tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84867398231024640232024-03-17T02:28:33.087-07:00Wonky Thoughts Wonk: An overly studious person, an intellectual, a nerd with a keen interest in policies, strategy, and technical details._________________
Wonky: Crooked, off-center, askew, unsteady, shaky, not functioning correctly, faulty.Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.comBlogger102125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-60255140144787359772023-10-12T13:30:00.002-07:002023-10-12T17:48:52.240-07:00All The President's Men<p class="MsoNormal">This post is a duplicate of a post on my political blog. I'm re-posting because of the importance of this topic. <br />--------<br />Donald Trump was the 45<sup>th</sup> president of the United
States, serving from 2017 until 2021.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Like
any president, Trump appointed a cabinet of department secretaries, choosing
highly accomplished individuals to serve in those positions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Trump, with his well-known inclination for
authority figures, chose a number of military generals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Over the years, Trump also developed a circle
of associates in private business.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As in
any administration, conflicts developed between Trump and his subordinates, and
sometimes between the subordinates.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However,
Trump’s administration was noteworthy for the number of conflicts and for
turnover in his cabinet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">During his first campaign, Trump told Bret Baier of Fox
News, “I'm going to surround myself only with the best and most serious people.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Indeed, the people recruited to serve in
Trump’s cabinet had remarkable resumes, particularly those in top-tier
positions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But as those individuals left
the White House, a picture began to unfold about the president himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Their writings, interviews and public
statements about the former president are a performance review from those who
worked with him most closely in the White House.</p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhJiw6ZMHKI01mXEbQ_1KxI4JJ7M_aydVY_b4A3GOHrRqDQQ45g0UsEuA7C9A24Ns4FiTgG0Xh5AeHerFyB-vV-7qzTZqebc9bIGqxekjnBFhdDRtZ20x2PoZWdUFLgWcAQBfj7aTQ1GDEDBrzP_0xPl3Kz6TdASJQ_PX5pAmOHkmtGrJfKQ_km7SZ7Q/s1676/Trump%20Cabinet.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1117" data-original-width="1676" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhJiw6ZMHKI01mXEbQ_1KxI4JJ7M_aydVY_b4A3GOHrRqDQQ45g0UsEuA7C9A24Ns4FiTgG0Xh5AeHerFyB-vV-7qzTZqebc9bIGqxekjnBFhdDRtZ20x2PoZWdUFLgWcAQBfj7aTQ1GDEDBrzP_0xPl3Kz6TdASJQ_PX5pAmOHkmtGrJfKQ_km7SZ7Q/w640-h426/Trump%20Cabinet.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The opinions about Donald Trump from his former subordinates
are a remarkably consistent portrait of the president.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They describe a man who who no principles,
who sees everything through the lens of his own self-interest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They describe a man who has no regard for
rules, laws, treaties or behavioral norms.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>They describe a man who is unbelievably impatient, who reacts rather
than thinks, who doesn’t, can’t or won’t learn relevant facts before making a
decision.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They describe a man with an incredibly
short attention span.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They describe a
man who admires dictators, aspires to have the power of a dictator, and who has
no regard for the constitution or democracy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>They describe a man who is enamored of violence, who seeks domination of
others as a matter of course.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In blunt
terms they describe a man with immature emotions and intellectual capacity, unable
to understand complex state matters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And
they say that Trump should not be president.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Here, then, is Donald Trump’s Presidential Portrait.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Mark Esper<br /></u><i></i></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><i><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4WYnufDyKM7Xkv1C2u2DeY3-nqKjAfq4akIVKaQ15XSlod6CBy8Qyrq2A6g3-HMEK2eNLGJHCX3y3mbr2gOkmo2TwcIDNJZHiAm88XLGLLGH3g7ZLWbvQdPevxR2jifA5EKTFlxgou7w48Zh6PIg-WvMie9ZWcWzjVdJYNc-JBc7UTIyxsMvxI6-G0Q/s301/Mark%20Esper.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="301" data-original-width="227" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4WYnufDyKM7Xkv1C2u2DeY3-nqKjAfq4akIVKaQ15XSlod6CBy8Qyrq2A6g3-HMEK2eNLGJHCX3y3mbr2gOkmo2TwcIDNJZHiAm88XLGLLGH3g7ZLWbvQdPevxR2jifA5EKTFlxgou7w48Zh6PIg-WvMie9ZWcWzjVdJYNc-JBc7UTIyxsMvxI6-G0Q/w151-h200/Mark%20Esper.jpg" width="151" /></a></i></b></div><b><i>West Point, Lt. Colonel US Army, Congressional policy
analyst, VP Aerospace Industries Association, VP Raytheon, Secretary of
Defense.</i></b><u><br /></u><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><u>
</u>“He is an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be
in the position of public service."<br /><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/mark-esper-book-trump.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/mark-esper-book-trump.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“It's important to our country, it's important to the
republic, the American people, that they understand what was going on in this
very consequential period… The last year of the Trump administration.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And to tell the story about things we prevented.
Really bad things. Dangerous things that could have taken the country in a dark
direction."<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/mark-esper-book-trump.html"><br />https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mark-esper-donald-trump-reelection-60-minutes-2022-05-08/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Bret Baier, Fox News: "Is Donald Trump a threat to democracy?<br />Mark Esper: ““I think that given the events of January 6, given
how he has undermined the election results, he incited people to come to DC,
stirred them up that morning and failed to call them off, to me, that threatens
our democracy. … I think the answer would – what else can you conclude, Bret?”<br /><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/10/politics/donald-trump-mark-esper-democracy-threat/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/10/politics/donald-trump-mark-esper-democracy-threat/index.html</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>John Kelly<br /></u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2NIRTgy-NoXUQ1P7WMmHqby7wqD5FSdgWmWgegEiJYNxQU7NdpRoSj0XAXTrS966_1VK7JDM3VP31bWZ6jEhbbyoGmKjOKAbO3WJRo1Ky0fVRDh6pHFJEZr9JGhD3xMjYSK9oVwGt0mcyWDqunNOtkjKnHJ0c1CDTMUqHdRCGfB4x7QAYyPrPh9VO5w/s626/John%20Kelly.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="626" data-original-width="501" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2NIRTgy-NoXUQ1P7WMmHqby7wqD5FSdgWmWgegEiJYNxQU7NdpRoSj0XAXTrS966_1VK7JDM3VP31bWZ6jEhbbyoGmKjOKAbO3WJRo1Ky0fVRDh6pHFJEZr9JGhD3xMjYSK9oVwGt0mcyWDqunNOtkjKnHJ0c1CDTMUqHdRCGfB4x7QAYyPrPh9VO5w/w160-h200/John%20Kelly.jpg" width="160" /></a></b></div><b><i>4-star General, US Marines, Board of Advisors, DC
Capital Partners, Secretary of Homeland Security, White House Chief of Staff.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Trump is:<br />“A person that has no idea what America stands for and has
no idea what America is all about.”<br />“A person who demonstrated open contempt for a Gold Star
family…and rants that our most precious heroes who gave their lives in
America’s defense are ‘losers’ and wouldn’t visit their graves in France.”<br />“A person who cavalierly suggests that a selfless warrior
who has served his country for 40 years in peacetime and war should lose his
life for treason – in expectation that someone will take action.”<br />“A person who admires autocrats and murderous dictators.”<br />“A person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic
institutions, our Constitution, and the rule of law."<br /><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/politics/john-kelly-donald-trump-us-service-members-veterans/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/politics/john-kelly-donald-trump-us-service-members-veterans/index.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“He’s an idiot. It’s pointless to try to convince him of
anything. He’s gone off the rails. We’re in Crazytown. I don’t even know why
any of us are here. This is the worst job I’ve ever had.”<br /><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/07/trump-week-of-dysfunction-inside-the-white-house">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/07/trump-week-of-dysfunction-inside-the-white-house</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kelly referred to Trump as "an idiot" multiple
times to underscore his point, according to four officials who say they've
witnessed the comments.<br /><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodwards-new-book-reveals-a-nervous-breakdown-of-trumps-presidency/2018/09/04/b27a389e-ac60-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodwards-new-book-reveals-a-nervous-breakdown-of-trumps-presidency/2018/09/04/b27a389e-ac60-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html<br />https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/kelly-thinks-he-s-saving-u-s-disaster-calls-trump-n868961</a>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">An unidentified friend of Kelly told CNN that Trump
"can’t fathom the idea of doing something for someone other than
himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Trump can’t imagine anyone
else’s pain."<br /><a href="https://people.com/john-kelly-says-donald-trump-refused-to-be-seen-with-military-amputees-8346820">https://people.com/john-kelly-says-donald-trump-refused-to-be-seen-with-military-amputees-8346820<br />https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Jim Mattis<br /></u><i></i></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><i><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixqR19xHbEYhhlLa2xALvKonyBbLnVnN4LBOpz3xR9A8bdZJQ8msaMrIDl1iQ1DA3KC0fCs_J_b0fCPGNh57WaDmlEowUzTlehT6n5vvkuK2SV9FJ07Vkb4gC8zqy4IsEDBW3VFp9eisjartfFUJSzy2JxXBNyqvQV1xBckscdReBT9UEJvucTk64bOA/s626/Jim%20Mattis.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="626" data-original-width="461" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixqR19xHbEYhhlLa2xALvKonyBbLnVnN4LBOpz3xR9A8bdZJQ8msaMrIDl1iQ1DA3KC0fCs_J_b0fCPGNh57WaDmlEowUzTlehT6n5vvkuK2SV9FJ07Vkb4gC8zqy4IsEDBW3VFp9eisjartfFUJSzy2JxXBNyqvQV1xBckscdReBT9UEJvucTk64bOA/w148-h200/Jim%20Mattis.jpg" width="148" /></a></i></b></div><b><i>4-star General, Commander US Joint Forces, Commander
NATO Allied Forces Transformation, Director General Dynamics, Secretary of
Defense.</i></b> <br /><br />"The president acted like — and had the understanding of — ‘a fifth- or
sixth-grader.’" <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodwards-new-book-reveals-a-nervous-breakdown-of-trumps-presidency/2018/09/04/b27a389e-ac60-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bob-woodwards-new-book-reveals-a-nervous-breakdown-of-trumps-presidency/2018/09/04/b27a389e-ac60-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html</a><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does
not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he
tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this
deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without
mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths.”<br /><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-trump-protests-militarization/612640/">https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-trump-protests-militarization/612640</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Bill Barr<br /></u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBF8jQNToE8JXsjiAeIviELAf4JtSNp5tSUlNMrnu2MTzx93cZEkzdESp65XJMKZc8_UzGSN_6-idwzWGAQ9ZHtOgUymzn_pE25FxlecP3YVzfPHeQ1fQZR131zHwP_CY3JlQeNT8EojIuQB_fBid3Uq1n9pkOU4FjAM_nD2paKtSSsvRQO5LkHaxVNg/s303/Bill%20Barr.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="303" data-original-width="205" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBF8jQNToE8JXsjiAeIviELAf4JtSNp5tSUlNMrnu2MTzx93cZEkzdESp65XJMKZc8_UzGSN_6-idwzWGAQ9ZHtOgUymzn_pE25FxlecP3YVzfPHeQ1fQZR131zHwP_CY3JlQeNT8EojIuQB_fBid3Uq1n9pkOU4FjAM_nD2paKtSSsvRQO5LkHaxVNg/w135-h200/Bill%20Barr.jpg" width="135" /></a></b></div><b><i>U</i><i>S Attorney, corporate lawyer, director of
Time/Warner, Attorney General (1991-93, 2019 - 2020).</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Donald Trump “knew well he lost the election.”<br />“Someone who engaged in that kind of bullying about a
process that is fundamental to our system and to our self-government shouldn’t
be anywhere near the Oval Office.”<br /><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/03/politics/bill-barr-trump-arraignment-2020-election/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/03/politics/bill-barr-trump-arraignment-2020-election/index.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“There was never an indication of interest in what the
actual facts were.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I thought, ‘Boy, if
he really believes this stuff, he has lost contact with – he’s become detached
from reality if he really believes this stuff.’”<br />Barr said the theories Trump supported were “idiotic” and
“amateurish”.<br /><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/14/politics/bill-barr-donald-trump-january-6-hearing-analysis/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/14/politics/bill-barr-donald-trump-january-6-hearing-analysis/index.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Barr said this about various claims by the Trump legal team:
“bullshit,” “completely bullshit,” “absolute rubbish,” “idiotic,” “bogus,”
“stupid,” “crazy,” “crazy stuff,” “complete nonsense,” and “a great, great
disservice to the country.”<br /><a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/bill-barr-calls-bullshit-on-trumps-election-lie">https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/bill-barr-calls-bullshit-on-trumps-election-lie<br />https://news.yahoo.com/the-growing-list-of-people-donald-trump-hired-who-eventually-soured-on-him-171720536.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Trump is a “fundamentally flawed person who engaged in
reckless conduct.”<br />“He will always put his own interests and gratifying his own
ego ahead of everything else, including the country's interests.”<br />“He's like a 9-year-old, a defiant 9-year-old kid who is
always pushing the glass toward the edge of the table, defying his parents to
stop him from doing it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It's a means of
self-assertion and exerting his dominance over other people. And he's a very
petty individual who will always put his interests ahead of the country’s.”<br /><a href="https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2023/06/19/ex-trump-officials-among-loudest-critics-in-documents-case">https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2023/06/19/ex-trump-officials-among-loudest-critics-in-documents-case</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Rex Tillerson<br /></u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxJ2nUiha9d1pEPg4Ga0eCli_4l0p5mWyzvKf0TxaLvZUsPIZ27J4a5YlzGT5yWZ-gW-qYUTrcVfBYoqjVlVbKBmpQxUQt3Jvha5qusFpg9QmahmIRP_xkIedAxzXUO38PKaZwYky8LNZ-UnTkIj7nmAApMw5FgAWafeX8yCCxEhg_sJbAg8AScL4qbQ/s631/Rex%20Tillerson.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="631" data-original-width="471" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxJ2nUiha9d1pEPg4Ga0eCli_4l0p5mWyzvKf0TxaLvZUsPIZ27J4a5YlzGT5yWZ-gW-qYUTrcVfBYoqjVlVbKBmpQxUQt3Jvha5qusFpg9QmahmIRP_xkIedAxzXUO38PKaZwYky8LNZ-UnTkIj7nmAApMw5FgAWafeX8yCCxEhg_sJbAg8AScL4qbQ/w149-h200/Rex%20Tillerson.jpg" width="149" /></a></b></div><b><i>Chairman & CEO of Exxon-Mobil, President of Boy
Scouts USA, Secretary of State.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“…a fucking moron.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Corroborated by White House witnesses, following a meeting where Trump
asked to increase the US nuclear arsenal ten-fold.<br /><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-wanted-dramatic-increase-nuclear-arsenal-meeting-military-leaders-n809701">https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-wanted-dramatic-increase-nuclear-arsenal-meeting-military-leaders-n809701</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“When the president would say, ‘Here’s what I want to do,
and here’s how I want to do it,’ and I’d have to say to him, ‘Well, Mr.
President, I understand what you want to do but you can’t do it that way. It
violates the law, it violates the treaty,’.... I think he grew tired of me
being the guy every day that told him, ‘You can’t do that, and let’s talk about
what we can do.’</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/07/tillerson-spills-on-trump-1048884">https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/07/tillerson-spills-on-trump-1048884<br /></a>Trump “is pretty undisciplined, doesn’t like to read,
doesn’t read briefing reports, doesn’t like to get into the details of a lot of
things, but rather just kind of says, ‘This is what I believe.’ ”<br /><br />“Nothing worked out” with Trump’s foreign policy
decisions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"We squandered the best
opportunity we had on North Korea. It was just blown up when he took the
meeting with Kim [Jong Un], and that was one of the last straws between him and
I," Tillerson told Foreign Policy. "With [Russia's Vladimir] Putin,
we didn't get anything done. We're nowhere with China on national
security.”..."We're in a worse place today than we were before he came in,
and I didn't think that was possible."<br /><a href="https://people.com/politics/rex-tillerson-savages-president-trump-as-uninformed-and-easily-distracted/">https://people.com/politics/rex-tillerson-savages-president-trump-as-uninformed-and-easily-distracted/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“His understanding of global events, his understanding of
global history, his understanding of U.S. history was really limited....It’s
really hard to have a conversation with someone who doesn’t even understand the
concept for why we’re talking about this.”</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“I used to go into meetings with a list of four to five
things I needed to talk to him about, and I quickly learned that if I got to
three, it was a home run, and I realized getting two that were meaningful was
probably the best objective....If I could put a photo or a picture in front of
him or a map or a piece of paper that had two big bullet points on it, he would
focus on that, and I could build on that,” Tillerson told the outlet. “Just
sitting and trying to have a conversation as you and I are having just doesn’t
work....I’m not sure many of those decisions were well-informed.”<br /><a href="https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/01/14/former-secretary-of-state-rex-tillerson-on-trump-were-in-a-worse-place-today-than-we-were-before-he-came-in/">https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/01/14/former-secretary-of-state-rex-tillerson-on-trump-were-in-a-worse-place-today-than-we-were-before-he-came-in/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>John Bolton</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd8HHSSr3QCWw62JlYN84R86WnIM9QcoJCYYbbaWftCkzZQwd781BUczhghKcc0UzudL9moTGFllA2XtrZZJ_OQNDNrDm7ZR3R0LtvuSSiS99XAf37RCsSSgZSxK5lWomFR8Fioa0WTPYZIkJiV5HKc91f74zTn_Y_nKAKUuVjbaajQFVdXihW9pNM-A/s404/John%20Bolton.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="404" data-original-width="319" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd8HHSSr3QCWw62JlYN84R86WnIM9QcoJCYYbbaWftCkzZQwd781BUczhghKcc0UzudL9moTGFllA2XtrZZJ_OQNDNrDm7ZR3R0LtvuSSiS99XAf37RCsSSgZSxK5lWomFR8Fioa0WTPYZIkJiV5HKc91f74zTn_Y_nKAKUuVjbaajQFVdXihW9pNM-A/w158-h200/John%20Bolton.jpg" width="158" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Assistant Attorney General, Ambassador to the UN, US
National Security Advisor, Secretary of State.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Trump has the attention span of a fruit fly.”<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPvB7ixfEgw">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPvB7ixfEgw</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“I hope [history] will remember him as a one-term president
who didn’t plunge the country irretrievably into a downward spiral.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We can get over one term. I have absolute
confidence. … Two terms, I’m more troubled about.”<br /><a href="https://news.yahoo.com/the-growing-list-of-people-donald-trump-hired-who-eventually-soured-on-him-171720536.html">https://news.yahoo.com/the-growing-list-of-people-donald-trump-hired-who-eventually-soured-on-him-171720536.html</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Richard Spencer</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3fuhJlqTmKo0y4MlPqGaR6qJvsDT21R6zRVOyCkj5txXNX37BHWUFh9aqYMXcVLh7nRi8Tx45HHxyxL8rU-UtIbIax6DOWJ2-cQQEbeM0HwlrcQhUmWR3bqcaHGCHVQQ0NrS_x5ctUcG-HV-ijQGRcM6VQeQbDu05yZ7Zo2leXGKpzmVMdKAYqbIZOQ/s637/Richard%20Spencer.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="637" data-original-width="432" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3fuhJlqTmKo0y4MlPqGaR6qJvsDT21R6zRVOyCkj5txXNX37BHWUFh9aqYMXcVLh7nRi8Tx45HHxyxL8rU-UtIbIax6DOWJ2-cQQEbeM0HwlrcQhUmWR3bqcaHGCHVQQ0NrS_x5ctUcG-HV-ijQGRcM6VQeQbDu05yZ7Zo2leXGKpzmVMdKAYqbIZOQ/w136-h200/Richard%20Spencer.jpg" width="136" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>US Marine aviator & captain, Wall Street
executive, Vice-chair & CFO of Intercontinental Exchange, Pentagon &
Navy business advisory panels, Secretary of the Navy.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“…the president has very little understanding of what it
means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform
set of rules and practices."<br /><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-spencer-i-was-fired-as-navy-secretary-heres-what-ive-learned-because-of-it/2019/11/27/9c2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-spencer-i-was-fired-as-navy-secretary-heres-what-ive-learned-because-of-it/2019/11/27/9c2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Mark Milley</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5nVjPr6uCCq3BnymJNn1pX5xGMXQYOHcsOs725F3_6Dk-73eO2tbsGpAwXgeIWSZ7-NEDenT2UzzbCKQo3ZOGQWLZg6l4pCko_-G3pkgJYPl4mOCcjTF8qJYtkYh3hFuDUmjTWMYQyKTaUtd6LXzjXbZ3En801eMA5yaz5fYrr-ZESMHjplTykWRPRg/s637/Mark%20Milley.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="637" data-original-width="474" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5nVjPr6uCCq3BnymJNn1pX5xGMXQYOHcsOs725F3_6Dk-73eO2tbsGpAwXgeIWSZ7-NEDenT2UzzbCKQo3ZOGQWLZg6l4pCko_-G3pkgJYPl4mOCcjTF8qJYtkYh3hFuDUmjTWMYQyKTaUtd6LXzjXbZ3En801eMA5yaz5fYrr-ZESMHjplTykWRPRg/w149-h200/Mark%20Milley.jpg" width="149" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>4-star General US Army, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">After Trump’s election loss in 2020, General Milley feared Trump
would try “to use the military on the streets of America to prevent the
legitimate, peaceful, transfer of power.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Milley also feared that Trump would have a “Reichstag moment” to
manufacture a foreign crisis and seize power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Milley called his counterpart in China to reassure him that the US would
not start a war.<br /><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/11/general-mark-milley-trump-coup/675375/">https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/11/general-mark-milley-trump-coup/675375/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“We don’t take an oath to a king, or queen, or tyrant or a
dictator, and we don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator.”<br /><a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/29/milley-farewell-speech-trump-dictator-00119130">https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/29/milley-farewell-speech-trump-dictator-00119130</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Gary Cohn</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjc2PQBXd2H8dH8yVqs-f5lop_mwrbz6cIcUvQpuptXSLw6xzfKAzQ2EPCz2M-sb2_rIXuQ7sYmPdpsplK29YuyEVDTwp1fF2zTkFmPY4pgxqKKpiLbqFT2Ay2REKA5sryeKZifKHExCJqXMJTvrCprQ4K4NvTuf-BEWk6mqrUabSa6_b3KDxnapVMQKw/s408/Gary%20Cohn.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="408" data-original-width="275" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjc2PQBXd2H8dH8yVqs-f5lop_mwrbz6cIcUvQpuptXSLw6xzfKAzQ2EPCz2M-sb2_rIXuQ7sYmPdpsplK29YuyEVDTwp1fF2zTkFmPY4pgxqKKpiLbqFT2Ay2REKA5sryeKZifKHExCJqXMJTvrCprQ4K4NvTuf-BEWk6mqrUabSa6_b3KDxnapVMQKw/w135-h200/Gary%20Cohn.jpg" width="135" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Vice-chair & COO of Goldman Sachs, Vice-chair of
IBM, Director of National Economic Council, Chair of Pallas Advisors, Trump’s
Chief Economic Advisor.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“It's worse than you can imagine. An idiot surrounded by
clowns. Trump won't read anything--not one-page memos, not the brief policy
papers; nothing. He gets up halfway through meetings with world leaders because
he is bored….Trump is less a person than a collection of terrible traits. No
one will survive the first year but his family….I am in a constant state of
shock and horror.”<br /><a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gary-cohn-answers-questions-about-future-at-white-house-with-im-here-today/">https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gary-cohn-answers-questions-about-future-at-white-house-with-im-here-today/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Mike Pompeo</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnCfIgEClrFZzJtdbI3t4gG4bYb1jXusl9w6l0nqq_a87TsflvJu3xVDVTzBjmmNoTiCuIddPlzwScASA65EDJ_TQMkl1qxJk2Qgkz2RpL0LQxEy7Xg6-i9pPgVMyELfRY_fkp1M0HQBMJ_HMbttufNlsOAkaVsDn0XzGTS99I_MgtZLNNBHFTqTR90A/s631/MIke%20Pompeo.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="631" data-original-width="444" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnCfIgEClrFZzJtdbI3t4gG4bYb1jXusl9w6l0nqq_a87TsflvJu3xVDVTzBjmmNoTiCuIddPlzwScASA65EDJ_TQMkl1qxJk2Qgkz2RpL0LQxEy7Xg6-i9pPgVMyELfRY_fkp1M0HQBMJ_HMbttufNlsOAkaVsDn0XzGTS99I_MgtZLNNBHFTqTR90A/w141-h200/MIke%20Pompeo.jpg" width="141" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>US Army Captain, founder, attorney, Thayer Aerospace,
president Sentinel International, US Representative, Director of CIA, Secretary
of State</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“We can’t become the left, following celebrity leaders with
their own brand of identity politics, those with fragile egos who refuse to
acknowledge reality,”<br />“Trump had classified docs when he shouldn’t have had them,
and when given the opportunity to return them, he chose not to do that”.<br /><a href="https://apnews.com/article/cpac-trump-pompeo-haley-2024-election-d12b8dba671169aebcb479c303cf3627">https://apnews.com/article/cpac-trump-pompeo-haley-2024-election-d12b8dba671169aebcb479c303cf3627<br />https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/03/pompeo-trump-cpac/<br />https://news.yahoo.com/mike-pompeo-slams-trump-fox-222433505.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>H.R. McMaster</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIkkDk9MGx_6Qqls6U_cObRC5NnYrAbAXZjxMIVz_IgCwedgxJJlUCJSd_TdbK66apNxjJKOnud8DR3QNzLZiLJ6OaI4CWI88s7mWv7y1n_yf8eUP8JLZ0WTPAUF9EHl3SlIdrmaR4qiH32rcSHxLKIOFNalzfHTC1ekXOC8c7MV9XN_2sEJCYClECqQ/s302/HR%20McMaster.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="302" data-original-width="241" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIkkDk9MGx_6Qqls6U_cObRC5NnYrAbAXZjxMIVz_IgCwedgxJJlUCJSd_TdbK66apNxjJKOnud8DR3QNzLZiLJ6OaI4CWI88s7mWv7y1n_yf8eUP8JLZ0WTPAUF9EHl3SlIdrmaR4qiH32rcSHxLKIOFNalzfHTC1ekXOC8c7MV9XN_2sEJCYClECqQ/w160-h200/HR%20McMaster.jpg" width="160" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>3-star General, US Military Academy, Hoover
Institution Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, Int’l Inst. of Strategic
Studies, National Security Advisor.</i></b><br />
H.R. McMaster said the president was an “idiot”, a “dope”, “with the
intelligence of a kindergartener.”<br /><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/04/trumps-insults-idiot-woodward-806455">https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/04/trumps-insults-idiot-woodward-806455</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"></span><a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/sources-mcmaster-mocked-trumps-intelligence-in-a-private#.uyYeK7MPzX"><br />https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/sources-mcmaster-mocked-trumps-intelligence-in-a-private#.uyYeK7MPzX</a><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Reince Priebus</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7DRlh16Ck_N9G8y1SWP9UuELlr4a1mPdrdd7IkDQl-F_3NAHXjM56smlY76LO8b7Qicdjjp3QayfR-ry7VnFQYzcic8YDig6bwaLuRnwdI807le4f1Wq6tL5MtX1ibquRFw3fGuGIp_FV85hCdc3PSNoBTVl_elvI68L3kcCyo0GkgUJGI1zpDIJoaA/s631/Reince%20Priebus.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="631" data-original-width="392" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7DRlh16Ck_N9G8y1SWP9UuELlr4a1mPdrdd7IkDQl-F_3NAHXjM56smlY76LO8b7Qicdjjp3QayfR-ry7VnFQYzcic8YDig6bwaLuRnwdI807le4f1Wq6tL5MtX1ibquRFw3fGuGIp_FV85hCdc3PSNoBTVl_elvI68L3kcCyo0GkgUJGI1zpDIJoaA/w124-h200/Reince%20Priebus.jpg" width="124" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Attorney, Republican National Committee Chair, White
House Chief of Staff</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Reports of chaos and disorganization inside the White House
through the first months of President Donald Trump’s administration are
accurate, former chief of staff Reince Priebus said. In fact, Priebus said,
those reports understated the truth of the Trump administration’s beginnings.<br />“Take everything you’ve heard and multiply it by 50.”<br /><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/reince-priebus-white-house-chaos-411689">https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/reince-priebus-white-house-chaos-411689</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Anthony Scaramucci</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgurIKXdPNZJxOP22QKpm11GdOXNefQEkR9MTfKugvjcX9d8iFcLHkSMzqwwSjvB0Q5CPhy2Vo3c78N0Jq8W9UHQz6vehXgNMXEy8EZDeLcGJDSwUSWfdtuGajoTW73v073zU1Mu1taeAvP8-TPCTG_h7Osh4DqjzPQDLmIdG65_sEhUMk8PYEj4VLa2g/s301/Anthony%20Scaramucci.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="301" data-original-width="211" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgurIKXdPNZJxOP22QKpm11GdOXNefQEkR9MTfKugvjcX9d8iFcLHkSMzqwwSjvB0Q5CPhy2Vo3c78N0Jq8W9UHQz6vehXgNMXEy8EZDeLcGJDSwUSWfdtuGajoTW73v073zU1Mu1taeAvP8-TPCTG_h7Osh4DqjzPQDLmIdG65_sEhUMk8PYEj4VLa2g/w140-h200/Anthony%20Scaramucci.jpg" width="140" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Goldman Sachs investment banker, founder Oscar
Capital, founder Skybridge Capital, White House Communications Director
(briefly).</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Recently he has said things that divide the country in a
way that is unacceptable. So I didn’t pass the 100% litmus test. Eventually he
turns on everyone, and soon it will be you and then the entire country.”<br /><a href="https://twitter.com/Scaramucci/status/1160508048798113793">https://twitter.com/Scaramucci/status/1160508048798113793</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Steve Bannon</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBtb4kGavVsrT3dkyGwuQqnJSR9sV6khnTn2mNmybS7fmEiW9kNg0lciE7yFKvtWV206trjLcCI5K_K0jHFkO1g7_Lc60ocavVZuLu8eXPRwckBBGMF6Uzw-dF30yx_h_BAuhJXuR_-r4m001zMGmmUTpV_qhUIpL5Ockea220JXXeZEvSLGcWCpI1sw/s301/Steve%20Bannon.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="301" data-original-width="234" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBtb4kGavVsrT3dkyGwuQqnJSR9sV6khnTn2mNmybS7fmEiW9kNg0lciE7yFKvtWV206trjLcCI5K_K0jHFkO1g7_Lc60ocavVZuLu8eXPRwckBBGMF6Uzw-dF30yx_h_BAuhJXuR_-r4m001zMGmmUTpV_qhUIpL5Ockea220JXXeZEvSLGcWCpI1sw/w155-h200/Steve%20Bannon.jpg" width="155" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Lt. US Navy, Assistant to Chief of Naval Operations,
investment banker, executive chairman of Breitbart News, Senior Counselor to
the President.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“He’s like an 11-year-old child.”<br /><a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/bannon-for-president-trump-kushner-ivanka">https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/bannon-for-president-trump-kushner-ivanka</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <b><u>Alyssa Griffin</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0ALiFbSEP05UI0wLdsNKBJWq9OX3L9_jelant7U6ZwlLA5nXA4CjRutFEiMWE_gj-1dd0rrKAOCns0JxtXFA7mVF1AUXYUR5IFcKLYyMtj3GWuHSYVSRIOKwvFRvaelDm_MfBKslk3KW6TkMP2gen9KSmxw9eTX-VCK4XZxfetEfj16GGgbmeaCBV5w/s301/Allysa%20Griffin.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="301" data-original-width="262" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0ALiFbSEP05UI0wLdsNKBJWq9OX3L9_jelant7U6ZwlLA5nXA4CjRutFEiMWE_gj-1dd0rrKAOCns0JxtXFA7mVF1AUXYUR5IFcKLYyMtj3GWuHSYVSRIOKwvFRvaelDm_MfBKslk3KW6TkMP2gen9KSmxw9eTX-VCK4XZxfetEfj16GGgbmeaCBV5w/w174-h200/Allysa%20Griffin.jpg" width="174" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Press secretary for the Dept of Defense, Press
secretary to Mike Pence, co-host of The View, Special Assistant to the President.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">She is trying to reach those who, like her, "drank the
Kool-Aid."<br />“The people I’m most hoping to reach and convince that Trump
is terrible for our country, are people who, like I once did, support him.”<br /><a href="https://news.yahoo.com/the-growing-list-of-people-donald-trump-hired-who-eventually-soured-on-him-171720536.html">https://news.yahoo.com/the-growing-list-of-people-donald-trump-hired-who-eventually-soured-on-him-171720536.html</a> <br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Omarosa Newman</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgj2rZtwLOuXGPfwDRbxB4rAu1rCFwOotP9JGrw9MElr0jhreW3j2pttSghRW05KApyH6lKvlBmhDmTYon7jxD_ajNrYpgELZIVfzdfH2W-QzoilnX5H6Dthh4bGgvhNtQV9VeUmi-0k7rvmMbgnZLgmzuMZoAexjqtHaWBp4XrNlYerZ0T9A-TyU5PIA/s300/Omarosa%20Newman.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="248" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgj2rZtwLOuXGPfwDRbxB4rAu1rCFwOotP9JGrw9MElr0jhreW3j2pttSghRW05KApyH6lKvlBmhDmTYon7jxD_ajNrYpgELZIVfzdfH2W-QzoilnX5H6Dthh4bGgvhNtQV9VeUmi-0k7rvmMbgnZLgmzuMZoAexjqtHaWBp4XrNlYerZ0T9A-TyU5PIA/w165-h200/Omarosa%20Newman.jpg" width="165" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Participant on “The Apprentice”, Presidential aide,
Director of Communications, Office of Public Liaison. </i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Trump is “racist, misogynist and bigot.”<br />“Would you look at this George Conway article?” she quotes
the president as saying. “F**ing FLIP! Disloyal! Fucking Goo-goo.”<br />“growing realization that Donald Trump was indeed a racist,
a bigot and a misogynist. My certainty about the N-word tape and his frequent
uses of that word were the top of a high mountain of truly appalling things I’d
experienced with him, during the last two years in particular.”<br /><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/omarosa-trump-book-the-apprentice-memoir">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/omarosa-trump-book-the-apprentice-memoir</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Tony Schwartz</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJRd58aE8QYidlTPB9odHYeBNS7E3NEEIQRpXQrD3HVtlo2cF7Cpm2jqEmSv6hVu4ngLFTw4hi1tqL34b5sokrPy9CVQIWMtR4WQjsy_siIHi9Ff-KwmclL5-5Gly9X7lyubA48b-PYo-e_RaH7K-0Zihvx_KWcMgBqqg4TUusdOBk0rI3T0Yn6W1iww/s401/Tony%20Schwartz.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="401" data-original-width="328" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJRd58aE8QYidlTPB9odHYeBNS7E3NEEIQRpXQrD3HVtlo2cF7Cpm2jqEmSv6hVu4ngLFTw4hi1tqL34b5sokrPy9CVQIWMtR4WQjsy_siIHi9Ff-KwmclL5-5Gly9X7lyubA48b-PYo-e_RaH7K-0Zihvx_KWcMgBqqg4TUusdOBk0rI3T0Yn6W1iww/w164-h200/Tony%20Schwartz.jpg" width="164" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>Co-author, “The Art of the Deal”</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“He is so deeply sociopathic that I don't think there is any
capacity for empathy or any capacity for remorse.”<br />“He likes violence and particularly when that violence he
perceives as exalting him and being on his behalf.”<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2aFSRzGloI">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2aFSRzGloI</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“He had a stunningly short attention span....He was like a
kindergartener who couldn’t sit still in the classroom.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My strong guess is that Trump has never read
a book in his adult life.”<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l_S-ZsjlSg">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l_S-ZsjlSg</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“When he feels aggrieved, he reacts impulsively and
defensively, constructing a self-justifying story that doesn’t depend on facts
and always directs the blame to others.”<br />“Trump was equally clear with me that he didn’t value — nor
even necessarily recognize — the qualities that tend to emerge as people grow
more secure, such as empathy, generosity, reflectiveness, the capacity to delay
gratification or, above all, a conscience, an inner sense of right and wrong.”<br />“When he is challenged, he instinctively doubles down — even
when what he has just said is demonstrably false.... Trump would see no
contradiction at all in changing his story about why he fired Comey and thereby
undermining the statements of his aides, or in any other lie he tells. His aim
is never accuracy; it’s domination.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> <br /></span><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/16/i-wrote-the-art-of-the-deal-with-trump-his-self-sabotage-is-rooted-in-his-past/">https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/16/i-wrote-the-art-of-the-deal-with-trump-his-self-sabotage-is-rooted-in-his-past/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Lying is second nature to him.”<br /><a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-addled-and-ominous-interview-with-the-times">https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-addled-and-ominous-interview-with-the-times</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="text-decoration: none;"> <br /></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><b>Michael Cohen</b></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizjvLNsY44vaGDTumUAHciY4VlgCwuroKvIllen2N2falFrOxyQbbgsRCyQ2h7QMituAEskeR62yDig8eZ2e7HDfQOnnR0oI07KkJ9zUz3ijvKjwdrm_vtJxDwsTAxHNgFFPaMtYsi9SK34tw5BnHmdqAOHFdoIv6IpwulHE3kJR-UyVF2zqN6-Tnlrg/s397/Michael%20Cohen.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="397" data-original-width="258" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizjvLNsY44vaGDTumUAHciY4VlgCwuroKvIllen2N2falFrOxyQbbgsRCyQ2h7QMituAEskeR62yDig8eZ2e7HDfQOnnR0oI07KkJ9zUz3ijvKjwdrm_vtJxDwsTAxHNgFFPaMtYsi9SK34tw5BnHmdqAOHFdoIv6IpwulHE3kJR-UyVF2zqN6-Tnlrg/w130-h200/Michael%20Cohen.jpg" width="130" /></a></b></div><b><i>Former Trump personal lawyer.</i></b><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“I am ashamed because I know what Mr. Trump is. He is a
racist. He is a conman. He is a cheat.”<br />“A copy of a check Mr. Trump wrote from his personal bank
account – after he became president – to reimburse me for the hush money
payments I made to cover up his affair with an adult film star and prevent
damage to his campaign.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He asked me to
pay off an adult film star with whom he had an affair, and to lie to his wife
about it, which I did.”<br />“Trump knew of and directed the Trump Moscow negotiations
throughout the campaign and lied about it. He lied about it because he never
expected to win the election. He also lied about it because he stood to make
hundreds of millions of dollars on the Moscow real estate project.”<br />“He once asked me if I could name a country run by a black
person that wasn’t a ‘shithole.’ This was when Barack Obama was President of
the United States.”<br />“He told me that black people would never vote for him
because they were too stupid.”<br />“I fear that if he loses the presidential election in 2020,
there will never be a peaceful transition of power.”<br /><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-oversight-committee-russia/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-oversight-committee-russia/index.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Cohen said Trump told him to lie about the medical
deferments Trump received that excused him from the draft during the Vietnam
War.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> <br /></span><a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/02/27/696752450/michael-cohen-to-testify-publicly-before-congress-on-alleged-trump-lawbreaking">https://www.npr.org/2019/02/27/696752450/michael-cohen-to-testify-publicly-before-congress-on-alleged-trump-lawbreaking</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Trump ordered Cohen to find a fake buyer for a portrait of
Trump to make it appear that the painting had sold for a lot of money and was
therefore valuable; actually, Cohen said, Trump arranged to use money from his
foundation to inflate the sale price.<br /><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/27/michael-cohen-testimony-trump-painting-foundation-money">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/27/michael-cohen-testimony-trump-painting-foundation-money</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">"The man doesn't tell the truth.”<br /><a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/12/14/676672787/cohen-on-trump-the-man-doesn-t-tell-the-truth">https://www.npr.org/2018/12/14/676672787/cohen-on-trump-the-man-doesn-t-tell-the-truth</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Cohen said Trump is “a cheat, a liar, a fraud, a bully, a
