimacombe – does it portend foul weather ahead or are such sayings a myth? Step inside and let’s find out…

In present time we recognize such beautiful clouds to be a reflection from the rising Sun, but in times past mankind relied on such fanciful wordsmithing to help them predict weather patterns crucial to farmers and sailors. Can the appearance of the sky and appearance of the clouds really foretell the atmospheric future? You just might be surprised…

Generally our weather moves in the opposite direction – west to east – from which our Earth turns. It’s carried along by the romantic westerly trade winds, meaning storm systems are more likely to arrive from the west. We know the brilliant and varied colors we see in the sky are caused by sunlight being refracted into almost all the colors of the spectrum as they pass through our atmosphere and bounce off the water vapor and fine particles present in Earth’s atmosphere. The amount, of which, are darn good indications of weather-to-be!

At both rise and set, the Sun is low on the horizon and the light coming through is penentrating the very thickest part of Earth’s atmosphere. When skies appear red, we know it carries a concentration of both moisture and dust particles. We perceive red because the longest wavelengths in the visible spectrum dictate it. The shorter blue wavelengths are dispersed. Therefore a red sunrise means the Sun is reflecting from dust particles and clouds that have passed from the west and a storm may be following in from the east. Watch for the skies themselves to change color, too… Because if they should appear a deep, brilliant red? That means there’s a high moisture content in the atmosphere and rain is usually on the way!

And now you know…

Many thanks to Dr. Joseph Brimacombe for sharing his awesome photo taken from Coral Towers Observatory, Cairns, Australia. You rock, Doc!

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

Mann: A Changing Climate Doesn’t Have a Political Agenda

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Source: NOAA)

[/caption]

The body of evidence for climate change is strong and convincing, and multiple lines of evidence show the changes are caused largely by human activities. The consensus among scientists about the reality of the phenomenon is also convincing.

But from the nature of public discussions on the subject today – at least in the US – that consensus might not be apparent. And somehow the discussion has become a “debate,” which is often divided down political party lines.

“We have to make it clear that the ice sheets are not Republicans or Democrats – they don’t have a political agenda as they disappear,” said Michael Mann, a physicist at Pennsylvania State University, who has been at the recent forefront of climate research. “Certain facts cannot be denied. We have to find a way to steer the conversation to a good faith debate about what we can do about the problem, not this bad faith debate about the reality of it.”

Mann spoke to over 600 writers and journalists on November 7, 2010 at the combined meetings of the National Association of Science Writers and the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing, held at Yale University this week.

Why has the public discourse become so polarizing and why is there a fair amount of legislators and the public who now think that climate change is an elaborate hoax?

Michael Mann, Professor Director, Earth System Science Center, Pennsylvania State University. Credit: PSU

Mann said there has been a large, well funded campaign to manufacture misinformation about climate change, similar to how tobacco companies muddied the waters in the 1960’s on how smoking causes lung cancer and emphysema. It’s no secret that many climate change deniers have ties to the fossil fuel industry.

Mann referred specifically to an infamous memo sent out by GOP political consultant Frank Luntz in 2002 to President George Bush, “which basically said that if the public comes to understand the reality of this problem they will demand policy action to deal with it,” Mann said, “and so you need to manufacture doubt and controversy and uncertainty and cultivate a set of scientists who can act for advocates essentially for fossil fuel industry. And that is what is happened.”

And the science became politicized. “If you can politicize something in today’s political environment,” Mann continued, “you can immediately get half the population on your side. Unfortunately the forces of anti-science — those who deny the science — have been very effective in politicizing the framing.”

Line plot of global mean land-ocean temperature index, 1880 to present, with the base period 1951-1980. The dotted black line is the annual mean and the solid red line is the five-year mean. The green bars show uncertainty estimates. Credit: NASA

But thousands of scientists from almost 200 countries around the world agreed on the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report which said most of the observed increases in global average temperatures is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations. Additionally, the US National Academy of Sciences, the National Academies of all the G-8 nations, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and several other scientific bodies have all issued equivalent statements of consensus of the reality of human-caused climate change.

“Certain facts cannot be denied because you don’t like the implications,” Mann said.

Mann is probably best known for known for his “hockey stick” reconstruction of past climate, (Nature, 1998) which shows the world is warmer now than it has been for at least 1000 years. The “hockey stick” has been attacked by climate change deniers, and while new research has better defined the data, it has not been disproven, nor is it the only line of evidence for global warming.

“The hockey stick is not ‘the’ pillar of evidence for the reality of climate change,” Mann said. “There are multiple pillars that include just the basic understanding of chemistry and physics. But it is one of the more visually compelling pieces of evidence for warming.”

The 'hockey stick' chart from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report in 2001.

Mann conceded that various other studies and reconstructions of past climate data don’t agree entirely and that there are uncertainties of how much warming will continue because the predictions are based on models, which attempt to predict the future.

“There are legitimate uncertainties, but unfortunately the public discourse is so far removed from where the scientific discourse and controversies actually are, “Mann said. “There is not an uncertainty of the reality of climate change, that sea levels are going to rise, that arctic sea ice will be gone in a few decades or a whole lot of other areas, but we do have an uncertainty in our ability to project regional climate change.”

Mann said scientists don’t completely understand the El Nino and La Nina affects, how cloud feedback will influence the warming and other modeling issues.

However, Mann said, the science has improved over the past few years, and still, there is enough evidence for not just a hockey stick, but an entire hockey league.

“Every reconstruction reveals that the warming is indeed anomalous in a very long term context. Global temperatures are running the highest they have ever run. The twelve month running averages are warmer than they have ever been in documented history. There is no cooling of the globe and no decline to hide,” Mann said referring to the “Climategate” emails that were stolen from East Anglia climate research center and leaked just a few weeks before the Copenhagen climate summit in late 2009.

“Hackers stole thousands of emails –private correspondences between scientists,” said Mann, “and their words were cherry picked, taken out of context and distorted to make it sound like scientists were engaged in some sort of hoax.”

‘Hide the decline’ actually meant the scientists were going to remove unreliable tree-ring data, not cover up any decline in temperatures.

Mann said the real crime was the illegal theft of private correspondence, in addition to the moral crime of intentionally distorting what scientists believe and think.

Mann took his audience to task by saying, “I’d like to say the mainstream media recognized the manufactured controversy for what is was, but they didn’t, entirely.” He also admitted that scientists have not done all they could in the past to make the science clear and their words convincing.

But looking at the current political climate, Mann asked for journalists’ help in the future.

“No doubt we are in for a period of months or even years where climate science is likely to be subject to the sort of politically motivated inquisition that we haven’t seen, frankly, since the 1950’s,” he said. “It is necessary and important for the scientific community to do the best it I can to defend itself from this oncoming attack, and frankly, we are entirely reliant on the willingness of the mainstream media to serve in its role as the critical and independent arbiter and not just report the two sides of the so-called debate, but to actually establish what is fact and what is fiction. The scientists will not be successful against the attack that is coming unless the media is serving its role.”

Mann ended his talk with a picture of his daughter enthralled by a polar bear at a zoo. “I don’t want to have to tell my daughter that polar bears became extinct because we failed to counter a well funded effort to distract the public,” he said.

————————————

Note: For any reader who thinks they need to leave a comment to debate the climate change science, before posting, please take a look at the following information:

Mann’s (and other scientists’) data are entirely open and available for anyone to view.

RealClimate.org –– Mann and other climate scientists answer questions and discuss climate change data

NASA’s Global Climate Change Website. Lots of graphs, images and information.

IPCC

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

New Galaxy Zoo Project Crowd-sources Old Climate Data

The newest citizen science project from the Galaxy Zoo team lets the public travel back in time and join the crews of over 280 different World War I royal navy warships. While an engaging historical journey, the project will help scientists better understand the climate of the past. There are gaps in weather and climate data records, particularly before 1920, prior to when weather station observations were accurately recorded. But old naval ships routinely recorded the weather they encountered – marking down temperatures and conditions even while in battle. The information in many of these weather logbooks has not been utilized – until now, as the “Old Weather” project has made its debut as the newest way for the public to contribute in scientific research.