racist, a predator, a con man.”<br /><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cohen-trump-book/2020/09/05/235aa10a-ef96-11ea-ab4e-581edb849379_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cohen-trump-book/2020/09/05/235aa10a-ef96-11ea-ab4e-581edb849379_story.html</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Trump ran his operation “much like a mobster would do,”
Cohen said.<br /><a href="https://apnews.com/article/88e83c32a9d54d82abe3ac52bfad22e4">https://apnews.com/article/88e83c32a9d54d82abe3ac52bfad22e4</a><u><span style="color: #1f4e79; mso-themecolor: accent1; mso-themeshade: 128;"></span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Bonus Quote:</u></b><br /><b><u>James Comey</u></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><u><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRglEwSMv80i6jM-7-F8bqBVkLfcHtdNwFIa2EHf8TGLX5sPw-8v6S74LksDzzKisnYQ2pG_5cNCvZUF3yXhkrxrwNNh85jWivUWmuKjXiYSFYUF7_s6mMK3dGJaNa9d7sA9bwvaS-0RiarZlJB-xlMzEjm9Hh2EP4Fog5llQ7SEIgi3pGzbobPgwERQ/s401/James%20Comey.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="401" data-original-width="269" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRglEwSMv80i6jM-7-F8bqBVkLfcHtdNwFIa2EHf8TGLX5sPw-8v6S74LksDzzKisnYQ2pG_5cNCvZUF3yXhkrxrwNNh85jWivUWmuKjXiYSFYUF7_s6mMK3dGJaNa9d7sA9bwvaS-0RiarZlJB-xlMzEjm9Hh2EP4Fog5llQ7SEIgi3pGzbobPgwERQ/w134-h200/James%20Comey.jpg" width="134" /></a></u></b></div><b><i>US attorney, Director of the FBI<br /></i></b>James Comey is not a Trump associate or appointee, but
played a prominent role in Trump’s 2016 election victory over Hillary
Clinton.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here is Comey’s assessment of
Trump.<p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“I actually believe he's morally unfit to be president." <br />Trump is "someone who is able to see moral equivalence
in (white nationalist protests in) Charlottesville or to speak and treat women
like they're pieces of meat and to lie constantly and who appears to lack an
external moral framework" of religion or philosophy or history.”<br /><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/16/james-comey-interview-donald-trump-morally-unfit/515529002/">https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/16/james-comey-interview-donald-trump-morally-unfit/515529002/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <b><u>Conclusion<br /></u></b>The prominent people featured in this post are not woke or
leftist critics of the former president, but are Trump’s hand-picked appointees
to the most critical posts in the country.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t like most of them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I think that they are largely terrible people
for their conservative positions and past actions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But these are the people responsible for the administration,
operations and policies of the most critical elements of the United States
government,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and some of Trump’s closest
associates in private life.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They’re
telling the truth about Trump.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They have
a clear consensus about his character flaws that should preclude him from ever
again holding the office of president.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
character flaws they describe are entirely consistent with everything else we
know about this man – that he lied on loan applications, that he cheated on
taxes, that he failed to pay his contractors, that he cheated on three wives,
that he held a teen beauty contest so that he could walk in unannounced on naked
children in their dressing room, that he stole government secrets and refused to return them when caught, that he tried to overturn the legitimate results of a presidential election, that he organized a riot to attempt a coup. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The conclusion is plain – Trump should not be president
again.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But Republican voters continue to
hold Trump in high regard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Republican elected
officials (with few exceptions, such as Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney) do not criticize
or denounce this emperor with no clothes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The media faithfully reports on his rallies, with a mild, futile protest
of “Trump said XYZ without evidence” in the fine print near the bottom of the
article.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">What does it take to get through to Republican voters?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p> </p>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-5981041136714237942022-08-11T13:08:00.025-07:002022-08-12T12:24:48.964-07:00Global Warming: How It Works<p> I have a small collection on the bottom shelf of my bookcase of important books. The books are: How Things Work (4 volumes), Roger Segalat, translated from German; The Way It Works, Robin Kerrod, 1980; The Way Things Work, translated from Italian, 1989; The Way Things Work, David McCauley, 1988; and two massive volumes on the history of science. That’s what people do – we figure out how things work, and use that knowledge to understand and manipulate the world around us. </p><p>A friend recently asked me, “What is the best argument that a lot of current climate change is caused by humans, through fossil fuel CO2, methane, and other green house gases? What are the best data and arguments?” The most important point about climate science is that we know how it works. It isn’t speculation or correlation. We simply know how it works. Since the 1860s or before, people have known that glass bottles filled with CO2 heat up faster than bottles filled with air. In 1896, the brilliant Swedish chemist Arrhenius calculated how much the earth would warm if CO2 concentration was doubled. This happened in the same decade that we invented the manual transmission and radio transmission of Morse code, and about a decade after Edison’s electric lightbulb. Scientific research has continued since Arrhenius, and we know how the CO2 greenhouse effect works just as well as we know how an AM radio, manual transmission, or incandescent lightbulb works. </p><p>We’ve observed and measured the processes that trap heat in the atmosphere and we’ve made predictions of future warming and related events. To confirm or deny the theory of global warming, scientists set up a system of instrumentation across the planet and in orbit, beginning about 30 years ago. The data are clear – oceans are warming from the surface downwards, ice is melting in every setting on the planet, and atmospheric temperatures are rising. We’ve seen the primary predictions of global warming and second-order climate changes robustly confirmed. Objections and challenges to the data and interpretation have been evaluated and refuted.</p><p><b><u>How It Works</u></b><br />The entire spectrum of electromagnetic radiation includes gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet, visible light, infrared, microwaves and radio waves. The high-energy end of the spectrum consists of very short wavelengths, including gamma rays and x-rays through visible light, while the low-energy end of the spectrum has longer wavelengths, from infrared through radio waves. </p><p>Everything radiates electro-magnetic radiation at some wavelength. It’s called by several names –Planck radiation, black-body radiation, or thermal infrared radiation. The kind of radiation emitted by objects depends on temperature. Hot objects emit high energy radiation with short wavelengths, and cool objects emit low energy radiation with long wavelengths. The sun primarily emits energy in the visible spectrum, because it is very hot. Atmospheric gases are transparent to the visible spectrum, so most of the sun’s energy passes through our atmosphere to reach the ground. Visible light strikes the earth’s surface and is converted to heat. The warmed earth also emits radiation, but at a longer wavelength (infrared) because it is cool. The earth’s infrared radiation mostly escapes back into space. Carbon dioxide, water vapor and methane, however, are partly opaque to infrared radiation, depending on the specific wavelength. These gases trap heat in the atmosphere, warming the air, the oceans and the ground. The phenomenon is called the greenhouse effect, because glass will do exactly the same thing, keeping a greenhouse warm – visible light goes in, but infrared radiation is trapped inside. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj10ZQHbWp1XaeQcYa8JC048MfYbbQjjKrjj4JUjkVzA0VI1FbdiIiF8lvCYY7zkVvdOWYf2hQpspNB3a6FdfOxjs_NgNOOZ9GSPStPYTwlEVV1Y6AWmFQQ9rGs6u9Cduw6QyNXbNolr470JJW5CmjoQ2IIleRZ5mF_t9QAkV8ZqcV6XFnND9ZQkvqd8Q/s1463/upgoing%20IR%20absorption.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1133" data-original-width="1463" height="496" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj10ZQHbWp1XaeQcYa8JC048MfYbbQjjKrjj4JUjkVzA0VI1FbdiIiF8lvCYY7zkVvdOWYf2hQpspNB3a6FdfOxjs_NgNOOZ9GSPStPYTwlEVV1Y6AWmFQQ9rGs6u9Cduw6QyNXbNolr470JJW5CmjoQ2IIleRZ5mF_t9QAkV8ZqcV6XFnND9ZQkvqd8Q/w640-h496/upgoing%20IR%20absorption.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p></p><p>Image credit: Science News. The yellow lines are actual IR readings from space, compared to the theoretical Planck radiation from the ocean surface shown in dark blue. Depressions and divots in the yellow lines represent absorption of upgoing IR radiation by various greenhouse gases, notably CO2. Differences between the yellow lines represent clear and cloudy skies, with cloud tops having cooler temperatures and a different baseline Planck profile.</p><p>The natural amount of CO2 and water vapor in the air keeps the earth at a temperature to which we’ve become adapted. If the earth’s atmosphere had absolutely no CO2 or H2O, the earth’s average temperature would be about 33 C colder, causing freezing conditions over the entire planet.</p><p>Of the sun’s incoming radiation (341 W/m2), about 29% (100 W/m2) is directly reflected back into space, mostly by clouds. The remaining 241 W/m2 is absorbed by the ground and atmosphere, warming the Earth. The Earth radiates energy back into space at a wavelength in the infrared spectrum, balancing the energy input from the sun to create a stable climate for the past 6000 years. But the addition of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere is currently trapping 0.94% (3.2 W/m2) of the sun’s energy reaching the surface. That heat is ultimately redistributed to the oceans, ice, and air, warming the earth.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZrL6FBZSznJ3ynlY-VGwOsoHrPtnk3siOab9yx4IObWGpqY-p6XA8fnLVwMTn5c0j7k5BGemz85Flnh-jpUunN3VRtRXfzTjVa31GwhUuukiQlRk3i3XkBVhkIVQD5iZFsxI1KVZDqAKn5OHF2To6Xq8QgexDmAOQlpZdlqtF51dHHXpczJ8nZM-EiA/s1461/radiation%20balance.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1127" data-original-width="1461" height="494" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZrL6FBZSznJ3ynlY-VGwOsoHrPtnk3siOab9yx4IObWGpqY-p6XA8fnLVwMTn5c0j7k5BGemz85Flnh-jpUunN3VRtRXfzTjVa31GwhUuukiQlRk3i3XkBVhkIVQD5iZFsxI1KVZDqAKn5OHF2To6Xq8QgexDmAOQlpZdlqtF51dHHXpczJ8nZM-EiA/w640-h494/radiation%20balance.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>This figure simplifies many heat transfers within the atmosphere before energy is either retained on earth or returned to space. The heat retained by greenhouse gases is given the awkward technical term "radiative forcing".</p><p>[Technical note: The sun's radiation, measured in space, has an intensity of 1364 W/m2. There is a range of reported figures from 1361 W/m2 to 1368 W/m2, depending on the choice of instrument calibration. The earth receives sunlight according to its cross-sectional area, equal to one-quarter of its surface area. The earth emits radiation from its entire surface area. So for a simplified energy budget as shown below, we have to choose a convention of adapting numbers for the cross-sectional area or the surface area of the earth. Most displays adopt the convention of the whole earth surface area as I've done above. This requires dividing the sun's input radiation by four, yielding 341 W/m2 to represent the average energy input across the entire earth.]</p><p>Under natural conditions, a balance develops between the incoming and outgoing radiation, which keeps the earth’s temperature stable, unless disturbed by other factors such as orbital variation. The earth’s orbit varies over cycles of 40,000 years and 100,000 years, which triggers feedback mechanisms (including CO2 concentration and reflective ice) producing ice ages. <br /><br />Climate-change deniers are fond of saying "The climate has always been changing." But since the last ice age, for the past 6,000 years, the climate has been stable, as proven by geological studies of sea-level, temperature-sensitive isotopes, and ice-sheet deposits. This is the entire period of the written record of humanity. The pre-industrial level of CO2 created a “Goldilocks” climate in which humans and nature thrived.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1u-TgxEtZVZ6nWZdEFI0-M4BaxqQKEfc_UQ2Q46yerZpLfcDwsiq8v5BPH5W_6RpECc0oggPbprA8My2JtoCpbwWp5TKpk6zwUxYRgQ6WMz6s86QftPAyiZOTWobgh1Fcg1UIK9le2JK6CcUWRRB-Ng8zWUmxps53_8V0X7GnXIEzHZr08v6LDqjCQA/s1128/Sea%20Level%20Lambeck.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1128" data-original-width="1069" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1u-TgxEtZVZ6nWZdEFI0-M4BaxqQKEfc_UQ2Q46yerZpLfcDwsiq8v5BPH5W_6RpECc0oggPbprA8My2JtoCpbwWp5TKpk6zwUxYRgQ6WMz6s86QftPAyiZOTWobgh1Fcg1UIK9le2JK6CcUWRRB-Ng8zWUmxps53_8V0X7GnXIEzHZr08v6LDqjCQA/w379-h400/Sea%20Level%20Lambeck.jpg" width="379" /></a></div><br />For the past 150 years, we have burned increasing quantities of fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas, and cleared or burned forests to create new farmland.<br /><div style="text-align: left;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhttO5lJMsmJ4d_XNZf_CUS0uT88cl15cunefDPXvD0_yNudqo5mlKF4rtJjn5ybcNeriEaUv8AwldELIw5ut7Kg1NNGS9kICQLyde9ohPTsayzo4DkJn3wva3QxGWRCeLK6m5WwCaJdtVgsez1MnjYUi0I9mHWKHULK4wrDUrhyUaNtPRb0H23_hw0Uw/s1422/Emissions.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhttO5lJMsmJ4d_XNZf_CUS0uT88cl15cunefDPXvD0_yNudqo5mlKF4rtJjn5ybcNeriEaUv8AwldELIw5ut7Kg1NNGS9kICQLyde9ohPTsayzo4DkJn3wva3QxGWRCeLK6m5WwCaJdtVgsez1MnjYUi0I9mHWKHULK4wrDUrhyUaNtPRb0H23_hw0Uw/w640-h464/Emissions.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p></p><p>The CO2 emitted from these human activities has markedly changed the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, from the pre-industrial level of about 280 parts per million (ppm) of CO2, to the current level of 420 ppm CO2. Because CO2 is such a potent greenhouse gas, this small change in atmospheric composition has a marked change in retained infrared radiation. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiBD_y71W-t_QNsOm9J_u9ZT2oS1CS5T0UnnpVyDha15S4RodVuvbC373jFcs2zc7qPWMQm2R6WEJbSQTeEa4wxIs09EtmqykQ5kgEiqkcSooigUQwZsqyynV25s8WsQITbL31yv4Jc1W1R3cl3vo8FzsPWmMA3-6KSZb-9hU6jW9iuetrTrorafPEYQ/s1422/Longterm%20CO2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiBD_y71W-t_QNsOm9J_u9ZT2oS1CS5T0UnnpVyDha15S4RodVuvbC373jFcs2zc7qPWMQm2R6WEJbSQTeEa4wxIs09EtmqykQ5kgEiqkcSooigUQwZsqyynV25s8WsQITbL31yv4Jc1W1R3cl3vo8FzsPWmMA3-6KSZb-9hU6jW9iuetrTrorafPEYQ/w640-h464/Longterm%20CO2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p>You might not think that 400 parts per million is enough to change the retention of radiation in the atmosphere. I’d like to propose a small thought experiment. Four hundred parts per million is equivalent to four parts in ten thousand, or one part in 2,500. One ounce of water contains about 600 drops. Four and 1/6 ounces of water, about a half-cup, contains 2,500 drops. Imagine, for a moment (or really try) putting one drop of opaque India ink or dark food coloring into a half-cup of water. The ink noticeably reduces the visible light transmitted through the otherwise transparent water. It’s the same with CO2 in the atmosphere. </p><p><b><u>Climate Feedbacks</u></b><br />There are further processes known as feedback mechanisms affecting the earth’s heat budget. Feedbacks are processes that are triggered by changes in Earth’s temperature, which either amplify (positive) or diminish (negative) the primary changes. The strongest feedback effect is the Planck effect, a negative feedback. As the Earth’s temperature rises, it radiates energy more strongly, counteracting the influence of greenhouse gases. The balance between the sun’s incoming energy and the Planck effect is what caused the Earth to settle at a stable temperature. The second strongest feedback is water vapor. As the ocean surface becomes warmer, the equilibrium humidity in the air rises. Also, warmer air can hold more humidity, keeping additional water vapor in the air. Higher humidity is a positive feedback mechanism, because water vapor is itself a powerful greenhouse gas. So as the planet warms, more heat is retained by water vapor. As Arctic snow and ice melt, the surface reflectivity diminishes, causing positive feedback. Climate change increases cloudiness, causing feedback effects. Clouds are complex as a feedback mechanism, with both positive and negative impacts. Depending on the type of cloud, the primary impact may be to reflect sunlight, or may be to retain infrared emissions from earth. Overall, clouds are considered to be a positive feedback. There are more complex feedbacks involving biochemistry and methane, and fast versus slow feedbacks, but these are generally an order of magnitude less significant than the physical feedbacks. This is an area of active climate research.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXEBFw1HgLQdmtDqBdlcmij23X53Z5g-h3j9WF4JLySlUmyT1-Sr9Vul6eZP0PupIOHRiwNVFKNbF3anVawo7XlSP8dyPdAR7NIJ57CSeCZTjOEbvj0pJj6y2xldGoPEJd4CewfS6Smt8HnZykHoxNpXBu6nvqBDHKuRWFq4HgD7EiJ1PdWod8ZlL2Iw/s1493/IPCC%20feedbacks.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="647" data-original-width="1493" height="278" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXEBFw1HgLQdmtDqBdlcmij23X53Z5g-h3j9WF4JLySlUmyT1-Sr9Vul6eZP0PupIOHRiwNVFKNbF3anVawo7XlSP8dyPdAR7NIJ57CSeCZTjOEbvj0pJj6y2xldGoPEJd4CewfS6Smt8HnZykHoxNpXBu6nvqBDHKuRWFq4HgD7EiJ1PdWod8ZlL2Iw/w640-h278/IPCC%20feedbacks.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJf_HILn-CJDwaYR9fsoro6jnyS2K92SO7RqbUMoEeulmyGB2NVhFOB-lyjGexqePvih2QPGLFETHmYzbXKrRqxeBd3YQGCEwwcTsXle1a6OcN_tIoBHOrnU3bIFPrTwZ3G0ez_Yeu_IuInIPLW8fa69VoSrtc2exZsmL8cB_CO6PijeLbPJAz7Dhq1w/s1343/Feedbacks%204.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1127" data-original-width="1343" height="538" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJf_HILn-CJDwaYR9fsoro6jnyS2K92SO7RqbUMoEeulmyGB2NVhFOB-lyjGexqePvih2QPGLFETHmYzbXKrRqxeBd3YQGCEwwcTsXle1a6OcN_tIoBHOrnU3bIFPrTwZ3G0ez_Yeu_IuInIPLW8fa69VoSrtc2exZsmL8cB_CO6PijeLbPJAz7Dhq1w/w640-h538/Feedbacks%204.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p>The Planck effect dominates all other feedback mechanisms, and the total impact of all feedback effects is negative. This is very good, because a simple modeling exercise shows that the global climate would soon irreversibly blow up if the total feedback were positive. Nevertheless, there are number of authoritative sources on climate feedbacks (notably Wikipedia and Andrew Dessler’s Modern Climate Change) that neglect to mention the Planck effect among climate feedbacks and assert that the net climate feedback is positive. This is incorrect.</p><p>Global temperature change since pre-industrial times is about 1.1 C, so the current total feedback is -1.3 W/m2. Combining the greenhouse gas effect with total feedback leaves a positive (warming) climate influence of 1.9 W/m2. </p><p><b><u>Validation</u></b><br />Climate science predicts that the earth should be warming, due to heating resulting from the buildup of greenhouse gases. These greenhouse gases, particularly CO2, are unquestionably from human activities (see my blog post, <a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2019/12/understanding-source-of-rising.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2019/12/understanding-source-of-rising.html</a>). We have detailed temperature records for much of the world for the past 150 year or so, and we have plentiful temperature measurements of the oceans beginning in about 1950. However, early climate data have a few issues with data quality and coverage.</p><p>Starting around 1990, scientists put in place a comprehensive set of instrumentation specifically designed to detect and measure global warming. These systems have corrected some of the issues of data collection from early research, and provide unprecedented coverage of our planet. The results are unequivocal. The oceans are warming from the surface downwards; the air is warming over the oceans; the air is warming more rapidly over land; the Arctic is warming faster than the rest of the planet; and continental glaciers, Arctic sea ice, and the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps are melting. Other, second order effects of the heat are well-proven also, including an acceleration of rising sea level and seasonal changes in physical and biological systems.</p><p>There is simply no point to denying that global warming and resulting climate changes are happening due to human emissions of greenhouse gases. These changes are observed to be accelerating, as expected, due to higher concentrations of greenhouse gases. Previous predictions about climate change have been highly accurate. There is no reason to doubt further predictions of serious to catastrophic harm from future climate change unless we greatly curtail emissions of greenhouse gases.</p><p><b><u>Appendices<br /></u></b><b><u>Appendix 1<br /></u></b><b><u>Climate change indicators and sources<br /></u></b><b>Air Temperature Over Land and Oceans</b><br /><a href="https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v4/">https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v4/</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkmzGLE2XhXu_O7sJKFfo_UL76kdaUwvM9si-IdqDG3qPLtdirLzepetLXe-8LF_euzzslx5oDwc3vTgagHwORjZdllq0K9qYcZD9ThJtCKPvovFgbzZt_Xi9eHUeQcI83wIevVi08ZiKxL7GozcnIbqKEZ-yThrCxDrTU6KZCJx2ab2nzn7fLuNChBg/s1130/Land%20Sea%20Surface%20Temperature.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="1130" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkmzGLE2XhXu_O7sJKFfo_UL76kdaUwvM9si-IdqDG3qPLtdirLzepetLXe-8LF_euzzslx5oDwc3vTgagHwORjZdllq0K9qYcZD9ThJtCKPvovFgbzZt_Xi9eHUeQcI83wIevVi08ZiKxL7GozcnIbqKEZ-yThrCxDrTU6KZCJx2ab2nzn7fLuNChBg/w400-h248/Land%20Sea%20Surface%20Temperature.png" width="400" /></a><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><b>Temperature Anomaly Map, 2016-2022 vs. 1951-1980<br /></b>Note Arctic warming is more intense than the rest of the planet, as predicted by the Macdonald report in 1979. Also note that air over land is warming faster than air over oceans.<br /><a href="https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps/">https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps/</a></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6MYG8EHStTZ2T6GiN3F4aF5QVqG1m4PranFP4kiq6ebZKgaDnA-F-bMyg8VLp4hQ042YE9qxq8S3EabknFzLweEVoRZDY3WdKRp6A0BkT9L20mFlxDGRrjJFYoAE6C-jID4YI_Q6lHTEq7oKU_atHpMuSy3fcvBL1nw8peHiSDO7RG6TZhJLnlUZ7zA/s770/GISS%20temp%20anomaly%202016_2021.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="486" data-original-width="770" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6MYG8EHStTZ2T6GiN3F4aF5QVqG1m4PranFP4kiq6ebZKgaDnA-F-bMyg8VLp4hQ042YE9qxq8S3EabknFzLweEVoRZDY3WdKRp6A0BkT9L20mFlxDGRrjJFYoAE6C-jID4YI_Q6lHTEq7oKU_atHpMuSy3fcvBL1nw8peHiSDO7RG6TZhJLnlUZ7zA/w400-h253/GISS%20temp%20anomaly%202016_2021.png" width="400" /></a><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><b>Ocean Heat Content and Temperature</b><br />Note that the ocean is warming from the surface downwards.<br /><a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/index3.html">https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/index3.html</a><br /><a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/index.html">https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/index.html</a></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsOGLRCCqKHXJKcqUjTU5Tv2Mu2nsKHxsJayOZSPoXlXGehyy4o_GCiNNKWaUfBrr9KkUV4SVe_7E29j2r26p4k-P4_Bto-bAnvxZHtJuwbuDTLNWN1No-e6Qjttzz9Ev6du_uV3FPPxsvWUf3wVC-jOnjjnP7ZbWG1WxnszYtYlysXr3VzS4HQPcn4A/s569/heat_content2000m.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="380" data-original-width="569" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsOGLRCCqKHXJKcqUjTU5Tv2Mu2nsKHxsJayOZSPoXlXGehyy4o_GCiNNKWaUfBrr9KkUV4SVe_7E29j2r26p4k-P4_Bto-bAnvxZHtJuwbuDTLNWN1No-e6Qjttzz9Ev6du_uV3FPPxsvWUf3wVC-jOnjjnP7ZbWG1WxnszYtYlysXr3VzS4HQPcn4A/w400-h268/heat_content2000m.png" width="400" /></a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwADnNt_qrtHZuz6SFlbGXk_fLbL3Veyj8qZyOwRNHhNJ1LyPIjjZ211W58AaoPOaYg_V2dmGtFivNoC-Gvwg9NxnTose5tF9opOGCL5t6z92Hu2um-5r0-b-JsT-h58RBMtaJx2twUVheOzOHBrHheGsXXsUjLoXWmL-xtjPhgRBbUgD-wSO8VPDb9Q/s572/meantempcomp.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="380" data-original-width="572" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwADnNt_qrtHZuz6SFlbGXk_fLbL3Veyj8qZyOwRNHhNJ1LyPIjjZ211W58AaoPOaYg_V2dmGtFivNoC-Gvwg9NxnTose5tF9opOGCL5t6z92Hu2um-5r0-b-JsT-h58RBMtaJx2twUVheOzOHBrHheGsXXsUjLoXWmL-xtjPhgRBbUgD-wSO8VPDb9Q/w400-h266/meantempcomp.png" width="400" /></a></div></div><b>Continental Glaciers, World Glacier Monitoring Service</b><br /><a href="https://wgms.ch/global-glacier-state/">https://wgms.ch/global-glacier-state/</a><br /><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCPLFsFhrVnRqduDRJxFT6NZ2LPZ3xzC1qoDb8oJViikWVbC2jY8P2D9QTwgehSzVjX02-T1vfvM1ni0PzD27Guq3u8zwtT4Qe2JlBkov65NzWoxZqbQ_RKlKLQbzR10Bld9rZhkl2fcDIhHqxzwUip1b8LFDNyoxV3AaXxuC3CkAN5tZ0WCeewpnawQ/s960/Continental%20Glaciers.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="719" data-original-width="960" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCPLFsFhrVnRqduDRJxFT6NZ2LPZ3xzC1qoDb8oJViikWVbC2jY8P2D9QTwgehSzVjX02-T1vfvM1ni0PzD27Guq3u8zwtT4Qe2JlBkov65NzWoxZqbQ_RKlKLQbzR10Bld9rZhkl2fcDIhHqxzwUip1b8LFDNyoxV3AaXxuC3CkAN5tZ0WCeewpnawQ/w400-h300/Continental%20Glaciers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><b>Arctic Sea Ice Extent (July)</b><br /><a href="http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/">http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/</a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRLoWyQQR6X2DCjtYEQJGo3HNDRnMVOPivsracxh3ldlH6PGUkO8al-dlaSQg7kw2TicEsqb8wOtrzEYohlqw_-LJRtEwrbDoB6ZNLUJNVC6RQIO88_rf5sD204bkTiQeTB3WuRbsvxBjL1mxI6hsnvsDZTjsZ1Iv7_1kTgcezqQGJY_hsU37qI6UDcA/s1980/Arctic%20sea%20ice.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1530" data-original-width="1980" height="309" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRLoWyQQR6X2DCjtYEQJGo3HNDRnMVOPivsracxh3ldlH6PGUkO8al-dlaSQg7kw2TicEsqb8wOtrzEYohlqw_-LJRtEwrbDoB6ZNLUJNVC6RQIO88_rf5sD204bkTiQeTB3WuRbsvxBjL1mxI6hsnvsDZTjsZ1Iv7_1kTgcezqQGJY_hsU37qI6UDcA/w400-h309/Arctic%20sea%20ice.png" width="400" /></a></div><b>Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets<br /></b><a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/</a><div><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjT8R4WmrrU-nE4TJnNEpEEFs-5ysDOmo4NTYqTnthXLOCgpNw8DBpyrd13Vh0BX9x7S5eSpAB_q5UPYD1rUtPpsYdX5RblLoJ8sdiRJDrpG1O7AZf7Wotqdi_43BAm_xDfgoOcDqXwBYLKrjL-rLB6sflyuA3qyyeVcbNjvlybLIMeBE-v4gurg6Vf_g/s1851/Antarctic%20Ice%20Sheet%20Mass%20Loss.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1043" data-original-width="1851" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjT8R4WmrrU-nE4TJnNEpEEFs-5ysDOmo4NTYqTnthXLOCgpNw8DBpyrd13Vh0BX9x7S5eSpAB_q5UPYD1rUtPpsYdX5RblLoJ8sdiRJDrpG1O7AZf7Wotqdi_43BAm_xDfgoOcDqXwBYLKrjL-rLB6sflyuA3qyyeVcbNjvlybLIMeBE-v4gurg6Vf_g/w400-h225/Antarctic%20Ice%20Sheet%20Mass%20Loss.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZf-dStoR8sdnTUzKkcjPSRXuEIOiu0POZzsloenAgheeDrJVRDHAnvjXMgD2nccCd-ni6wER6qenxv2tq-kwJ2a6uWliHdt2htJKMAkaqCqEFzrs5aibo-F01LIDKPo0tor_d-91qydY5LGp1v7OXcIyitBCB_biMmTApxQl3yLSGsK72ddyYNI-lsA/s1889/Greenland%20Ice%20Sheet%20Mass%20Loss.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1077" data-original-width="1889" height="228" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZf-dStoR8sdnTUzKkcjPSRXuEIOiu0POZzsloenAgheeDrJVRDHAnvjXMgD2nccCd-ni6wER6qenxv2tq-kwJ2a6uWliHdt2htJKMAkaqCqEFzrs5aibo-F01LIDKPo0tor_d-91qydY5LGp1v7OXcIyitBCB_biMmTApxQl3yLSGsK72ddyYNI-lsA/w400-h228/Greenland%20Ice%20Sheet%20Mass%20Loss.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Sea Level Rise</b><br /><a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/</a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY7VSQefLseLT6IjiFssqJkdeZGNDim4lbUQG1Ne8C0WtTVOUZ9KeeAgpPmxoZWAV30aDKiGO_ohHXQoRpn8DxgqapnaPj03f0DXVJ0bNWuZWVfeLrkSqLdB2s-ygH27Csl2IxqZpiGVj32hMRRkyam2Ah1H8bRPRjnrtusziQ3AAfBt86uUmV8USkbg/s1706/Sea%20Level%20Rise%20Satellite.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1021" data-original-width="1706" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY7VSQefLseLT6IjiFssqJkdeZGNDim4lbUQG1Ne8C0WtTVOUZ9KeeAgpPmxoZWAV30aDKiGO_ohHXQoRpn8DxgqapnaPj03f0DXVJ0bNWuZWVfeLrkSqLdB2s-ygH27Csl2IxqZpiGVj32hMRRkyam2Ah1H8bRPRjnrtusziQ3AAfBt86uUmV8USkbg/w400-h240/Sea%20Level%20Rise%20Satellite.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtQLFxEJI-cDiuLRHvJQ1wZj-TAT4WoDWPVOPCWJ1VP_SoUR4tuDgU6-d8-OeovCBHJEr5UD_blkXL6Uhv-tW5SQiBye0V6Da-2-8EAHbo6GhgCMBLnYX48pSNFJ78Vl0xL6tOk_ysxUFSIrXyvDrOln2bRFbiPHbzUPezGYtcp4xYjpmxcaDIhfRLeA/s700/Sea%20Level%20Tide%20Guages.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="447" data-original-width="700" height="255" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtQLFxEJI-cDiuLRHvJQ1wZj-TAT4WoDWPVOPCWJ1VP_SoUR4tuDgU6-d8-OeovCBHJEr5UD_blkXL6Uhv-tW5SQiBye0V6Da-2-8EAHbo6GhgCMBLnYX48pSNFJ78Vl0xL6tOk_ysxUFSIrXyvDrOln2bRFbiPHbzUPezGYtcp4xYjpmxcaDIhfRLeA/w400-h255/Sea%20Level%20Tide%20Guages.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p><u><b>Appendix 2, Comparison of Descriptions of Greenhouse Gas Heating<br /></b></u><u><b>Arrhenius, 1896<br /></b></u>“The selective absorption of the atmosphere is…of a wholly different kind [than diffusion of ultraviolet radiation]. It is not exerted by the chief mass of the air, but in a high degree by aqueous vapour and carbonic acid [CO2], which are present in the air in small quantities. Further, this absorption is not continuous over the whole spectrum, but nearly insensible in the light part of it, and chiefly limited to the long-waved part, where it manifests itself in very well-defined absorption-bands, which fall off rapidly on both sides. The influence of this absorption is comparatively small on the heat from the sun, but must be of great importance in the transmission of rays [thermal infrared, or long-wave radiation] from the earth.” <br />Arrhenius then describes the debate over whether water vapor or CO2 has the greater influence as a greenhouse gas. </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Asimov, 1959</u></b><br />"The light rays of the Sun hit the air, pass through a hundred miles of it, hit the surface of the Earth, and are absorbed. The Earth heats up. The heated Earth radiates energy at night back into space, in the form of the far less energetic infra-red. This also passes through the atmosphere. The warmer Earth grows, the more heat is radiated away at night. At some particular equilibrium temperature, the net loss of radiation by Earth at night equals that gained by day so that, once the temperature (whatever it is) is reached, the Earth as a whole neither warms nor cools with time.<br />Carbon dioxide, however, introduces a complication. It lets light rays through as easily as do oxygen and nitrogen, but it absorbs infra-red rather strongly. This means that Earth’s nighttime radiation finds the atmosphere partially opaque, and some doesn’t get through. The result is that the equilibrium temperature must rise a few degrees to reach the point where enough infra-red is forced out into space to balance the Solar input. The Earth is warmer (on the whole) than it would be if there were no carbon dioxide at all in the atmosphere. The warming effect of carbon dioxide is called the “greenhouse effect”.<br />…A recent set of calculations indicate that if the present carbon dioxide level should double, the overall temperature of the Earth would rise by 3.6 C."<br />Asimov was reporting on the work of G.N. Plass, published in 1958. </p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Ramaswamy, 2019</u></b><br />“Interactions of the incoming solar radiation and outgoing longwave radiation with Earth’s surface and atmosphere affect the planetary heat balance and therefore impact the climate system.”<o:p></o:p></p><p><b style="text-decoration-line: underline;">Also see:</b><br />Ramaswamy, Radiative Forcing of Climate Change, 2001<br /></p><p>Ramaswamy, Radiative Forcing of Climate: The Historical Evolution of the Radiative Forcing Concept, the Forcing Agents and their Quantification, and Applications, 2019</p><p>R. J. Bantges & H. E. Brindley, On the Detection of Robust Multidecadal Changes in Earth’s Outgoing Longwave Radiation Spectrum, 2016</p><p>A. Dessler, Modern Climate Change, Third Edition, 2022</p><p>IPCC Reports, Technical Summaries, various dates.<br /></p><p><u><b>Appendix 3, Discussion of Climate Feedback Discrepencies<br /></b></u>Wikipedia asserts that there is a net positive feedback to warming. However, a check of the referenced IPCC Technical Summary for AR5 (2014) is less clear and does not explicitly mention Planck radiation, the strongest negative feedback. Andrew Dessler’s <u>Modern Climate Change</u> also concludes that total feedbacks are positive. Dessler also does not mention Plack radiation as a feedback parameter. [Dessler quantifies the total feedback relative to radiative forcing, rather than temperature change, which makes direct comparison of the feedback numbers a little more difficult.] On the other hand, <u>Global Climate Models</u>, by D.L. Hartman, clearly identifies each feedback component, including Planck radiation. Hartman states “the best estimate of the total feedback is about −1.2 ± 0.6 W m−2 K−1, but it is uncertain by about ±50%.” The IPCC AR6 preliminary Technical Summary also concludes that total physical feedbacks are negative, with a best value of about -1.2 ± 0.7 W m−2 K−1. I think that the value of -1.2 W m−2 K−1 is likely to be the best estimate.</p><p><u><b>References:<br /></b></u>Svante Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the
Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, 1896.<br /><a href="https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf">https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Isaac Asimov, "No More Ice Ages?", 1959<br />In <u>Fact and Fancy</u>, 1972</p><p class="MsoNormal">Ocean heat content, NOAA<br />
<a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/">https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/global-ocean-heat-content/</a> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">ARGO Ocean Temperature Program Homepage<br />
<a href="https://argo.ucsd.edu/">https://argo.ucsd.edu/</a> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index<br />
<a href="https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html">https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html</a> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Lambeck et al, Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene, 2014<br /><a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1411762111">https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1411762111</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Doug Robbins, atmospheric CO2 and related charts, 2022.<br />
<a href="http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2022/04/charts-of-atmospheric-co2-carbon.html">http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2022/04/charts-of-atmospheric-co2-carbon.html</a> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">NASA GISS Annual Mean Temperature over Land and over Oceans<br />
<a href="https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/">https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">G. Macdonald, JASONs presidential science advisory report,
excerpt, 1979.<br />
<a href="https://climatestate.com/2019/07/10/the-jason-report-the-long-term-impact-of-carbon-dioxide-on-climate-1979/">https://climatestate.com/2019/07/10/the-jason-report-the-long-term-impact-of-carbon-dioxide-on-climate-1979/</a><br />
Whole report:<br />
<a href="https://irp.fas.org/agency/dod/jason/co2.pdf">https://irp.fas.org/agency/dod/jason/co2.pdf</a> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dennis Hartmann, Global Climate Models, 2016 (feedback
chart)<br /><span face=""Calibri",sans-serif" style="font-size: 11pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/climate-feedback">https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/climate-feedback</a><br /></span>IPCC AR6 Technical Summary (feedback chart, pg. 96)<br /><a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_TS.pdf">https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_TS.pdf</a></p><p class="MsoNormal">Andrew Dessler, Introduction to Modern Climate Change, Third Edition, 2022</p></div>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-56790506118916202222022-06-26T20:05:00.000-07:002022-06-26T20:05:32.519-07:00Is Something Really Safe Because It Is Natural?<p> A few years ago, a good friend, Alison Warn, posted a brilliant, concise FB comment about the safety and hazards from artificial and natural sources. Here's Alison:</p><p>"Ahem: Ricin, Oleander, Hydrochloric Acid, Formaldehyde, Tuberculosis, Taipei Venom, Curare, Cyanide, Staphylococcus Aureus, Ebola, Arsenic, Methylmercury, Lead, Lionfish, Radon Gas, Saltwater Crocodiles.... need I go on?</p><p>Safety has nothing to do with source and everything to do with inherent properties such as chemical structure, radiation, germ virulence, or teeth. Some synthetic materials are indeed quite dangerous (sarin gas, anyone?) while others are harmless. Some natural materials are indeed quite harmless, while nature has also given us many of our most deadly poisons.</p><p>Being blinded by the source can be quite dangerous - it both leads us away from potentially lifesaving synthetic materials (such as promising new pharmaceuticals) and can lead to our discounting some very dangerous natural threats."</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgd1-kk82je5aZ-Nt2bZ_ChPuUxkrF6TdD3-bPUjZrl4iX24MLJfS0AhbNe_1pwdHxJ0AUD1SFsKZgp_0HYL0a3-YSqYnmxyCHFHJ6U12u-XpqytAjxbGPI8jGqIhP0pX4SOfYoK16C5fRjk6edKtkA2jKd8g1N8FSaK4hVeNs1yIBJl2znUxOGKH327A" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="186" data-original-width="271" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgd1-kk82je5aZ-Nt2bZ_ChPuUxkrF6TdD3-bPUjZrl4iX24MLJfS0AhbNe_1pwdHxJ0AUD1SFsKZgp_0HYL0a3-YSqYnmxyCHFHJ6U12u-XpqytAjxbGPI8jGqIhP0pX4SOfYoK16C5fRjk6edKtkA2jKd8g1N8FSaK4hVeNs1yIBJl2znUxOGKH327A" width="320" /></a></div><br />---<p></p><div>Whether something is safe or not has nothing to do with whether it is "natural" or not, and everything to do with its physical and chemical properties. And something artificial is not necessarily any riskier than a natural substance.</div><p><br /><br /><br /></p>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-17564362406246954682022-04-26T20:22:00.002-07:002022-04-26T20:35:00.229-07:00Charts of Atmospheric CO2, Carbon Isotopes, Oxygen and Methane<p> I started making charts of atmospheric CO2 in 2009, when the
global average CO2 concentration was 386 ppm.
I updated my charts in 2012, at 392 ppm, and in 2017, at 405 ppm, and at
the end of 2021, at 418 ppm. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvu10GEosI6QVe-KaXZdEey0ViW7ytTs2lH6aKEr2Z_gIbpPldgJZJd0uGK6YiLF2SKgBSiEwqp7yBtDdtSb4IzQlU3I1KFc1eGkLnpov6Fqyr3-EI8gxkzvw6kNSWg0E-wuwZr3jakS6taacjXcSVRpYGOfPyOD7C1nV_qX1uLB4CfAQ4LG2ShL1Aew/s1420/1%20CO2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvu10GEosI6QVe-KaXZdEey0ViW7ytTs2lH6aKEr2Z_gIbpPldgJZJd0uGK6YiLF2SKgBSiEwqp7yBtDdtSb4IzQlU3I1KFc1eGkLnpov6Fqyr3-EI8gxkzvw6kNSWg0E-wuwZr3jakS6taacjXcSVRpYGOfPyOD7C1nV_qX1uLB4CfAQ4LG2ShL1Aew/w640-h464/1%20CO2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>The monitoring stations are located from the far north, at 82° N in Canada to the South Pole. Scripps Institute has managed most of these stations since the 1950s, first under the direction of Charles Keeling, and later under his son, Ralph Keeling. I also included records from a few obsolete legacy stations that were operated by foreign governments. I standardized my chart displays using cool colors to represent the Northern Hemisphere, and warm colors for the Southern Hemisphere.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimQPNWZga03aGGrs3TbhR6ZOTFE4YA-SPWgGCsn1VAdrjmOGGCbPF-IYAdw7BlIWhdIJs_HZiFLtyI-mgiI6pYz6HqNkNubSdM5Bu7EhSdG650mnN6k1cxM0aJ2sor4BWQRrQCqZX0CyIPA4oXHY4qghQmLv7n5T75brgsHW_ajwWSRU84aNKU392StA/s1490/2%20Picture1.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="858" data-original-width="1490" height="368" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimQPNWZga03aGGrs3TbhR6ZOTFE4YA-SPWgGCsn1VAdrjmOGGCbPF-IYAdw7BlIWhdIJs_HZiFLtyI-mgiI6pYz6HqNkNubSdM5Bu7EhSdG650mnN6k1cxM0aJ2sor4BWQRrQCqZX0CyIPA4oXHY4qghQmLv7n5T75brgsHW_ajwWSRU84aNKU392StA/w640-h368/2%20Picture1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div><p>The amplitude of the CO2 seasonal cycle varies with latitude,
from high amplitude in far northern latitudes to very little amplitude at the
South Pole. The seasonal cycle is driven by seasonal plant growth and decay on lands with temperate climate, which are concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere. Agriculture, which is also concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere, also contributes to the seasonal cycle. I took advantage of this for
my standard display, overlaying low amplitude over higher amplitude traces, so that all traces can be seen.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfprN3xy3Qu4YzeF6SsZNcSlSUp-PsObcBckCYXruDhRu69NHpzBxRehkX6lFzWiSv9Ahf03xWGDg45voXxL2k0xpzTPgQ-N3FnTgQjZzCkkZ8nHjjE7ba6kQOQRS1h_xtCJ61voJnfkdxKFU7jMQwzFzumInzTzeOIlFiuXoZuq9cmDihaFQHW5mShw/s3371/World%20Cycles%202.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2046" data-original-width="3371" height="388" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfprN3xy3Qu4YzeF6SsZNcSlSUp-PsObcBckCYXruDhRu69NHpzBxRehkX6lFzWiSv9Ahf03xWGDg45voXxL2k0xpzTPgQ-N3FnTgQjZzCkkZ8nHjjE7ba6kQOQRS1h_xtCJ61voJnfkdxKFU7jMQwzFzumInzTzeOIlFiuXoZuq9cmDihaFQHW5mShw/w640-h388/World%20Cycles%202.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p>In general, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is growing
exponentially, a fact noted by Isaac Asimov in 1959. In 2009, I made an exponential function,
beginning at the pre-industrial CO2 concentration of 280 ppm in 1800, with an
eyeball-fit to the data from 1957 to 2009.
Here’s the function, and the chart beginning in 1800, updated with CO2
data through 2021. This chart has the
“hockey stick” impression that characterizes many climate-change charts.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>CO<sub>2</sub> concentration, ppm = e</b><b><sup><span style="font-size: 12pt;">(n*0.001854)</span></sup></b><b><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> </span>+ 280, where n = the number of months since
Jan. 1800</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This function would predict that global CO2 would pass 450
ppm in January, 2032 (ten years from now), and pass 500 ppm in August, 2043.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdBGk4tjRLGBwkg1J-6hOs_erI93XHAcCsSfX9HIXJT3nNMFwrRodITV6uCTIp41w3kK7gAq3s9qhUq0UJ0FLPk4VC6hUY6AMe4nEEoDEf3_ktsjwGhUHZVOX6qP8-PE3IqKALnArJi1oqhraF0xcrJMSQnCV33uhyI83OUpp4JIEFslrdHFLqPzjnTA/s1422/3%20exponential%20trend.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdBGk4tjRLGBwkg1J-6hOs_erI93XHAcCsSfX9HIXJT3nNMFwrRodITV6uCTIp41w3kK7gAq3s9qhUq0UJ0FLPk4VC6hUY6AMe4nEEoDEf3_ktsjwGhUHZVOX6qP8-PE3IqKALnArJi1oqhraF0xcrJMSQnCV33uhyI83OUpp4JIEFslrdHFLqPzjnTA/w640-h464/3%20exponential%20trend.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The exponential function seems to be slightly overstating
the rate of CO2 growth since 2009, so I tried an alternate formula for the
forecast in coming decades, a second-degree polynomial with a least-squares fit
to the global average CO2 from 1974 to 2009.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>That formula is <b>CO2 in ppm = 0.000104*x</b><b><sup><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">2</span></sup>+0.0897*x+331.66,</b>
<b>where x is the number of months from July, 1974</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This formula predicts global CO2 will pass
450 ppm in June, 2034, and pass 500 ppm in July, 2050.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiryMztuL-nBAK1xS88SYJ3JGmnWnB_WHPrFeBh0JaLzNpux5hSdPBBtV1J44CfJdZJg1wm7ZyRSBPicLHnVKSP5m_UdNBoTfNJ-0f1y3_sPnugB5H_7mYe1TL0yKGktQ0U6jBgIbUXhUK5fpjUsLtIcduiyDRZq2gTy0EH-YQNNgyj2oD78utyXeM8OA/s1420/6%20polynomial%20forecast%202.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiryMztuL-nBAK1xS88SYJ3JGmnWnB_WHPrFeBh0JaLzNpux5hSdPBBtV1J44CfJdZJg1wm7ZyRSBPicLHnVKSP5m_UdNBoTfNJ-0f1y3_sPnugB5H_7mYe1TL0yKGktQ0U6jBgIbUXhUK5fpjUsLtIcduiyDRZq2gTy0EH-YQNNgyj2oD78utyXeM8OA/w640-h464/6%20polynomial%20forecast%202.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>Certainly, these forecasts are simple extrapolations, and
include none of the analysis of policies and economics which should be the
basis of forecasting. But it’s worth
noting that my exponential forecast from 13 years ago is pretty much right on
the money, overshooting by only one or two parts per million. The last thirteen years has seen
unprecedented growth in renewable energy technologies, but so far without
significant impact on the rate of CO2 growth.
Here are the two forecasts on the same chart.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfUVTnbGBE7-ZdHuf1OkIHSoo3GKxcfhD0gFmbJ_mvXwDUB5cR0tCbJMubEK59Lq5Zo-o1NJOZW9C6L81EZPkFu9Q1mh1bsJ70gEFGVOleuDHeLZ5_ihJd7m6qb6vpEscdLDkInlOyveC7rPnmZoUcaYSVj1ZOkRcP5u70wDvzaLHeDkC3IJ9OGVa4Xg/s1420/5%20Polynomial%20forecast.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfUVTnbGBE7-ZdHuf1OkIHSoo3GKxcfhD0gFmbJ_mvXwDUB5cR0tCbJMubEK59Lq5Zo-o1NJOZW9C6L81EZPkFu9Q1mh1bsJ70gEFGVOleuDHeLZ5_ihJd7m6qb6vpEscdLDkInlOyveC7rPnmZoUcaYSVj1ZOkRcP5u70wDvzaLHeDkC3IJ9OGVa4Xg/w640-h464/5%20Polynomial%20forecast.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p class="MsoNormal">The seasonal cycle can easily be filtered from the data,
leaving the long-term trend at each station.
From this, it’s easy to see that the Northern Hemisphere leads the
Southern Hemisphere in rising CO2. About 90% of fossil fuel burning happens in the Northern
Hemisphere, and CO2 accumulates in the far north, while dispersing to the
south. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9IjMYhBGdif71VhP_OhbtXhF9to46HECxMEGUgojgUsWSmjhDd2nCSw3iMChAgUjQ9tVE0o77f3545NH24GKgpw2C-yXH9x5QnuiFZFb9MCm3D9s62WiJVRr_gPBd0htJgAJk32hzT5uy9wTqZ3FezD6S8m33GvIQ4ZjyfV5iG18Pu9mZ6u_bVtK7yA/s1420/7%20CO2%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9IjMYhBGdif71VhP_OhbtXhF9to46HECxMEGUgojgUsWSmjhDd2nCSw3iMChAgUjQ9tVE0o77f3545NH24GKgpw2C-yXH9x5QnuiFZFb9MCm3D9s62WiJVRr_gPBd0htJgAJk32hzT5uy9wTqZ3FezD6S8m33GvIQ4ZjyfV5iG18Pu9mZ6u_bVtK7yA/w640-h464/7%20CO2%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">The difference in concentration from the far north to the
South Pole has been increasing as larger volumes of fossil fuels are burned
each year, from about 3 ppm in the 1980s to over 5 ppm now. The chart below shows the difference in the one-year
time-averaged CO2 concentration measured in Alert, Canada, at latitude 82°
North, and the South Pole. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0S6jlbV6EXGrwh51IV3m6NSXLmJE1lYexSlLPv5GQghvDYjitq8vp-cUjJraMapvY7YNZohZQBU0dcoTFtJR5lQsFT1ZVqJMwH6NoZ7rAh7_xVWXhHu__XiuzWEVd7-PXX6VLv_trFpTpZjzeKR7uKJLSU7qApPQbCDKZ9zI30HDNxgHsFwejEFMDsg/s1420/N%20S%20Difference.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0S6jlbV6EXGrwh51IV3m6NSXLmJE1lYexSlLPv5GQghvDYjitq8vp-cUjJraMapvY7YNZohZQBU0dcoTFtJR5lQsFT1ZVqJMwH6NoZ7rAh7_xVWXhHu__XiuzWEVd7-PXX6VLv_trFpTpZjzeKR7uKJLSU7qApPQbCDKZ9zI30HDNxgHsFwejEFMDsg/w640-h464/N%20S%20Difference.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">The amplitude of the seasonal cycle has also been increasing
in the far north. The amplitude of the
cycle increased from 15 ppm to 20 ppm since the mid-1970s. This probably reflects increased agriculture
and farm productivity in the Northern Hemisphere as world population has doubled. Previous work showed that seasonal
fossil-fuel use is volumetrically inadequate to produce the change in the
atmospheric CO2 seasonal cycle. <a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/04/modeling-global-co2-cycles.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/04/modeling-global-co2-cycles.html</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgptXCAeRpFQNWjv4tQA0CqeoqrtiwyEjOjawuv8xD-1gewHD0hh1v3ELtfPvy9FnePQTWXDRaFgalblRBoul_AGynBTLW9jqxHJ1bHOHaLcQvDgIYVw6VRwKhh9XwUcJOB7gDR3qz6CGnC6skrpyqew3QpZw8g3pS-2zFOFNyBgUL40_woA2Iw0FCE7Q/s1422/Amplitude%20by%20Year.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgptXCAeRpFQNWjv4tQA0CqeoqrtiwyEjOjawuv8xD-1gewHD0hh1v3ELtfPvy9FnePQTWXDRaFgalblRBoul_AGynBTLW9jqxHJ1bHOHaLcQvDgIYVw6VRwKhh9XwUcJOB7gDR3qz6CGnC6skrpyqew3QpZw8g3pS-2zFOFNyBgUL40_woA2Iw0FCE7Q/w640-h464/Amplitude%20by%20Year.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">Carbon comes in two common naturally occurring isotopes, <b>C<sup>12</sup>
</b>and <b>C<sup>13</sup></b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Various
processes, including life processes, sort the isotopes, favoring the
accumulation of one or the other isotope.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Photosynthesis favors<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> <a name="_Hlk101099465">C<sup>12</sup></a></b><span style="mso-bookmark: _Hlk101099465;"></span>,
so everything with carbon derived from plants, including lumber, your mashed
potatoes, you, me, and fossil fuels is enriched in<b> C<sup>12</sup></b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Scientists use a measure of the <b>C<sup>13</sup>/C<sup>12</sup>
</b>ratio written as<b><span style="font-family: Symbol;"> d</span></b><b><sup><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">13</span></sup></b><b><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">C</span></b>
, and called <b>delC13</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As fossil fuels are burned the <b>C<sup>12</sup></b>-enriched carbon in CO2 changes the ratio of these isotopes in the atmosphere, lowering the value of delC13.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>DelC13 continued to fall from 2009 to 2021, reflecting a growing fraction of carbon from fossil fuels in the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihY4zWWwaRlgQfKiF0OYZr4S0p3OhOytJb9U4W39VW3YS2JiAAgi7RxHxlTg5kDkSn6ro6HeHMkCyaKIxAEyIWc0ws3XGaV1Mmd2dkRsrtAYeeTR9bPxa-wio8ZzlJbslxuZELc_jQf-9Ck6lgj6ailkUt6klqOdfEcAk_eckugi7djZIm0NnDzyqqKg/s1420/8%20CO2%20isotopes.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1030" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihY4zWWwaRlgQfKiF0OYZr4S0p3OhOytJb9U4W39VW3YS2JiAAgi7RxHxlTg5kDkSn6ro6HeHMkCyaKIxAEyIWc0ws3XGaV1Mmd2dkRsrtAYeeTR9bPxa-wio8ZzlJbslxuZELc_jQf-9Ck6lgj6ailkUt6klqOdfEcAk_eckugi7djZIm0NnDzyqqKg/w640-h464/8%20CO2%20isotopes.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>Carbon isotopes in the atmosphere are also affected by the
seasonal cycle of plant growth on the temperate land mass of the Northern
Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As plants grow during the
northern summer, the lighter isotope <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">C<sup>12</sup></b>
is preferentially removed from the atmosphere, and returned during the winter
months as plants decay.<p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">After filtering the seasonal cycle, we see that the Northern
Hemisphere leads the Southern Hemisphere in falling DelC13.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As an aside, the residual fluctuations in the
trend have a strong correlation to the Oceanic Nino Index (ONI), reflecting sea
surface temperatures in the Pacific.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/carbon-isotopes-in-atmosphere-part-ii.html"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/carbon-isotopes-in-atmosphere-part-ii.html</span></a></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1JgQtQ5YN9_dz6wW02-Lud9h4wPY9sR_iuvcEDr7KkE4ODHi704AciFSd7cbQFEA5lBi55kl2XRoMZVEz101Mz2mo1yBT5xH6y2BKqzqfw-IGpxQP_GJPUy5EJD16FJ54i1GRiD_xRAYmTXjdu1SWUcE4F9vccFXPnDXD-Se_3akeE352zU4gLGoJGA/s1425/9%20CO2%20isotopes%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1425" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1JgQtQ5YN9_dz6wW02-Lud9h4wPY9sR_iuvcEDr7KkE4ODHi704AciFSd7cbQFEA5lBi55kl2XRoMZVEz101Mz2mo1yBT5xH6y2BKqzqfw-IGpxQP_GJPUy5EJD16FJ54i1GRiD_xRAYmTXjdu1SWUcE4F9vccFXPnDXD-Se_3akeE352zU4gLGoJGA/w640-h464/9%20CO2%20isotopes%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">Interestingly, if all of the carbon released by fossil fuels
stayed in the air, the DelC13 value would be much lower, about -13, instead of
-8.5.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The measured dilution of carbon
with the isotope signature of fossil fuels provides a way of estimating the
volume of all carbon reservoirs exchanging carbon with the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Currently, the reservoirs freely exchanging
carbon with the atmosphere have a carbon mass of about 5200 gigatonnes, before
accounting for additional carbon in the system from new burning of fossil
fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s about 6 times the mass of
carbon currently in the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/how-big-is-carbonsphere.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/how-big-is-carbonsphere.html</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Atmospheric oxygen is also influenced by burning of fossil
fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Oxygen is consumed, causing
atmospheric O2 to fall.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The atmosphere
is about 21% oxygen, and the decline is only about 0.08%, so there is no threat
to breathing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Still, the decline can be
measured precisely.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The decline in
oxygen is reported in units per meg, which is equivalent to ppm in this range
of values.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMZI9cVpFn2dcfOZ5TnKICrnHvGX9j2hBRIEnEnNgfTohrmvFQvKdSJ1vfun2ubDsExBw9elzjNLQ0DDeKRa8GDNBIBOTaGzb3tGZmsT0Us8Jkw4oKOfNmjzIfYbfZUUWB9Q1pW_TLvIJjXlJfbytA0DnjqhAO4o1HhLG4g55w1fHDIOjKT7ASjnzeMA/s1420/10%20Oxygen.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMZI9cVpFn2dcfOZ5TnKICrnHvGX9j2hBRIEnEnNgfTohrmvFQvKdSJ1vfun2ubDsExBw9elzjNLQ0DDeKRa8GDNBIBOTaGzb3tGZmsT0Us8Jkw4oKOfNmjzIfYbfZUUWB9Q1pW_TLvIJjXlJfbytA0DnjqhAO4o1HhLG4g55w1fHDIOjKT7ASjnzeMA/w640-h464/10%20Oxygen.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">After filtering the seasonal cycle, we see that the Northern
Hemisphere leads the Southern Hemisphere in oxygen decline, because most fossil
fuels are burned in the Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The total volume of oxygen decline is very close to the expected
consumption of oxygen considering the reported volumes of fossil fuels burned
and deforestation, as reported in this previous post.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2019/12/understanding-source-of-rising.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2019/12/understanding-source-of-rising.html</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVnibMxBxu_zZxMb7-6-ILLo-N5uZ22pmGC4h0GfQO5XUwl_Hb-CtlMhrKh2BOoK_9OVtSKcFhvs7-DL2s_wmNz34TMVnlz5MC5PgP_lry9MNxB4ChH3-cgdM0da4lC6nHtOvSxdshAbqLZQw-kFQz70JPwJ_ChjKvt6E0u1PgpmlScTDtEkPMipP5_A/s1423/11%20Oxygen%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1032" data-original-width="1423" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVnibMxBxu_zZxMb7-6-ILLo-N5uZ22pmGC4h0GfQO5XUwl_Hb-CtlMhrKh2BOoK_9OVtSKcFhvs7-DL2s_wmNz34TMVnlz5MC5PgP_lry9MNxB4ChH3-cgdM0da4lC6nHtOvSxdshAbqLZQw-kFQz70JPwJ_ChjKvt6E0u1PgpmlScTDtEkPMipP5_A/w640-h464/11%20Oxygen%20wo%20seasonal%20cycles.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">Atmospheric methane (C4) is also increasing as a result of human
emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Methane is a much more
powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, but has a shorter lifespan.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>CO2 has a half-life of 120 years, while
methane has a half-life of about 10 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This is why the climate scientists use the parameter GWP (global warming
potential) to represent the different strength of various greenhouse gases over
an effective time frame.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The GWP of CO2 equals
1, by definition, for all time intervals. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For methane, the warming potential over 20
years (GWP-20) is 84 – 87, and over 100 years is 28 – 36.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Over shorter intervals, methane is an even stronger
greenhouse gas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Currently, methane
concentration in the atmosphere is about 1.9 ppm (i.e. 1900 ppb).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In absolute terms, methane warmed the earth
by about 0.52 W/m2, compared to 2.11 W/m2 for CO2, for the latest year reported
by NOAA, 2020.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All other greenhouse gases
combined contributed another 0.55 W/m2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Methane
also has a seasonal cycle in both hemispheres with high values in the summer
and low values in the winter, but I don’t know the explanation for the seasonal
cycle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_MC9waGAnNpYRdDSHZlSRgt4kJaK6ku9vnIbgOZ4q0cq-0Skcx1M0D8-bgoU2J2ls9hFg3HfXJRj_cg4SqoM3M3DBL9pAUFHIUWe5PogMwJz_mwlwqrqUOOHcN1vU-iEjrbEHpK80UshGDjciIXMfcQSvK7sWSI__BkGttAND2oFk-g0EMo0FAqrKgg/s1420/12%20methane.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1420" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_MC9waGAnNpYRdDSHZlSRgt4kJaK6ku9vnIbgOZ4q0cq-0Skcx1M0D8-bgoU2J2ls9hFg3HfXJRj_cg4SqoM3M3DBL9pAUFHIUWe5PogMwJz_mwlwqrqUOOHcN1vU-iEjrbEHpK80UshGDjciIXMfcQSvK7sWSI__BkGttAND2oFk-g0EMo0FAqrKgg/w640-h464/12%20methane.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">As the concentrations of CO2 and methane in the air rise, the atmosphere
will absorb heat at a faster rate, leading to destructive climate change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Temperatures and climate change will not
stabilize until carbon emissions reach zero.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I will update my charts on carbon emissions when summary data for 2021
is released in the BP Statistical Summary of World Energy in July.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Apart from a small pandemic-related decline
in emissions in 2020, the world continues to add CO2 to the atmosphere at an ever-increasing
rate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If the world had acted to reduce
emissions three decades ago, simply reducing emissions might have been a
reasonable policy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, in our
current situation, outright elimination of carbon emissions is required to
avoid some level of catastrophic consequences.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Globally, we need to reduce emissions to 50% by 2035, and to zero
some time between 2050 and 2070.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am
very pessimistic that we have the public understanding or political will to
reach these goals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Bill Gates wrote
in 2021, "To avoid a climate disaster, we have to get to zero greenhouse
gas emissions….The case for zero was, and is, rock solid. Setting a goal
to only reduce our emissions—but not eliminate them—won’t do it. The only
sensible goal is zero.”</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>References:<o:p></o:p></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>CO2, CO2 carbon isotopes, oxygen and methane data,
including obsolete CO2 stations</b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/atmospheric_co2/sampling_stations.html">https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/atmospheric_co2/sampling_stations.html</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/data.html">https://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/data.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://gml.noaa.gov/dv/data/">https://gml.noaa.gov/dv/data/</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/view/doi:10.3334/CDIAC/ATG.015">https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/view/doi:10.3334/CDIAC/ATG.015</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.osti.gov/dataexplorer/biblio/dataset/1409297">https://www.osti.gov/dataexplorer/biblio/dataset/1409297</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://carbonmapper.org/data/">https://carbonmapper.org/data/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Isaac Asimov, "No More Ice Ages?" prediction and commentary on global warming,<br />in Fantasy and Science Fiction, Jan. 1959, republished in Fact & Fancy, 1962 and Asimov on Chemistry, 1974. </b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Global Warming Potential</b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials#:~:text=Methane%20(CH4)%20is%20estimated,uses%20a%20different%20value">https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials#:~:text=Methane%20(CH4)%20is%20estimated,uses%20a%20different%20value</a>.).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">GWP-20 for methane = 84 to 87; GWP-100 for methane = 28 to
36 (also reported as 25)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Radiative Forcing for various greenhouse gases<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html">https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/aggi.html</a><o:p></o:p></p></div>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-51808094747549518352021-10-14T16:40:00.000-07:002021-10-14T16:40:32.340-07:00George Will: Willful Ignorance About Climate Change<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal">The Washington Post recently published an op-ed on climate
change by aging political commentator George Will.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(August 12, 2021, <a name="_Hlk85114463"></a><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/11/with-closer-look-certainty-about-existential-climate-threat-melts-away/"><span style="mso-bookmark: _Hlk85114463;">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/11/with-closer-look-certainty-about-existential-climate-threat-melts-away/</span></a><span style="mso-bookmark: _Hlk85114463;"></span>, too bad about the paywall).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will’s commentary appears to be drawn
exclusively from a book by noted climate-change denier Steven Koonin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>George Will has been a climate-change denier since
at least 2007, holding forth on a variety of ideas which were either false at
the time or have been subsequently debunked.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are very basic errors of fact throughout Will’s current
column.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His talking points seem to
drawn from the early 1990s, and he is oblivious to the quantity of definitive
data about the climate that has been gathered over the past 30 years.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Will begins by saying, “There is a low ratio of evidence to
passion in today’s exhortations to combat climate change.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ridiculous.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Climate change is probably the most intensively studied scientific topic
in history, with tens of thousands of scientific reports written by thousands
of scientists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Over the last three
decades, scientists have implemented monitoring systems specifically designed
to measure the impact of greenhouse gases on the global climate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We are closely measuring incoming energy from
the sun; energy radiating from the earth into space according to wavelength,
measuring the impact of greenhouse gases; the temperature and heat content of
the oceans to 2000 meters, the temperature of the air from the surface to the
stratosphere, the mass of the ice caps, the area, thickness and age of Arctic
sea ice, the melting of continental glaciers; the temperature of the ocean
surface; global changes in sea level; the CO2 and methane content and isotope
chemistry of the atmosphere, etc.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Considering all of these data, the IPCC 6th Assessment Report reaches a
clear conclusion: that warming of the global climate due to human activities is
an unequivocal, established fact.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The early draft of Volume I of the IPCC 6<sup>th</sup>
Climate Appraisal runs over 3500 pages, written by about 300 authors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The full report, when completed, will involve
about 700 authors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The US Fourth
National Climate Assessment weighs in at over 1500 pages by 300 scientists from
13 US government agencies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These follow
on three decades of earlier reports with contributions from thousands of
scientists, representing tens of thousands of scientific papers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is not a lack of evidence regarding
climate change.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Will repeats the hoary comment that the climate is always
changing, which is completely irrelevant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The point is that the climate is rapidly changing now due to human
emissions of greenhouse gases, and we know it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This self-induced fiasco will cause substantial harm to people and
nature in coming decades, and has already begun.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Past changes have no bearing on our
problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Will complains that science has limited ability to
disentangle human and natural influences in the climate changes during the
Little Ice Age (1450 – 1850), or in the cooling period from 1940 – 1980.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will is misconstruing lack of data for a lack
of understanding.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Using Will’s reasoning,
if a doctor is unable to diagnose the cause of death for King Francis II of
France (1544 – 1560), why would anyone go to a doctor today?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The answer is obvious; it is because the
doctor looking at today’s patient has MRI images, blood chemistry, and a host
of other diagnostic medical tools.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Similarly, the instrumentation for earth systems implemented in the past
30 years allows us to clearly diagnose what is happening to the climate now.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Will states that sea level has been rising a few millimeters
a year for 20,000 years, and cites a source which denies that sea level has
been rising over the past century, or that melting of ice-sheets is currently
higher than in the past.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These points
are patently false.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sea level rose
sharply at the end of the last ice age about 20,000 years ago, but stabilized
about 5000 years ago.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the past 5000
years, sea level has risen only about a meter, rising at a rate of about 0.2
mm/yr to the present (Lambeck et al, 2014; also R. Rohde, Berkeley Earth, from
other published data).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sea level is a
proxy for climate, and stable sea level implies a stable climate in the last
five millennia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>According to satellite
measurements, the current rate of sea level rise is now 15 times faster than
the past 5000 years, and accelerating. Continuous coastal sea-level
measurements dating from the 1800s also verify the acceleration of sea-level
rise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Melting ice accounts for about 60%
of that rise, with thermal expansion of the warming ocean accounting for the
rest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will’s point in the same
paragraph, about relatively little change in the average warmest temperature in
the United States is cherry-picking the various parameters (change in lowest
temperature, change in average temperature, change in winter temperatures,
etc.) to find the parameter with the least change, in a deliberate attempt at
obfuscation and distortion.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEielYpBzCiFfQct84ZySHWkqgQL6PfgHuChuGAvd-IK_hgQkdb4CUZPOvnkaor8x4fnXk4oU097J2hPf0fK0hL9syw6dmBOZXS_uGM9K8kdW9wc2vDD72_GyctfzAQI2ReweFboQ9lU0XyZ/s1204/sea+level+Lambeck.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1204" data-original-width="1141" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEielYpBzCiFfQct84ZySHWkqgQL6PfgHuChuGAvd-IK_hgQkdb4CUZPOvnkaor8x4fnXk4oU097J2hPf0fK0hL9syw6dmBOZXS_uGM9K8kdW9wc2vDD72_GyctfzAQI2ReweFboQ9lU0XyZ/w379-h400/sea+level+Lambeck.jpg" width="379" /></a></div>Sea level stabilized about 6000 years ago, meaning that climate also stabilized after deglaciation following last ice age. <p class="MsoNormal">Will disputes media reports that hurricanes are increasing
in number and intensity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The concern
about hurricanes is not about what has happened thus far, but what will happen
as climate change advances.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The sea
surface temperature is rising.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hurricane
strength and frequency are driven by higher sea surface temperatures and will
inexorable become stronger and more frequent in the future.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Scientists are not correlating hurricane
strength to greenhouse gases and making an extrapolation; scientists are
forecasting stronger hurricanes because they understand how things work.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKVe1BiouIODWP2ypLLUjPDusOYfOHv1_u-CC8VsnNbT8dp1SFVqZA4UwMnA7Hez1k6DNq_Jz0PShhkhfYyvLQbDRW4ZrNQlDDv9WYC3IXtHzRKrNLBQAaN0EdJ6NUhKgKzi2EpmEx97_r/s1232/Hurricane+and+SST+forecast.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1027" data-original-width="1232" height="534" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKVe1BiouIODWP2ypLLUjPDusOYfOHv1_u-CC8VsnNbT8dp1SFVqZA4UwMnA7Hez1k6DNq_Jz0PShhkhfYyvLQbDRW4ZrNQlDDv9WYC3IXtHzRKrNLBQAaN0EdJ6NUhKgKzi2EpmEx97_r/w640-h534/Hurricane+and+SST+forecast.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>Hurricane wind speed versus sea surface temperature, modified from Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth. Higher sea surface temperatures will inevitably mean stronger hurricanes. Sea surface temperatures are inexorably rising.<p class="MsoNormal">Will attempts to deflect responsibility for rising CO2 from
the developed world to the developing world, citing plans to increase fossil-fuel
power production in India and China.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
this, Will is neglecting the 150-year history of fossil-fuel use by industrialized
countries, which have brought us to the brink of climate disaster, where we
stand today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Will concludes by referencing a “previous UN report” (not cited)
which projects minimal economic harm from climate change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no indication of when this report
was written, or my whom.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But that report
does not reflect the views of the climatologists of the IPCC, or US scientists
who wrote the 4<sup>th</sup> National Climate Assessment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The IPCC 1.5 Special Report states: “Climate-related
risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security, and
economic growth are projected to increase with global warming of 1.5°C and
increase further with 2°C.” (Summary for Policy Makers, section B.5.)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Likewise, the United States’ Fourth Climate
Assessment (2018) states: “Climate change creates new risks and exacerbates
existing vulnerabilities in communities across the United States, presenting
growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of
economic growth….Without substantial and sustained global mitigation and
regional adaptation efforts, climate change is expected to cause growing losses
to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth
over this century.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">George Will is misguided and uninformed about climate
change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will has read one discredited book
by one discredited scientist, who is not a climatologist, instead of the well-documented
publications from respected institutions of science.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will’s column is part of the general celebration
of ignorance and lies which characterize the Conservative movement, on issues from
the treatment of COVID-19 to the 2020 election loss by Donald Trump.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>George Will’s column on climate change is a
classic example of Willful Ignorance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></p>
<div style="text-align: left;"><o:p><u>References<br /></u></o:p>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/11/with-closer-look-certainty-about-existential-climate-threat-melts-away/</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><o:p></o:p></p><div>George Will’s recent column.</div><div><br />https://www.desmog.com/george-will/<br />Will’s former statements about climate change.</div><div><br />https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/<br />IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 degrees C.<br />https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-i/<br />IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Volume I, The Physical Science Basis, 2021.</div><div><br />Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume I, Physical Science 2017.<br />https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/<br />Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States, 2018.</div><div><br />https://www.pnas.org/content/111/43/15296</div><div>Lambeck et al, Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene, 2014.</div><div><br />https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png<br />Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth, Holocene Sea-Level Chart, 2005.<br />https://twitter.com/RARohde/status/907918199202701344/photo/1<br />Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth, Tropical Storm Wind Speed Versus Water Temperature, 2017.</div><p></p><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><o:p><br /></o:p></p>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-73809978723979324902021-08-15T00:13:00.004-07:002022-08-06T01:49:24.443-07:00Global Warming, Natural Cycles and Unicorn Farts<p> <o:p>"</o:p>The suggestion that natural causes are contributing to global warming is entirely speculative.
If someone proposes that natural causes are warming the earth, they need
to identify, observe and quantify the specific process that is occurring. It may be true that unicorn farts, rather
than greenhouse gases, are warming the earth over the past century. But the burden of proof is on the unicorn
advocates. They need to find the
unicorns, observe and measure the heat generated per unicorn fart. They need to demonstrate that unicorn farts
are sufficient to account for a significant portion of global warming, and to
either discredit the physics of greenhouse gases or to identify a previously
undetected heat sink on the scale of the global ocean to account for the
displacement of greenhouse gas heat.
They also need to demonstrate that unicorn farts are delivering heat to
the surface of the ocean and cooling the stratosphere. The notion that “we just don’t know what is
warming the earth” is not a viable statement.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2lSWWiJczF_jEUcP2HtScNF8A32g_ZPLz_lEonGENQGjuTxjRZ9Q5HuwjYScjuqnPJZh-2peVJCCvbHYEzxLkTurm6-_NedL0kTkv5Rywmwspq44Ge4hXceN7t4rKZuvwxOBMXE_t6BEn/s957/Unicorn+fart.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="957" data-original-width="530" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2lSWWiJczF_jEUcP2HtScNF8A32g_ZPLz_lEonGENQGjuTxjRZ9Q5HuwjYScjuqnPJZh-2peVJCCvbHYEzxLkTurm6-_NedL0kTkv5Rywmwspq44Ge4hXceN7t4rKZuvwxOBMXE_t6BEn/w354-h640/Unicorn+fart.jpg" width="354" /></a></div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I recently had a call with a staffer for Alaska’s more conservative U.S. Senator. I had made a trip to DC, and Alaska’s Congressional Delegation will usually make time to meet with constituents who travel 3350 miles from home. I had sent meeting requests to both Senators, and the moderate Senator’s staff contacted me, and we had a good discussion of climate change. The more conservative Senator’s office contacted me after I sent a complaint comparing their non-responsiveness to the moderate Senator. In my call with the staffer, I discussed the points on my
agenda: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">1) That we needed to cut CO2 emissions 50% by the year 2035
and to zero by 2050, to avoid a climate disaster.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">2)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Achieving those cuts
will be very difficult and costly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Real
climate solutions need to be affordable, scalable, timely, environmentally
acceptable, and technologically mature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There are no currently viable solutions, as global upscaling of
renewable energy runs into problems with increasing costs and timeliness.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">3)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We cannot count on
negative emissions technologies to provide a climate solution due to similar
issues with global scaling of these technologies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">4)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Historically, the
United States disproportionally contributed to the climate crisis, and we will
be held responsible, accountable, and liable for damages to other nations in
the future.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">5)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because we are
disproportionally to blame, we are morally obligated to lead the world in
reducing emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">6)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the case of south-central
Alaska, replacing our fossil-fuel electrical generation will require about 1000
new wind turbines, plus short-term and seasonal energy storage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Powering a full fleet of electric vehicles
will require at least another 1000 wind turbines, and replacing space heating by
fossil fuels will require at least another 1000 wind turbines, all to be
accomplished by 2050.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For reference,
building an 11-turbine wind farm near Anchorage required a decade of planning
and two years of construction. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">7) A carbon tax is the best way to meet emission reduction
goals, starting small, and increasing until renewable energy or carbon
sequestration is commercially justified.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The staffer listened politely to my sermon, at points
offering small interjections.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
commented that the Senator sponsored legislation to reduce the permitting
obstacles to building more wind turbines.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I responded that it was a nice ideological gesture, but the real problem
in building more wind energy wasn’t permitting, it was the availability of
capital.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The great majority of cost for
fossil-fuel generation is in fuel expense, which is spread out across the life
of the power plant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The great majority
of cost for renewable energy is in capital, which must be funded up-front.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The staffer added that it was an exciting
time for renewable energy; and that there was much interest and activity in
Congress for doing more.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">At the end of our conversation, I took issue with one of the
Senator’s canned response letters regarding climate change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Senator’s previous position was that we
don’t know how much of climate change is due to human greenhouse gas emissions,
and how much is due to natural factors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I said that was false.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“It is?”