The project is designed to provide a detailed map of the world’s climate around 100 years ago, which will help tell us more about the climate today. Anyone can take part, read the logs, follow events aboard the vessels and contribute to this fun and historical project, which could tell us more about our climate’s future.

“These naval logbooks contain an amazing treasure trove of information but because the entries are handwritten they are incredibly difficult for a computer to read,’ said Dr. Chris Lintott of Oxford University, a Galaxy Zoo founder and developer of the OldWeather.org project. “By getting an army of online human volunteers to retrace these voyages and transcribe the information recorded by British sailors we can relive both the climate of the past and key moments in naval history.”

By transcribing information about weather, and any interesting events, from images of each ship’s logbook web volunteers will help scientists to build a more accurate picture of how our climate has changed over the last century, as well as adding to our knowledge of this important period of British history.

HMS Acacia, one of the ships in the Old Weather project.

“Historical weather data is vital because it allows us to test our models of the Earth’s climate,”said Dr. Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the British meteorology, or Met Office. “If we can correctly account for what the weather was doing in the past, then we can have more confidence in our predictions of the future. Unfortunately, the historical record is full of gaps, particularly from before 1920 and at sea, so this project is invaluable.”

Weather observations by Royal Navy sailors were made every four hours without fail, said Dr. Robert Simpson of Oxford University, who added that this project is almost like “launching a weather satellite into the skies at a time when manpowered flight was still in its infancy.”

What is Old Weather from National Maritime Museum on Vimeo.

If you are not yet familiar yet with the Zooniverse, which includes citizen science projects like Galaxy Zoo and Moon Zoo, you are really missing out on a fun and engaging way to do actual, meaningful science. In those projects, 320,000 people have made over 150 million classifications and published several scientific papers – which shown that ordinary web users can make observations that are as accurate as those made by experts.

Old Weather is unique among the eight scientific projects encompassed by the Zooniverse because of how old the data is, and participating really is a trip back in time. The ‘virtual sailors’ visiting OldWeather.org are rewarded for their efforts by a rise through the ratings from cadet to captain of a particular ship according to the number of pages they transcribe. Historians are also hoping that a look into these old records will provide a fresh insight into naval history and encourage people to find out more about the past.

Here’s a tutorial on how to participate in Old Weather:

Old Weather – Getting Started from The Zooniverse on Vimeo.

To find out more, and participate visit OldWeather.org. There’s also an Old Weather blog at http://blogs.zooniverse.org/oldweather

You can also follow the project on Twitter (@OldWeather) and Facebook.

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

Could the World Run on Solar and Wind Power?

More than 3,300 solar panels have been erected on a vacant five acres at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. Credit: NASA/Jim Grossman

[/caption]

Today, the total oil and natural gas production provides about 60 percent of global energy consumption. This percentage is expected to peak about 10 to 30 years from now, and then be followed by a rapid decline, due to declining oil reserves and, hopefully, sources of renewable energy that technologies that will become more economically viable. But will there be the technology breakthroughs needed to make clean and exhaustible energy cost effective?

Nobel prize winner Walter Kohn, Ph.D., from the University of California Santa Barbara said that the continuous research and development of alternate energy could soon lead to a new era in human history in which two renewable sources — solar and wind — will become Earth’s dominant contributor of energy.

“These trends have created two unprecedented global challenges”, Kohn said, speaking at the American Chemical Society’s national meeting. “One is the threatened global shortage of acceptable energy. The other is the unacceptable, imminent danger of global warming and its consequences.”

The nations of the world need a concerted commitment to a changeover from the current era, dominated by oil plus natural gas, to a future era dominated by solar, wind, and alternative energy sources, Kohn said, and he sees that beginning to happen.

The global photovoltaic energy production increased by a factor of about 90 and wind energy by a factor of about 10 over the last decade. Kohn expects vigorous growth of these two energies to continue during the next decade and beyond, thereby leading to a new era, what he calls the SOL/WIND era, in human history, in which solar and wind energy have become the earth’s dominant alternative energies.