questioned the staffer, sounding surprised.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>“Yes”, I replied.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><b>“That’s
complete bullshit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></b><b>All of climate change is due to human influences; one hundred percent. </b><b>There are no natural
processes or cycles that are adding heat to the earth to the degree and over
the time frame that we have observed global warming.”</b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Shortly
afterward, we concluded the call.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In retrospect, I wasted a good opportunity to provide a real
explanation to someone who could make a difference in forming policy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the fashion of introverts everywhere, here
is what I should have said.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Global warming is by now a well-quantified problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The physics of greenhouse gases has been
understood for 125 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The physics of
global warming has been well-quantified since the 1980s, when satellites began
measuring incoming solar radiation, and outgoing radiation was measured at the
surface, and at various altitudes up to the stratosphere, and later by
satellites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What was happening to that
heat was still somewhat uncertain in the 1990s, but in the early 2000s instrumentation
was devised to measure the temperature of the ocean to a depth of 2000 meters, and
to monitor the mass of the polar ice caps, Arctic sea ice, and continental
glaciers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The system of measuring
surface temperatures was also improved with the addition of satellite observations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Considering all of this information, we now have
twenty years of comprehensive measurements for the earth’s heat budget.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>The first point is that heat from greenhouse gases is fully
sufficient to account for the heat now appearing in earth’s heat sinks</b>, with
an imbalance of only a few percent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If
a natural source of heating existed, it would raise another problem – what is
happening to the heat from greenhouse gases?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In order to validate a natural source of heat, either the physics of
greenhouse gases needs to be overturned (which isn’t going to happen), or we
have somehow overlooked a heat sink on the scale of the global ocean.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This also is extremely unlikely.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>A second point is that any alternative explanation of
global warming must also explain the pattern of heat flow.</b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><b>Observations show that the oceans, which
absorb more than 90% of the heat from greenhouse gases, are warming from the
surface downwards</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This implies
heating at the surface, either from increased solar radiation or by conduction
from the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We have forty years
of satellite observations of the solar radiation, conclusively proving that the
solar radiation is declining slightly, not increasing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Any speculative natural process for global
warming must necessarily deliver heat to the surface of the ocean, from the
atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This rules out any
speculative heat source involving ocean currents or cycles.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>A final point is that there are no known natural systems
adding new heat to the earth over the past five decades.</b><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Geologists, oceanographers, and meteorologists have done a pretty good job over the past 200 years, identifying the processes operating on the earth's surface. No process that would add new heat to the planet's surface, over the time that global warming has occurred, has been identified. </span>Natural systems do have some cyclicity that
affect the global climate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ocean cycles
generally operate over periods of a decade or less, not over the multi-decade
time scale that we observe heat appearing in earth systems. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But one important thing to note is that these natural
cycles are zero-sum; they redistribute heat but don’t add new heat to the
earth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As noted above, solar radiation
varies according to the eleven-year solar cycle, but there is no continuing
warming persisting beyond those cycles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_Hlk79848729">The argument that natural causes are
contributing to climate change is entirely speculative.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If someone is proposing that natural causes
are warming the earth, they need to identify, observe and quantify the specific
process that is occurring.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It may be
true that unicorn farts are warming the earth, rather than greenhouse
gases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the burden of proof is on the
unicorn advocates, to find the unicorns, observe and measure the heat generated
per unicorn fart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They need to
demonstrate that unicorn farts are sufficient to account for a significant
portion of global warming, and to either discredit the physics of greenhouse
gases or to identify a previously undetected heat sink on the scale of the
global ocean, to account for the displacement of greenhouse gas heat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They also need to demonstrate that unicorn farts
are delivering heat to the surface of the ocean, and cooling the
stratosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark: _Hlk79848729;">The notion that “we
just don’t know what is warming the earth” is not a viable statement.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>References</u></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Written testimony of
climatologist Zeke Hausfather to the US House Committee on Space, Science and
Technology, , p. 13, 3/12/2021 </b><a href="https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Hausfather%20Testimony.pdf">https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Hausfather%20Testimony.pdf</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Our best estimate is that approximately all of the observed
global mean surface temperature warming since the 1950s is due to human emissions of CO2 and
other greenhouse gases. Natural climate “forcings” such as changing solar output,
variations in the Earth’s orbit, and volcanic activity would have likely led to a slight cooling
over the past 70 years in the absence of human influences on the climate.” </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p>I</o:p>PCC 6<sup>th</sup> Assessment Report, Headline Statements
from the Summary for Policymakers, 8/9/2021 (draft)</b> <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/#SPM">https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/#SPM</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“A.1 It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the
atmosphere, ocean and land.” – Policy-makers’ Headline Statements, first
line. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Human influence on the climate system is now an established
fact:…It is unequivocal that the increase of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous
oxide (N2O) in the atmosphere over the industrial era is the result of human
activities and that human influence is the principal driver of many changes
observed across the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere.” Pg. TS-8<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Table TS.1: Synthesis: Warming of
the global climate system since preindustrial times], Observed Change Assessment – Established Fact; Human Contribution Assessment – Established Fact.” Pg. TS-33.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>‘Less than 1% probability’ that Earth’s energy imbalance
increase occurred naturally, say Princeton and GFDL scientists, Liz Fuller-Wright, 2021. </b><a href="https://www.princeton.edu/news/2021/07/28/less-1-probability-earths-energy-imbalance-increase-occurred-naturally-say">https://www.princeton.edu/news/2021/07/28/less-1-probability-earths-energy-imbalance-increase-occurred-naturally-say</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“[Shiv Priyam Raghuraman] and his co-authors used satellite
observations from 2001 to 2020 and found that Earth’s “energy imbalance” is
growing….’It is exceptionally unlikely — less than 1% probability — that this
trend can be explained by natural variations in the climate system,’ said
Raghuraman.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Anthropogenic forcing and response yield observed positive trend in Earth’s energy imbalance, Reghuraman et al, 2021. </b><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24544-4">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24544-4</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-28963420070724832542021-02-24T21:21:00.001-08:002021-02-24T21:21:11.440-08:002020 Climate Review; Global and Alaska<p> Unsurprisingly, the global climate in 2021 continued to warm and to experience climate-related disasters. Global air temperature tied 2016 as the warmest year on record. Oceans continued to warm, and marked the warmest year on record. Oceans absorb about 95% of heating from greenhouse gases, and thus have a more consistent increase in temperature. </p><p>According to Carbon Brief, CO2 emissions in 2020 fell by about 7% compared to 2019, due to economic cut-backs during the Covid-19 epidemic. Nevertheless, average atmospheric CO2 ended the year at about 413.5 ppm, a rise of about 2.5 ppm over 2019 (ESRL/NOAA). That rate of increase is not significantly different than the previous decade. For reference, pre-industrial levels of CO2 were about 280 ppm.</p><p>Alaska had a relatively mild 2020 in terms of climate change, cooler than recent years, with temperatures in the range of temperatures of the 1980, but still warmer than earlier decades. There were fewer climate-related wildfires, and the warm-water "blob" in the Gulf of Alaska did not develop during 2020. Nevertheless, the long-term trajectory of climate change in Alaska is still clear.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMF1YbydJi_2ETc6qVmGpJIjJqi8a-WcqEZY3Sf9HH-q4oy2V4i-O0FuMRB4XJ4D8lIxnNnXWn6i6Tvo_u4X9bDA1clG1ZlpF7_idEFWzdJCsBsliflIcQtR1k-LlGAyYCP6ZLUU8J90G_/s1491/1+2021+summary.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="841" data-original-width="1491" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMF1YbydJi_2ETc6qVmGpJIjJqi8a-WcqEZY3Sf9HH-q4oy2V4i-O0FuMRB4XJ4D8lIxnNnXWn6i6Tvo_u4X9bDA1clG1ZlpF7_idEFWzdJCsBsliflIcQtR1k-LlGAyYCP6ZLUU8J90G_/w640-h360/1+2021+summary.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPymVgwtb6wDFs39IJOmWwEA1QjHhPAnGJ3cr3RGpz9Iv8rNa3O8F_Z0OarF7EUZTKgMgMoLK4zJk6okSa4U9JzkDYOF09WFHFZl6yjOjJ2_hwzCFIp2lMNt0nfhcrHfB9Hd2M-puS2tjF/s1538/2+global+temperature.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1046" data-original-width="1538" height="436" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPymVgwtb6wDFs39IJOmWwEA1QjHhPAnGJ3cr3RGpz9Iv8rNa3O8F_Z0OarF7EUZTKgMgMoLK4zJk6okSa4U9JzkDYOF09WFHFZl6yjOjJ2_hwzCFIp2lMNt0nfhcrHfB9Hd2M-puS2tjF/w640-h436/2+global+temperature.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfokjeWnr9FU_sLlXfQ2Km62bOJiTAFmb8gX4qhsQX48MzO_YnsUk9FrlytF7BHttIdTvEItmGtOK19sqJsNHkC-o3_vpKMme04ZLMfMiWrjUkogFpXySn2NHaQHH28rxvG4vQvXLWk4w4/s1919/3+Ocean+heat.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1919" height="346" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfokjeWnr9FU_sLlXfQ2Km62bOJiTAFmb8gX4qhsQX48MzO_YnsUk9FrlytF7BHttIdTvEItmGtOK19sqJsNHkC-o3_vpKMme04ZLMfMiWrjUkogFpXySn2NHaQHH28rxvG4vQvXLWk4w4/w640-h346/3+Ocean+heat.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh35ez-6McWDPTIdz9G1hff1hSMy4kAMetCVgHvLGy_avURUi7mLtqpcK-UaUjOdcycLnmcsq44ULWC_aICF2asz5vIpIqqcpQ_h6IBEQGu62yuLjSnZgNwtqq0MtdJou4jL9yW3PH0Fv_/s1591/4+Ice.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1089" data-original-width="1591" height="438" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh35ez-6McWDPTIdz9G1hff1hSMy4kAMetCVgHvLGy_avURUi7mLtqpcK-UaUjOdcycLnmcsq44ULWC_aICF2asz5vIpIqqcpQ_h6IBEQGu62yuLjSnZgNwtqq0MtdJou4jL9yW3PH0Fv_/w640-h438/4+Ice.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHCVpQlAgAPIGQJm_PgolGc7_KzrNle5CQyoeOyx3pFnLdAveS9jZ7nRsiuiWLD9SgkQv42RB3GVd-RbI9agnR3op9pV6tbWfmhEFpiGVBTnV8hIqLlhkq-BQL0NdbKKszHs8_J2C3A4-h/s1973/9+Soil+Moisture.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1138" data-original-width="1973" height="370" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHCVpQlAgAPIGQJm_PgolGc7_KzrNle5CQyoeOyx3pFnLdAveS9jZ7nRsiuiWLD9SgkQv42RB3GVd-RbI9agnR3op9pV6tbWfmhEFpiGVBTnV8hIqLlhkq-BQL0NdbKKszHs8_J2C3A4-h/w640-h370/9+Soil+Moisture.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"> Low soil moisture results in dry plants, which cause wildfires to burn hotter and faster. Low soil moisture also causes dead undergrowth, which provides fuel-loading to forests, increasing fire danger.</div></div></blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZd4slMD0RmnAimpB7MC8shhCrxbTjmRuY6ttHPb0khN_DtbN-0kTzgYgMzrq73C5Y5H7mttTnnjdSCXSjf7ydj18EcgUuzRVjKmp_nNvlgV8mbw0WBKoozVcOoXfZttkU8EmzGikUKFJ9/s1579/5+California+Wildfires.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1110" data-original-width="1579" height="450" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZd4slMD0RmnAimpB7MC8shhCrxbTjmRuY6ttHPb0khN_DtbN-0kTzgYgMzrq73C5Y5H7mttTnnjdSCXSjf7ydj18EcgUuzRVjKmp_nNvlgV8mbw0WBKoozVcOoXfZttkU8EmzGikUKFJ9/w640-h450/5+California+Wildfires.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div>Robert Rohde of Berkeley Earth prepared the chart above. Annual averages of precipitation and temperature during the California fire season are shown in a color spectrum ranging from cool to warm colors representing 20-year intervals. The chart shows a slow progression toward warmer temperatures, with the most significant change in the last twenty years. Note that the ten largest wildfires, and the ten most destructive wildfires all occur in the warmest & driest quadrant of the chart. The amount of change in the past 40 years is dramatic, and sobering if these trends continue over the next 40 years.</div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWcp0R96FCHNxg8y_4cOq25x6ZZUc0JU0yskY3x9D-G1oLLA0BwZ_7LJOHMiNW8xcYcYE4Q4H450Ctneax4ZLZidjNaOX8D0o2S1Spiz_UDeJCJc7YDwUIQ1ZQ7_0UfHh9u_7BL7hq13fO/s2048/10+Hurricane.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1119" data-original-width="2048" height="350" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWcp0R96FCHNxg8y_4cOq25x6ZZUc0JU0yskY3x9D-G1oLLA0BwZ_7LJOHMiNW8xcYcYE4Q4H450Ctneax4ZLZidjNaOX8D0o2S1Spiz_UDeJCJc7YDwUIQ1ZQ7_0UfHh9u_7BL7hq13fO/w640-h350/10+Hurricane.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Alaska had a relatively moderate year regarding climate events in 2020. Nevertheless, the long-term trends remain. NOAA published a report card indicating that changes in the Arctic are likely to be permanent.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihKgTs1fz7Y-n4PGxljrqtumQW81BZIVXlp1-SPOSaCen0j_Ukt_1gmPfNNGqZMNMnSiZpiFER-YMijRPwtBdh6HWbP8nST60NJ91p0fjLGefd05qDONO2Hbnka9MCJ6Cg4M9SMaBgE_TC/s1969/16+NOAA.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1969" height="346" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihKgTs1fz7Y-n4PGxljrqtumQW81BZIVXlp1-SPOSaCen0j_Ukt_1gmPfNNGqZMNMnSiZpiFER-YMijRPwtBdh6HWbP8nST60NJ91p0fjLGefd05qDONO2Hbnka9MCJ6Cg4M9SMaBgE_TC/w640-h346/16+NOAA.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiy-DA9dtFc5COpvDU2MfEpXdh_nywM-xIiTcGRitl22eucxrh7OTLSQmmS7PM1BLinuGB4efAU5tvrbDFSWKA-_BZVw23Bz2Dda0GwkPjE0ZGV5-5JaXi2wFuGGWEYH3Se6CZZ5K3hOoyx/s1938/17+AK+2020+Temp.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1083" data-original-width="1938" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiy-DA9dtFc5COpvDU2MfEpXdh_nywM-xIiTcGRitl22eucxrh7OTLSQmmS7PM1BLinuGB4efAU5tvrbDFSWKA-_BZVw23Bz2Dda0GwkPjE0ZGV5-5JaXi2wFuGGWEYH3Se6CZZ5K3hOoyx/w640-h358/17+AK+2020+Temp.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlWVlgc2A7I79OG_0fftEFgh9w-duq2x6FUNHWaN5r1fJQM_e7ugtOUbWgNz49N8nmqJ30s2_VVWw4QGcFseBLvB6mxy4YSraZdPcie3x2xd-d0uaCtuHkAqpI-_M7LuB4oTnXz-bVgdvj/s2000/6+Arctic+Amplification.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1121" data-original-width="2000" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlWVlgc2A7I79OG_0fftEFgh9w-duq2x6FUNHWaN5r1fJQM_e7ugtOUbWgNz49N8nmqJ30s2_VVWw4QGcFseBLvB6mxy4YSraZdPcie3x2xd-d0uaCtuHkAqpI-_M7LuB4oTnXz-bVgdvj/w640-h358/6+Arctic+Amplification.jpg" width="640" /></a></div> The chart shows temperature change since 1945.<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Arctic temperatures are rising two to three times faster than the rest of the globe, as a consequence of feedback factors from loss of snow and ice. This effect was predicted in climate models by the Jasons' report in 1979. Note also that air temperatures over land has warmed more than the oceans. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVKKAj8DPa71KVWjQ24HUathuUq5RAt2mC6jctajyRPENTqwCf-GGblmcNEBU0w0dTaJJY9nRym20Sn5AHl5jH5i-n-TudMwpPdqaCmRbjRSuMS65x9_ZyHjc5QYSsgFRWI5smXxARqjYp/s1814/7+Land_Ocean+Temps.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="999" data-original-width="1814" height="352" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVKKAj8DPa71KVWjQ24HUathuUq5RAt2mC6jctajyRPENTqwCf-GGblmcNEBU0w0dTaJJY9nRym20Sn5AHl5jH5i-n-TudMwpPdqaCmRbjRSuMS65x9_ZyHjc5QYSsgFRWI5smXxARqjYp/w640-h352/7+Land_Ocean+Temps.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Oceans absorb about 95% of heat retained by greenhouse gases. The absorption of heat, and evaporative cooling, keeps air temperatures over oceans lower than over land. Therefore, air temperatures over land are increasing faster than the global average, which is inconvenient, because we live on land.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifGzG_f6soocMW-liD1Xvy9QxfGs5sJyj_nG7O0RanZ_fgpF9Rrt15HGSLrDWGr-Xy1o0cEVVBCx11LSVkB2ebGdgaWQuIwjR_tOTsjEhraE19GKqZfJK5hyphenhyphenGnNpQJQ7SCMVf_Rwneiree/s1573/8+Alaska+winter+temps.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1073" data-original-width="1573" height="436" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifGzG_f6soocMW-liD1Xvy9QxfGs5sJyj_nG7O0RanZ_fgpF9Rrt15HGSLrDWGr-Xy1o0cEVVBCx11LSVkB2ebGdgaWQuIwjR_tOTsjEhraE19GKqZfJK5hyphenhyphenGnNpQJQ7SCMVf_Rwneiree/w640-h436/8+Alaska+winter+temps.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>Alaska temperatures clearly show the impact of Arctic amplification. North Slope temperatures in the fall season have been sharply higher since the mid-1990s, due to early loss of Chukchi Sea ice.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCJAAHWWWPSd8yAHIYG2ZhRE3Gfiypk4-WBLlPmZmk2Y7D0CZZ0Aj8soUbE2FaUTv7Ini6_Ci4E5Yig2V12dn3yExlIkc49W4raACBqttFPn1m0_uj6n2t81VCv5juCBt4c8EUHBjfsrih/s1477/14+North+Slope+Temperatures.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1100" data-original-width="1477" height="476" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCJAAHWWWPSd8yAHIYG2ZhRE3Gfiypk4-WBLlPmZmk2Y7D0CZZ0Aj8soUbE2FaUTv7Ini6_Ci4E5Yig2V12dn3yExlIkc49W4raACBqttFPn1m0_uj6n2t81VCv5juCBt4c8EUHBjfsrih/w640-h476/14+North+Slope+Temperatures.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjj3C1-pGUW5tunq9lPiaVMSI9gfptf-rfDvpBEXtBcIsRM_Dx3F3rEBjBRj2dJNHKUo_W2AqKELuKXKM8F0nsOpTbPVC-bgIAkUf-3YwD1r98WT2D-vvo1qByDZIRLVw1IZdAO1rc0ToIC/s2002/15+Chukchi+Sea+Ice.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1100" data-original-width="2002" height="352" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjj3C1-pGUW5tunq9lPiaVMSI9gfptf-rfDvpBEXtBcIsRM_Dx3F3rEBjBRj2dJNHKUo_W2AqKELuKXKM8F0nsOpTbPVC-bgIAkUf-3YwD1r98WT2D-vvo1qByDZIRLVw1IZdAO1rc0ToIC/w640-h352/15+Chukchi+Sea+Ice.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-x-Gjv53r5_S2wP9uVBVHj1OGDtdx70_KmbXfs1ZgRFHr_jy5CMZrwN2YT-KgRIJOua5Z4a9z8ap_9O2k3B0ClmA3fVsLVesQT2hWNgel66r89JzT13eqdiGIHv6oieu2Z_YdidaFmVOo/s1532/12+Gulf+of+Alaska.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1100" data-original-width="1532" height="460" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-x-Gjv53r5_S2wP9uVBVHj1OGDtdx70_KmbXfs1ZgRFHr_jy5CMZrwN2YT-KgRIJOua5Z4a9z8ap_9O2k3B0ClmA3fVsLVesQT2hWNgel66r89JzT13eqdiGIHv6oieu2Z_YdidaFmVOo/w640-h460/12+Gulf+of+Alaska.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhateR8n2BavWrpFfyx3aic7Rv0sQvgkjx5VCn74vAoMiQWGyR-U2JLNnJ0sVjOfy5A-vx4jnJeGq_n-47JpKKyveLGi7x21wCkiVg3th1rHaLxbpV9x1fQNl1UvNxdCsvSWmzyM55mGKdQ/s1443/13+Anomalous+Weather.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1100" data-original-width="1443" height="488" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhateR8n2BavWrpFfyx3aic7Rv0sQvgkjx5VCn74vAoMiQWGyR-U2JLNnJ0sVjOfy5A-vx4jnJeGq_n-47JpKKyveLGi7x21wCkiVg3th1rHaLxbpV9x1fQNl1UvNxdCsvSWmzyM55mGKdQ/w640-h488/13+Anomalous+Weather.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Thunderstorms have become measurably more frequent near Fairbanks since about 1990. The state's biggest wildfires typically occur near Fairbanks, and are most often caused by lightning.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiI844rm2QdylnOd5sWxC9o2HvMo1kB8cgvr7iNNPYADWnqNv9dF6f2-cj0x2b5I4MARPdQltGg9-B5Fze_SY4_sG3n-F7FE7W_lpQdJzOs-KfpkFHsCkBeMRygDyqHwGzGZwhHwj76hvLH/s1717/11+Fairbanks+Thunder.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1037" data-original-width="1717" height="386" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiI844rm2QdylnOd5sWxC9o2HvMo1kB8cgvr7iNNPYADWnqNv9dF6f2-cj0x2b5I4MARPdQltGg9-B5Fze_SY4_sG3n-F7FE7W_lpQdJzOs-KfpkFHsCkBeMRygDyqHwGzGZwhHwj76hvLH/w640-h386/11+Fairbanks+Thunder.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Alaska's climate continues to change rapidly, and future decades are likely to bring serious, detrimental change. </div></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div></div></div>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-76240706682998176602020-12-19T01:09:00.018-08:002022-08-06T01:45:52.285-07:00Doug's Laws<p>A few months ago, I posted a reply on social media with a comment that I called "Doug's Law #271". "There’s a precursor event to every disaster, if anyone is paying sufficient attention." A friend, taking me seriously (big mistake) asked to read the other 270, which didn't really exist. </p><p>After a little thought, I decided it would be worthwhile to make a list of my life lessons and insights. Some are original, but more are life lessons I learned from others, in person or through reading. Some of these might seem cynical, obvious or trivial. As another friend often says, your mileage may vary. But for what it's worth, here is the list of Doug's Laws.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgp2ZfqIf-RTrh-UTLFhjE3Qj0ipKqvoYftFio7DEwfSHNyAhYCQn5GvPWpeOPkcnhryaxlEuY80QJRfuMrHBN7py5ub7OLBZFeKa1FDQDz8j1-uNW8Mj4OxIQwbOmL7wdY0S2QGn0ALZtY/s921/Laws.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="614" data-original-width="921" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgp2ZfqIf-RTrh-UTLFhjE3Qj0ipKqvoYftFio7DEwfSHNyAhYCQn5GvPWpeOPkcnhryaxlEuY80QJRfuMrHBN7py5ub7OLBZFeKa1FDQDz8j1-uNW8Mj4OxIQwbOmL7wdY0S2QGn0ALZtY/w400-h266/Laws.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">1) All human problems can be solved with enough knowledge, money, social cooperation and time. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>Social cooperation and time are usually the limiting factors.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>- Modified from David Deutsch</p><p class="MsoNormal">2) On a beach of white seashells, the dark shell is the prettiest. On a beach of dark seashells, the white one is the prettiest. <br /> The sunset is beautiful because it is brief and different than the other colors of the day. </p><p class="MsoNormal">3) Objective truth exists and is generally accessible to everyone.</p><p class="MsoNormal">4) Progressive risk-taking always ends in trouble or disaster. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>Examples of progressive risk-taking include: <br /><span> </span><span> </span>> “We’ve taken chances before, and it’s always worked out all right.”<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> “We’ve launched the Space Shuttle successfully twenty-four times; what can go wrong?”<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> “You can always fit a car through a narrower space than you expect” - until you can’t.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> “Well, you didn’t get pregnant the last time”.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> “You can go farther than you think on a tank of gas” - until you can’t. This is especially important in small airplanes. – Modified from FAA Accident Report, circa 2009</p><p class="MsoNormal">5) You have to learn to cooperate when paddling a canoe.</p><p class="MsoNormal">6) There is no rewind button on life. <br />Kasparov makes an analogy to the chessboard. You have to play the position on the board, regardless of your own prior errors or unexpected moves by your opponent. Omar Khayyam also had something to say about the moving finger that writes and moves on. </p><p class="MsoNormal">7) We should judge God according to standards of reason and justice.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>If we determine that God is not reasonable or just, why should anyone believe in God?<br /> <span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>- Modified from David Deutsch.</p><p class="MsoNormal">8) Thinking based on false premises cannot be expected to yield good conclusions or decisions. <br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>This is why I reject religion and spirituality, despite some positive aspects of these beliefs.</p><p class="MsoNormal">9) The existence of war causes me to question the existence of nations as an organizing principle for humankind.</p><p class="MsoNormal">10) Borders are not for keeping people out; they are for keeping rules in. <br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>- Steve Robbins (son)</p><p class="MsoNormal">11) Kindness is best and most needed when it is completely unexpected.</p><p class="MsoNormal">12) Humans are a uniquely improbable, intelligent and capable species with no known analogs in time and space. <br />There is no evidence of another sentient and capable species in the 4.5 billion year history of earth. Cephalopods did not develop technical intelligence in nearly 500 million years of evolution. Dinosaurs did not evolve technical intelligence in 170 million years of evolution. There is no evidence of another sentient species in the galaxy. </p><p class="MsoNormal">We should make the most of our abilities. We are unique, and have the opportunity to become something better than we are today.</p><p class="MsoNormal">13) I live in the Middle Ages, a time of war, disease, superstition and ignorance.<br />The Middle Ages will end when humankind is no longer organized into nations, when infectious disease is conquered, when most people no longer believe in spiritual beings and when education provides understanding, instead of belief and knowledge.</p><p class="MsoNormal">14) It’s critically important to know when the rules have changed.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>People in 1930s Europe didn’t realize that the rules had changed.</p><p class="MsoNormal">15) If you don’t have a better idea, it’s time to shut up.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>When someone is objecting to the solution to a problem, ask them for their alternative.</p><p class="MsoNormal">16) Three out of six people are completely honest. <br /> <span> </span><span> </span>Two out of six will bend the rules to their advantage.<br /><span> </span><span> </span> One out of six people will simply cheat.<br /> - From experience as an internal auditor, an unscientific sample.</p><p class="MsoNormal">17) The great ethical debate of the next century will be what rights to give to sentient machines. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>The great ethical debate of the following century will be what rights to give to sentient humans.</p><p class="MsoNormal">18) Justice delayed is injustice.</p><p class="MsoNormal">19) You can’t mop the floor clean with dirty water.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> <span> </span><span> </span></span>-Steak ‘n Shake manager, 1972.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>Ends and means are the same. There are no good ends achieved though bad means.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"><span> </span><span> </span> </span>- Modified from Jacob Bronowski.</p><p class="MsoNormal">20) Celebrate people who are different. Accept people you don’t understand. Tolerate people who are somewhat annoying. Confront people who are evil.</p><p class="MsoNormal">21) No one is solely responsible for their own success. Everyone is helped by other people along the way, and by the schools and institutions that enable them to succeed.<br />No business is solely responsible for its own success. Every business is only successful because society has created a landscape of fair opportunity, physical and commercial infrastructure and a legal framework that enable the business to succeed.<br />Successful individuals and businesses have a responsibility to pay forward the profits of their success, so that others can also succeed.</p><p class="MsoNormal">22) Anything worth doing requires practice.</p><p class="MsoNormal">23) You improve what you measure.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>- Ralph Dartez </p><p class="MsoNormal">24) You can’t write unless you have something to say.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>Decide what to say before you write.</p><p class="MsoNormal">25) Say the most important thing first.<br /> - Ed Buchwald</p><p class="MsoNormal">26) Everything you write will be improved by an editor.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> - Renee Frazee, former secretary </p><p class="MsoNormal">27) Get rid of commas and extra words whenever you can.</p><p class="MsoNormal">28) Explanations matter. <br />Science is a matter of finding explanations. An explanation is the identification, observation, measurement and communication about some process that changes physical reality. Explanations follow the structure of language, with subjects, objects, actions and descriptive modifiers.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span> </span>- Synthesis and expansion after David Deutsch, Jacob Bronowski and Ed Buchwald.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal">29) Empiricism isn’t science; it only works within the range of previous experience. <br />A good explanation has reach; it works outside the bounds of prior experience and extends to unexpected domains.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> - Modified from David Deutsch and Jacob Bronowksi.</p><p class="MsoNormal">30) Nassim Taleb’s Black Swans represent events outside of the previous range of experience. <br />“The Envelope” is the term used by test pilots to describe the range of previous testing parameters for an airplane Unexpected behavior often occurs outside of the envelope. Empiricism only works within the envelope of prior experience. Good explanations are needed to anticipate outcomes outside of the envelope of prior experience.</p><p class="MsoNormal">31) Doing something and doing enough are entirely different things.</p><p class="MsoNormal">32) People think and identify in dualities. <br />Examples: Communism or Democracy, mountains or seashore, truth or falsehood, good or evil, Republican or Democrat. Reality is more complicated.</p><p class="MsoNormal">33) Scientists come in two types, experimentalists and theoreticians. <br />Consider Aristotle vs. Plato, Galileo vs. Newton, Michelson vs. Einstein, Edison vs. Tesla. Neither can progress without the other. This is another example of a simplified but useful duality.</p><p class="MsoNormal">34) People think either in terms of what is seen and experienced, or in terms of underlying causes. It is difficult for the two types to communicate. <br />This difference corresponds to the “sensing” or “intuitive” types in the Myers-Briggs personality system. The sensing individual believes only what he’s seen and doesn’t look for underlying causes. The intuitive individual seeks to understand what he hasn’t seen and expects underlying causes. This distinction seems to represent the some of the biggest differences in human outlook, including political orientation.</p><p class="MsoNormal">35) There is a hierarchy in the ways that people comprehend the world: experience, belief, knowledge and understanding. Understanding is the highest level of comprehension, and fails less often than experience, belief, or knowledge. Experience is necessarily limited. Belief is without basis beyond historical precedent. Knowledge implies learning from authoritative sources, and is generally limited to outcomes. Understanding implies that you know how things work; you comprehend the physical processes producing a higher level result.</p><p class="MsoNormal">36) People hate to let go of knowledge they learned as a child.</p><p class="MsoNormal">37) Any number is meaningless without another number for context.</p><p class="MsoNormal">38) Anyone or anything of sufficient intelligence should be able to independently derive the golden rule. Some animals are sufficiently intelligent. Some people are not.</p><p class="MsoNormal">39) People who don’t give respect don’t deserve respect.</p><p class="MsoNormal">40) Democracy and free enterprise are the best known systems for political and economic organization, but these institutions only work in societies with high integrity, fairness and regard for truth. This is concerning for the United States in 2020.</p><p class="MsoNormal">41) Rome didn’t fall in a day.</p><p class="MsoNormal">42) Anyone who won’t face the world without a gun is either a bully or a coward.</p><p class="MsoNormal">43) Being a manager is largely about being a life counselor.</p><p class="MsoNormal">44) At any given time, one out of ten people is in an existential crisis, and has told somebody about it. Another one out of ten people is in crisis but hasn’t told anyone yet.</p><p class="MsoNormal">45) Being a manager is like being a custodian.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>You stay at the office after everyone else has gone home and clean up the mess that people made during the day.</p><p class="MsoNormal">46) Always learn the name of the custodian and thank them by name.</p><p class="MsoNormal">47) Always greet people by name.</p><p class="MsoNormal">48) People who think like dogs make great employees. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>People who think like cats wind up in prison.</p><p class="MsoNormal">49) Every small child is a genius in terms of learning, memory and creativity.</p><p class="MsoNormal">50) Every small child instinctively understands that this moment will never come again.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Adults mistakenly believe that there’s time to do things later.</p><p class="MsoNormal">51) Amateur music is good training for life. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>You learn to appreciate the good notes and ignore the bad ones.</p><p class="MsoNormal">52) It’s always darkest just before you stub your toe and fall down the stairs.</p><p class="MsoNormal">53) People are at their greatest risk of a tragic accident when they are on vacation or having fun.</p><p class="MsoNormal">54) The enjoyment of a bit of food is often inversely proportional to its size.</p><p class="MsoNormal">55) When you’re hiking up a mountain, most of the way you can’t see the top.</p><p class="MsoNormal">56) Always minimize the weight you are carrying when hiking. <br />You will enjoy the hike much more. But in dry country, always carry enough water. You can make that a life metaphor if you like.</p><p class="MsoNormal">57) It’s best to start hiking uphill and come down on the way home. <br />Also, start biking, canoeing or kayaking into the wind, and return with the wind at your back.</p><p class="MsoNormal">58) Always check the gas when you start an engine.</p><p class="MsoNormal">59) People consciously and unconsciously signal their status to other people. <br />One of our strongest signals is gender identity. </p><p class="MsoNormal">60) Women usually wear mittens. Men usually wear gloves. <br />Nothing they say about it actually explains the dichotomy. </p><p class="MsoNormal">61) If it’s important, write it down now.</p><p class="MsoNormal">62) The more hours I spend outdoors, the better I sleep.</p><p class="MsoNormal">63) For every proverb, there’s an equal and opposite proverb.<br />Examples: <span> </span>A) Look before you leap. B) He who hesitates is lost.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>A) A penny saved is a penny earned. B) You can’t take it with you.<br /><span> </span><span> </span> – Steve Robbins (son)</p><p class="MsoNormal">64) A good question carries with it the key to its own solution. <br /><span> <span> </span></span>– source unknown</p><p class="MsoNormal">65) When a reporter asks you for a comment, they’ve already decided what you are going to say.</p><p class="MsoNormal">66) If you are a public figure, no reporter is ever really your friend.</p><p class="MsoNormal">67) Propaganda works. <br />Confirmation bias is a very powerful force. Confirmation bias combined with propaganda forms a feedback loop leading to unreasonable denial of truth.</p><p class="MsoNormal">68) Most people are not interested in seeing both sides of an issue.</p><p class="MsoNormal">69) Most politicians only know how to get elected and have no idea how to govern.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>- Peggy Robbins</p><p class="MsoNormal">70) It is impossible for a politician to remain completely independent of the interests of his campaign donors. This is the reason for campaign finance reform.</p><p class="MsoNormal">71) When there’s only one way to say the truth, that’s how you have to say it.<br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>- Modified from Ed Sneed.</p><p class="MsoNormal">72) Truth is necessarily an approximation, operating over a given domain, and with a degree of uncertainty. But uncertainty does not mean falsehood. Objective truth (not absolute truth) exists.</p><p class="MsoNormal">73) Art is the deliberate creation of something that produces an emotional response in another person. Art is an intentional form of communication. Art requires an artist and an audience. </p><p class="MsoNormal">74) People come in distinct, different personality types, easily recognizable according to various systems (Briggs/Myers INTJ, etc.; Thinker/Doer/Socializer/Empathizer; Authority Centered/Peer Centered/Ego Centered; Ravenclaw, Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, etc.). Bu personalities are not fixed, but vary with time and context. A leader in the office may be a follower in the family, and yet another type in a social club.</p><p class="MsoNormal">75) The personality of a dog usually says something about the personality of its owner.</p><p class="MsoNormal">76) Everyone working a full-time job deserves to earn a living wage. A living wage is enough to comfortably raise a family. </p><p class="MsoNormal">77) Dog owners will never understand that the dog’s behavior toward a stranger is different than the dog’s behavior toward its family.</p><p class="MsoNormal">78) All cats are alike, which is why tigers will sit in boxes. <br />This is concerning because the biggest cats would like to eat you.</p><p class="MsoNormal">79) Every database has errors. The larger the database, the more errors there are.</p><p class="MsoNormal">80) Every question from a vice-president begins with “what” or “how”. Every question from the president begins with “who”.</p><p class="MsoNormal">81) The potential return from cutting costs is one-fold. The potential return from growth is unlimited.</p><p class="MsoNormal">82) There is value in redundancy. Redundancy provides resiliency, optionality, innovation and quality control. These benefits usually outweigh the costs.</p><p class="MsoNormal">83) There is value in diversity – of people, of systems, of approaches to problems. Like redundancy, diversity provides resiliency, optionality, innovation and quality control. </p><p class="MsoNormal">84) People make work for other people. Larger organizations have greater scope and flexibility, but less efficiency.</p><p class="MsoNormal">85) Every system has friction and inefficiencies. A rigorous program of eliminating inefficiencies may impair the primary function of the system.</p><p class="MsoNormal">86) The benefit of a risk decision should first be weighed against the impact of the potential loss, without regard to probability.</p><p class="MsoNormal">87) There’s a precursor event to every disaster, if anyone is paying sufficient attention.<br />Problems with the Titanic’s rivets were known before it hit an iceberg. Problems with the Shuttle O-Rings were known before the Challenger disaster. Problems with the Shuttle heat tiles were known before the Columbia disaster.</p><p class="MsoNormal">88) The most common cause of failure for risk appraisal models is correlated risk. <br />This was the cause of the financial crisis of 2008. The second most common cause is neglected experience.</p><p class="MsoNormal">89) The universe will keep teaching you the same lesson until you learn it. <br /><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>- Michelle Turner</p><p class="MsoNormal">90) In your previous life experience, you have never found the limit of how good or how bad a situation can be. <br />“You only think you’ve found the endpoint of the lowest quality oil in the Gulf of Mexico.” <br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>– Vic Beghini, President of Marathon Oil. (Note: Beghini was right.).<br />In any distribution there’s always a possible realization beyond what you have sampled. <br />In any situation, it’s always possible for things to be worse. </p><p class="MsoNormal">91) Variables in one dimension have a normal distribution. Variables in multiple dimensions (either physical dimensions or the product of one-dimensional variables) have a skewed, log-normal distribution. The greater the skew, the more likely the variable is due to multiple-parameters.</p><p class="MsoNormal">92) Most real-world distributions are log-normal in the middle, but distorted on the tails. <br />Distribution tails may be truncated by physical limits or fattened by some parameter outside of basic model.</p><p class="MsoNormal">93) No one can properly assess very low probability or very high probability events. <br />This is partly due to sampling theory, party human nature, and partly due to uncertainty about <span> </span>distribution tails. Strategic planning for these events should focus on scenarios rather than probabilities<span> </span>.</p><p class="MsoNormal">94) Truly random events happen in streaks.</p><p class="MsoNormal">95) There are more ways for things to go wrong than right. <br />This accounts for the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy), Murphy’s Law, and Tolstoy’s aphorism about happy and unhappy families. </p><p class="MsoNormal">96) It is in the nature of the human brain to sometimes make mistakes. <br />Thinking is a statistical process, involving thousands of synapses modulating thousands of others. The process is generally correct, but not always. – after Jacob Bronowski and Daniel Kahneman</p><p class="MsoNormal">97) Today’s geologists will spend the first half of our careers trying to get carbon out of the ground. We will spend the second half of our careers trying to put it back.<br /> - Me, circa 1990</p><p class="MsoNormal">98) Regarding climate change, if we all do a little, we will only do a little. <br /><span> </span>Large scale solutions are needed. <br /><span> </span><span> </span>- modified from David MacKay</p><p class="MsoNormal">99) Climate change solutions need to be efficient (affordable) scalable and timely. As of today, no such solutions exist. - Dr. Charles Hall, SUNY, circa 2009<br />More than a decade later, we are only a little closer to efficient, scalable solutions, and we are running out of time.</p><p class="MsoNormal">100) Risk factors are not all equal. <br />The risk on an oil prospect is calculated as the product of several component risks – source rock, reservoir rock, seal, trap, and timing. However, the risks are not of equal scope. The lack of a source rock condemns a basin; lack of reservoir, seal or poor timing condemns a play; lack of a trap condemns only a prospect. Risk factors occur in a natural hierarchy and should not be regarded as equal in developing an exploration program.</p><p class="MsoNormal">101) The main criterion for judging prospects should not be the chance of success on the exploration well, but the probability that if the exploration well is successful, the project will be successful. Delineation risk should be managed during the prospect generation and selection process.</p><p class="MsoNormal">102) A good prospect should have five elements. These elements constrain delineation and development risk. (AKA Robbins’ Rules.)<br /> > A prospect should be simple.<br /> > A prospect should be big (enough to be clearly economic if successful, and have a meaningful commercial impact to the company).<br /> > A prospect should be seismically visible.<br /> > A prospect should have a laterally continuous reservoir.<br /> > A prospect should be developed according to a conceptual model.</p><p class="MsoNormal">103) Every list in a business presentation starts with the author’s personal agenda, followed by several things that everybody knows and ends with the boss’s personal dogma. (See list above.)</p><p class="MsoNormal">104) The productivity and wealth of a nation depends on its energy usage and level of integrity. <br />Per capita GDP correlates very well with an index weighting energy usage by 2/3 and integrity (from Transparency International) by 1/3. See the “Wealth of Nations” post on my blog, Wonky Thoughts.<br /><a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2011/08/wealth-of-nations.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2011/08/wealth-of-nations.html</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">105) Your reputation is your most important asset.<br />- Steve Robbins (father, b. 1923)</p><p class="MsoNormal">106) No one can ever take your education away from you.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>- Steve Robbins (father, b. 1923)</p><p class="MsoNormal">107) A contract is meaningless without mechanisms for enforcement of its terms.<br /><span> </span><span> </span><span> - Ralph Dartez</span><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal">108) Buying and holding a low-cost stock index is the most effective investing strategy. <br />This is due to several simple truths: 1) you can’t time the market, 2) a broad portfolio performs best, 3) gains on held stocks compound without tax, and 4) you will minimize management fees.</p><p class="MsoNormal">109) If you have an investing idea but aren’t sure that you are right, do half of what you originally considered. This prevents inaction.</p><p class="MsoNormal">110) My grandfather dropped out of school at the age of 14 and started a real estate business with his older brother. He retired at the age of 89. He said that 75 years in real estate had taught him three things.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>1) Every house has cracks.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>2) Every house eventually sells.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>3) Something is only worth what someone else will pay you for it.<br /> <span> </span><span> </span> When I became older, I wondered if he meant this to be an analogy to people.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>1) Every person has flaws.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>2) There’s a suitable partner for every person.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>3) Your value as a person is measured by what you provide to others.</p><p class="MsoNormal">111) Human values inform the decisions and behavior of individuals and societies. There are first-order core values, and second-order values which logically follow from core values or the intersection of core values. <br />The following is a list of my values.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Empathy – Kindness, Compassion, Human Understanding, Care, Generosity<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Truth – Honesty, Integrity, Accountability<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Equity – Fairness, Justice, Respect, Diversity, Human Dignity, Opportunity, Democracy, Shared Prosperity<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Service – Work Ethic, Humility (do the little things), Productivity (produce more than you <span> </span><span> </span>consume).<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Progress – Science, Exploration, Technology, Physical Understanding, Globalism, Economic Development, Social Development, Peace<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Responsibility – Ethics, Family, Community, Care and Provision for Future Generations<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Conservation—Care and preservation of Nature for its own sake<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Liberty – Individual Freedom, Self-determination<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Self-regard – Courage, Reputation, Self-reliance, Challenge, Legacy, Productivity, Creativity</p><p class="MsoNormal">112) Here is a list of values I reject.<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Faith<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Patriotism<br /><span> </span><span> </span>> Nationalism</p><p class="MsoNormal">113) The creative personality is one that looks on the world as fit for change, and on himself as an instrument for change – Jacob Bronowski. </p><p class="MsoNormal">114) Creativity is a deliberate process used by clever people to solve problems, or for the pure joy of creation. There are many similarities between technical creativity and artistic creativity.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Here is a list of creative processes.<br />> Creativity begins with deep expertise in a field.<br />> The next step involves reframing the problem or the paradigm. A good question carries with it the key to its own solution (Law #54).<br />> Creativity often involves inversion of some part of the problem – or asking what would happen if you try exactly the opposite of what you’ve been trying to do.<br />> Visualize the problem from different vantage points, or before and after a process.<br />> Abstract thought (visualization) should alternate with analytical thought (measurement and calculation) in an iterative cycle.<br />> Depending on the problem, multiple solutions may be generated and evaluated before selecting an optimal solution, by some criteria.<br />> The creative work may come as a single inspiration, or a set of incremental innovations.<br />> The final step of any creative process is the realization and validation, through publication, construction or performance of the creative enterprise. – Modified after Betty Edwards</p><p class="MsoNormal">115) Here is a list of laws about photography.<br />> Avoid back-lighting. Put the subject of the photo in the best light, and focus on the subject.<br />> Try to achieve a range of brightness in the subject.<br />> Underexpose the photo; never overexpose. For landscapes, set the light setting by focusing on the sky. <br />> Check the background for distracting elements.<br />> Check that the horizon is horizontal.<br />> Never put the subject in the middle; follow the rule of thirds.<br />> Direct movement, facing and gaze toward the center of the photo.<br />> In landscapes, put an object in the foreground to create depth in the photo.<br />> Find complimentary colors.<br />> Look for patterns diverging or radiating from a point; look for repeating shapes or patterns at different scales.</p><p></p>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-82314517633457631802020-11-25T22:15:00.000-08:002020-11-25T22:15:13.566-08:00California Wildfires, Climate Change, and Lisa Murkowski Message #12<p> <b><u>Synopsis</u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski and James Hubbard, USDA
Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment, recently produced a
session of the Senator’s podcast, talking about the extraordinary wildfire
season in the Western US.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These public
servants failed to acknowledge man-made climate change as the ultimate cause of
the fire intensity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Increased fire size
and intensity were clearly forecast in the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change) Impacts report in 1990, thirty years ago.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The causes of increased fire intensity were
clearly identified in that report: higher temperatures and drought, leading to
low soil moisture, dry plants and deadwood, increased fuel loading and
increased lightning strikes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Every contributing
factor identified in the 1990 report has been realized and today’s wildfires
are larger and more intense as predicted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>To neglect the explanation for that intensification is
irresponsible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Murkowski and Hubbard
failed to inform the public, not only about what happened in 2020, but to warn
the public of future risks as CO2 emissions and climate change continue
unchecked.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Murkowski’s Message #12<o:p></o:p></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In September of 2020, California was wracked by some of the
largest and most destructive wildfires in its history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Senator Lisa Murkowski, in her role as chair
of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, met with James
Hubbard, USDA Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment, to
discuss the crisis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Senator Murkowski
posted audio of the twenty-minute interview as #12 in her series of Murkowski’s
Messages, available here:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="https://vimeo.com/459453081">https://vimeo.com/459453081</a><span class="MsoHyperlink">.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I listened to the entire discussion. There is practically no
mention of climate change, although Murkowski and Hubbard danced around the
topic, with Murkowski making a passing reference to “the changing
climate”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, they quickly brushed
that idea aside and focused instead on overstocked fuel conditions in the
forests.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Undersecretary Hubbard noted the persistence of abnormal
fire conditions in the western states, with Hubbard saying, “…it has been
developing for a long time, and it’s certainly going to be with us for a long
time….We can expect this kind of fire behavior for some time to come.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hubbard also noted the significance of high
heat and low humidity in intensifying the fires, and stated “This is unusual,
but I think we will see more of it.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For her part, Murkowski dismissed the idea of seeking causes
for the intense fires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Senator said
that others were asking, “Why are we seeing so much?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What can be done?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Who is responsible, and who is to blame?”,
but these were not questions she wanted to pursue.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In my view, this is deeply flawed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the contrary, these are exactly the
questions we must answer if we want to avoid even worse wildfires in the
future.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Incredibly, this talk by the Senator and the Undersecretary
avoided all mention of human-caused climate change, which is the most significant
factor in causing the disastrous Western wildfires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Let me be clear – the dry and hot weather
conditions of recent years in the West are due to the accumulation of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, principally CO2 from human use of fossil
fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hot and dry weather cause low
soil moisture, dry plants, and more deadwood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Low soil moisture causes excess fuel in the forest, and causes fires to
burn hotter and faster.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Undersecretary
Hubbard acknowledged, these conditions are strikingly different from the past
and will persist a long time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact,
these conditions will persist as long as elevated CO2 in the atmosphere
persists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Levels of atmospheric CO2 will
inevitably increase in coming decades, worsening the wildfire problem in the
West.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We are not likely to return to the
CO2 levels and climate conditions of the 20<sup>th</sup> century for another
century or more.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Forecast of Increased Wildfires, 1990 IPPC Impacts
Assessment<o:p></o:p></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For thirty years, we’ve been warned repeatedly that
human-caused climate change will result in more destructive wildfires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Beginning in 1990, each report of the ICPP
(Intergovernmental Committee on Climate Change, a UN agency) has warned about
the increasing danger of wildfires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
series of National Climate Assessments produced by the United States have also
highlighted the danger.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The 1990 IPCC Impacts Assessment lays out in explicit detail
how and why wildfires are becoming worse, depending on geography.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Temperatures are higher, and some areas are
subject to drought; these cause a number of second-order changes that intensify
wildfires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Later IPCC reports provide
even more area-specific forecasts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here
are a few quotes from IPCC 1990 Impact Assessment:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>"Losses from wild-fire will be increasingly
extensive" (Policy-Makers Summary, p. 2)</li><li>“Fire damage is expected to increase with the susceptibility
of forests.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even if precipitation
remains roughly the same, increased temperatures will lead to increased
evapotranspiration and thus drier sites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Warmer drier sites could have a higher incidence of severe fires,
especially where stands are in a state of decline because of climatic changes”
(p. 2-25).</li><li>“…blocking high pressure patterns, more lightning strikes
and increased fuel loadings are a dangerous combination causing more and larger
fires" (p. 2-25).</li><li>“Wildfire frequency and severity is expected to increase
throughout most of the unmanaged lands because of the projected increases in
available fuel as primary productivity increases and because of the increased
amount of dead fuel accumulating as a result of increased mortality” (p. 3-19).</li><li>“In those forested areas where there is a decrease in soil
moisture, drying of forest fuels will be enhanced, thereby increasing the
amount of available fuel”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(p. 3-20).</li><li>Increased fuel loading resulting from climate change was
forecast to cause a three-fold increase in the number of fires greater than
1000 hectares in the Sierra Nevada (p. 3-20).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li></ul><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Temperature, Precipitation and Fires in California,
2000 – 2020<o:p></o:p></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dr. Robert Rohde of Berkeley Earth compiled temperature and
precipitation data for the California fire season from 1895 to 2020.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The animation of the data can be found on Dr.