Kohn noted that this challenge require a variety of responses. “The most obvious is continuing scientific and technical progress providing abundant and affordable alternative energies, safe, clean and carbon-free,” he said.

One of the biggest challenges might be leveling off global population, as well as energy consumption levels.

Source: American Chemical Society

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

Satellite Data Show Plant Growth is Declining on Earth

Caption: A snapshot of Earth's plant productivity in 2003 shows regions of increased productivity (green) and decreased productivity (red). Credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio

[/caption]

One idea about climate change suggested that higher temperatures would boost plant growth and food production. That may have been a trend for awhile, where plant growth flourished with a longer growing season, but the latest analysis of satellite data shows that rising global temperatures has reached a tipping point where instead of being beneficial, higher temperatures are causing drought, which is now decreasing plant growth on a planetary scale. This could impact food security, biofuels, and the global carbon cycle. “This is a pretty serious warning that warmer temperatures are not going to endlessly improve plant growth,” said Steven Running from the University of Montana.

During the 1980s and 1990s global terrestrial plant productivity increased as much as six percent. Scientists say that happened because during that time, temperature, solar radiation and water availability — influenced by climate change — were favorable for growth.

During the past ten years, the decline in global plant growth is slight – just one percent. But it may signify a trend.

Interannual shifts in plant productivity (green line) fluctuated in step with shifts in atmospheric carbon dioxide (red line) between 2000 through 2009. Credit: Maosheng Zhao and Steven Running

“These results are extraordinarily significant because they show that the global net effect of climatic warming on the productivity of terrestrial vegetation need not be positive — as was documented for the 1980’s and 1990’s,” said Diane Wickland, of NASA Headquarters and manager of NASA’s Terrestrial Ecology research program.

A 2003 paper in Science led by then University of Montana scientist Ramakrishna Nemani (now at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.) showed that land plant productivity was on the rise.
Running and co-author Maosheng Zhao originally set out to update Nemani’s analysis, expecing to see similar results as global average temperatures have continued to climb. Instead, they found that the impact of regional drought overwhelmed the positive influence of a longer growing season, driving down global plant productivity between 2000 and 2009.

The discovery comes from an analysis of plant productivity data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Terra satellite, combined with growing season climate variables including temperature, solar radiation and water. The plant and climate data are factored into an algorithm that describes constraints on plant growth at different geographical locations.

For example, growth is generally limited in high latitudes by temperature and in deserts by water. But regional limitations can vary in their degree of impact on growth throughout the growing season.

Zhao and Running’s analysis showed that since 2000, high-latitude northern hemisphere ecosystems have continued to benefit from warmer temperatures and a longer growing season. But that effect was offset by warming-associated drought that limited growth in the southern hemisphere, resulting in a net global loss of land productivity.

“This past decade’s net decline in terrestrial productivity illustrates that a complex interplay between temperature, rainfall, cloudiness, and carbon dioxide, probably in combination with other factors such as nutrients and land management, will determine future patterns and trends in productivity,” Wickland said.
The researchers plan on maintaining a record of the trends into the future. For one reason, plants act as a carbon dioxide “sink,” and shifting plant productivity is linked to shifting levels of the greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Also, stresses on plant growth could challenge food production.

“The potential that future warming would cause additional declines does not bode well for the ability of the biosphere to support multiple societal demands for agricultural production, fiber needs, and increasingly, biofuel production,” Zhao said.

“Even if the declining trend of the past decade does not continue, managing forests and croplands for multiple benefits to include food production, biofuel harvest, and carbon storage may become exceedingly challenging in light of the possible impacts of such decadal-scale changes,” Wickland said.

The team published their findings Aug. 20 in Science.

Source: NASA

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

What is Causing Weather Extremes in 2010?