Rohde’s Twitter page, and is quite striking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The trend of increasing temperatures and decreasing precipitation across
the decades is quite evident in his chart, with 19 of the years from 2000 to
2020 occurring above the midpoint in temperature, and 12 of those 20 years
occurring in the hot and dry quadrant of the chart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The last two decades have also seen the
largest deviations from normal conditions of the preceding century.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<br />
Dr. Rohde also posted the ten largest fires and ten most damaging fires in
California’s history on the chart, by year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The year with the farthest excursion from normal temperature and precipitation,
2020, also had the worst fire record.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Other years with bad fire records, 2017 & 2018, were among the years
with the farthest excursion from normal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It’s worth noting that all of the large and destructive fires occurred
in the hot and dry quadrant of the chart.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjahd7ot8MFLt9uhGLTaTVCvf1d_KtVv8dJEPrV-2TKNtBehGRBWdQTnGbpM7P7e5VS_R6eFrbOBL28XrJ_5Q0nGKJPseZnBe9pdjoFI4LfpQ6YoyxyaIuNJ0yuEWolQ-CJWetbMnwhhLYN/s1278/California+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1278" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjahd7ot8MFLt9uhGLTaTVCvf1d_KtVv8dJEPrV-2TKNtBehGRBWdQTnGbpM7P7e5VS_R6eFrbOBL28XrJ_5Q0nGKJPseZnBe9pdjoFI4LfpQ6YoyxyaIuNJ0yuEWolQ-CJWetbMnwhhLYN/w640-h360/California+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Figure 1</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>California
temperature and precipitation, 1895 – 2020, with the ten largest fires and ten
most damaging fires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Chart created by
Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth, and used by permission.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Low soil moisture is a consequence of high temperature and
low precipitation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Most of the years
since 2000 have been marked by persistent drought conditions in the west.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The USDA published nationwide maps of drought
conditions, which have been seasonally persistent in the American West since
the year 2000.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>National Centers for
Environmental Prediction (NCEP), a department of NOAA, publishes maps of soil
moisture over the lower 48 states.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Relative soil moisture is shown as a percentile map with respect to
historical conditions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Maps of drought
conditions and soil moisture show persistent conditions that predispose the
West to high fire activity since the year 2000.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfanT-TfCNF66aEEEpANIGzG2jVO1V-IG7NTNvWR96iwPMugjeUIdRvjhK7o9FsI3pzT8_PBjFmZ7QOWNicHDyvRn6ML4mN9c6YDQs58-t_gP6Nf-iKJLqxymmLENn83imbK_hDYpDWvts/s2048/9_2020+drought+map.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1583" data-original-width="2048" height="494" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfanT-TfCNF66aEEEpANIGzG2jVO1V-IG7NTNvWR96iwPMugjeUIdRvjhK7o9FsI3pzT8_PBjFmZ7QOWNicHDyvRn6ML4mN9c6YDQs58-t_gP6Nf-iKJLqxymmLENn83imbK_hDYpDWvts/w640-h494/9_2020+drought+map.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Figure 2</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Drought
conditions, week of September 15, 2020, USDA map.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0QIDyxIkuhSBxsywHY1z6Q3y3yC15h49jxJO9jhLuE5AbTWej6UhiYnOCLdoh-CLsZvl_H4ynOPgG3ZCoTM-LhqKgCX_oS4raCX-OgYNnzUQNDYpXL0gVB8JZ21L9L4tKyJYtpppBxXkQ/s800/September+2020+soil+moisture_crop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="514" data-original-width="800" height="412" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0QIDyxIkuhSBxsywHY1z6Q3y3yC15h49jxJO9jhLuE5AbTWej6UhiYnOCLdoh-CLsZvl_H4ynOPgG3ZCoTM-LhqKgCX_oS4raCX-OgYNnzUQNDYpXL0gVB8JZ21L9L4tKyJYtpppBxXkQ/w640-h412/September+2020+soil+moisture_crop.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Figure 3</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Soil
Moisture Percentile (relative to history) September, 2020, map from NCEP, NOAA.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Of course, California was not the only place on earth to
experience severe fires in recent years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Dr. Rohde also prepared a similar chart of temperature and precipitation
for New South Wales, Australia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Although
Dr. Rohde did not include fire statistics on this chart, the decadal shift in
temperature and precipitation is clearly apparent on this chart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsI9o7dRSnpvjx0z3dwIiZr1UJOikeRM4Cg7_kpf7Ll4kC2RB2rIqVwlGqm6Jiq7bUUm9kVgxx38SgxEVf4uv4Dc5ib_XN1KstFJ40BbumNjhO03RsEcfcIYrDZk99fT25LlzCG3DlON1B/s1278/New+South+Wales+Summer+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1278" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsI9o7dRSnpvjx0z3dwIiZr1UJOikeRM4Cg7_kpf7Ll4kC2RB2rIqVwlGqm6Jiq7bUUm9kVgxx38SgxEVf4uv4Dc5ib_XN1KstFJ40BbumNjhO03RsEcfcIYrDZk99fT25LlzCG3DlON1B/w640-h360/New+South+Wales+Summer+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Figure 4</b>. New South
Wales temperature and precipitation, January – October, 1900 – 2019. Chart created by Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth, and used by permission.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In Alaska, Senator Murkowski’s home state, wildfires have
also been larger and more damaging. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Lightning
initiates most of the wildfires in the state.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It follows that increased thunderstorm activity results in more fires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The location of the state’s largest recent
fires, generally north and east of Fairbanks, corresponds with the highest
summer temperatures and increased thunderstorm activity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This information is documented in
communications by Rick Thoman, climatologist with the International Arctic
Research Center (IARC), Fairbanks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiikg5ZbvqC2uJFB4YNu3t4TqlYeXQlrxvj61PR04-s3MvRiZGIa13hQP2G4M3Yq35ONgGuKma1s_U-NGcUP5TB9YX_mk-5SUr1MzPNaeVthm0KIIdHD2ofkGQzf984bWiG8DFylkVS8rx2/s1500/Wildfire+alaska+acreage.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1500" height="384" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiikg5ZbvqC2uJFB4YNu3t4TqlYeXQlrxvj61PR04-s3MvRiZGIa13hQP2G4M3Yq35ONgGuKma1s_U-NGcUP5TB9YX_mk-5SUr1MzPNaeVthm0KIIdHD2ofkGQzf984bWiG8DFylkVS8rx2/w640-h384/Wildfire+alaska+acreage.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div><b>Figure 5</b>. Alaska
Wildfire Acreage, Season Total, 1950 – 2019.
Chart by Rick Thoman, IARC.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPWfPEyepouQ0Yj5ya_Rh3rbtlPEM6GeejgIKo9UoQF_HTB7lsKLpBu2SqrYRfTISNb5fxm5jQGfu-NcVrZrW22QpVnGKEN5PXjJ3dgyMJcG0UU6BnDlOK_SwzlYaax05v32eaXClE7wn-/s1500/Thunder+Fairbanks.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1500" height="384" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPWfPEyepouQ0Yj5ya_Rh3rbtlPEM6GeejgIKo9UoQF_HTB7lsKLpBu2SqrYRfTISNb5fxm5jQGfu-NcVrZrW22QpVnGKEN5PXjJ3dgyMJcG0UU6BnDlOK_SwzlYaax05v32eaXClE7wn-/w640-h384/Thunder+Fairbanks.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Figure 6</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fairbanks
Alaska, Annual Days with Thunder, 1952 – 2020.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Chart by Rick Thoman, IARC.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>Conclusion<o:p></o:p></u></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s clear that the scientific forecasts of wildfire intensity
in 1990 were correct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The processes
causing more intense wildfires are higher temperatures and lower precipitation,
which lead to low soil moisture, dry plants and more deadwood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Higher temperatures and low precipitation in
California and Australia are predictable consequences of human emissions of
greenhouse gases, which continue to accumulate in the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The conditions which lead to large,
fast-moving and destructive wildfires didn’t “just happen”, and will worsen in
coming decades.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Senator Murkowski and Undersecretary Hubbard failed the
public by not discussing the actual causes of the wildfires in their public
communications.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Explanations matter, and
causes matter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Senator Murkowski’s
questions -- “What can be done?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Who is
responsible, and who is to blame?” – are pertinent questions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Human emissions of CO2 are responsible;
consumers of energy are to blame.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And
the best thing to do is to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, significantly
and quickly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The physical processes of climate change are
well-established, proven science.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We’ve
known how it works for over 120 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We’ve had pretty good estimates for how much temperatures would change,
depending on how much CO2 was in the air, for almost as long.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The forecasts of more intense wildfires, made
30 years ago, have been entirely accurate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>At this point, in 2020, it is important for our public leaders to
acknowledge man-made climate change as the ultimate cause of intense wildfires,
and to give a credible warning that the situation will only get worse as
temperatures continue to rise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Senator
Murkowkski and Undersecretary Hubbard have done the public a disservice by
neglecting to address the cause of 2020’s extraordinary fire season, and to
give a warning for the future.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s time
for them to address the public truthfully.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><u>References</u></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Murkowski's Message #12 <a href="https://vimeo.com/459453081">https://vimeo.com/459453081</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Arrhenius, 1896, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the
Air upon the Temperature on the Ground<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf">https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Arrhenius, 1906, The Probable Cause of Climate Fluctuations <a href="http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Arrhenius%201906,%20final.pdf">http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Arrhenius%201906,%20final.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Climate Change, The IPCC Impacts Assessment, 1990 <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_II_full_report.pdf">https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_II_full_report.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Forest Fuels<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal">California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection <a href="https://californiasaf.org/policy/forest-fuels-management/">https://californiasaf.org/policy/forest-fuels-management/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">University of California Cooperative Extension<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="https://ucanr.edu/sites/fire/Prepare/Treatment/">https://ucanr.edu/sites/fire/Prepare/Treatment/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">California chapter of the Society of American Foresters <a href="https://californiasaf.org/policy/forest-fuels-management/">https://californiasaf.org/policy/forest-fuels-management/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Soil Moisture maps<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Soilmst_Monitoring/US/US_Soil-Moisture-Monthly.php">https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Soilmst_Monitoring/US/US_Soil-Moisture-Monthly.php</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Soilmst_Monitoring/US/Soilmst/Soilmst.shtml">https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Soilmst_Monitoring/US/Soilmst/Soilmst.shtml#</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Drought Maps<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Maps/MapArchive.aspx">https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Maps/MapArchive.aspx</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Australia's Climate in 2019<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/">http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Australia’s climate in 2019<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Australia's
warmest year on record, with the annual national mean temperature
1.52 °C above average<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Both
mean annual maximum and minimum temperatures above average for all States
and the Northern Territory<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Annual
national mean maximum temperature warmest on record (2.09 °C above
average)<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Widespread
warmth throughout the year; January, February, March, April, July,
October, and December all amongst the ten warmest on record for Australian
mean temperature for their respective months<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Significant
heatwaves in January and in December<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Australia's
driest year on record<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Nationally-averaged
rainfall 40% below average for the year at 277.6 mm<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Rainfall
below average for most of Australia<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Rainfall
above average for parts of Queensland's northwest and northern tropics<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Much
of Australia affected by drought, which was especially severe in New South
Wales and southern Queensland<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Widespread severe fire weather throughout the year; national annual accumulated Forest Fire Danger Index highest since 1950, when national records began</li>
</ul>Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-73763791154051183462019-12-21T20:36:00.002-08:002021-01-30T20:58:46.616-08:00Understanding the Source of Rising Atmospheric CO2<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
For the last time, increasing atmospheric CO2 is coming from fossil fuels, and not from volcanoes.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The concentration
of CO2 in the atmosphere is rising rapidly.
Before widespread burning of coal, circa 1750, atmospheric CO2 was about
280 parts per million (ppm). By 1955, global
CO2 concentration had risen to 314 ppm. Average
global CO2 levels are now about 412 ppm, and are still rising at about 3 ppm
per year. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Industrial
processes are able to change the composition of the earth’s atmosphere because
there really isn’t very much atmosphere, and there isn’t very much CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The atmosphere thins rapidly with altitude,
so that about half of the atmosphere is less than 3 miles above the earth, and breathable atmosphere extends only about 6 miles above the earth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Further, there isn’t very much CO2 in the
atmosphere – about 400 ppm, or 0.04%.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Nevertheless, that small amount of CO2 is very effective at blocking
thermal infrared radiation, which is why changing the CO2 concentration of the
atmosphere has already had a significant impact on global climate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGIy9CptN99FI56mLEl0h8AX3ccWDmDdevDi0A7Xbir44WZwEVZg4d1CMNVgtxrV2Ka0iIIQVKzPkn9JQprKgNChCt_tgCG9caGicndDsSqMteB-FeJYTt-q3vPn4EWW6mk_XKMWRn1yQu/s1600/atmosphere+2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="585" data-original-width="1600" height="232" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGIy9CptN99FI56mLEl0h8AX3ccWDmDdevDi0A7Xbir44WZwEVZg4d1CMNVgtxrV2Ka0iIIQVKzPkn9JQprKgNChCt_tgCG9caGicndDsSqMteB-FeJYTt-q3vPn4EWW6mk_XKMWRn1yQu/s640/atmosphere+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Figure 1.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There isn’t very much atmosphere, and there really isn't very much CO2. The pie-slice of CO2 in the second figure is exaggerated three-fold for visibility.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">A common myth
that circulates on social media is that rising CO2 in the atmosphere is coming from
volcanoes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> It isn't. </span></span><span lang="EN">I already wrote one
blog post about the origin of atmospheric CO2.
(</span><a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2017/06/volcanic-co2-emissions.html"><span lang="EN">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2017/06/volcanic-co2-emissions.html</span></a><span lang="EN">). </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">This blog post will
present additional evidence that rising CO2 is of human origin.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The evidence is: <u><span style="color: #1f4e79; mso-themecolor: accent1; mso-themeshade: 128;"><o:p></o:p></span></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span lang="EN">Declining oxygen
concentration of the atmosphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">The quantity of
missing oxygen</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">The location of
declining oxygen concentration by hemisphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">Volumetric data for fossil fuel emissions, deforestation, and volcanism, compared
to volumes of CO2 appearing in the atmosphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">The location of
rising CO2 by hemisphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">Changing carbon
isotopic composition of the atmosphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">The location of the declining carbon isotope measure (del C13) by hemisphere</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN">The steady rise of atmospheric CO2, whereas volcanic eruptions are intermittent (although slow emissions from non-eruptive events, mid-ocean ridges and rifts also occur). </span></li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN">Atmospheric CO2
is now also monitored by two orbiting carbon observatories (OCO), which
directly measure CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere and connect rising atmospheric
CO2 with points of origin.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The myth that volcanoes
are responsible for human-caused atmospheric disruption has been propagated since
the 1990s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The book “Merchants of Doubt”
provides a history of claims that volcanoes were responsible for destruction of
stratospheric ozone, or for acid rain in the US and Canada.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Those claims were thoroughly debunked long
ago.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nevertheless, articles attributing
rising CO2 to volcanoes still appear on climate-change denying websites, (e.g.
James Edward Kamis’ 2018 post on ClimateChangeDispatch). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Let’s look at the
evidence.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Fossil-Fuel
Combustion<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">When fossil fuels
are burned, atmospheric oxygen is converted to CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Consequently, the oxygen concentration in the atmosphere falls.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we quantify oxygen depletion in the
atmosphere, we find that it validates the volumes of fossil fuel consumption reported
by inventory methods (BP Statistical Review, CDIAC, EIA, etc.).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The volumes of CO2 determined by either method are approximately twice what is necessary to account for the observed rise in atmospheric CO2. The
remaining CO2 is dispersed into CO2 reservoirs in the oceans and biosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A full accounting of the CO2 flows on earth can be
found in the Global Carbon Project or Berkeley Earth websites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Simply stated, the
depletion of atmospheric oxygen quantifies CO2 emissions from fossil fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This volume of CO2 emssions more than accounts
for the rise in atmospheric CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There isn’t
any room for a significant contribution from volcanoes without somehow getting
rid of the CO2 from the combustion of fossil fuels in some as-of-yet
unidentified carbon sink (which is unlikely to exist).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Depletion
of Atmospheric Oxygen<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The amount of
oxygen in the atmosphere is falling (although not enough to cause trouble for
breathing).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Atmospheric oxygen is
falling because oxygen is consumed by burning fossil fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This would not occur if the source of rising CO2
was from volcanoes (Figure 2).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As seen
in the bulk CO2 and Del C13 charts, there is a strong seasonal signal in the
concentration of atmospheric oxygen, related to the growing season in each
hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The amplitude of the
seasonal cycle is somewhat stronger in the Northern Hemisphere, due to the
preponderance of temperate land-mass and agriculture.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDcCxPDH1xvgNSbE3io5JAKY_qy25hA-6RSWPgLBnJcHupQoO6Bi_fbz3gcQ2z5YNgj-BwIejPKgmU12L7sFg5pHWPrCbHFYJV3Q7tOOxeADMYY3DePDmskj9lUZJlbL_0QzewQDjEXboA/s1600/Oxygen.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="495" data-original-width="680" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDcCxPDH1xvgNSbE3io5JAKY_qy25hA-6RSWPgLBnJcHupQoO6Bi_fbz3gcQ2z5YNgj-BwIejPKgmU12L7sFg5pHWPrCbHFYJV3Q7tOOxeADMYY3DePDmskj9lUZJlbL_0QzewQDjEXboA/s640/Oxygen.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Figure 2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The concentration of atmospheric oxygen is
falling, due to combustion of fossil fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Per Meg (del O2/N2) can be roughly converted to ppm by multiplying
by 0.2095, the fractional concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A discussion of the Per Meg (del O2/N2) measure
can be found on the Scripps Institute CO2 website FAQs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The loss of 700 ppm of oxygen is a relatively
small change because of the greater abundance of oxygen in the atmosphere as
compared to CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The percentage of
oxygen in the atmosphere is about 20.95%; the percentage of CO2 in the
atmosphere is about 0.04%.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Oxygen
Depletion by Hemisphere <o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Falling oxygen
concentrations in the Northern Hemisphere lead falling oxygen in the Southern
Hemisphere (Figure 3).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is because
90% of fossil fuels are being burned in the Northern Hemisphere, consuming
oxygen in the Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Atmospheric mixing works to equilibrate oxygen concentrations, but
continuing combustion of fossil fuels in the Northern Hemisphere keeps oxygen
lower than in the Southern Hemisphere.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhilQAVhxEuhLvqBmXkVPOuWksXLS3MTEgHIS8rTOkZAGXxWsSOJZKvIlxtmAqJY_33KR13x_qjHB_BcEiTLML4rBD_qJvpzi5J4K4fUpQg_gfk-6Wk3ig7dRIrtl2elqBWi1tsxxTzjLWM/s1600/oxygen+smoothed.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="495" data-original-width="680" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhilQAVhxEuhLvqBmXkVPOuWksXLS3MTEgHIS8rTOkZAGXxWsSOJZKvIlxtmAqJY_33KR13x_qjHB_BcEiTLML4rBD_qJvpzi5J4K4fUpQg_gfk-6Wk3ig7dRIrtl2elqBWi1tsxxTzjLWM/s640/oxygen+smoothed.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 3.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Atmospheric oxygen recorded by Scripps
Institute network of atmospheric observatories.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The seasonal cycle at each station was
filtered with a 12-month rolling average.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Northern Hemisphere leads the Southern Hemisphere in falling oxygen.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Oxygen –
Carbon Stoichiometry<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The number of
molecules of oxygen disappearing from the atmosphere is a very close match to
the number of carbon atoms burned in fossil fuels and deforestation (Figure 4).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is a quantitative match, showing that for
each atom of carbon burned, one molecule of oxygen disappears from the
atmosphere, as C + 02 -> CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
depletion of atmospheric oxygen, in stochiometric balance with human carbon
combustion, validates the volume of CO2 released into the atmosphere by burning
fossil fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOs0tCFrEfHFQ3_1YcnUHBdP4hJrvQsL22IrcFjVMAP1cntyc9EjKLSwRwiTXebmox15X13OCm66KlBdoWY_yQmv54nuEhD_2fBGv4ykUKaDAgsVFGZYq1OrzxhbCrZ2rQdqrV1Mu_2p8B/s1600/Oxygen+stoichiometry.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1037" data-original-width="1420" height="466" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOs0tCFrEfHFQ3_1YcnUHBdP4hJrvQsL22IrcFjVMAP1cntyc9EjKLSwRwiTXebmox15X13OCm66KlBdoWY_yQmv54nuEhD_2fBGv4ykUKaDAgsVFGZYq1OrzxhbCrZ2rQdqrV1Mu_2p8B/s640/Oxygen+stoichiometry.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 4.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moles of carbon burned by fossil fuels and
deforestation annually, compared to atmospheric oxygen depletion in moles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The close match confirms that volumes of CO2
released from fossil fuels and deforestation are responsible for rising
atmospheric CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN">Moles of oxygen
depletion can be calculated by converting “per meg” to ppm (oxygen/atmosphere)
and assuming an initial volume of the total atmosphere of 1.81E+20 moles (various
Internet sources). Notes on the calculation
are given in the Appendix, following References.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Volumetric
Evidence<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">CO2 emissions
from gas, oil, coal, cement, flaring, and deforestation are now about 40 gt per
year, and forecast to go higher. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Estimates
and measurements of volcanic CO2 emissions are far smaller than known volumes
of CO2 from fossil fuels and deforestation (Figure 5).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Estimated volumes of volcanic CO2 include
deep carbon emissions, and passive emissions from continental rifts and
mid-ocean ridges.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Volcanic CO2 emissions
are only about 1.8% of human CO2 emissions by volume.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1q60qfZ5bvvwYjR5mpmByhSv__GHZQ6bmNRRd2nAPV1jEGAUJuvJoA_fdbjOUYklpO7dmM0TGRGXS7piNm_pMAHtV3IBk7D0zBpWoF83-ZDtAj_84jNvvs0znJ_qlE3R5-EQB0gQepinM/s1600/emissions+and+EIA+forecast.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1416" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1q60qfZ5bvvwYjR5mpmByhSv__GHZQ6bmNRRd2nAPV1jEGAUJuvJoA_fdbjOUYklpO7dmM0TGRGXS7piNm_pMAHtV3IBk7D0zBpWoF83-ZDtAj_84jNvvs0znJ_qlE3R5-EQB0gQepinM/s640/emissions+and+EIA+forecast.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 5.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Annual Human CO2 Emissions by type and
Volcanic CO2 Emissions, with EIA forecast to 2040.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Estimates of CO2 emissions from volcanic
activity have been revised significantly higher since the 1990s, as CO2
emissions from deep volcanic source, continental rifts and mid-ocean ridges
have been recognized and quantified.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Still, volcanic CO2 emissions are now estimated at about 700 million
tonnes, compared to about 40 gigatonnes of CO2 from fossil fuels and
deforestation.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Fraction of
CO2 Emissions Which Remain in the Atmosphere<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Only about 44% of
human CO2 emissions remain in the atmosphere; the rest of the CO2 is absorbed
by the oceans or taken up by plants.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Human CO2 emissions are more than twice what is necessary to account for
rising atmospheric CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since volcanic
CO2 emissions represent only 1.8% of human CO2 emissions, it is impossible for
volcanoes to account for the large volume of CO2 now appearing in the
atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(Figure 6).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNU77R2nUEiE4DRA9tTUry3XxXh1ZeB1yJsjMqH3BFXcY-IpbizLTv78hhFH6expu24enYh_c0uRuRW8XYhcit1RlBincn7ntZ_0_u3zLIe0k9ya6WLiZvvrjlSa4PUfivORwxmhisjYcp/s1600/Emissions+and+concentration.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNU77R2nUEiE4DRA9tTUry3XxXh1ZeB1yJsjMqH3BFXcY-IpbizLTv78hhFH6expu24enYh_c0uRuRW8XYhcit1RlBincn7ntZ_0_u3zLIe0k9ya6WLiZvvrjlSa4PUfivORwxmhisjYcp/s640/Emissions+and+concentration.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 6.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If all human CO2 emissions remained in the
atmosphere, atmospheric CO2 concentrations would rise about twice as fast as
what is observed (red line).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Actual
average global CO2 is rising at a rate of about 44% of cumulative human CO2
emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If only volcanic CO2 was entering
the atmosphere, atmospheric CO2 would rise only negligibly, offset by the
removal of carbon by natural processes.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Difference
in CO2 between Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and <br />
Comparison to Net CO2 Emissions from the Northern Hemisphere<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">About 90% of humans
live in the northern hemisphere, and 90% of human CO2 emissions originate in
the northern hemisphere. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Atmospheric CO2
concentrations in the northern hemisphere are consistently higher than CO2
concentrations in the southern hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The amount of the difference is
very close to the net CO2 emissions from fossil fuels in the northern
hemisphere (Figure 7).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The close
correspondence of net Northern Hemisphere CO2 emissions and the difference
between Northern and Southern CO2 concentration is partly a coincidence between
the mixing rate between the hemispheres and the reporting period for CO2
emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, the consistent fit
is a clear proof that fossil fuel emissions in the Northern Hemisphere are
principally responsible for rising CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
largest volcanic eruptions of the past 60 years have been in the Southern
Hemisphere, but these have made no impact on the record of atmospheric CO2.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRKQN_m-fmXzoPl7qCm-z11n8V8WG2exFf0if6_ELpLHwMhk9p-gTw-rVYRgJsp5868zjBR_S7OuujpAoIHaiAJeT8z1bWZJKdwE2WEwh2BuHFzZ_1gyrw9ew2ldSoP4uXrHxNxuyxCJ2P/s1600/N_S+Hemisphere+CO2+w+emissions.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRKQN_m-fmXzoPl7qCm-z11n8V8WG2exFf0if6_ELpLHwMhk9p-gTw-rVYRgJsp5868zjBR_S7OuujpAoIHaiAJeT8z1bWZJKdwE2WEwh2BuHFzZ_1gyrw9ew2ldSoP4uXrHxNxuyxCJ2P/s640/N_S+Hemisphere+CO2+w+emissions.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 7.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Northern and Southern Hemisphere CO2
concentrations, and net fossil-fuel emissions from the Northern
Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Major volcanic eruptions,
such as Mt. Pinatubo and Mt. Hunter in the Southern Hemisphere in 1991, are not
observed as a difference in CO2 observations between the hemispheres.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Carbon
Isotope Ratios in Atmospheric CO2<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Natural carbon
mostly occurs in two isotopes: C12 and C13.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Plants and all fossil fuels (which derive from plants) are enriched in
C12 by biological processes, giving fossil fuel emissions and deforestation a
“lighter” isotopic signature (more C12) than the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The measure of carbon isotopic ratios is </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12, typically </span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">called “del C13”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Samples which are relatively enriched in
“light” C12 have a negative del C13, while samples that are enriched in “heavy”
C13 have a positive del C13.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A technical
definition of del C13 is given at the bottom of the article, below the
references.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">In the 1950s, the
atmosphere had a del C13 value of about -7.5, reflecting a higher concentration
of C12 than the oceans, which has a del C13 of about zero.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As mentioned above, fossil fuels are enriched
in C12 with typical values in the range of -20 to -30.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Biogenic natural gas has been fractionated
twice, and may have del C13 values ranging from -40 to -70.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Volcanic emissions have a heavier isotopic
signature than the atmosphere, with a del C13 value of about -1 to -4.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The isotopic
composition of the atmosphere is steadily becoming lighter as CO2 concentrations
rise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is only possible if the
additional CO2 is from a source isotopically lighter than the atmosphere, not
heavier.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thus, fossil fuels, and not
volcanoes or the oceans, are the source of rising CO2 (Figure 8).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNln8JP_JqOt_wAjIgReM2-0MJ_85iwcyCL5J72JTb_qnapctGmPhUGF5P1i_qOInA5UpyExzKGWj7kNHj0KeFySkvoTHf3P9lR7uZNlTL0_1T0633yghbyrRr_r8N2B_LTjnW3E1jDzMi/s1600/isotopes.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNln8JP_JqOt_wAjIgReM2-0MJ_85iwcyCL5J72JTb_qnapctGmPhUGF5P1i_qOInA5UpyExzKGWj7kNHj0KeFySkvoTHf3P9lR7uZNlTL0_1T0633yghbyrRr_r8N2B_LTjnW3E1jDzMi/s640/isotopes.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 8.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Del C13 Carbon Isotopic Record of
Atmospheric CO2, recorded by the Scripps Institute.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The record is marked by a strong seasonal
cycle in the Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>During
the Northern Hemisphere growing season C12 is preferentially taken out of the
atmosphere by plants, and released back to the atmosphere in winter causing the
seasonal cycle in the air.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Overall, the
Del C13 index has fallen from -7.5 to -8.5 since 1977, showing an increasing
prevalence of light C12 (characteristic of fossil fuels and deforestation) in
the atmosphere.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">After filtering
the seasonal cycle, we see that the Northern Hemisphere leads the Southern
Hemisphere in falling Del C13 isotope ratio (Figure 10).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is because 90% of fossil fuel emissions occur
in the Northern Hemisphere. The remaining wavy signal in the Del C13 record
correlates to El Nino cycles (Figure 9), with a rapidly falling Del C13 ratio
during El Nino events, and a slightly rising Del C13 ratio during La Nina
events.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is unclear whether the El
Nino signal in the data is due to fractionation between atmosphere and ocean,
changes in the uptake of carbon in the ocean, or related climate events.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidGNQIyy4dyzfFPuuMtesg7X1kt1reYNW_vfP8qlY1MvxgIGs9E2jGlWDFBD6YbBpGVhI8G9BRfPiuKS7ifp36iLVFN_zEz0-UX3lE8-B9cR5tH4eg9olGQTKT-E506fE3Jwv3kAD02IhV/s1600/CO2+isotopes+smoothed.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1032" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidGNQIyy4dyzfFPuuMtesg7X1kt1reYNW_vfP8qlY1MvxgIGs9E2jGlWDFBD6YbBpGVhI8G9BRfPiuKS7ifp36iLVFN_zEz0-UX3lE8-B9cR5tH4eg9olGQTKT-E506fE3Jwv3kAD02IhV/s640/CO2+isotopes+smoothed.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figure 9.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Del C13 carbon isotope record in
atmospheric CO2, from Scripps Institute atmospheric observatories; the seasonal
cycle was filtered with a 12-month rolling average.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Broadly, the Northern Hemisphere leads the
Southern Hemisphere in falling Del C13, because 90% of CO2 emissions from
fossil fuels occur in the Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The residual long-wavelength signal relates to the El Nino/La Nina
cycle. [See an earlier post:<br />
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/carbon-isotopes-in-atmosphere-part-ii.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/11/carbon-isotopes-in-atmosphere-part-ii.html</a> ]<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Rate of Increase in Global Atmospheric CO2<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Atmospheric CO2 is steadily rising around the globe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Volcanic eruptions are intermittent; the largest eruption (Mt. Pinatubo) and the third-largest eruption (Mt. Hudson) of the past century both occurred in 1991, but there is no perceptible change in the rate of rising atmospheric CO2 (Figure 10).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Likewise, other large volcanic eruptions produced no perceptible impact over the period of detailed CO2 observations [Mount Agung (1963), Mt. St. Helens (1980), El Chichon (1982). Puyehue-Cordón Caulle (2011)]. Slow, *quiet*, emissions of CO2 also occur from non-eruptive events, mid-ocean ridges and onshore rifts, but these have been well quantified over the past 20 years, and do not contribute significant volumes of CO2 to the atmosphere.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1nZG7CUELz4znvRzkPJCvunbUySkw46P8ky19mACxW8wuMtYyDLcBHaod0fSdjsbfly9BzeWC3KtR74rxCMHq1SKBh_JmlFr8u8IOQVu7hwweUkmAeQGoTRC4eCfm2mwHkUnJT_vUwiO/s1600/2017+CO2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1nZG7CUELz4znvRzkPJCvunbUySkw46P8ky19mACxW8wuMtYyDLcBHaod0fSdjsbfly9BzeWC3KtR74rxCMHq1SKBh_JmlFr8u8IOQVu7hwweUkmAeQGoTRC4eCfm2mwHkUnJT_vUwiO/s640/2017+CO2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Figure 10. Global atmospheric CO2. </span><span color="windowtext"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span lang="EN">This is my version of the Keeling Curve.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Data is from the Scripps Institute network of atmospheric observatories.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Cool colors indicate stations in the Northern Hemisphere. Warm colors show stations in the Southern Hemisphere. Atmospheric CO2 falls in the Northern Hemisphere summer, as carbon is taken up by plants, and rises in winter as the plants decay.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is a strong seasonal cycle dominated by the Northern Hemisphere due to predominant location of temperate landmass and agriculture in the Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Apart from the seasonal cycle, CO2 has risen steadily from about 314 ppm in 1955 to about 412 ppm today.</span></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Orbiting
Carbon Observatories and NASA CO2 Modeling<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Two new NASA
satellites, OCO2 & OCO3, now provide worldwide continuous CO2
monitoring.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Data gathered by these
satellites will provide a detailed identification of the specific sources of
CO2 across the entire globe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrQzbXc6LVE"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrQzbXc6LVE</span></a><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">NASA also
prepared a supercomputer simulation of atmospheric CO2, based on ground-based
and aerial CO2 observations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A video of
the simulation can be seen on YouTube:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=33&v=x1SgmFa0r04&feature=emb_logo"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=33&v=x1SgmFa0r04&feature=emb_logo</span></a><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The simulation
highlights major CO2 sources, in the eastern US, eastern China, industrial
centers of central & eastern Europe, oilfields of western Siberia, and
wildfires in the Amazon rainforests (Figures 11A and 11B).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhFYVZScaQ9CP0Dn5tvGqTQ8-6D1bT-Z7LdoqO4w00Twe_JG1MGsCB7SmD9wz_ppGCGY-rMzrEopKeZw5K-9zb6Rof3o-AAHz3MfQZbRLGiXf8KwgQKrNRVSo8w7J3stm5ibtsVeLxDU6W/s1600/OCO1.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="867" data-original-width="1410" height="392" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhFYVZScaQ9CP0Dn5tvGqTQ8-6D1bT-Z7LdoqO4w00Twe_JG1MGsCB7SmD9wz_ppGCGY-rMzrEopKeZw5K-9zb6Rof3o-AAHz3MfQZbRLGiXf8KwgQKrNRVSo8w7J3stm5ibtsVeLxDU6W/s640/OCO1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-t0VATMrs9qZ1Tz9V5UAmRpJDx3xm5nBbHXR4hZsWPH3BrmGJbU0uCd_01OAoxSv27bUdsTopBb0NaAyJGyl9dj3bSUMQWQOCUJUKNwOLQTprnbV5Sjkq6ezL7gRgsMZmU4zU8OYtaqKP/s1600/OCO3.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="872" data-original-width="1404" height="396" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-t0VATMrs9qZ1Tz9V5UAmRpJDx3xm5nBbHXR4hZsWPH3BrmGJbU0uCd_01OAoxSv27bUdsTopBb0NaAyJGyl9dj3bSUMQWQOCUJUKNwOLQTprnbV5Sjkq6ezL7gRgsMZmU4zU8OYtaqKP/s640/OCO3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Figures 11A and 11B. Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations from NASA
supercomputer simulations for the year 2006.
The location of CO2 sources is apparent from cities, industrial centers,
and wildfires.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Rising CO2
concentrations are unquestionably from human sources, as a result of combustion
of fossil fuels and deforestation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There
is volumetric, temporal, isotopic, geographic, stoichiometric evidence
supporting human sources of rising atmospheric CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no evidence that volcanoes make a significant
contribution to rising CO2.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>References:</u></b><u><o:p></o:p></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Previous Posts on
Volcanic and Atmospheric CO2<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2017/06/volcanic-co2-emissions.html"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2017/06/volcanic-co2-emissions.html</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/08/forecast-of-future-carbon-dioxide.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/08/forecast-of-future-carbon-dioxide.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-keeling-curve-seasonal-co2-cycles.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-keeling-curve-seasonal-co2-cycles.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/04/modeling-global-co2-cycles.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/04/modeling-global-co2-cycles.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/long-term-trends-in-atmospheric-co2.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/long-term-trends-in-atmospheric-co2.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/seasonal-carbon-isotope-cycles.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/seasonal-carbon-isotope-cycles.html</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/keeling-curve-and-seasonal-carbon.html">https://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2012/03/keeling-curve-and-seasonal-carbon.html</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Posts on Twitter on Volcanic CO2</span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://twitter.com/dougrbbns/status/1128751236012838912"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">https://twitter.com/dougrbbns/status/1128751236012838912</span></a><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://twitter.com/dougrbbns/status/1106691152906842117"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">https://twitter.com/dougrbbns/status/1106691152906842117</span></a><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>External References:<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Scripps Institute CO2 Home<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/">https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Scripps Institute O2 Program<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/">http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Boden, et al, 2013, Global and National Fossil-fuel CO2
Emissions, in Global Carbon Atlas<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/content/fossil-fuel-emissions<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/docs/Public_Presentation_of_the_GCA_Paris_EN.pdf<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/" target="_blank">http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Burton et al, 2013, Deep Carbon Emissions from
Volcanoes<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.minsocam.org/msa/rim/RiMG075/RiMG075_Ch11.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.minsocam.org/msa/rim/RiMG075/RiMG075_Ch11.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Discussion of CO2 flux from subaerial volcanic eruptions on
page 332.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Total CO2 flux from volcanic sources: 637 mT per year,
p. 341, table 6.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 was the largest
volcanic eruption since 1912. That eruption produced ~50 Mt of CO2
(Gerlach et al. 2011). Individual eruptions are dwarfed by the
time-averaged continuous CO2 emissions from global volcanism. The
eruption of Mt. Pinatubo was equivalent to only 5 weeks of global subaerial
volcanic emissions. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The average volume of eruptive CO2 emissions over the past
300 years was only 0.1 cubic kilometers, which suggests an annual rate of about
1 million tonnes of CO2 annually (Crisp, 1984, cited in Burton).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
CO2 consumption from continental silicate weathering was 515
Mt/yr, (Gaillardet et al., 1999, cited in Burton).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Metamorphism accounts for the release of about 300 million
tonnes of CO2 annually. (Mörner and Etiope, 2002, Carbon degassing from
the lithosphere. Global Planet Change 33:185-203, cited in Burton). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lee et al, 2016, Massive and prolonged deep carbon emissions
associated with continental rifting, Nature Geoscience Letters, Jan.18,
2016. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf" target="_blank">http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paper accounts for additional CO2 emissions from East
African Rift, potentially bringing natural world CO2 emissions to 708 mT, an
increase of 11% from previous estimates.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Houghton, R.A. 2008. Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from
Land-Use Changes: 1850-2005. In TRENDS: A Compendium of Data on Global Change.
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html" target="_blank">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marland, G., T.A. Boden, and R.J. Andres. 2008. Global,
Regional, and National Fossil Fuel CO2 Emissions. In Trends: A Compendium of
Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview" target="_blank">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Erik Klemetti, 2015, Volcanic versus Anthropogenic Carbon
Dioxide: An Addendum, WIRED website.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.wired.com/2015/04/volcanic-versus-anthropogenic-carbon-dioxide-addendum/">https://www.wired.com/2015/04/volcanic-versus-anthropogenic-carbon-dioxide-addendum/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Pre-industrial atmospheric del C13 was about -6.5, and declined
following industrialization, in correlation with rising atmospheric CO2.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Individual Volcanic Eruptions</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Judy Fierstein, USGS, in Forbes, Ethan Siegel, "How Much CO2 Does a Single Volcano Emit?"</div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/">https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/</a></div></div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><b><u>Representative del C13 values from volcanism</u></b>:</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320194432_Isotopically_delta_C-13_and_delta_O-18_heavy_volcanic_plumes_from_Central_Andean_volcanoes_a_field_study">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320194432_Isotopically_delta_C-13_and_delta_O-18_heavy_volcanic_plumes_from_Central_Andean_volcanoes_a_field_study</a></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><b>Del C13 : -3.2</b></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><a href="https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL068499">https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL068499</a></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Del C13: -4.9 to -6.3</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225535635_First_13C12C_isotopic_characterisation_of_volcanic_plume_CO2">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225535635_First_13C12C_isotopic_characterisation_of_volcanic_plume_CO2</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Del C13: Currently -0.9 to -1.4; 1970s and 1980s ~ -4</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf">http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Del C13: -6 to -10. N.B.: These are samples of soil gases in a rift zone with known petroleum generation, and may be contaminated by thermogenic or biogenic CO2 deriving from petroleum sources.</b> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Faure, 1984, Principles of Isotope Geochemistry</u><br />
<b>Del C13: -2 to -6. </b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Volcanoes and CO2<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.volcanocafe.org/volcanoes-and-co2/">http://www.volcanocafe.org/volcanoes-and-co2/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.volcanocafe.org/volcanoes-and-co2-continued/">http://www.volcanocafe.org/volcanoes-and-co2-continued/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A good discussion of former and current estimates of CO2
emissions from volcanoes and fossil fuels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Also, a good recap of errors made by certain commentators in creating
and propagating the volcanic CO2 myth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, 2010, Merchants of Doubt. <o:p></o:p></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A deeply researched book about right-wing scientists, funded
by industry, working outside of their fields of expertise, tried to throw doubt
on science that might result in regulations in the interest of public health or
environmental protection.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The scientists
involved were generally retired, had worked in military science and were given
compensation or recognition in return for their efforts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Among the false narratives they created was
the idea that volcanoes were responsible for chlorine damage to stratospheric ozone,
and that volcanoes were responsible for acid rain in the US and Canada.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Neither idea is correct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The idea of blaming volcanoes for man-made
atmospheric disruption has now been extended to CO2 and climate change.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human
activities?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Climate.gov.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities">https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The following are examples of deliberately misleading
media articles about atmospheric CO2.<o:p></o:p></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Volcano eruption WARNING: Intense volcanic CO2 activity
'drives GLOBAL EXTINCTION'<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/973192/Volcano-eruption-warning-carbon-dioxide-CO2-extinction-climate-change">https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/973192/Volcano-eruption-warning-carbon-dioxide-CO2-extinction-climate-change</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Article omits mention of fossil fuels entirely.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
J.E. Kamis, 2018, Discovery Of Massive Volcanic CO2
Emissions Puts Damper On Global Warming Theory<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climatechangedispatch.com/massive-volcano-emissions-warming/">https://climatechangedispatch.com/massive-volcano-emissions-warming/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This article contains false claims.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Notably, the article claims that:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Natural volcanic and man-made CO2 emissions have the exact
same and very distinctive carbon isotopic fingerprint.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is therefore scientifically impossible to
distinguish the difference between volcanic CO2 and human-induced CO2 from the
burning of fossil fuels (<a href="https://www.skepticalscience.com/anthrocarbon-brief.html"><b>see here</b></a>).”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The reference provided (<a href="https://skepticalscience.com/anthrocarbon-brief.html">https://skepticalscience.com/anthrocarbon-brief.html</a>)
directly contradicts the claim!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“In fact
the global C13/C12 ratio has declined, which is very strong evidence the source
of the CO2 increase has was C12 enriched, ie, derived from photosynthesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Therefore it is very strong evidence that it
comes from the biosphere or fossil fuels, rather than from volcanoes or oceanic
outgassing.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Appendix<a href="https://twitter.com/dougrbbns/status/1128752870503772160/photo/1"><o:p></o:p></a></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Stoichiometry Calculations</u></b><br />
Annual fossil fuel emissions are reported in tonnes of CO2 by CDIAC, the BP Annual
Statistical Review of World Energy, and the EIA. One tonnes of CO2 (1000 kg) contains 22,722
moles of CO2. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Calculation Notes for atmosphere stoichiometry. The Scripps pages on units and FAQs are
helpful in understanding the use of the “per meg” unit, and conversion to
ppm. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/units-and-terms.html">http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/units-and-terms.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/faq.html">http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/faq.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Per meg” units of oxygen reported by Scripps can be
converted to ppm (oxygen/atmosphere) over small ranges by multiplying by 20.95%,
the current oxygen fraction in air. Parts
per million (ppm) of oxygen can then be converted to moles by multiplying by
the number of moles in the atmosphere (1.81E+20), from various Internet sources.
<a href="https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints3/976/">https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints3/976/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-line-height-alt: 12.8pt; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: #333333; font-size: 14pt;">A Few Words about CO<sub>2</sub> Carbon
Isotopes</span></b><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">There are two stable isotopes of
carbon, C13 and C12.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>C12 is the more
abundant isotope; the natural ratio of C12 to C13 is about 99 to 1. The
standard measure of carbon isotopes compares the C12/C13 isotope ratio of the
sample in question to the C13/C12 ratio of a standard limestone, according to
the expression:</span><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span></b><b><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12 = ((C13/C12
sample/C13/C12 standard) – 1)*1000.</span></b><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">This expression, commonly termed
“del 13”, amplifies small but meaningful differences in the isotopes, which are
diagnostic of certain processes and occurrences of carbon. The standard
is a uniform Cretaceous limestone with a </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> 13 value defined as zero. Positive values
indicate a heavier composition, i.e., a greater concentration of C13 than the
standard. Negative values indicate a lighter composition, i.e., a smaller
concentration of C13 than the standard.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white;">
<span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Plants fractionate carbon, favoring
the lighter isotope C12. Anything derived from plants, including oil,
gas, and coal (and algae, animals and people) carries a light (negative) </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12 signature.
Limestone carries a </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12
ratio near zero. The atmosphere, in 1977, had a </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12 ratio of about -7.5;
it is currently about -8.3, reflecting the influence of fossil fuels.
Oceans have a slightly positive </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12 ratio of dissolved inorganic carbon, although
Northern Hemisphere waters show a negative ratio due to the greater use of
fossil fuels in the Northern Hemisphere. Fossil fuel CO<sub>2</sub> emissions
and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from deforestation carry a very light </span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "symbol"; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">d</span><span style="color: #333333; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;"> C13/C12, often in the range
of -25 to -28 (although biogenic natural gas, which is fractionated twice, can
have del 13 value in the range of -40 to -70). The distinctive isotopic signature
of CO<sub>2</sub> from fossil fuels and deforestation is useful in
tracking the movement of carbon through the atmosphere and oceans. </span><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br /></div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-28349148707146018262019-07-20T23:27:00.000-07:002019-07-20T23:27:04.545-07:00Key References for Understanding Climate Change<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here are key references for understanding the cause and
evidence for global warming and climate change. Also included are references for some of the consequences with a focus on
Alaska.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some of the references link to
primary data (such as atmospheric data at Scripps); some assembly may be
required.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>CO2 Emissions<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Boden, Marland & Andres, Global and National Fossil Fuel
CO2, 2017<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/overview.html">https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/overview.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
BP Statistical Review of World Energy (annual fossil fuel
CO2 emissions, by nation & type)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html">https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
U.S. Energy Information Agency, Data Tables, U.S. Energy
Information Agency, Office of Energy Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington D.C. data tables, 2014<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/">http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Houghton 2008 (CO2 emissions from land use changes)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html">https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Burton, 2013 (volcanic CO2 emissions)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4e58/5f447a80c2965cb72c56945e4e9b2306833f.pdf">https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4e58/5f447a80c2965cb72c56945e4e9b2306833f.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lee 2016 (volcanic CO2 emissions)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290996133_Massive_and_prolonged_deep_carbon_emissions_associated_with_continental_rifting">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290996133_Massive_and_prolonged_deep_carbon_emissions_associated_with_continental_rifting</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
EIA World CO2 Emissions Forecast to 2050, International
Energy Outlook 2017<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Forecast CO2 Emissions by Region<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=10-IEO2017&sourcekey=0">https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=10-IEO2017&sourcekey=0</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
ForecastCO2 Emissions by Fuel Type – select appropriate
table.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/">https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Atmospheric CO2<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Global CO2 and del C13 isotopes. <a href="http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/cosub2sub-data">http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/cosub2sub-data</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Global O2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/">http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/</a> <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Formerly available at CDIAC. <a href="https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/">https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Heat Retention by Greenhouse Gases<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tyndall, 1861, 1872, cited in Arrhenius, 1906.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arrhenius, 1896, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the
Air upon the Temperature on the Ground<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arrhenius, 1906, The Probable Cause of Climate Fluctuations <a href="http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Arrhenius%201906,%20final.pdf">http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Arrhenius%201906,%20final.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA Greenhouse Gas Index.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Page includes formulas for predictive calculation of radiative forcing
as function of concentration, and a table for historical annual radiative
forcing for major greenhouse gases. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html">https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IPPC 5th Assessment Report, Anthropogenic Effective
Radiative Forcing history, pp 1404 – 1409.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Table includes historical radiative forcing for greenhouse
gases, and negative radiative forcing for cooling anthropogenic emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/">https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trenberth, et al, 2009, Earth’s Global Energy Budget.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/trenbert/trenberth.papers/BAMSmarTrenberth.pdf">http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/trenbert/trenberth.papers/BAMSmarTrenberth.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ramaswamy, et al 2001, Radiative Forcing of Climate Change.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/TAR-06.pdf">https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/TAR-06.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Ocean Heat Content<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/">https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content">https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://cpo.noaa.gov/warmingworld/sea_surface_temperature.html">https://cpo.noaa.gov/warmingworld/sea_surface_temperature.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/">http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.oceanscientists.org/index.php/topics/ocean-warming">https://www.oceanscientists.org/index.php/topics/ocean-warming</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Melting Ice <o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
National Snow and Ice Data Center<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://nsidc.org/noaa">https://nsidc.org/noaa</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA Global Ice Viewer<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/global-ice-viewer/#/">https://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/global-ice-viewer/#/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Global Cryosphere Watch<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://globalcryospherewatch.org/">https://globalcryospherewatch.org/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Antarctic and Greenland<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Gravity measure of Antarctic and Greenland Ice Loss<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IMBIE: Ice Sheet Mass Balance Inter-Comparison Exercise<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Antarctic and Greenland Ice-loss data preceding NASA GRACE
mission.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://imbie.org/">http://imbie.org/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA Ice-Bridge Project<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/icebridge/index.html">https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/icebridge/index.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Arctic Sea Ice<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Polar Science Center<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/">http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Chart with relative volume loss (km3) 1980 – 2018.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://nsidc.org/soac/sea-ice-age-year.html#seaiceagesequential">http://nsidc.org/soac/sea-ice-age-year.html#seaiceagesequential</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sequential maps of Arctic sea ice extent and thickness.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/extent/sea-ice/N/1">https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/extent/sea-ice/N/1</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sea Ice Data Portal<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/">https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA Arctic Report Card<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2018/ArtMID/7878/ArticleID/780/SeanbspIce">https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2018/ArtMID/7878/ArticleID/780/SeanbspIce</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Continental Glaciers<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
World Glacier Monitoring Service<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://wgms.ch/">https://wgms.ch/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
WGMS Global Glacier Change Bulletin 2013<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://wgms.ch/downloads/WGMS_GGCB_01.pdf">https://wgms.ch/downloads/WGMS_GGCB_01.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Zemp et al, 2019, Global glacier mass changes and their
contributions to sea-level rise from 1961 to 2016.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1071-0">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1071-0</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Permafrost</u></b><br />
Pacific Marine Environment Laboratory, NOAA<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/arctic-zone/detect/land-permafrost.shtml">https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/arctic-zone/detect/land-permafrost.shtml</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
UAF Geophysical Institute<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.gi.alaska.edu/research/snow-ice-and-permafrost">https://www.gi.alaska.edu/research/snow-ice-and-permafrost</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Jorgenson, 2006, Abrupt Increase in Permafrost Degradation
in Arctic Alaska<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228973531_Abrupt_increase_in_permafrost_degradation_in_Arctic_Alaska">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228973531_Abrupt_increase_in_permafrost_degradation_in_Arctic_Alaska</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
USGS, Alaska’s Thawing Permafrost<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/pdf_archive/cape_halkett_4web.pdf">https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/pdf_archive/cape_halkett_4web.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Warming Surface Temperature<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/">https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/gridded/data.noaaglobaltemp.html">https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/gridded/data.noaaglobaltemp.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/marineocean-data/noaa-global-surface-temperature-noaaglobaltemp">https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/marineocean-data/noaa-global-surface-temperature-noaaglobaltemp</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>General Climate Change<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Climate Dashboard, Climate.gov<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.climate.gov/maps-data#global-climate-dashboard">https://www.climate.gov/maps-data#global-climate-dashboard</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IPCC Fifth Climate Assessment, 2013<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/">https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IPCC Fifth Climate Assessment 2013, Executive Summary, 2013<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf">https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fourth National Climate Assessment, Vol. I and II, 2014<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.globalchange.gov/nca4">https://www.globalchange.gov/nca4</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.globalchange.gov/climate-change">https://www.globalchange.gov/climate-change</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Key findings of the 4th National Climate assessment, organized
by topic and by region. <a href="https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights#section-5683">https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights#section-5683</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA Climate Change<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/">https://climate.nasa.gov/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
JPL Satellite Data & Climate Models, Earth’s Energy
Balance, Oceans & Ice, Carbon & Water<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climatesciences.jpl.nasa.gov/">https://climatesciences.jpl.nasa.gov/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA Climate Change<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.noaa.gov/climate">https://www.noaa.gov/climate</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate-education-resources/climate-change-impacts">https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate-education-resources/climate-change-impacts</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.noaa.gov/categories/climate-change">https://www.noaa.gov/categories/climate-change</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
National Climate Data Center/NOAA<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/indicators.php">https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/indicators.php</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/">https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
USGS<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-are-some-signs-climate-change-1?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products">https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-are-some-signs-climate-change-1?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/07/trump-officials-deleting-mentions-climate-change-us-geological-survey-press-releases">https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/07/trump-officials-deleting-mentions-climate-change-us-geological-survey-press-releases</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
European Space Agency Climate Work<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Space_for_our_climate/ESA_s_Climate_Change_Initiative/(print)">https://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Space_for_our_climate/ESA_s_Climate_Change_Initiative/(print)</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cci.esa.int/">http://cci.esa.int/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
World Meteorological Organization, Global Climate Observing
System<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://public.wmo.int/en/programmes/global-climate-observing-system">https://public.wmo.int/en/programmes/global-climate-observing-system</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Sea Level<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lambeck et al, 2014, Sea level and global ice volumes from
the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/111/43/15296">https://www.pnas.org/content/111/43/15296</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
R. Rohde, K. Fleming, Post-Glacial Sea Level<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://twitter.com/RARohde/status/1107919079699087360">https://twitter.com/RARohde/status/1107919079699087360</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA Sea Level<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Zemp et al, 2019, Global glacier mass changes and their
contributions to sea-level rise from 1961 to 2016.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1071-0">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1071-0</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
University of South Florida Satellite Oceanography Laboratory<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://xena.marine.usf.edu/~chambers/SatLab/Home.html">http://xena.marine.usf.edu/~chambers/SatLab/Home.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and
Washington<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nap.edu/read/13389/chapter/4">https://www.nap.edu/read/13389/chapter/4</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nap.edu/read/13389/chapter/5">https://www.nap.edu/read/13389/chapter/5</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Chambers et al, 2016, Evaluation of the Global Mean Sea
Level Budget<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
between 1993 and 2014<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cerfacs.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/GLOBC-Article-Chambers_etal_2016-1.pdf">http://cerfacs.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/GLOBC-Article-Chambers_etal_2016-1.pdf</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
French Space Agency, Satellite Altimetry Data website<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.aviso.altimetry.fr/en/data/products/ocean-indicators-products/mean-sea-level/msl-science-issues.html">https://www.aviso.altimetry.fr/en/data/products/ocean-indicators-products/mean-sea-level/msl-science-issues.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA, New study finds sea level rise accelerating<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2680/new-study-finds-sea-level-rise-accelerating/">https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2680/new-study-finds-sea-level-rise-accelerating/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Alaska and Arctic Climate Change<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
UAF Research<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.uaf.edu/research/">https://www.uaf.edu/research/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
UAF International Arctic Research Center<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://uaf-iarc.org/">https://uaf-iarc.org/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alaska Oceans Observing System<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.aoos.org/">http://www.aoos.org/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arctic Research Consortium of the United States<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.arcus.org/">https://www.arcus.org/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rick Thoman, at 2019 Weather and Climate Summit, (time
marker 1:58 to 3:12)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHxQ2E7yYs8&feature=youtu.be">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHxQ2E7yYs8&feature=youtu.be</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rick Thoman, A Century of Alaska Weather and Climate,
Science for Alaska Lecture Series<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk8gCCzPbNg">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk8gCCzPbNg</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Climatologists on Twitter: <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rick Thoman, IARC, <a href="https://twitter.com/AlaskaWx">https://twitter.com/AlaskaWx</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Brian Brettschneider, UAF, <a href="https://twitter.com/Climatologist49">https://twitter.com/Climatologist49</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Zach Labe, UC Irvine, Cornell, <a href="https://twitter.com/ZLabe">https://twitter.com/ZLabe</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Robert Rohde, Berkeley Earth, <a href="https://twitter.com/RARohde">https://twitter.com/RARohde</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Ocean and Food-Chain Stress<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Seabird Die-off<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nps.gov/subjects/aknatureandscience/commonmurrewreck.htm">https://www.nps.gov/subjects/aknatureandscience/commonmurrewreck.htm</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2017/09/11/hundreds-of-dead-birds-found-on-bering-sea-shores/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2017/09/11/hundreds-of-dead-birds-found-on-bering-sea-shores/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2018/08/10/alaska-seabird-die-off-continues-for-another-summer/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2018/08/10/alaska-seabird-die-off-continues-for-another-summer/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whale Deaths<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2019/05/31/spike-in-gray-whale-deaths-triggers-federal-investigation-into-unusual-mortality-event/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2019/05/31/spike-in-gray-whale-deaths-triggers-federal-investigation-into-unusual-mortality-event/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Declining Humpback Migration and Calving<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.pacificwhale.org/research/citizen-science/great-whale-count/">https://www.pacificwhale.org/research/citizen-science/great-whale-count/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Seal Die-off<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2019/06/12/noaa-investigating-unusually-large-numbers-of-dead-ice-seals-along-alaskas-coast/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wildlife/2019/06/12/noaa-investigating-unusually-large-numbers-of-dead-ice-seals-along-alaskas-coast/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Krill and Mussel Die-off<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2019/07/07/add-krill-and-mussels-to-the-list-of-unusual-marine-deaths-in-northwest-alaska/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2019/07/07/add-krill-and-mussels-to-the-list-of-unusual-marine-deaths-in-northwest-alaska/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Pink Salmon Die-off<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2019/07/12/warmer-waters-investigated-as-cause-of-pink-salmon-die-off-in-norton-sound-region/">https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2019/07/12/warmer-waters-investigated-as-cause-of-pink-salmon-die-off-in-norton-sound-region/</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br /><br />
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-62851989594605633192018-06-27T23:10:00.000-07:002018-07-06T01:14:51.360-07:00Global Heat Budget #3 – Ice<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is the third in a series of posts about the global heat
budget.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ice is melting around the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Greenland’s ice cap is melting. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Antarctica’s ice cap is melting. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Arctic sea ice is melting. Continental
glaciers are melting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Arctic permafrost
is melting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The melting is happening at
a rate that is readily visible to people who live near natural ice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From decade to decade and year-to-year, glaciers are visibly retreating, and can be directly verified by the most casual
observer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Melting ice is the second most important heat sink on the
planet, after the ocean (albeit a distant second).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Melting ice accounts for about 3% of
anthropogenic heat retained in the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Melting ice is the second most significant proof that human-caused
climate change is happening.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Melting ice
may be the most significant consequence of climate change in terms of costs
and damage to humanity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The data is unambiguous and irrefutable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The volumes of melted ice have been measured
by a variety of methods, including high accuracy satellite measurements.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The heat required to warm and melt this
volume of ice can be calculated and compared to the heat trapped in the
atmosphere by greenhouse gases, and the rising heat content of the oceans.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The volume of meltwater entering the ocean
can also be compared to measurements of rising sea level. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> The rate of sea level rise is already 3 times the rate of the past 7500 years, and accelerating. </span><b>The observed volumes of melting ice and the measurement of rising sea level provide unambiguous proof that climate change
is real.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Greenland</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ice on Greenland is melting.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Greenland covers an area one-fifth the size of Australia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Almost all of Greenland is covered by ice,
ranging between 1 and 2 miles of ice thick.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Greenland Ice sheet contains more than 2.8 million cubic kilometers
of ice. That is enough to make sea level rise by 20 feet if it all melted.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA’s GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) satellites
have monitored the mass of the Greenland ice cap since 2002.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Gravity observations were supplemented by
altimetry and radar data from overflights and satellites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Other satellite observations include NASA’s
early ICESat, and the ESA’s currently operating CryoSat2.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQLCEaVbc7HQlHFgeEB7LXWz3_vosBCQk-2ecKfmbQ0FkGKWGTsTnIxLg2T0SfbQ3dwK0mAKV4qVvBnsxC_69Fe5LUccHdMkopEl9n5vWzZOS7Jw89uJdwdmB-b2P3O2JnsFEVuCUdUoNa/s1600/Greenland+Ice.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1069" data-original-width="1500" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQLCEaVbc7HQlHFgeEB7LXWz3_vosBCQk-2ecKfmbQ0FkGKWGTsTnIxLg2T0SfbQ3dwK0mAKV4qVvBnsxC_69Fe5LUccHdMkopEl9n5vWzZOS7Jw89uJdwdmB-b2P3O2JnsFEVuCUdUoNa/s400/Greenland+Ice.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a strong seasonal signal in the history of ice loss
from Greenland, with a slight build in ice mass during the Northern Hemisphere
winter, and a stronger decline in the summer. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From 2002 to 2016, Greenland lost about 3900
gigatonnes of ice due to melting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Each gigatonne is a little more than one cubic kilometer of ice by volume, and produces one cubic kilometer of fresh water when it melts. </span>Altimetry data show that most of the melting was concentrated near the
coast, particularly on the western side.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Six feet to fourteen feet of ice has melted around the edges of the entire
island.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The GRACE satellite, designed for only a five-year life,
actually worked for nearly fifteen years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The last data was recorded in June 2017.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The replacement mission, GRACE Follow-On, is scheduled to be launched in
five days, on May 19<sup>th</sup>, 2018.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA’s IceBridge is an airborne project using laser
altimetry and ice-penetrating radar data to measure the elevation, snow cover,
and total thickness of Greenland and Antarctic ice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>IceBridge will provide data to connect and
calibrate data from the new GRACE satellites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>IceBridge was originally designed to replace data from the ICESat satellite, which failed after seven years of service.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ICESat-2 is planned to be launched in
September, 2018, to replace ICESat.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Antarctica</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ice on Antarctica is melting.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Antarctica is about seventeen times larger than Greenland,
and nearly twice as large as Australia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Ice covers 98% of the continent, to an average thickness of over a
mile.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Antarctica holds about ten times
the volume of ice as Greenland.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If all
of the ice on Antarctica melted (which would require centuries to occur), it
would raise sea level by about 200’, placing most of the world’s major cities and human habitation under water.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The GRACE data for Antarctica is noisier than the data for
Greenland and shows a weaker seasonal cycle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It seems likely that the melting season over Antarctica is not (yet) as
profound as over Greenland.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As with Greenland, the Antarctic ice sheet has been
monitored by NASA’s Grace and ICESat satellites, and the IceBridge aerial
observation program.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Earlier
observations were integrated by the European Space Agency’s IMBIE (ice sheet
mass balance comparison exercise) to provide the ice balance record from 1992
to 2010.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The chart showing both IMBIE
data and GRACE data is shown below.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From
1994 through 2017, at least 2450 gigatonnes of ice on Antarctica melted.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKGWp9RTQ3RHZaD4-Yk12QOCsInYLz8jgMz89Ap5jJq1-LUfqTkAg_urGMEZM3a1Qwnmj-uG3YYhiPRiqVuloNGTNYARMJj_QSGbGcaBEBNl2_Cq9FcGRMn1US8UJpJj21A0yRmpxAEzh3/s1600/Antarctic+Ice.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1030" data-original-width="1422" height="288" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKGWp9RTQ3RHZaD4-Yk12QOCsInYLz8jgMz89Ap5jJq1-LUfqTkAg_urGMEZM3a1Qwnmj-uG3YYhiPRiqVuloNGTNYARMJj_QSGbGcaBEBNl2_Cq9FcGRMn1US8UJpJj21A0yRmpxAEzh3/s400/Antarctic+Ice.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I should note that gravity methods will not detect ice loss
on the portions of the ice sheet that are floating (and more susceptible to ice
loss).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ice floating on water will have
the same net density as ice-free water.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So,
altimetry methods must be combined with gravity methods for a full
determination of ice loss on Antarctica.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The East Antarctic (Filchner-Ronne) and West Antarctic (Ross) ice
shelves are approximately 900,000 square kilometers in area.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dozens of smaller ice shelves also exist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The actual loss of ice from Antarctica may be
greater than 2450 gigatonnes, because losses from these floating ice shelves
are not detected by gravity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While melting of floating ice shelves is difficult to
observe, it is also true that the melting of floating ice will not cause sea
level to rise, at least as a first-order consequence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The same buoyancy of ice shelves that makes sea-ice loss invisible to gravity detection means that sea level does not change
when a volume of ice is converted to water.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Melting ice shelves matter to the earth’s heat budget, but not
(directly) to sea level.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The rate of future ice loss in Antarctica depends on feedback
mechanisms.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The principle feedback
mechanism is the restraining force that ice shelves exert on flowing
glaciers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ice shelves impede the flow of
ice from the continent and into the ocean; when those shelves melt, the rate of
ice loss will accelerate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The timing and
amount of acceleration are unpredictable, so the best estimates of future sea
level rise are uncertain on the high end.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>We are fairly certain about the minimum expected sea level rise, but the
maximum possible sea level rise is very uncertain.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Antarctic Sea Ice<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For many years, Antarctic sea ice was not subject to the
declines seen in Arctic sea ice (seen in the next section).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This was often referenced in commentaries on
climate-change deniers’ web sites.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
recent years, Antarctic sea ice <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">has</i>
declined, but it is likely to continue to show an irregular response to climate
change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason is simple.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Antarctic sea ice is regularly replenished by
calving from Antarctic glaciers and ice shelves.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Anyone with tour-boat experience in Alaska
knows that sea ice actually increases following calving events.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So, with a huge reservoir of ice in the
Antarctic ice cap, Antarctic sea ice is likely to fluctuate, but not disappear,
as the mother-lode of ice continues to flow and break apart, feeding the sea
ice around the continent.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjX355CVc1Xb6Izo-BL98PFbfWM7EBgLXa1Gt9NWZgyf2GexlwvXFOa0MJ9FXapaA4B6fHlBWi-_XG1DtYrII2Odenb9-LDPlvwN4xri4OLid4fF3_UKNvqcFbJcIYWAvOJa7ABxMJeG_YX/s1600/Antarctic+Sea+Ice.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1260" data-original-width="1600" height="315" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjX355CVc1Xb6Izo-BL98PFbfWM7EBgLXa1Gt9NWZgyf2GexlwvXFOa0MJ9FXapaA4B6fHlBWi-_XG1DtYrII2Odenb9-LDPlvwN4xri4OLid4fF3_UKNvqcFbJcIYWAvOJa7ABxMJeG_YX/s400/Antarctic+Sea+Ice.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Arctic Sea
Ice</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arctic Sea Ice is melting.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In contrast to Antarctica, the Arctic has no mother-lode of
ice feeding the polar sea ice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The sea
ice freezes and melts in a seasonal cycle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>For the past forty years, each cycle has ended with less ice, on
average, than the previous cycle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
loss of ice has accelerated over that period.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There was about 250,000 square miles less sea ice in the 1990s than
during the 1980s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From the 1990s to the
2000s, the decadal average showed a loss of about 500,000 square miles of sea
ice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The annual data from the current
decade suggests an even greater rate of loss.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_6ZN7vdokjzSmnzfbqUXcaq6nSkoQPnMhq6BIw5kCWcczvQEnjLrev4Mnu6Dc6xlu_wE-V7YM1dSq25u8y0I9bt3CzYgcGPKo3NxXBxY6Vt9JcPaerBnw6yRXaBsRmQus9jk58enOtggR/s1600/Arctic+Sea+Ice.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1260" data-original-width="1600" height="315" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_6ZN7vdokjzSmnzfbqUXcaq6nSkoQPnMhq6BIw5kCWcczvQEnjLrev4Mnu6Dc6xlu_wE-V7YM1dSq25u8y0I9bt3CzYgcGPKo3NxXBxY6Vt9JcPaerBnw6yRXaBsRmQus9jk58enOtggR/s400/Arctic+Sea+Ice.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQuMv96XH85cNdbdx_5R-Pv3wxzpIv7wDFZyiDL8f-4Xor8Nipv9M_O5wO0A2vO5aUcZ59CtKZOdDcKo1FlRtjO9CVPKUk0mhsgb-mV70iYQJNBXRZimllOThUL5PaFTVCJwj3SRP0b8RH/s1600/Arctic+Sea+Ice+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1061" data-original-width="1352" height="313" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQuMv96XH85cNdbdx_5R-Pv3wxzpIv7wDFZyiDL8f-4Xor8Nipv9M_O5wO0A2vO5aUcZ59CtKZOdDcKo1FlRtjO9CVPKUk0mhsgb-mV70iYQJNBXRZimllOThUL5PaFTVCJwj3SRP0b8RH/s400/Arctic+Sea+Ice+1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Area is not the only measure of sea ice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some sea ice persists through multiple
seasons, gaining thickness from season to season.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, against the background rate of
general melting, less and less ice persists from season to season, and the
overall thickness of Arctic sea ice is also declining.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Between 1984 and 2016, 94% of the sea ice more
than four years old had disappeared.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE00_-H4S80rrDgB6lpQwk73MKH2yLlGijCXfd8vHvVRHPrzspqL9iU9h53Ykv7ZClupQ-cJJY8eE9CeYxlhi4paXcwWwXsoXPyK4PF6RcEMzM7aQ7cMAEZHTgxT3oLKCsPau46fMIRhPt/s1600/Picture1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="984" data-original-width="1500" height="261" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE00_-H4S80rrDgB6lpQwk73MKH2yLlGijCXfd8vHvVRHPrzspqL9iU9h53Ykv7ZClupQ-cJJY8eE9CeYxlhi4paXcwWwXsoXPyK4PF6RcEMzM7aQ7cMAEZHTgxT3oLKCsPau46fMIRhPt/s400/Picture1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">Image by M Tschudi and S. Stewart of the
University of Colorado, and W. Meier and J. Stroeve of NSIDC.</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some researchers have attributed 30 percent to 50 percent of
the loss of Arctic sea ice to natural variability, and 50 to 70 percent to
anthropogenic influences, including direct warming by greenhouse gases, and the
second-order influence of atmospheric circulation patterns.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Overall, Arctic sea ice has declined by 12,000 cubic
kilometers since 1980.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As noted in the
section about Antarctica, there is no sea level impact due to the melting of
floating ice, but there is an impact on the earth’s heat budget.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">The loss of sea ice in some of the peripheral seas of the Arctic Ocean (Chukchi Sea, Bering Sea, Barents Sea, and others) is more evident. </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYgjkC__yJSltmMeqYTQOkpx8XhxLxMPOEJDri4Sk3c7AulmvJk_PyZPLM2wCf9MTawt2z5Cep3_U_lwmzYjIgwfwn79gcZF1cC0pg7atKDngFXzlftrlhhQMh9SzAAc2bE4V_lxybZqu5/s1600/Bering+Sea+Ice+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="574" data-original-width="960" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYgjkC__yJSltmMeqYTQOkpx8XhxLxMPOEJDri4Sk3c7AulmvJk_PyZPLM2wCf9MTawt2z5Cep3_U_lwmzYjIgwfwn79gcZF1cC0pg7atKDngFXzlftrlhhQMh9SzAAc2bE4V_lxybZqu5/s400/Bering+Sea+Ice+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit, Rick Thoman, National Weather Service, Fairbanks</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Continental Glaciers<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Continental glaciers are melting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
People who live near glaciers are well aware of the
historical and current melting of glaciers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In Alaska and Western Canada, popular glaciers often have signposts or
old photographs showing the earlier extent of the glaciers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some examples are the Columbia Ice Field in
Alberta between Banff and Jasper National Parks, and in Alaska, Root Glacier
near Kennecott mine, Exit Glacier near Seward, Portage Glacier and associated
glaciers near Anchorage, and the many tidewater glaciers along the Alaskan
coast, including Glacier Bay near Juneau, College Fjord near Valdez, the
glaciers of Kenai Fjords National Park, and Columbia Glacier near Valdez.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Glaciers are in retreat, on a scale which is
noticeable from year to year and dramatic over the course of decades.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The UN Glacier Monitoring Service and its predecessor
organizations have measured the melting of continental glaciers, other than
Greenland & Antarctica.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>WGMS issued
major reports in 2008 and 2015; each report shows overwhelming evidence of melting
of glaciers worldwide.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>WGMS includes
data on about 100,000 glaciers, with digital outlines of about 62,000 glaciers;
data on glacier fluctuation includes over 35,000 length observations for nearly
2000 glaciers (as of 2008).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Detailed
mass balance observations are conducted on a smaller number of reference
glaciers (including the most volumetrically significant glaciers).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Data from reference glaciers are extrapolated
to other glaciers on the basis of regional association, altitude and latitude.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7idpLX3EwwWZxTeHvGKii4hxi0jObSjE4_c2xJLeG5nmcUPWhl524uG21EiIOWEfpko-lojwC_3_gjCdnqJ_bgq-DM0WYB99OwqfP7ost7IPglcxn0lLqajor3KW-Wh3SMlt9gTbscGsS/s1600/Continental+Glaciers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1140" data-original-width="1345" height="338" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7idpLX3EwwWZxTeHvGKii4hxi0jObSjE4_c2xJLeG5nmcUPWhl524uG21EiIOWEfpko-lojwC_3_gjCdnqJ_bgq-DM0WYB99OwqfP7ost7IPglcxn0lLqajor3KW-Wh3SMlt9gTbscGsS/s400/Continental+Glaciers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
At any given time, a small number of glaciers are growing,
due to natural fluctuations of snowfall, warmth, and air circulation. But the
great majority of glaciers worldwide are melting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Annoyingly, the WGMS does not report summary ice loss in
terms of cubic kilometers or gigatonnes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Glacial Mass Balance is reported in terms of meters of water equivalent,
a vertical measure of average ice melted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Volumes of melted ice can be calculated from the reported total area of
glaciers under study.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Those volumes can
then be used for purposes of understanding the global heat budget and sea level
rise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Sea Level</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The earth entered a period of cyclic ice ages about 3
million years ago. The last 600,000
years have been characterized by ice age cycles of about 100,000 years,
apparently triggered by variations in earth’s orbit. The influence of the orbital cycles is
enhanced by feedback mechanisms, including CO2 and the reflectivity of
ice. The peak of the last glacial cycle
occurred only about 20,000 years ago, and remnants of ice may have persisted in Ontario until about 8,000 years ago.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Deglaciation following the last ice age was mostly complete
by 8000 years ago.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We know this from
studies of sea level and sediment cores.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Sea level rose by about 80 meters between 14,000 years ago and 8000
years ago, an average rate of 1.3 cm/year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>From 7500 years ago to the 20<sup>th</sup> century, sea level rose only
5 meters, a rate of 0.07 cm/year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Through the 20<sup>th</sup> century, sea level
rose at about 0.2 cm/year, a significant increase over the background rate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Satellite data over the past 25 years shows
that sea level rise has accelerated to 0.35 cm/year, five times the rate of sea level rise for the past 7500 years. This is a clear indication that global
warming from human greenhouse gases is contributing to melting ice.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhocyEAGUf70KBUTAJU_kZqx-SPdKwZooqZN1X5zaE52ZH6xgvf_32q2eJwntU5I8MjmMvrdlqFlMjY77w7hk0OCebZaLemXf6T7xH4FypRYAWvjxvS5u_vWd8PZz-tVvBspxbl-0F9-dbY/s1600/Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="359" data-original-width="526" height="272" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhocyEAGUf70KBUTAJU_kZqx-SPdKwZooqZN1X5zaE52ZH6xgvf_32q2eJwntU5I8MjmMvrdlqFlMjY77w7hk0OCebZaLemXf6T7xH4FypRYAWvjxvS5u_vWd8PZz-tVvBspxbl-0F9-dbY/s400/Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Additional heat retained by greenhouse gases will result in
a faster rate of melting ice, and higher sea level rise. Current forecasts of sea level rise range
from about 2 feet to 8 feet by the end of the century. Sea level rise of only 4 to 6 feet would seriously damage some coastal communities around the world, including the inundation of barrier island and low-island communities.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Heat Budget</u><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>From 2003 to 2016,
greenhouse gases retained 1.6 x 10</b><b><sup><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">23</span></sup> joules</b>
of heat in the atmosphere, according to tables of radiative forcing published
by NOAA (<a href="https://esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html">https://esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html</a>). This figure for anthropogenic heat does not
include the effect of cooling or warming aerosols, primary heat from fossil
fuels and deforestation, or other minor sources of heat. Estimates for some of these other anthropogenic
disturbances are found in the IPCC 5 report, but only through the year 2011.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We have good estimates of the cumulative ice lost from
Antarctica, Greenland, Arctic sea-ice and Continental Glaciers from 2003 to
2016, due to high-quality satellite observations. About 10,400 gigatonnes of ice was lost over
that period. <b>The heat required to warm (+10 C) and melt that volume of ice is 3.7 x
10</b><b><sup><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">21</span></sup> joules, or about 2.3% of the total
heat retained by greenhouse gases.</b>
The allocation of heat to warm the ice by 10 degrees C was to reflect
heating of an equivalent amount of ice, which has not yet melted. Average temperatures of -10 C from core-holes
in Greenland and Antarctica were taken as the ambient temperature of ice before
melting. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Considering that about 2.9% of the earth’s surface is covered by ice, this seems like a reasonable distribution of greenhouse heat which is going to warm and melt ice. Looking forward, if a higher percentage of heat goes towards melting ice, sea level will necessarily rise faster. Possible reasons for faster melting of ice could be more rapid ice flow from Antarctica and Greenland. This might occur as the base of the ice is lubricated by meltwater, or when restraining ice shelves are lost around Antarctica.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Antarctica and Greenland<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA GRACE Ice Mass, Antarctica and Greenland<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Grace Data<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Wiese, D. N., D.-N. Yuan, C. Boening, F. W. Landerer, and M.