Wildfires in Russia as seen from space by ESA's Envisat satellite. Credit: ESA

[/caption]

Massive rains in Pakistan, China and Iowa in the US. Drought, heat and unprecedented fires in Russia and western Canada. 2010 is going down as the year of crazy, extreme weather. Is this just a wacky year or a trend of things to come? According to meteorologists, unusual holding patterns in the jet stream in the northern hemisphere are to blame for the extreme weather in Pakistan and Russia. But also, the World Meteorological Organization and other scientists say this type of weather fits patterns predicted by climate scientists, and could be the result of climate change.

“All these things are the kinds of things we would expect to happen as the planet warms up,” said Tom Wagner, a NASA scientist who studies the cryosphere, during an interview on CNN on August 11. “And we are seeing that the planet is warming about .35 degrees per decade. Places like Greenland are warming even faster, like 3.5 degrees per decade. And all these events from heat waves to stronger monsoons, to loss of ice are all consistent with that. Where it gets a little tricky is assigning any specific event to say, the cause of this event is definitely global warming, that is where we get to the edge of the research.”

“This weather is very unusual but there are always extremes every year,” said Andrew Watson from the University of East Anglia’s Environmental Studies. “We can never say that weather in a single year is unequivocal evidence of climate change, if you get many years of extreme weather then that can point to climate change.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has long predicted that rising global temperatures would produce more frequent and intense heat waves, and more severe rainfalls. In its 2007 report, the panel said these trends have already been observed, with an increase in heat waves since 1950, for example.

NOAA measurements show that the combined global surface temperatures for June 2010 are the warmest on record, and Wagner said there are larger conclusions to be drawn from the definite global warming trend. “We are seeing things that haven’t really happened before on the planet, like warming at this specific rate. We think it is very well tied to increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since the late 1800’s caused by humans.”

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Source: NOAA)

Graphs on NASA’s climate website show an undeniable rise in global temperatures, sea levels, and carbon dioxide levels. See more of these graphs here.

“Not just over 10 years, but we have satellites images, weather station records and other good records going back to the late 1800’s that tells us all about how the planet is warming up,” Wagner said. “Not only that but we have evidence from geologic records, ice cores, and sediment cores from ocean cores. All of this feeds together to show us how the planet is changing.”

Asked if the cycle can be reversed, Wagner replied, “That is the million dollar question. One thing we have to think about is that the planet is changing and we have to deal with that. Ice around Antarctica and Greenland is melting. Sea level is rising right now at 3 millimeters a year. If you just extrapolate that to 100 years, it will rise to at least a foot of sea level rise. But there is the possibility it could be more than that. These are the types of things we need to think about and come up with mitigation strategies to deal with them. We’re doing the research to try and nail down these questions a little more tightly to see how much sea level is going to rise, how much temperatures are going to rise and how are weather patterns going to change.”

Reducing emissions is one thing that everyone can do to help protect the planet and the climate, and climate experts have been saying for years that there needs to be sharp cutbacks in emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that go into the atmosphere from automobiles, power plants, and other fossil fuel-burning industrial and residential sources.

In the news this week was the huge ice chunk coming loose from a Greenland glacier. Not only is this an indication of warming water, but other problems could develop, such as the large ice chunks getting in the way of shipping lanes or heading towards oil rigs. The high temperatures and fires in Russia are affecting big percentage of the world’s wheat production, and could have an effect on our food supply this coming year.

Not only that, but the wildfires have created a noxious soup of air pollution that is affecting life far beyond just the local regions, JPL reports. Among the pollutants created by wildfires is carbon monoxide, a gas that can pose a variety of health risks at ground level. Carbon monoxide is also an ingredient in the production of ground-level ozone, which causes numerous respiratory problems. As the carbon monoxide from these wildfires is lofted into the atmosphere, it becomes caught in the lower bounds of the mid-latitude jet stream, which swiftly transports it around the globe.

Two movies were created using continuously updated data from the “Eyes on the Earth 3-D” feature, also on NASA’s global climate change website. They show three-day running averages of daily measurements of carbon monoxide present at an altitude of 5.5 kilometers (18,000) feet, along with its global transport.

And in case you are wondering, the recent solar flares have nothing to do with the wildfires — as Ian O’Neill from Discovery space deftly points out.

Sources: CNN, AP, JPL , SkyNews