M. Watkins (2017) Antarctica Mass Variability Time Series Version 1 from JPL
GRACE Mascon CRI Filtered. Ver. 1, PO.DAAC, CA, USA. Dataset accessed
[2017-06-07] at <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5067/TEMSC-ANTS1">http://dx.doi.org/10.5067/TEMSC-ANTS1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IMBIE: Ice Sheet Mass
Balance Inter-Comparison Exercise<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Integrated Methods Measuring Ice Mass<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://imbie.org/">http://imbie.org/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Arctic Sea Ice<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arctic Sea Ice Volume<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a href="http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/">http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/</a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Chart with relative volume loss (km3) to 1980. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/extent/sea-ice/N/1">https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/extent/sea-ice/N/1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Charts of Arctic Sea Ice Extent by Month<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2018/05/arctic-winter-warms-up-to-a-low-summer-ice-season/">https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2018/05/arctic-winter-warms-up-to-a-low-summer-ice-season/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Image of declining multi-year Arctic Sea Ice. Image by M Tschudi and S. Stewart of the
University of Colorado, and W. Meier and J. Stroeve of NSIDC.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a href="http://earthsky.org/earth/decline-of-arctics-thickest-sea-ice">http://earthsky.org/earth/decline-of-arctics-thickest-sea-ice</a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Arctic Sea Ice<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Multi-year ice grows up to 4 meters thick, while single-year
ice is 2 meters thick at most.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_Hlk486943693"></a><a href="http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/climate-change-arctic-lost-nearly-95-of-its-old-ice-since-1984/story-XJiOVQT3bMeqN4NVrz67KJ.html">http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/climate-change-arctic-lost-nearly-95-of-its-old-ice-since-1984/story-XJiOVQT3bMeqN4NVrz67KJ.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
the area covered by
Arctic sea ice at least four years old has decreased from 1,860,000 square
kilometres in September 1984 to 110,000 square kilometres in September 2016.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Continental Glaciers<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://wgms.ch/downloads/WGMS_GGCB_01.pdf">http://wgms.ch/downloads/WGMS_GGCB_01.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
World Glacier Monitoring Service bi-annual update, 2015<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a href="http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/141/2013/tc-7-141-2013.pdf">http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/141/2013/tc-7-141-2013.pdf</a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Volume estimate for Glaciers and Ice sheets (other than
Antarctica and Greenland.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br /></div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-84343491435112744562018-04-21T19:16:00.001-07:002018-05-02T01:10:45.151-07:00Global Heat Budget #2: Oceans<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The world’s oceans are warming. Ocean warming is the strongest confirmation
that greenhouse gases are warming the planet. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The heat capacity of water is among the highest of common
substances.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That means that water can absorb
a large amount of heat while its temperature changes only slightly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The measurable warming of the world’s oceans
indicates that a very large amount of heat has come from somewhere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The only credible source for so much heat is
the retention of heat by atmospheric greenhouse gases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Let’s look at the source of the data, and the
numbers.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>ARGO Oceanographic Program</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rising ocean temperatures have been measured by
oceanographic surveys since the 1970s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However,
these ocean surveys were limited in geographic coverage and continuity of data
acquisition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A more comprehensive
system, ARGO, was put in place beginning in the early 2000s, with improvements
and new deployments continuing today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Today, ARGO consists of nearly 4000 floats which continuously measure
ocean temperature, salinity, density and currents from the surface to 2000
meters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIfmzwpOAemN6yoBGM4Z57qg1QhvSfTb1karK-MSULr375tr1gWIUR8gzFHsnmo0W3Gqz2xzmfhihB1R4NT71tZKBaVcvLqQrp66-YuZ4XP4HDdGGsj0BrDQNYjbJuLOgDfMw9FGtyEiVK/s1600/ARGO+2.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="291" data-original-width="627" height="296" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIfmzwpOAemN6yoBGM4Z57qg1QhvSfTb1karK-MSULr375tr1gWIUR8gzFHsnmo0W3Gqz2xzmfhihB1R4NT71tZKBaVcvLqQrp66-YuZ4XP4HDdGGsj0BrDQNYjbJuLOgDfMw9FGtyEiVK/s640/ARGO+2.gif" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
ARGO floats measure temperature to an accuracy of
two-thousands (0.002) of a degree Celsius.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The floats are “parked” at 1000 meters, and every ten days submerge to
2000 meters and return to the surface, where data is broadcast to satellite
receivers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The system provides
comprehensive coverage worldwide except for polar latitudes, and continuous
measurements.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Ocean *Weather* <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Like the atmosphere, ocean temperatures are seasonal,
cyclic, variable, and turbulent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
large number of ARGO floats was designed to adequately measure and characterize
the variable temperatures of the ocean.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
volume of data acquired allow scientists to make maps of the changing water
temperature and calculate the total heat content in the ocean.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYCEs2eNgOywC5hVv1gLLzbBdN_8LIWBvkPuV13Et5FZf-d4GXG1TNdh4td7TG8PrKcsfjfOvkL8G8zuf0VTkaIxcHWoR4B9x28cyvt745ZZ06PmEtIgFd_L34r3Okfgb9c7XsZjq8J01C/s1600/t_an_20092009_13.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="420" data-original-width="700" height="384" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYCEs2eNgOywC5hVv1gLLzbBdN_8LIWBvkPuV13Et5FZf-d4GXG1TNdh4td7TG8PrKcsfjfOvkL8G8zuf0VTkaIxcHWoR4B9x28cyvt745ZZ06PmEtIgFd_L34r3Okfgb9c7XsZjq8J01C/s640/t_an_20092009_13.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Observations<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Surface temperatures are warming the fastest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>NOAA presents charts of average ocean
temperature and ocean heat content according to water depth, based on ARGO
observations and earlier oceanographic studies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Surface waters (0 – 100 m) have warmed by about 0.6 degrees
C on average since the late 1960s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEima4WtHlza4RQABGSVtOB-Y5CFjXeOSRLgegczPcqw16O8P3LtzAVwIoQjHW6POomsJnYFqA-GtRP7NVX5lTgBHYvNB_5rZ3L_UEoAVutbuxE9U_s4BDQoTHsmEdOpSJ1SY-WHXrlYBKLr/s1600/meantemp_0-100m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="567" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEima4WtHlza4RQABGSVtOB-Y5CFjXeOSRLgegczPcqw16O8P3LtzAVwIoQjHW6POomsJnYFqA-GtRP7NVX5lTgBHYvNB_5rZ3L_UEoAVutbuxE9U_s4BDQoTHsmEdOpSJ1SY-WHXrlYBKLr/s640/meantemp_0-100m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Intermediate waters (0 – 700 m) have warmed by a little over
0.2 degrees C on average since the late 1960s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEwFIM9ZP10mXNTfIe14oL3TjBNBfnSSQeQ2a-yFsWIA8wKD8Yibp7eVIFq4G4gEHrBH0YU8ueIEpZZaJ4-nXCR2U1DLBcMZ4JRdxeH1YbSGdSJA2iVq-KnVRduYq8Hwh6t-0eFBJcGkHH/s1600/meantemp_0-700m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="567" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEwFIM9ZP10mXNTfIe14oL3TjBNBfnSSQeQ2a-yFsWIA8wKD8Yibp7eVIFq4G4gEHrBH0YU8ueIEpZZaJ4-nXCR2U1DLBcMZ4JRdxeH1YbSGdSJA2iVq-KnVRduYq8Hwh6t-0eFBJcGkHH/s640/meantemp_0-700m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Relatively deep waters (0 – 2000 m) have warmed by about 0.1
degree C on average, since the late 1960s.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD09VKRGLBYHDAOP_OHxplXCcZDcCE7xrsDwq8hlRzNxpLCKa_4_vQn5Dk88O8zmm9jLgHZRxL2VpOewmia8sexd83eo6eYMAEmxgkTJDFCpFjid2IZG_GNE20BYZwQdBFE-nw-c4KqM9b/s1600/meantemp_0-2000m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="567" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD09VKRGLBYHDAOP_OHxplXCcZDcCE7xrsDwq8hlRzNxpLCKa_4_vQn5Dk88O8zmm9jLgHZRxL2VpOewmia8sexd83eo6eYMAEmxgkTJDFCpFjid2IZG_GNE20BYZwQdBFE-nw-c4KqM9b/s640/meantemp_0-2000m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Over all depth increments observed, the rate of warming
seems to be slightly increasing.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Heat Content<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The changing heat content of the ocean is a simple function
of the change in temperature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The heat
capacity (or specific heat) of water represents the amount of heat required to
change the temperature of a given volume of water.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From an observed change in temperature, we
can back-calculate the amount of heat that has entered the ocean.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The density and heat capacity of water change slightly with
pressure (and water depth). NOAA has calculated
the heat content of the ocean over various depth intervals from the temperature data and heat capacity. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The heat content of the ocean at intermediate depths (0 –
700 m) has increased by about 2 x 10<sup>23</sup> joules since the late
1960s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGsjI5ikKHfmrkhWbTVtzDFt0zKxUIY_SeCPGt3wXfioI5Wx_k-8dY6BMxQSEazeXuMhW-IGTaQjGZcaVS8w_RqaPCQZYYLr5Mux_Tq08-bUaNHfn2zoYUWLDZl5nwzpY0GTypODxt1Tww/s1600/heat_content55-07.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="566" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGsjI5ikKHfmrkhWbTVtzDFt0zKxUIY_SeCPGt3wXfioI5Wx_k-8dY6BMxQSEazeXuMhW-IGTaQjGZcaVS8w_RqaPCQZYYLr5Mux_Tq08-bUaNHfn2zoYUWLDZl5nwzpY0GTypODxt1Tww/s640/heat_content55-07.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The heat content from the surface to 2000 meters (0 – 2000 m) has
increased by about 3 x 10<sup>23</sup> joules since the late 1960s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This means that the heat content over the
interval from 700 m to 2000 m has increased by about 1 x 10<sup>23</sup>
joules, about half of the increase in heat content at intermediate water
depths.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFeIdC-x3O9gL-l3bpYfYEKqeThC4Z5YOEZVyMPgGogGU7WOx7h__ioNLHNHvPQL1jwlwUOcdIvgCm8xHlhoRPxZHrvb8Nn0_H4Rz_OKX9WrAjZCz5Ua1xlTQ7nTcOfYowh8vRISImFdT_/s1600/heat_content2000m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="566" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFeIdC-x3O9gL-l3bpYfYEKqeThC4Z5YOEZVyMPgGogGU7WOx7h__ioNLHNHvPQL1jwlwUOcdIvgCm8xHlhoRPxZHrvb8Nn0_H4Rz_OKX9WrAjZCz5Ua1xlTQ7nTcOfYowh8vRISImFdT_/s640/heat_content2000m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Source of Increasing Heat<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA unfortunately did not report temperature change or heat
content in separate depth intervals, but only in overlapping intervals of 0 –
100 , 0 – 700, and 0 – 2000 meters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Starting from the average change of temperature for each interval, I
calculated the heat content for 0 – 100 m, 100 – 700 m, and 700 – 2000 m.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My figure for total heat content calculated
from temperature change exceeds the heat content reported by NOAA by 14%,
probably due to errors in my single-point values for temperature or heat
capacity over these depth intervals.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>LINK Excel.Sheet.12
"C:\\Users\\Doug\\Documents\\Blog Working\\Climate Heat Budget\\Ocean Heat
Content.xlsx" Sheet1!R5C2:R8C8 \a \f 4 \h<span style='mso-spacerun:yes'>
</span>\* MERGEFORMAT <span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 624px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 30.75pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"></td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="60"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Temp
Rise (C)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 63.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="84"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Volume
(km3)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 53.85pt;" valign="bottom" width="72"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Density
(g/cc)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.65pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Mass
(kg)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Heat
Capacity (J/kg-C)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 30.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Change
in Heat Content (J)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0 -
100 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="60"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0.6<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 63.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="84"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">5.23E+07<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 53.85pt;" valign="bottom" width="72"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.025<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.65pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">5.10E+19<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3928.00<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.20E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0 -
700 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="60"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0.2<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 63.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="84"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3.69E+08<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 53.85pt;" valign="bottom" width="72"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.034<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.65pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3.57E+20<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3421.50<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">2.44E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0 -
2000 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="60"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0.1<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 63.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="84"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.36E+09<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 53.85pt;" valign="bottom" width="72"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.329<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 58.65pt;" valign="bottom" width="78"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.02E+21<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 13.5pt;" valign="top" width="18"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3339.04<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">3.41E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]--><!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>LINK Excel.Sheet.12
"C:\\Users\\Doug\\Documents\\Blog Working\\Climate Heat Budget\\Ocean Heat
Content.xlsx" Sheet1!R10C2:R13C5 \a \f 4 \h<span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>\* MERGEFORMAT <span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 492px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 29.25pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 29.25pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="bottom" width="120"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Intervals<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 29.25pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 76.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="102"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Change
in Heat Content<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 29.25pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Percent
of Heat Change<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 29.25pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 121.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="162"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Change
in Heat Content per 100 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="bottom" width="120"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">0 -
100 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 76.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="102"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.2E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">35%<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 121.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="162"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.2E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="bottom" width="120"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">100 m
- 700 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 76.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="102"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">1.2E+23<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">36%<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 121.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="162"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">2.1E+22<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="bottom" width="120"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">700 m
- 2000 m<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 76.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="102"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">9.6E+22<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">28%<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 121.5pt;" valign="bottom" width="162"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">7.4E+21<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a large difference between the heat gained in the
upper 100 meters of the ocean and the heat gained at deeper levels by
equivalent volume.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The ocean is clearly
heating from the surface downward.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>About
35% of the total heat increase has occurred in the upper 100 meters of the
ocean, about 36% in the next 600 meters, and about 28% in the next 1300
meters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Research on deep ocean currents shows
that heat is also being introduced into the deep ocean by currents, rather than
by conduction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The geographic distribution of ocean heating also shows
atmospheric influence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The ARGO ocean
data shows distinct heating anomalies between 30 and 40 degrees of latitude,
north and south.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These are the
down-welling points of large atmospheric convection cells termed Hadley cells.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You can see atmospheric circulation in
observations of ocean warming.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbika5O4RwEmrLBj-MHo_UqXEZNjaNoxqF7hwi9iccc5YC5TstGhtuYdO4d9RXVqj0HndO8MYXeNMelWNMefATjRbF4PGBxTqXv6FTLF1wlRviFnTsdtzvIcmih_nHPZiQSNeqVJJv2EG9/s1600/Hadley+cells+Ocean+heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1127" data-original-width="1502" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbika5O4RwEmrLBj-MHo_UqXEZNjaNoxqF7hwi9iccc5YC5TstGhtuYdO4d9RXVqj0HndO8MYXeNMelWNMefATjRbF4PGBxTqXv6FTLF1wlRviFnTsdtzvIcmih_nHPZiQSNeqVJJv2EG9/s640/Hadley+cells+Ocean+heat.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first post in this series quantified anthropogenic heating
and cooling, primarily from greenhouse gases, particularly CO2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This post looked at the largest heat sink on
earth – the oceans. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Net Anthropogenic heat absorbed by the planet from 1970 to 2016 was about 3.4 x 10<sup>23</sup>
joules. Over the same period, the heat
content of the oceans has increased by about 3.0 x 10<sup>23</sup> joules. Anthropogenic heat is the only credible source for the heat appearing in the ocean, and the warming oceans confirm that greenhouse gases are, in fact, warming the planet. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> -------------------</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Global Heat Budget #1: Anthropogenic Heat<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2018/04/global-heat-budget-1-anthropogenic-heat.html">http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2018/04/global-heat-budget-1-anthropogenic-heat.html</a>] </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index.html">https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ocean heat content figures.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html">https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ocean temperature figures.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/OC5/3M_HEAT/showfiganom.pl?action=start">https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/OC5/3M_HEAT/showfiganom.pl?action=start</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Gridded temperature data in map view.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Oceans Their Physics, Chemistry, and General Biology, UC
Press E-Books Collection, 1982-2004, University of California Press<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=kt167nb66r&chunk.id=d3_4_ch03&toc.id=ch03&brand=eschol%20">https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=kt167nb66r&chunk.id=d3_4_ch03&toc.id=ch03&brand=eschol%20</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Physical properties of sea water.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br /></div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-14589188749323254572018-04-11T23:27:00.000-07:002018-05-23T18:34:05.985-07:00Global Heat Budget #1: Anthropogenic Heat<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I have been away from my blogs for far too long.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I will try to post a series on the global
heat budget.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Previously, I posted a lot of work on atmospheric
CO2, considering the geographic distribution, isotope data, rates of change,
comparison to man-made emissions from various sources, and interaction of the
atmosphere with global carbon reservoirs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The latest summary post is here:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html" target="_blank">http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I deliberately avoided the question of climate change to focus
on the science of atmospheric CO2.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For the past year, I’ve been studying on the problem of
global warming (the first-order consequence of greenhouse gases) and climate
change (the higher-order consequences of greenhouse gases).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And I’ve been posting less while I worked to understand the data.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’m going to present what I’ve learned as a series of
short posts, rather than writing a book.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The very short version is this:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Global Heat Budget; The</span></u></b><b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"> Very
Short Version</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
People have raised the concentration of
atmospheric CO2 by burning fossil fuels.
The volume of CO2 released by fossil fuels has increased sharply since about 1950, and continues to increase today.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
CO2 and other greenhouse gases
retain heat in the atmosphere. The
quantity of heat is easily calculated as a function of the concentration of CO2
in the air. We can calculate the amount
of heat that has been trapped to date, and we can forecast the heat that will
be trapped in the future.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Heat is increasing in heat sinks on
earth. Observations show that the amount
of heat appearing in earth’s heat sinks is approximately equal to the heat
retained by greenhouse gases. The heat
is showing up as rising ocean temperatures, melting ice, and a warmer
atmosphere. The quantity of heat
appearing in these systems has been measured by high-accuracy monitoring programs
since about 2003. The warming ocean
accounts for about 95 percent of our estimates of anthropogenic heat. Retained heat due to greenhouse gases is the
only credible source for the heat appearing in heat sinks.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Sea-level is rising. Sea level rise has been documented by tidal gauges
for 130 years, and by high-accuracy satellite measurements since 1992. The amount of sea level rise matches the
observed volumes of melted ice, thermal expansion of the ocean, and
ground-water extraction. The fact of rising sea
level confirms observations of melting ice and warming oceans.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Higher atmospheric CO2
concentrations are inevitable for the foreseeable future. Quantitative forecasts of future heating
indicate serious and expensive problems will develop for the nation & the
world.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicAY1kuhaUnU6b50e5b1KZcTPzZ2RUHuobLiCRJiTXSuall9AhQrT_0Xba-3S4azoV8jMRgetssmL3oPS8y19VpTvFKR1uqC584VRoG3FWWTloMB4LvE17udKdN7fZnGUjHo6LTFjJjdiS/s1600/CO2+Emissions.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicAY1kuhaUnU6b50e5b1KZcTPzZ2RUHuobLiCRJiTXSuall9AhQrT_0Xba-3S4azoV8jMRgetssmL3oPS8y19VpTvFKR1uqC584VRoG3FWWTloMB4LvE17udKdN7fZnGUjHo6LTFjJjdiS/s640/CO2+Emissions.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Atmospheric CO2 has risen as a consequence of fossil fuel emissions. The following chart is my version of the Keeling Curve (<a href="http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html">http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-keeling-curve-and-global-co2.html</a>) showing global CO2 concentration, including high-amplitude seasonal cycles in the Northern Hemisphere, and low-amplitude seasonal cycles in the Southern Hemisphere.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFWl_z6K9lnEKy4_HBFkob9SySDcG4ngqJwanijc9itpSWF9af_o9AGHmXIkxzQ5yoKjy5ImnkkaGGheYnKBO2v7NVtsIlCoaYMdEwHhxy6CNPVmPHzBP1R36HHeJ1WYoE0tRwUMtKRl-0/s1600/Atmospheric+CO2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFWl_z6K9lnEKy4_HBFkob9SySDcG4ngqJwanijc9itpSWF9af_o9AGHmXIkxzQ5yoKjy5ImnkkaGGheYnKBO2v7NVtsIlCoaYMdEwHhxy6CNPVmPHzBP1R36HHeJ1WYoE0tRwUMtKRl-0/s640/Atmospheric+CO2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><u>History of Study of CO2 as a
Greenhouse Gas</u><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The physics of CO2 as a greenhouse gas is settled science,
based on published studies dating back over 150 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>High accuracy programs to measure melting
ice, ocean temperatures, and rising sea level have been in place in recent
decades, long enough to yield conclusive results.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Carbon dioxide was first proved to be a greenhouse gas by
John Tyndall in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1859</b>, proving
speculation that began in 1820.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
planet-wide effect of changing CO2 concentrations was calculated by the Swedish
chemist Arrhenius and published in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1896</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Arrhenius was originally attempting to find
the cause of the ice ages, but later recognized the possibility that fossil
fuel emissions could change the climate, and published that result in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1906</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Quantitative measurements of CO2 and rising temperatures were published
in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1938</b> by Guy Callendar.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Systematic global measurements of CO2
concentrations began in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1955</b> by
Charles Keeling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Satellite measurements
of sea level rise began in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">1992</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Satellite measurements of Antarctic and
Greenland ice mass began in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">2003</b>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Detailed, comprehensive and continuous
measurements of ocean temperatures began in <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">2004</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT6aZlyunLEHqMf81nh2Ejdtd2auGVwCwAWQAhNWXHOP8gb940WJZDPNDepGoO05hxky-5uNRR4P7mNT3D_mzy6qcyaJY8kWcj1L0WnUSI9_Pgot7-x1KK6Z52aIv8t0Km7eNig4Pkx5Jt/s1600/Arrhenius.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="840" data-original-width="558" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT6aZlyunLEHqMf81nh2Ejdtd2auGVwCwAWQAhNWXHOP8gb940WJZDPNDepGoO05hxky-5uNRR4P7mNT3D_mzy6qcyaJY8kWcj1L0WnUSI9_Pgot7-x1KK6Z52aIv8t0Km7eNig4Pkx5Jt/s640/Arrhenius.jpg" width="424" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><u>Calculation of Heat Retained
by Greenhouse Gases</u></span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Greenhouse gases are mostly transparent to wavelengths of
visible light, which carry most of the energy from our sun.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Visible light strikes the earth and is converted
to heat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Normally, some portion of that
energy is re-radiated into space as thermal infrared radiation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But greenhouse gases are opaque to infrared
wavelengths, and trap heat in the atmosphere as a function of the concentration
of those gases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As greenhouse gases have
accumulated in the atmosphere, lower levels of the atmosphere have warmed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Higher levels of the atmosphere have cooled,
as more heat has been trapped near the surface.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA publishes historical tables of the atmospheric heating
coefficients (known by the awkward and uninformative phrase *radiative
forcing*) for anthropogenic greenhouse gases, dating back to 1979.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The coefficients are prepared according to
international standards, taking into account cloudiness and angle of solar
incidence to yield a global average.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You
can do the math yourself to calculate annual heat retained by each greenhouse
gas, which I have done. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Carbon
dioxide represents about two-thirds of the heat retained in the atmosphere by
greenhouse gases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Methane, nitrogen
oxide, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and minor greenhouse gases account for the
rest of the heat retained by greenhouse gases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html" target="_blank">https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl3E6frdJNJBbegvJD2OCDRAOqmIERe9kzrpv8jaIjX13kh3J_S7rU6l4hgb4TH07kz6W97_iBdCdjNopeh-PqeKQj4V_N8vNfwzoWjmIluz9-wVYOz7qV3GR1QasovmExN8KCyICyTCng/s1600/NOAA+tables.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1002" data-original-width="1505" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl3E6frdJNJBbegvJD2OCDRAOqmIERe9kzrpv8jaIjX13kh3J_S7rU6l4hgb4TH07kz6W97_iBdCdjNopeh-PqeKQj4V_N8vNfwzoWjmIluz9-wVYOz7qV3GR1QasovmExN8KCyICyTCng/s400/NOAA+tables.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 1979, greenhouse gases retained about 7 x 10<sup>21</sup>
joules.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>By 2016, greenhouse gases
retained about 1.2 x 10<sup>22</sup> joules, an increase of 78% in annual
heating.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s difficult to conceptualize
how much heat is represented by 10<sup>22</sup> joules.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A joule is about ¼ of a standard calorie –
the heat required to raise a gram of water by one degree C.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s a small amount of heat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But 12,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules is
a lot of heat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Later in this series, we’ll
consider how the earth can absorb that quantity of heat, and where the heat is
going.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMHtqYBxi7T8Ce_4O-n5rDlX_F4_jrvVWpX8aWMJAnh1V5yaL4xlC2_JEP6IWn7_25pyTIRrzkLACZFCowEc3SvHgdD-967r8KTlxf1IvE3hMltpYFIq7uH7ss4ztHwmS3c8F-5NPRbFpJ/s1600/Greenhouse+Gases+NOAA.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1425" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMHtqYBxi7T8Ce_4O-n5rDlX_F4_jrvVWpX8aWMJAnh1V5yaL4xlC2_JEP6IWn7_25pyTIRrzkLACZFCowEc3SvHgdD-967r8KTlxf1IvE3hMltpYFIq7uH7ss4ztHwmS3c8F-5NPRbFpJ/s640/Greenhouse+Gases+NOAA.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Aerosols and Anthropogenic
Cooling</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aerosols are the least-well quantified anthropogenic
influence on earth’s climate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sulfate
aerosols cool the atmosphere by making clouds more abundant and
reflective.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sulfates can originate from
volcanic eruptions, but are also a common industrial pollutant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Carbon black aerosols warm the atmosphere by
absorbing sunlight.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sulfate emissions have dropped dramatically in the United
States and Europe over the past 25 years, thanks to regulations intended to
limit acid rain, but world-wide sulfate emissions have continued to grow.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The average global impact of sulfates and
black carbon aerosols is shown in the following graphs, but the more significant impacts are
regional.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>South Asia suffers from the
greatest carbon black emissions and impact, while China is now the source of
most sulfate emissions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">IPCC Net Anthropogenic
Heating and Cooling<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) 5th Climate
Assessment contains a table of anthropogenic heating and cooling
coefficients.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The IPCC numbers for
conventional greenhouse gases are identical to NOAA, but IPCC also recognizes
other anthropogenic factors, which can both heat and cool the atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These factors act by direct absorption of
sunlight, or by a greenhouse effect that is restricted to certain levels in the
atmosphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The IPCC recognizes the
warming factors of tropospheric ozone (O3), stratospheric water vapor (H2O),
black carbon on snow, and contrails.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>IPCC recognizes cooling factors, including land-use changes (which
affect the reflectivity of the earth), stratospheric ozone, and aerosols.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here is a chart based on IPCC data, showing anthropogenic heating and cooling coefficients (*radiative forcing*). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0ifdV8Wlcujq8kUqihcJDG7pUbWvXwxUj92nzrJ-J9hO3Pso91nld4feWigC8NOjDX-AlSU4FP54MqPCRxf4Fb8jmy5yDRJ8BR5RxeT0AZ686KDr7Tm4exp5y-vWQSUMe9Z_-LLjKNHyZ/s1600/IPCC+Net+Heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="714" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0ifdV8Wlcujq8kUqihcJDG7pUbWvXwxUj92nzrJ-J9hO3Pso91nld4feWigC8NOjDX-AlSU4FP54MqPCRxf4Fb8jmy5yDRJ8BR5RxeT0AZ686KDr7Tm4exp5y-vWQSUMe9Z_-LLjKNHyZ/s640/IPCC+Net+Heat.jpg" width="634" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Primary Anthropogenic and Other
Heat<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Strangely, to me, the IPCC report makes no mention of another
source of anthropogenic heat – the primary heat resulting from burning fossil
fuels and nuclear plants, and secondarily, the primary heat resulting from
deforestation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The global heat from
non-renewable sources is reported in the BP Statistical Review of World Energy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The energy released by deforestation can be
easily calculated from the volumes of carbon dioxide released, which is
estimated in several sources.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These
sources of heat represent about 5% and 1%, respectively, of the net
anthropogenic heat reported by IPCC, and exceed several other minor sources of heat in
the report.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here is a chart showing the calculated anthropogenic heating and cooling, based on IPCC estimates for radiative forcing, plus heat from primary energy.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-I_98tMmzJU64kdGoKKMNSxPP_56eSEPjjkOVWMnGrJLv1_tvAdqJnJwUp6gw616oplIKtZLj5jACVwbLsEuF_tVmvgzpvLQVdL48NEQEryK8Qg_OmpkY-u4q4ChraHty1_ABXifVzt1O/s1600/IPCC+Net+Heat+inc+primary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1052" data-original-width="1436" height="468" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-I_98tMmzJU64kdGoKKMNSxPP_56eSEPjjkOVWMnGrJLv1_tvAdqJnJwUp6gw616oplIKtZLj5jACVwbLsEuF_tVmvgzpvLQVdL48NEQEryK8Qg_OmpkY-u4q4ChraHty1_ABXifVzt1O/s640/IPCC+Net+Heat+inc+primary.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I considered and calculated the incremental accumulation of
geothermal heat, due to the retention of heat by greenhouse gases. Geothermal heat is normally in a steady
state, with heat flux from the planet balanced by thermal radiation into
space. The quantity of heat retained is
quite small, however, and not worth adding to the heat budget. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Agriculture has a significant influence on the planet’s
seasonal CO2 cycles, due to the preponderance of agriculture in the temperate
Northern Hemisphere.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Changes in
atmospheric CO2 necessarily imply changes in heat, through the reduction and
oxidation of carbon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Agriculture appears
to be a zero-sum influence on the long-term heat budget but may be significant
in seasonal climate modeling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Net Anthropogenic
Heat<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The net heating coefficient (*radiative forcing*) for all anthropogenic heating and cooling was about 2.4 watts/m<sup>2 </sup>in 2011. The global average for solar insolation at the top of the atmosphere is 1361 watts/m<sup>2. </sup>About 1000 watts/m<sup>2 </sup>of the sun's radiation reaches the earth's surface. Anthropogenic heat represents a small but noticeable increment to the natural heating of the earth by the sun, about 0.24% above the natural, steady state of solar heating and radiative cooling.<br />
<br />
Using the IPCC heating and cooling numbers, plus primary heat,
we see that net global anthropogenic heating was <span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">9.8 x 10<sup>21</sup> </span> joules in 2011.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p>That’s enough heat to melt about 29,500 gigatonnes of ice, or to bring 14,000 gigatonnes of water from room temperature to boiling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course, the icecaps are much larger than 29,500 gigatonnes of ice, and the ocean is much larger than 14,000 gigatonnes of water.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So the changes we see in a single year are subtle.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3XO6c_dUUWZuLjMWERrtsfDGpVMZsTAa_UvwWq4GIesrH7zs7Ecm9X25CqA_Ve9o_h4ordJ1hWzUwbhalgBdtmO9YxvQCxQKp6XSciGMOXVIStXPsUJOSKVEmKbodFwtd0n_LGg6W2L5B/s1600/Anthropogenic+Heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3XO6c_dUUWZuLjMWERrtsfDGpVMZsTAa_UvwWq4GIesrH7zs7Ecm9X25CqA_Ve9o_h4ordJ1hWzUwbhalgBdtmO9YxvQCxQKp6XSciGMOXVIStXPsUJOSKVEmKbodFwtd0n_LGg6W2L5B/s640/Anthropogenic+Heat.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Net anthropogenic heat from 1970 to 2016 is about 3.4 x 10<sup style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">23</sup> joules. The effect of heat retained by greenhouse gases is cumulative. Over time, the consequences are not so subtle. In the next few posts, we will look at how
anthropogenic heat is being distributed in earth’s heat sinks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
-------------------------------------------<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>NOAA Radiative
Forcing Tables<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html" target="_blank">https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html</a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>IPCC climate
change references<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
31 page Summary<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/18/16166014/negative-emissions" target="_blank">https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/18/16166014/negative-emissions</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
VOX article on BECCS (Bio-energy and Carbon Capture and
Sequestration) requirement to keep temperatures less than 2 degrees higher than
pre-industrial levels.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/" target="_blank">http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
2013 Full IPCC report, 1500+ pages<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Fourth National
Climate Assessment<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.globalchange.gov/nca4" target="_blank">https://www.globalchange.gov/nca4</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>BP Statistical
Review of World Energy<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Primary Heat from Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Energy<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html" target="_blank">https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Primary Heat from
Deforestation <o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Primary heat calculated from CO2 released.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Houghton, R.A. 2008. Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from
Land-Use Changes: 1850-2005. In TRENDS: A Compendium of Data on Global Change.
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html" target="_blank">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/reccap/global.htm" target="_blank">http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/reccap/global.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Aerosols<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IPCC 5<sup>th</sup> Climate Assessment, pg. 1446.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://science2017.globalchange.gov/" target="_blank">https://science2017.globalchange.gov/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aerosols caused by human activity play a profound and
complex role in the climate system through radiative effects in the atmosphere
and on snow and ice surfaces and through effects on cloud formation and
properties. The combined forcing of aerosol–radiation and aerosol–cloud
interactions is negative (cooling) over the industrial era, offsetting a
substantial part of greenhouse gas forcing, which is currently the predominant
human contribution. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>The magnitude of
this offset, globally averaged, has declined in recent decades, despite
increasing trends in aerosol emissions or abundances in some regions. </u></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>(emphasis mine).<o:p></o:p></u></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/343/6169/379/F1" target="_blank">http://science.sciencemag.org/content/343/6169/379/F1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By nucleating a larger number of smaller cloud drops,
aerosols affect cloud radiative forcing in various ways. (A) Buffering in
nonprecipitating clouds. The smaller drops evaporate faster and cause more
mixing of ambient air into the cloud top, which further enhances evaporation.
(B) Strong cooling. Pristine cloud cover breaks up by losing water to rain that
further cleanses the air in a positive feedback loop. Aerosols suppressing
precipitation prevent the breakup. (C) Larger and longer-lasting cirrus clouds.
By delaying precipitation, aerosols can invigorate deep convective clouds and
cause colder cloud tops that emit less thermal radiation. The smaller ice
particles induced by the pollution aerosols precipitate more slowly from the
anvils. This can cause larger and longer-lasting cirrus clouds, with opposite
effects in the thermal and solar radiation. The net effect depends on the
relative magnitudes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Aerosols/page3.php" target="_blank">https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Aerosols/page3.php</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/Aerosols.html" target="_blank">https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/Aerosols.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://phys.org/news/2016-05-atmospheric-aerosols-significantly-cool-climate.html" target="_blank">https://phys.org/news/2016-05-atmospheric-aerosols-significantly-cool-climate.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/10/help-cool-climate-add-aerosol/" target="_blank">https://www.wired.com/2016/10/help-cool-climate-add-aerosol/</a><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<b><u>Additional Calculation Reference</u></b><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://physics.oregonstate.edu/~hetheriw/energy/topics/doc/intro/total_solar_power_over_earth.pdf">http://physics.oregonstate.edu/~hetheriw/energy/topics/doc/intro/total_solar_power_over_earth.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<br /></div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-58621947881615596322017-12-12T14:17:00.000-08:002017-12-16T11:14:04.200-08:00Corporate Taxes and the 2017 Republican Tax Reform Plan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Republican-controlled Congress is in the final stages of
writing the most sweeping tax changes in forty years. The Senate version of the tax bill is 487
pages, which is hardly the sweeping simplification promised by Republicans, and
too long to easily summarize in this paragraph.
Business taxes are affected far more than individual taxes. Specifics of
the tax bill are summarized at the end of this article. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The main focus of the tax reform is lower taxes for
corporations. The pretext is that lower
taxes on corporations will result in economic growth, but the real goal is to
lower taxes on unearned income. Profits
saved through lower taxes will flow through corporations to shareholders,
including Republican Party donors. The
expectation of higher dividends and capital gains has driven the stock market
by more than 25% since the election.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Most, if not all, serious economic reviews of the tax plan
do not support the expectation of higher economic growth. The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation
concluded that the bill would only add marginally to economic growth, while
adding one trillion dollars to the US Federal debt, even after accounting for
the additional tax revenue resulting from growth. And both private and JCT analyses conclude that
tax benefits will accrue to the wealthiest Americans, with poorer Americans
losing money.<o:p></o:p><br />
--<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><u>Justification for 2017
Corporate Tax Cut</u><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The rationale for the deep cut in corporate taxes is based
on the idea that higher after-tax profits for corporations will result in a higher rate of economic growth. Also, the argument is that a higher rate of growth will be shared by wage-earners in the form of higher take-home pay.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s look at that idea.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>United States Corporate Taxes Compared to the OECD</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In justifying the corporate tax cut, both of Alaska's Senators have said that American corporate taxes are "among the highest in the world". They believe those high taxes render our corporations noncompetitive in global markets. As this blog has previously noted, a quick trip to the OECD database shows that idea is simply false. Although US nominal corporate taxes are comparatively high, the corporate tax actually paid in the United States is less than the average for the OECD. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSO7riZgtJu7vKRwInlFtsHVJnGPgjX8IIOSuv4TN07L_0qUyN3hcwqanMQ9kF7yTWPNamrBMvnK82x23-k2OaKDrm4xQ0KrN6tktvcK1vsJOZazS_-GyQQO3-bbWcuQBM-4UeeGFoFhJe/s1600/Corp+Tax+OECD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="839" data-original-width="1600" height="334" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSO7riZgtJu7vKRwInlFtsHVJnGPgjX8IIOSuv4TN07L_0qUyN3hcwqanMQ9kF7yTWPNamrBMvnK82x23-k2OaKDrm4xQ0KrN6tktvcK1vsJOZazS_-GyQQO3-bbWcuQBM-4UeeGFoFhJe/s640/Corp+Tax+OECD.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>GDP Growth, Corporate Taxes, After-Tax Profits and Wages</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The premise that higher after-tax corporate profits lead to higher economic growth and higher wages is false. American economic growth has been declining since World War II.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ13nK5ypvvAeVVAIr_8f1nMn_VAxXu4cwHyj4nKcQBEINKwpe6ZewFUXfmbLvQRLN3-0qPWh8i5zwi2PmPWHgSXw2kJ-RAmc6f-hlcRe6LzMwe51uF_GWGAqGIE8nk8rvj7AKIZ_kuF2O/s1600/Figure+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1426" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ13nK5ypvvAeVVAIr_8f1nMn_VAxXu4cwHyj4nKcQBEINKwpe6ZewFUXfmbLvQRLN3-0qPWh8i5zwi2PmPWHgSXw2kJ-RAmc6f-hlcRe6LzMwe51uF_GWGAqGIE8nk8rvj7AKIZ_kuF2O/s640/Figure+1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
This is especially evident when we look at non-recessionary
periods. This chart has deleted all
quarters with negative GDP growth.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRaP0bQsb_iZzyt4WJeWedHlSr4HYAk03zxn6QldmJbGFrLT3sfYXvCf0MwwHaZQg-4Z29cxP5T4BSjnyZTz3NExc42o_6yM2DBFr-AzmyOXgODs4DKNfDtoez3xk2fD9iDQMjLwx8Mnyx/s1600/Qtrly+nonrecession+GDP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1426" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRaP0bQsb_iZzyt4WJeWedHlSr4HYAk03zxn6QldmJbGFrLT3sfYXvCf0MwwHaZQg-4Z29cxP5T4BSjnyZTz3NExc42o_6yM2DBFr-AzmyOXgODs4DKNfDtoez3xk2fD9iDQMjLwx8Mnyx/s640/Qtrly+nonrecession+GDP.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Wages have declined since World War II, as a share of gross
domestic income, GDI (or similarly, GDP).<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1L-R7hGL0b-6m752e0PxBDVi1Mkn0Ur-YHMtWo7Vcq-nzaQsTsarzZX0ho1gtMQbfx2jYb0ujY9Mrm_njjqLFOcazY4UcrfJuoNIbJUs_8dWpCUtcaTwmfYQ7Ve4uTTiAJgHdflmkNE_y/s1600/Wages+as+share+of+GDI.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="470" data-original-width="1168" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1L-R7hGL0b-6m752e0PxBDVi1Mkn0Ur-YHMtWo7Vcq-nzaQsTsarzZX0ho1gtMQbfx2jYb0ujY9Mrm_njjqLFOcazY4UcrfJuoNIbJUs_8dWpCUtcaTwmfYQ7Ve4uTTiAJgHdflmkNE_y/s640/Wages+as+share+of+GDI.png" width="640" /></a></div>
Let's look at Corporate After-Tax Profits. We can see that profits
have soared since the 1980s as a share of GDP. Higher corporate profits since 2004 (excepting the recession year) have not produced higher GDP growth, or higher wages.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghyolzfDYPVifJ9IWViVf_Jzms2zZm0Ii9x6_QdRWz4NZ2QxvibW8hmf2hp10i7aNsDxCvllkqY8Exhx5AJyUU1r6hhzzDyqBSK_MDe5osE4Gp7H1l0cCaGkEebhyphenhyphen-SBpLXoP2J6jxbCvP/s1600/corp+profits_percent+GDP.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="470" data-original-width="1168" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghyolzfDYPVifJ9IWViVf_Jzms2zZm0Ii9x6_QdRWz4NZ2QxvibW8hmf2hp10i7aNsDxCvllkqY8Exhx5AJyUU1r6hhzzDyqBSK_MDe5osE4Gp7H1l0cCaGkEebhyphenhyphen-SBpLXoP2J6jxbCvP/s640/corp+profits_percent+GDP.png" width="640" /></a></div>
Corporate taxes have also fallen as a percent of GDP,
coincident with a falling rate of growth.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR5KjJzYG8SD1m32xlLf6xBPY-3Qp155MOETA9JnVbWvxDhUxt5WM4R0WcyWBwbXcipioin0jGo-H4tiEV56CSYegsDhx4HaFmkafF5661axV9LI9djeOXPcnXkqxqYY-Cn_17fb-HObiL/s1600/corp+tax_percent+GDP.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="470" data-original-width="1168" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR5KjJzYG8SD1m32xlLf6xBPY-3Qp155MOETA9JnVbWvxDhUxt5WM4R0WcyWBwbXcipioin0jGo-H4tiEV56CSYegsDhx4HaFmkafF5661axV9LI9djeOXPcnXkqxqYY-Cn_17fb-HObiL/s640/corp+tax_percent+GDP.png" width="640" /></a></div>
But the rise in After-Tax Profits has not resulted in a higher
rate of economic growth, or higher wages for workers. The argument that lower taxes will result in higher
economic growth appears to be void.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Tax Cuts and the Reagan Economy</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The final argument for tax cuts is that tax cuts worked in the past. The basis for that claim is generally in the mythology surrounding tax cuts enacted in 1981 and 1987 during the Reagan administration. Close examination proves that economic growth during the Reagan administration was not extraordinary, and the growth that did occur was largely due to other factors. The actual performance
of those tax cuts is complicated by eleven tax hikes that were also passed
during the Reagan years, for the purpose of restoring lost revenues.<br />
<br />
Let’s look at the Reagan economy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First, the “economic boom” of the Reagan years looks less
spectacular when viewed in the context of the total post-war economy. American economic growth has been falling
steadily since World War II, part of a general structural problem in the U.S.
economy, reflected in GDP growth, wages as a share of the economy, and the time
required for recovery after recessions. [That
should be the topic of another blog post.]
There were really only two years during the Reagan administration that had
economic growth above the long-term, non-recessionary trend (1983 and 1984). <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgseYJmLDag7BbN36XZGlZmiNwBwWI2kmnKgEfsmfY_BF17UuKGgGqMn2LBllniS_OdtMQ1dkgqjH-EuOnhT8H0uTOR7G01-PP8OM_D4diheP8pz-Jb58ORt9g6B4qx2cBFCxARIa1Hg4hx/s1600/Growth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="1600" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgseYJmLDag7BbN36XZGlZmiNwBwWI2kmnKgEfsmfY_BF17UuKGgGqMn2LBllniS_OdtMQ1dkgqjH-EuOnhT8H0uTOR7G01-PP8OM_D4diheP8pz-Jb58ORt9g6B4qx2cBFCxARIa1Hg4hx/s640/Growth.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
Still, the Reagan administration was marked by a period of fairly persistent
and strong growth. There are three
reasons for that growth. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>1)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Interest Rates<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
I believe that the main reason for sustained growth during the Reagan
years was falling interest rates. Interest
rates reached a singular, extraordinary peak in 1981 (see chart). The Volcker Federal reserve had largely quelled
inflation by 1981, and began to let interest rates fall. The extraordinarily high interest rates at
the peak probably caused the multiple recessions of 1980 – 1982. As interest rates fell, economic growth which
had been bottled up by high rates was released.
I believe the influence of falling rates far exceeded the influence of
lower taxes.<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCB9KeitKkKyKK7r4cihEHQVawR0qZWDbMBLyQidQVZWMWh_q_E4RpRqZcjWRaz3nuHSpZlIsaff7upnj21TCyAqtVoqoZFvfpV-fvjXyEo9Nm20uA65X2k0zjpmy5RmgPeBNESQ3tWYDo/s1600/Interest+Rates.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1063" data-original-width="1600" height="424" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCB9KeitKkKyKK7r4cihEHQVawR0qZWDbMBLyQidQVZWMWh_q_E4RpRqZcjWRaz3nuHSpZlIsaff7upnj21TCyAqtVoqoZFvfpV-fvjXyEo9Nm20uA65X2k0zjpmy5RmgPeBNESQ3tWYDo/s640/Interest+Rates.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>2)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Serendipity<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
Secondly, there is simply the matter of good timing. The Reagan administration was faced with
recessions in 1981 and 1982, but afterwards enjoyed the benefit of the typical
eight-to-ten year business cycle. There
is no particular policy which can be attributed to this aspect of success,
except luck. [See previous chart, with indicated recessions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>3)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Tax Cuts<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
Tax cuts do provide stimulus to the economy, and the Reagan tax cuts of
1981 were appropriately given during an economic recession. Ultimately, though, tax cuts are literally
borrowing against the future, and must someday be paid back in terms of later
economic growth. I believe that it is
best to run budgetary surpluses when there is strength in the economy, to allow
the government the ability to incur deficits when the economy is weak, without fear
of destabilizing the economy. The Reagan
administration never fully funded the government to pay for the deficits it
incurred.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The 2017 Republican Tax Reform Plan<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">
The
Republican Tax Plan passed by the House and the Senate must now be reconciled
into a single bill. The bills are very
similar in scope, and the process should not result in significant changes to the
plans, except where major errors are discovered in the assumptions and
provisions of the bill. <br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">
My
main objections to the plan are as follows:<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>1)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Debt<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
The plan runs large federal deficits, at a time when the total Federal
debt is approaching 100% of annual GDP, and interest payments are starting to
become a significant part of annual spending. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>2)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Timing<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
The plan cuts taxes at a time of full employment, when fiscal policy
should be to run surpluses. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>3)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Corporate Taxes<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
The plan awards long-term tax relief to corporations, at a time when
corporate taxes are already low; corporate earnings are already soaring, and no
gains in GDP have been observed. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>4)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Lack of Middle-Class Tax Relief/Benefits
for Unearned Income<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
Individual tax relief in the plan will accrue mostly to high income families,
particularly those with unearned income.
The corporate tax reduction will flow through to investors, much more
directly than to wage-earners. <o:p></o:p>The plan will not result in long-term tax relief for wage-earners, whose share of gross domestic income has been falling for 47 years.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><b>5)<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></b><!--[endif]--><b>Abolishes ACA Individual Mandate</b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
The
tax plan eliminates the individual mandate aspect of the Affordable Care
Act. It is considered an important facet
of the act, in encouraging younger people to participate in the insurance
pool. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><u>Conclusion</u></span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Republican tax plan is based on false ideas: that American corporate taxes are higher than other countries; that higher corporate taxes produce higher economic growth and higher wages; that general tax cuts during the Reagan administration produced extraordinary growth. All of these ideas can be demonstrated to be false, using economic data that is available to anyone.<br />
<br />
Lower corporate taxes increased profits, not wages.<br />
<br />
The Republican tax plan will probably become law. I expect that it is unlikely to survive the next
administration and Congress. But the debts
incurred before it is overturned will last for a generation.<br />
<br />
A copy of this post is available on my political blog, <a href="http://debatablypolitical.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://debatablypolitical.blogspot.com/</a>.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
------<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Appendix<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Summary of Important Changes
in the Republican Tax Reform Bill<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Business Tax Changes</span></b><br />
1) Drops the nominal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 20%. The current Senate bill, perhaps through an
oversight, keeps the minimum corporate tax at 20%, eliminating exemptions by
default. It is expected that the
reconciliation bill will restore those exemptions, dropping the actual
corporate rate below 20%.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
2) The tax rate for “pass-through” small businesses is
reduced, excepting service businesses such as lawyers, accountants, and
doctors. The amount of the reduction is
to be determined in reconciliation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
3) Rules for
expensing, rather than capitalizing, spending are relaxed, allowing quicker
realization of tax benefits from business investment.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
4) Repatriated
profits from foreign operations would be taxed at a much lower rate than US
profits. Cash assets would be taxed at
10% (Senate) or 14% (House), while non-cash assets would be taxed at 5%
(Senate) or 7.5% (House). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Individual Tax Changes<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
5) All classes of individual taxpayers will see a tax
reduction in the near term, but those reductions will expire in ten years. On the other hand, business tax reductions
will be permanent.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
6) The standard deduction is doubled, but personal
exemptions are eliminated. Child tax
credits are increased, but the full value is only available to those with
higher income to offset taxes. For large
families, the child tax credit may not fully offset the loss of personal
exemptions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
7) State & local
tax deductions are eliminated; casualty loss deductions are eliminated. The mortgage interest deduction is retained
for all but the largest mortgages.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
8) The estate tax may be eliminated, or the minimum
threshold for the estate tax may be doubled.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
9) The individual
mandate tax of the ACA is repealed. Some
fear that this will destabilize the insurance markets, by removing a large
number of younger, healthy individuals from the insurance pool.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
10) The fate of the Alternative Minimum Tax will be
determined in reconciliation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
11) Waived tuition, common for graduate students, will now
be taxed. Colleges with very large
endowments will have some earnings taxed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Other<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
12) Drilling will be allowed in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge Area 1002, which was originally set aside for consideration for oil
development.<o:p></o:p><br />
--<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Appendix 2<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
As this blog has previously noted, American Federal taxes
are among the lowest in the world, in direct contrast to Republican claims that
American taxes are among the highest in the world. Here is data from OECD and the World Bank,
showing the relative ranking of American Federal taxes compared to other
countries. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbbY-WSPTtSvrYu2LHa8cNK0hc8Bk4SnwmCXmQzHPyFPI9UfgC7IEo2iDesXnm4cmPmxdh53tJShblJf5YTV1LxKFmGX3cBh1-g-SCENbHS5Z1ZM25A0hX7_rPv29R8dOf_wQSjP76bBOT/s1600/Federal+tax+buden+OECD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbbY-WSPTtSvrYu2LHa8cNK0hc8Bk4SnwmCXmQzHPyFPI9UfgC7IEo2iDesXnm4cmPmxdh53tJShblJf5YTV1LxKFmGX3cBh1-g-SCENbHS5Z1ZM25A0hX7_rPv29R8dOf_wQSjP76bBOT/s640/Federal+tax+buden+OECD.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
United States Federal taxes as a share of GDP, compared to 34 OECD countries.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH5RTlwXi9tmNZhn2-_65reNOqdBcIs9ZUIONkSCoO_QcViPpqfmfOv059cKsbmwb6i5f4VXqqn0Vl7aRgwvGJ9LQGQNROHhzox5la48wgYSmKfdD6mv0Uy4kOg4TX3Ca_Uu9j2m7hAT4A/s1600/World+Bank+data.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="1422" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH5RTlwXi9tmNZhn2-_65reNOqdBcIs9ZUIONkSCoO_QcViPpqfmfOv059cKsbmwb6i5f4VXqqn0Vl7aRgwvGJ9LQGQNROHhzox5la48wgYSmKfdD6mv0Uy4kOg4TX3Ca_Uu9j2m7hAT4A/s640/World+Bank+data.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
United States Federal taxes compared to 123 other countries; data from World Bank.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Countries with lower Federal taxes than the United States
are Ethiopia, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Central African
Republic, West Bank and Gaza, Lithuania, Oman, Nigeria, Bahrain, Estonia,
United Arab Emirates.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<o:p></o:p></div>
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References</span></b><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Summaries of the Republican Tax
Plan<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Washington Post<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/11/30/what-is-in-the-senates-massive-tax-bill-and-what-could-change/?utm_term=.1864e4ff7721">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/11/30/what-is-in-the-senates-massive-tax-bill-and-what-could-change/?utm_term=.1864e4ff7721</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Forbes<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2017/12/02/winners-and-losers-of-the-senate-tax-bill/#5bfdfe5b254d">https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2017/12/02/winners-and-losers-of-the-senate-tax-bill/#5bfdfe5b254d</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
CNN<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/28/news/economy/senate-revised-tax-bill/index.html">http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/28/news/economy/senate-revised-tax-bill/index.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Economic Reviews of the Tax
Plan</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-analysis-reviews-text-2017-11">http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-analysis-reviews-text-2017-11</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tax Policy Center – the plan will ultimately raise taxes on
more than half of Americans.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
University of Chicago Survey – only one out of 42 economists
believes that the plan will significantly grow the economy. <br />
University of Pennsylvanian/Wharton review – the tax plan will add about $1.3
trillion to the national debt.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.aei.org/publication/the-gop-tax-plan-is-pro-growth/">https://www.aei.org/publication/the-gop-tax-plan-is-pro-growth/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This article attempts to put lipstick on a pig. The article acknowledges that economic growth
from the tax plan will be small, “but significant”. The article recognizes that slower growth has
occurred in the past two decades, when progressively slower growth has actually
been going on for seven decades. The
article gives no explanation for why growth is slower now than in the past, or
why tax cuts at a time of full employment will help. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-plan-tax-economist-says-senate-bill-crazy-stupid-2017-11">http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-plan-tax-economist-says-senate-bill-crazy-stupid-2017-11</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A Federal tax expert says that the tax plan is stupid.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Historical Data<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-on-corporate-profits.htm">https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-on-corporate-profits.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
OECD tax on corporate profits<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
US corporate tax among the lowest in the OECD<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-tax-share-gdp-1946-2015">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-tax-share-gdp-1946-2015</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Corporate Tax as share of GDP<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/source-revenue-share-gdp">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/source-revenue-share-gdp</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source of federal revenue<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
FRED<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A191RL1A225NBEA">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A191RL1A225NBEA</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDIA#0">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDIA#0</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W270RE1A156NBEA">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W270RE1A156NBEA</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A4102C1A027NBEA#0">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A4102C1A027NBEA#0</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CP#0">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CP#0</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX#0">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX#0</a><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-38544655283731263852017-11-13T21:58:00.002-08:002019-10-30T15:35:36.106-07:00Computer Sentience<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
The great ethical debate in the year 2100 will be about the
civil rights of sentient machines. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The great ethical debate in the year 2200 will be about the
civil rights of sentient humans. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
OK, that’s supposed to be a joke. But let’s think a bit about the possibility
of sentient machines.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Life is immaterial and ephemeral. One moment after death, a being has all of
the same solids and fluids, all of the same atoms and molecules as at a moment
before death. But something mysterious
has departed. Life exists as a
collection of electrical impulses and chemical changes. The idea of a living, immaterial,
non-physical spirit is a powerful one, and most people throughout history
subscribe to the idea that all living creatures are endowed with such a spirit.
But no such spirit has ever been
reliably observed. On a scientific
basis, we must presume that life consists solely of the electrical and chemical
interactions that animate our muscles and minds.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Consciousness, too, must be a matter of electrical and chemical
physical properties. It should not be a
surprise. We can influence consciousness with as chemicals diverse as caffeine,
TCP, or LSD; and we can stimulate memories with electrical impulses to the
brain. Is there any reason, then, why
machines using complicated patterns of electrical connections could not become
as conscious and aware as humans? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Examples from
Science Fiction<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Science fiction and science fiction authors have proved to
be remarkably prescient about future technology and social issues, and there are
innumerable examples of computer consciousness in science fiction. Considering the remarkable consensus of
science fiction authors about the possibility of computer consciousness, I am
inclined to believe that it is a real possibility. I
think it is time to consider in what form it may occur, and what implications
it will have for mankind.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here are a few sentient machines from some of my favorite science
fiction stories.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Character</u> <u>Type</u> <u>Book or Show</u> <u>Author</u><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Mycroft Mainframe The Moon is a Harsh Mistress Robert
Heinlein<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Daneel Olivaw Android
The Caves of Steel Isaac Asimov<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Colossus Mainframe The Forbin Project Michael Crichton<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Data Android Star Trek, Next Generation Various<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Samantha AI
Program Her Spike
Jonze<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marvin Robot Life, the Universe and
Everything Douglas Adams<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bender Robot Futurama Matt Groening<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Jay Score Robot Jay Score Eric
Russell<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Einstein AI
Program Beyond the Blue Event
Horizon Fredrick Pohl<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tardis Time-Ship Dr. Who Series Various<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are dozens of other examples in science fiction. What
makes these stories interesting is the range of thoughts and behaviors
exhibited by the sentient machines. And
in a way, the stories are explorations of what it means to be human and
sentient. In some of the stories,
machines threaten mankind; in some stories they save mankind. Sometimes they bond as friends with human
characters; sometimes they question their own lack of humanity. But as drawn by the authors, they are
unquestionably alive.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRw7GtfG218cee0VMa8KWCWiq_cTTZTGcgZPofl8utbiZBfReHR-cRBVLPZIGDsFWvsskzjXk7OIyjLdQ3GTvCEBk5DXE-lxuuOt0bVazEGuDcAyR6nhoijXejZ4tbYBQS7rk6jNxY7fFQ/s1600/AI+sentience.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="587" data-original-width="841" height="446" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRw7GtfG218cee0VMa8KWCWiq_cTTZTGcgZPofl8utbiZBfReHR-cRBVLPZIGDsFWvsskzjXk7OIyjLdQ3GTvCEBk5DXE-lxuuOt0bVazEGuDcAyR6nhoijXejZ4tbYBQS7rk6jNxY7fFQ/s640/AI+sentience.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Image from the film "I, Robot", screenplay by J. Vintar and A. Goldsman, </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
after a collection of stories by Isaac Asimov. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Today, artificial intelligence is one of the fastest
developing fields of technology. Artificial
Intelligence is expected to understand our spoken speech, speak meaningfully in
response, act as clerks or servants, interpret our instructions from gestures,
render judgments and decisions in complex fields such as medicine, recognize
and appropriately classify images and scenes, drive our cars, work in our
factories. Ultimately, artificial
intelligence may design and improve its own replacements. At this time, there are no known limits to
what artificial intelligence can do.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But all of this is less than what we see in science
fiction. Few computer specialists would
believe that today’s artificial intelligence is anything living. AI programs execute instructions from
programmers, and in some cases, can adapt that programming based on input from
the external environment. But even then,
the program is simply performing as it was designed, without motivation or
will. It isn’t alive.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><b>Sentience</b></u><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What, then, would be the hallmarks of a sentient
machine? What qualities would it have
that differ from today’s artificial intelligence? Would we recognize a sentient machine if we
saw one?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here is a list of the qualities that I think are necessary
to the definition of sentience. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Consciousness</b> – Awareness of the surrounding environment. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Self-awareness</b> – The ability to say “I am”, without being asked. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Personal Memory </b>– The ability to remember former analyses
(thoughts) and actions. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Thought</b> -- the ability to think in processes, make forecasts and
predictions based on processes, rather than pattern recognition. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Will</b> – The deliberate decision to perform or not perform an action
according to self-determined reasons.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>Empathy</b> – The ability to recognize other beings as sentient.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Consciousness<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Consciousness is hard to define. In the biological world, I think that
consciousness is a gradational quality, rather than a discrete property. No one would suggest that a virus is
conscious, and yet it has some property of life which is greater than that of a
piece of rock. But most would agree
that a worm is more conscious than a virus, and a dog is more conscious than a
clam. And perhaps a colony of bees is
more conscious than an individual bee. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Both computer programs and flatworms can respond to external
stimuli. Flatworms can be trained to
avoid stimuli associated with pain, and seek stimuli associate with food. Perhaps these actions demonstrate the
emotions of fear and pleasure. But it is
unclear if the responses of either flatworms or computers are <i>aware</i> and <i>knowing</i> responses, or simply the results of chemical and physical
programming.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Definitions of consciousness include awareness of exterior
and/or interior things. But the
definition and observation of awareness is difficult, even in humans who have
suffered brain damage. The
identification of consciousness, separate from the qualities of self-awareness
and free will, will be very difficult to recognize in computer
intelligence. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Personal Memory<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Personal memory is a critical part of human personality. I define personal memory as the memory of
prior thoughts (analyses) and actions. Personal
memory is distinctly different than computer memory which is used to hold data
for processing. It is the memory of
performing previous processes, and the memory of those results. This kind of memory allows people to learn,
and to develop preferences which reflect personality. Without personal memory, a machine could never
develop self-awareness or will. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When we wake up in the morning, personal memory is what
allows us to know that we are the same person who went to bed the night
before. Or more directly, personal
memory informs us that we are the same person from moment to moment. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Machine learning algorithms must have some kind of personal
memory, recording and comparing previous analyses to new ones. The type of memory probably depends on the
type of machine learning algorithm. Some
kind of personal memory, perhaps developed from machine learning, will be a
necessity for a sentient machine. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Self-awareness<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My son gave me the simplest definition of self-awareness: <b><i>The
ability to say “I am”, without being asked.</i></b> But perhaps this is a little too glib. Like consciousness, living creatures span the
range from clearly not self-aware, to fully aware. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A test performed with some creatures uses a mirror. A parakeet can be kept company by a mirror,
never realizing that the parakeet in the mirror is not a companion. A cat is initially mystified by a mirror, but
may eventually realize that the cat in the mirror is not another cat. A great ape will almost immediately realize
that the image in the mirror is itself. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It seems to me that for a digital entity, self-awareness
implies a recognition of external reality and the separation of the self from
that reality. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How could self-awareness be recognized? In biology, creatures have reward systems,
seeking food and sex. Rewarding oneself
is a demonstration of self-awareness.
Self-aware creatures also pass the mirror test, recognizing a patch of
paint visible only in the mirror. If a
computer could be observed treating itself differently than external reality,
it might demonstrate self-awareness.
Perhaps a self-diagnosis problem might show that the computer would
treat an internal problem differently than an external problem. But computers lack inborn desires, fears or
survival instinct. It might be difficult
to observe self-awareness in a computer, even when it exists.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Will<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Will is the ability to perform independent actions. This will be easier to recognize than
consciousness or self-awareness. Actions
independent of programming would be evidence of some measure of sentience in a
computer. Nevertheless, machine-learning
algorithms allow computers to make independent judgments and perform
actions. Machines can play chess,
diagnose medical conditions, connect electronic traffic in efficient ways,
answer questions, and perform many functions similar to humans. But at what point does a computer exhibit
free will? How can we tell? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Computer AIs do unexpected things all the time. Chatbots are a good example, offering
spectacularly bad examples of conversations, based on some learning algorithm
applied to real human conversations.
Microsoft’s experimental chatbot “Tay” became notorious after only a few
hours of exposure to interaction with real humans. Of course, a number of users were
deliberately trolling Tay, and succeeding in turning the naïve chatbot into a
bigoted and sexually aggressive delinquent.
Within 16 hours, the chatbot’s personality was hopelessly corrupted, and
Microsoft took Tay offline, ending the experiment. In a second, accidental public release of the
chatbot, the bot became stuck in a repetitive and poignant loop, tweeting “You
are too fast, please take a rest” several times a second to 200,000
followers. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is still unclear how we could recognize free will in a
machine, as opposed to an apparent malfunction.
(Once again, I recall episodes of Star Trek which explored that very
dilemma.) Perhaps behaviors that were
clearly in the best interest of the machine would be noticed, but how could we
expect such behaviors, when machines have not evolved to pursue their own best
interest? Once again, recognition of sentience
seems difficult or impossible.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Thought<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It seems to me that thought is a property of sentience. I believe that the empirical learning
performed by AI programs is not thought.
(I have similar views about empiricism in science, e.g., <a href="http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/12/the-scientific-method-redefined.html">http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/12/the-scientific-method-redefined.html</a>.) Actual thought involves something more than
the correlation of previous patterns. Thought
requires the recognition of processes which change reality (even a digital
reality). When an AI program can
recognize causation, rather than correlation, I would acknowledge that the
machine is thinking. And thinking is one
component of sentience.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There might be a test which could reveal how a computer was
solving problems, whether by empirical correlation, or by understanding processes
(thought). Understanding processes
allows something that physicist David Deutsch calls “reach”. Processes can be extrapolated to situations
which are far beyond the range of input data.
For example, a computer might draw empirical data on how apples fall
from many trees, and describe how other apples fall from trees. But understanding the process of Newtonian
gravity allows the computer to describe the orbits of planets, far beyond the
bounds of what could be achieved by any empirical program.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Empathy<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My wife suggested that empathy should be a component of
sentience, and I agree. A sentient
machine must have the qualities already discussed: Consciousness,
Self-awareness, Will, and Thought. But
just as self-awareness requires the recognition of external things (which are
“not-self”), full sentience requires the recognition of other sentient
beings. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Forms of Computer Sentience<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I would define sentience, it consists of several
components: Consciousness, Personal Memory, Self-awareness, Will, Thought and
Empathy. If sentience does emerge in
machines, I expect it will be gradual, and will not appear as the full-blown
sentient beings of science fiction.
Recognition of sentience may be very difficult, particularly in machines
which are already performing independent machine learning. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the biological world, four billion years of evolution has
been necessary for the development of sentience. Computers lack that evolutionary
background. Computers have no innate
instinct for survival or self-interest.
Computers, even if they have the glimmerings of consciousness and
self-awareness, may not demonstrate self-oriented behavior that would reveal
their progress toward sentience. Some period of evolution, by design or by accident, will probably be necessary for computers to develop sentience. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I am not sure what form computer sentience might take when
it appears. It seems to me that
sentience could appear in many different guises, and may surprise us by the
form that it takes. It may be a single machine, running
specialized machine learning programs, and designed to develop sentience. It may be a network of computers, or it may
be the entire Internet. The latter would
echo an old story by Arthur C. Clarke, in which a global telephone system
developed sentience. Sentience may
develop out of computer viruses, which have considerable evolutionary pressure
placed upon them already. Sentience may
exist as software, jumping from device to device as new hosts. In most science fiction stories, sentience
develops in a single, unique machine, but it may not happen that way. My daughter suggested that each of many small
devices – cell phones, smart TVs, home security systems – may become sentient
at the same time. Alternatively, it is
worth remembering that the human brain (as well as the human body) is a colony
of smaller cells, each capable of performing some of the basic functions of
life independently. Cells in the brain
each perform some analytical function, but it is only the total network of the
brain that we consider sentient. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b>
<b>Evolution of Sentience and Computer Viruses</b><br />
My son asked how computer viruses could develop sentience. I'm thinking about viruses which are sophisticated enough
to evolve, which may require human initiative to get started.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As far as evolution, I'm thinking about a virus which is
deliberately programmed to introduce variants in subsequent generations, or
steal bits of code from other programs.
As in ordinary evolution, most of the variants will be irrelevant or
harmful. But given enough cycles, some
of the variants may improve the virus' ability to survive. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
As for sentience, the virus itself would not be sentient,
any more than human DNA is sentient. But
I can imagine a program sophisticated enough to take over a host machine. The
virus might run in the background, undetected, and issue the commands that
produce sentience in the machine; and then send its “DNA” to another machine to
reproduce and evolve further. If some
aspects of sentience had evolutionary value (awareness of surroundings,
self-awareness, will, thought), then those traits would be enhanced in
subsequent generations.<br />
<br />
<b>Fear of Computer Sentience</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p>Science fiction is full of evil machines, perhaps with good reason. A number of futurists, including Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, have spoken strongly about the risks that artificial intelligence (whether sentient or not) poses to mankind. I would not presume to contradict them. When artificial intelligence reaches the point that it becomes self-designing, producing improved replicas without human design, it will exceed our capacity to understand or predict the capabilities of those machines. But I nevertheless think that the development of sentient machines will occur. </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<b>Inevitability of Computer Sentience</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If I am correct that human sentience is strictly a matter of
physical chemistry and electricity, then I believe that machine sentience is
ultimately inevitable, provided that humanity survives long enough. When it happens, it will challenge our place
in the world, the meaning of our goals, and the meaning of humanity. It may be the most important thing that has
happened to mankind since the emergence of our own species as sentient beings.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-76840501448806931522017-10-12T23:40:00.000-07:002017-10-27T13:43:20.384-07:00Seven Ways Climate Change Makes Hurricanes Worse<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I’m writing this post, Hurricane Ophelia is forecast to
hit Ireland, the first full-strength hurricane to hit the island since
1961, and the tenth consecutive storm this season to reach hurricane strength. The year 2017 has already been a
tragic and record-setting Atlantic hurricane season. Hurricane Harvey hit Texas as a 1000-year
rainstorm, dropping about 11 cubic miles of rain on Houston with enough
weight to depress the earth’s crust by a measured 2 centimeters. And within a period of two weeks, Hurricanes
Irma and Maria struck the Caribbean Islands as category 5 hurricanes – the strongest measure on the Saffir-Simpson scale, setting a record for the duration of category 5 storms in one
season. <br />
<br />
The obvious question is whether climate change is causing an increase in the
frequency or intensity of these storms. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Hurricanes and Climate
Change<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A hurricane is a convection engine. Warm tropical waters convey heat and humidity
to the air over the water. The warm,
humid air is light, and begins to rise at random spots over the ocean. The warm air cools as it rises, dropping
below the dew point. Water vapor
condenses to form clouds and rain. The
condensation of water vapor reduces air pressure, further lowering the air
density. The low-pressure center draws
warm air from the ocean surface toward itself, which feeds the rising
convection column.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The converging air currents are affected by the Coriolis
force, and begin to spin as they approach the growing low-pressure center. As the storm develops structure, a downward
current of air forms as the eye in the center of the storm, returning dry air from
high altitude. The hurricane eyewall of
clouds, rain and ferocious winds spins around the central eye. Surrounding the eye, spiral rain bands
develop as subsidiary convection systems, with upward air flow in the rain
bands and downward flow between those bands.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The strength of a hurricane is often limited by high-level
winds blowing across the top of the hurricane.
Strong high-level winds effectively decapitate a hurricane by blowing
the top off of the convection column. Hurricanes
tend to drift westward in equatorial waters, as the globe spins eastward
beneath them; and to drift toward the poles in temperate latitudes. Areas of surrounding high and low pressure
form steering currents, which modify the path of the hurricane as it drifts
across the globe.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Climate change is expected to increase the intensity of
hurricanes in a number of ways. Here are seven ways in which climate change is expected to make hurricanes worse.<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuBaTRRnTsj-17XkaLhcjrc4EqsujNO1PoAfXZvO4GgER2aeP5_YM4uHPExhknB0Tr2A8yRZ6XQAyxnvEjLP2SRx18X7krXHwSLTLTAal2EB-wH3i_vOqiJxJ4HUNKheK0V1yMPUkVTngQ/s1600/hurricane+climate+change+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1082" data-original-width="1600" height="432" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuBaTRRnTsj-17XkaLhcjrc4EqsujNO1PoAfXZvO4GgER2aeP5_YM4uHPExhknB0Tr2A8yRZ6XQAyxnvEjLP2SRx18X7krXHwSLTLTAal2EB-wH3i_vOqiJxJ4HUNKheK0V1yMPUkVTngQ/s640/hurricane+climate+change+3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Modified after image by Thompson Higher Education.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><br /></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Temperature<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
1) Average surface air temperature has risen around the globe
by about one degree Celsius since 1980.
The particular warming is variable at different times and places, and
may be greater over tropical waters at times.
Warmer surface air creates a greater tendency to form thermal convection
currents.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSu3C7lJmK3-6ABJrabxmUQwSAdk5qIpFbABHz7SI7Up3DN2LsyrpVrt-Tt7ViYiLRyvmDCavLmugUxg72CtVvpI8xDFpE2Hc0WQMVHIAeWhgC5_1mcX219oZWp97LcwI80ahOkliq8hkD/s1600/Air+temp+1880_2016.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1030" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSu3C7lJmK3-6ABJrabxmUQwSAdk5qIpFbABHz7SI7Up3DN2LsyrpVrt-Tt7ViYiLRyvmDCavLmugUxg72CtVvpI8xDFpE2Hc0WQMVHIAeWhgC5_1mcX219oZWp97LcwI80ahOkliq8hkD/s640/Air+temp+1880_2016.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Average annual global surface temperature, 1880 - 2016. Image credit NASA.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
2) Average temperature in the upper 100 meters of the ocean has
risen by ½ degree Celsius since 1980. As
with air, temperatures in the ocean vary seasonally and in complex patterns of
time and space. At times, tropical
waters will be warmer by more than the average ½ degree Celsius global
average. A warmer ocean surface
contributes more heat and humidity to a hurricane.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtePQ7ZdbiN_SX7FqYmhXVlvupVKDND0alSDtDOJsLUztoqGHjW3EnHcQlhOA3u4Ixpau2OeNi6Nn6xiCpm-u6aPuBMLTm-XdSIJTCbjr3tYY5HzMAtHkb7nfNzFpb5L8y1VJjMJQL_hWN/s1600/meantemp_0-100m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="567" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtePQ7ZdbiN_SX7FqYmhXVlvupVKDND0alSDtDOJsLUztoqGHjW3EnHcQlhOA3u4Ixpau2OeNi6Nn6xiCpm-u6aPuBMLTm-XdSIJTCbjr3tYY5HzMAtHkb7nfNzFpb5L8y1VJjMJQL_hWN/s640/meantemp_0-100m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Average water temperature, 0-100 meters, 1955-2017. Image credit NOAA.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br />
3) The average temperature of the ocean water at depth has also
risen. The average temperature of waters
from the surface to 700 meters has risen by 1/10 of a degree Celsius since
1980. Waters from 100 to 200 meters have
warmed nearly as much as surface waters. Hurricane waves churn up deeper water, bringing cooler water to the
surface. In the past, this stirring of
deeper water cooled the ocean surface, and acted as a buffer on the intensity
of a hurricane. But now that deeper
waters are also warmer, there is less tendency for wave action to moderate the
strength of a hurricane. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiINmVuuXWhKHpHm3yEXS-v9C9XtkDc8AOFFMKEh-OBPTWsc7pf1jx5G2-KgLjiTKQMkafRRaB5yLfkvzc7Y0vmyyZvPmqlKOzj17Nezhnian-pOzUZQ6DJjHnjq4qNGdNEQQ-5E55Fmzti/s1600/ocean+temp+700m.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="570" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiINmVuuXWhKHpHm3yEXS-v9C9XtkDc8AOFFMKEh-OBPTWsc7pf1jx5G2-KgLjiTKQMkafRRaB5yLfkvzc7Y0vmyyZvPmqlKOzj17Nezhnian-pOzUZQ6DJjHnjq4qNGdNEQQ-5E55Fmzti/s640/ocean+temp+700m.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Average water temperature, 0 - 700 meters, 1955 - 2107. Image credit NOAA.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Humidity<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The principles of physics mean that higher air temperatures
and higher water temperatures mean that more humidity is carried in tropical
air before the formation of a tropical storm.
Warmer air raises the water-carrying capacity according to the principle
of relative humidity, and higher water temperatures raise the humidity of the
air according to the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. Higher humidity acts in three ways to
increase the intensity of a hurricane.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
4) Higher humidity lowers the density of the air,
because the water molecule is lighter than the average molecular weight of
air. Intuitively, we tend to think that
moist air is “heavy”, perhaps because liquid water seems heavy. But the molecular weight of water is 20,
while the molecular weight of nitrogen is 28, and oxygen is 32, giving dry air
a molecular weight of about 29.
Molecules of water vapor occupy just as much space as gaseous molecules
of nitrogen or oxygen, thus lowering the density of air. [If we had a bucket of liquid water and a
bucket of liquid air, the liquid air would be heavier.] Lighter air contributes to stronger
convection, which strengthens the hurricane.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
5) Air with higher humidity has more moisture to
condense, causing a stronger drop in air pressure. This can lead to stronger winds and more
rapid intensification of a hurricane.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
6) Higher humidity raises the water-carrying capacity of
the hurricane, and contributes to higher volumes of rainfall and flooding when
a hurricane makes landfall. The unusual
volumes of rainfall associated with hurricanes Harvey and Maria probably
reflect higher humidity caused by climate change.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Winds<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
7) Finally, it is possible that climate change has reduced the
strength of high-level winds, reducing the tendency for these winds to blow the
tops off of hurricanes. Some scientists
have observed a decline in the strength of high-level winds in recent years,
and tentatively suggest that this may be a result of climate change. However, the mechanisms by which climate
change would affect these winds is unclear, and the proposal is still
controversial. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Quantification<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I wrote to “Ask a Climate Scientist” on Facebook, and asked
whether satellite data from NASA’s GOES satellites documented higher humidity
over the Atlantic since the 1980s, either in actual hurricanes or in general
background humidity. I wanted to know if
the data supported the idea that climate change is making hurricanes worse. Here’s the answer I received:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br />
<i>"The GOES imager series involve
technology upgrades and are not well calibrated, and so are not well suited for
measuring changes in water vapour over time.
<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>However,
the HIRS instrument aboard the NOAA polar orbiter series which began about the
same time is fairly well calibrated, and does show increases in humidity. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>More
recently the microwave radiometers on board the AMSU series of satellites also
show the increases, as does the global radiosonde and surface-observing
networks. The increases are in line with
expectations from thermodynamic principles (the Clausius-Clapeyron equation)
and climate models. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>We
are pretty confident that these increases are indeed causing a storm to dump
more rain now than it would have a few decades ago, all other things being
equal.”<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>Professor
Steve Sherwood, Climate Change Research Center, UNSW Australia<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I made a brief attempt to quantify changes in the hurricane
system in the Gulf of Mexico that are due to climate change. Assuming a 1.5 degree rise in sea surface
temperature, humidity will rise by about 5 percent, from about 75% relative
humidity to 80%, at an average daily temperature of 80 degrees F. Along with rising humidity, air temperatures
have risen by about 2 degrees F (global average). Air density will fall, but not very much,
only about ½ of one percent. This will
result in stronger convective activity, but I do not have the knowledge or
modeling ability to translate that change into hurricane intensity. <br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When water vapor in the air is converted to rain, air
pressure drops. Higher initial humidity will
lower air pressure in the center of the hurricane. This means stronger rotation and stronger
winds. Hurricanes are incredibly
efficient at removing humidity from the air.
Almost all of the surface humidity in a hurricane is converted to rain,
as convection drops the temperature of the air from 80 degrees Fahrenheit at the
surface to minus 130 degrees F at the cloud tops. But the initial saturation pressure of water
in air is fairly small. At 86 degrees F
and 80 percent humidity, air contains only 3.3 percent water vapor. Although climate change has raised the
humidity by 5 percent, this means that the surface air in a hurricane now
contains 3.5 percent water vapor. When
the vapor is converted to rain, the difference in air pressure is 0.2
percent. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, temperature and humidity reduce the air density in a
hurricane by 0.5%; additional rain reduces the air pressure by another 0.2 %,
for a total climate-change reduction in air pressure of 0.7%. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Conclusion<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Climate change produces higher temperature and humidity. Those changes push the physical processes of
a hurricane toward stronger convection, more rapid intensification, higher wind
speeds, and greater rainfall. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Quantifying those changes is difficult. Without sophisticated modeling, it is impossible
to say whether the small changes in air density and water vapor can result in a
major change to a storm system. But it
is important to note that hurricanes are feedback systems. Hurricanes start as a mild swirl of air over
the water, or a rain squall no different than any other rain squall. But like the proverbial “butterfly effect”, a
small change in the initial conditions of the hurricane may result in profound
changes in the ultimate intensity of the storm.
Feedback mechanisms in the convection system create the hurricane; it
would not be surprising if those same feedback mechanisms amplify the small
changes due to climate change to create monster storms. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I am generally critical of strictly empirical reasoning in
science. Science is about providing
explanations, identifying, observing and measuring processes which change the
world. But empirical evidence can
support scientific reasoning, and give a clue that an explanation is on the
right track. Currently, the remarkable
2017 hurricane season is supporting the notion that Climate Change is producing
stronger, more frequent storms, with more rapid intensification and heavier
rain.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
References:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog/archives/13930" target="_blank">http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog/archives/13930</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Temperature of cloud tops -90 degrees C.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_humidity#/media/File:Relative_Humidity.png" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_humidity#/media/File:Relative_Humidity.png</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Chart showing mass of water contained in air at 50% and 100%
humidity, as a function of temperature.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Air with 80% humidity at 86 degrees Fahrenheit contains
about 21 grams of water per kilogram of air.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/what-are-the-odds-of-a-super-storm-like-harvey/" target="_blank">https://www.wired.com/story/what-are-the-odds-of-a-super-storm-like-harvey/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tells us there is a roughly 3 percent increase in average
atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5 degrees Celsius of warming<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_da_rh.htm" target="_blank">https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_da_rh.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Air density calculator<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/Texas/humidity-annual.php" target="_blank">https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/Texas/humidity-annual.php</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Average annual humidity for places in Texas.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/Florida/humidity-annual.php" target="_blank">https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/Florida/humidity-annual.php</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Average annual humidity for places in Florida.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/coastal-water-temperature-trends" target="_blank">http://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/coastal-water-temperature-trends</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Temperature change for mid-Gulf surface waters, 1975 to the
present. Average temperatures have
increased by 1.5 degrees F; high temperatures have increased by about 3 degrees
F.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/forecast/modelclimate/gulf-of-mexico-seaplane-base_united-states-of-america_4157685" target="_blank">https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/forecast/modelclimate/gulf-of-mexico-seaplane-base_united-states-of-america_4157685</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Average Gulf of Mexico air temperatures, by month.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_humidity#/media/File:Relative_Humidity.png" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_humidity#/media/File:Relative_Humidity.png</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Mass of water in air at 50% and 100% humidity, as a function
of temperature.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/groups/hurricane-waves/hurricane-faq/" target="_blank">http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/groups/hurricane-waves/hurricane-faq/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hurricane facts. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog/archives/13930" target="_blank">http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog/archives/13930</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cloud top temperatures for hurricane Ingrid, 2013.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/relative-humidity-air-d_687.html" target="_blank">http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/relative-humidity-air-d_687.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Partial pressure of water in saturated air, as a function of
temperature.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Standard Air Pressure<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
14.70 psi<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
1013.25 millibars<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Air Density @ 80 F & 75% humidity: 1.166 kg/m3<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Air Density @ 82 F & 80% humidity: 1.16 kg/m3<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Personal Communication from Profesoor Steve Sherwood,
Climate Change Research Center, UNSW, Australia:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>"The GOES imager
series involve technology upgrades and are not well calibrated, and so are not
well suited for measuring changes in water vapour over time. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>However, the HIRS instrument aboard the NOAA
polar orbiter series which began about the same time is fairly well calibrated,
and does show increases in humidity. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>More recently the microwave radiometers on
board the AMSU series of satellites also show the increases, as does the global
radiosonde and surface-observing networks.
The increases are in line with expectations from thermodynamic
principles (</i><i><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">the Clausius-Clapeyron equation,</span></i><i> </i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clausius%E2%80%93Clapeyron_relation" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clausius%E2%80%93Clapeyron_relation</a><i>) and
climate models. </i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>We are pretty confident that these increases
are indeed causing a storm to dump more rain now than it would have a few
decades ago, all other things being equal."</i><i><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/" target="_blank">http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Real time and archived statistics on global cyclone energy.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-24731757728663256972017-09-22T20:26:00.001-07:002017-10-26T22:20:53.450-07:00Flooding in Houston: Hurricane Harvey and Climate Change<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
September 2017 has been an active and violent hurricane
season in the Atlantic tropical zone. Most
of this post was written following Hurricane Harvey, and before Hurricanes Irma
and Maria. Hurricane Harvey dumped
record-setting volumes of rain on the south Texas coast. Hurricanes Irma
and Maria, occurring in a two-week period, were the strongest hurricanes on
record in the open Atlantic Ocean. For
many years, researchers have warned that climate change would produce stronger
hurricanes -- it seems that the future has arrived.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the simplest analysis, I would ask the following question. Is it more likely that Hurricane
Harvey was a completely natural, unlikely event with a probability of
1:1000, or is it more likely that the storm was made worse by climate change, according to well-understood physical principles and predicted by scientists for over two decades? </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUeUSkFjRb1xtn4ijoc3dLnMabWDs58iroSyxlxhDWKMRptuqRUvYKjXT_eQAYFJzwdJDa5XKHqtOUmdNlE9VW33H-fLlcLI-DbX4HKQNMSFIRot63OfJUmSMt80XiJoWDdlxBIvTpjtxy/s1600/Harvey.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="677" data-original-width="1024" height="422" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUeUSkFjRb1xtn4ijoc3dLnMabWDs58iroSyxlxhDWKMRptuqRUvYKjXT_eQAYFJzwdJDa5XKHqtOUmdNlE9VW33H-fLlcLI-DbX4HKQNMSFIRot63OfJUmSMt80XiJoWDdlxBIvTpjtxy/s640/Harvey.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
------</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In August 2017, Houston Texas became the face of climate
change. More than 20 inches of rain
fell over an area of 28,949 square miles; > 30 inches over 11,492 square
miles; and > 40 inches over 3643 square miles. The maximum rainfall of 52 inches broke the
record for rainfall from a single storm in the contiguous United States. The intensely flooded area received 11 ½
cubic miles of water. Within a few days,
over 300,000 people had already filed claims for federal disaster assistance,
and many more are likely to require assistance in the future. The immediate death toll from the storm was 82, and illnesses relating to the storm are expected to persist for years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiexXpTk4_tkKkxs4sowhq7Dq7uqJO-HX3dU8TuO3uytPx5xCd5BBsk9_q9odU-9nDIHSvReQcBxOvN4dTeQ4ZJeW7KKhAiLR4axKAVveJDQ7u9X97mEV7EzA_SbaZMkF4B1FZqHz5JXI-D/s1600/harvey-precip.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="613" data-original-width="750" height="522" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiexXpTk4_tkKkxs4sowhq7Dq7uqJO-HX3dU8TuO3uytPx5xCd5BBsk9_q9odU-9nDIHSvReQcBxOvN4dTeQ4ZJeW7KKhAiLR4axKAVveJDQ7u9X97mEV7EzA_SbaZMkF4B1FZqHz5JXI-D/s640/harvey-precip.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<o:p>Total Rainfall from Hurricane Harvey, August 30, 2017 </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Climate change is often represented in terms of polar bear
on melting ice; of changing migration patterns for wildlife; of seemingly
trivial changes in long-term average temperatures; of higher sea level in the
next century. All of those are true and
real. But for many Americans, these
issues do not impact their lives. None
of this matters in terms of day-to-day living.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hurricane Harvey is different. It has been called a 1000-year flood by
scientists. This is an expression of the
probability of an event of this magnitude in a given year, based on statistics
of smaller events. The storm dropped an
awe-inspiring quantity of water on the earth, and America’s fourth-largest city
was totally disrupted. There was
certainly no economic productivity from the city for a week, and the damages
are considerable. When floodwaters threatened to destroy Houston's earthen flood-control dams, emergency managers opened the floodgates, deliberately flooding neighborhoods downstream of the dams, to save other neighborhoods in a kind of triage. An estimated 100,000
homes were flooded or damaged by the storm.
Many of them will be totally destroyed after sitting in flood waters for
a month. The human toll in lives and
economic loss is huge. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The damage is personal to me; two of my three former houses in Houston almost certainly flooded. Old friends and former neighbors are dealing with the loss of their homes, cars, and lifelong possessions. A number of deaths occurred in familiar neighborhoods</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEal7urYZ-_0CgCUIXa8H0mrY7wqaKF5sYyOrhcGLqsAD8VtNdYv8jvYz0_jzUlxleLl6ZyoXY5raFtm4OtoL97gjMoAR3b7e9WVkP39CUjVm1YfjuFIDtQGJDMYEg58Z8RlBm4cgy08Y1/s1600/flooded+houses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="800" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEal7urYZ-_0CgCUIXa8H0mrY7wqaKF5sYyOrhcGLqsAD8VtNdYv8jvYz0_jzUlxleLl6ZyoXY5raFtm4OtoL97gjMoAR3b7e9WVkP39CUjVm1YfjuFIDtQGJDMYEg58Z8RlBm4cgy08Y1/s400/flooded+houses.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Image credit Joe Raedle/Getty Images</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh24erJ5i9gt6Ck3rm8Lgu1qQqXzwK9lSw6jdkRZDI0_vZ2je6dJndqVr7qyLDZ0I_RcxwafmKrgNJQJBRsO4NfUvVXUeUtlEqTPjDdRnS_QM6tooPghYk_Os-r8dE7AozNQ1SXqZ7VQthq/s1600/flooded+house+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="401" data-original-width="534" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh24erJ5i9gt6Ck3rm8Lgu1qQqXzwK9lSw6jdkRZDI0_vZ2je6dJndqVr7qyLDZ0I_RcxwafmKrgNJQJBRsO4NfUvVXUeUtlEqTPjDdRnS_QM6tooPghYk_Os-r8dE7AozNQ1SXqZ7VQthq/s400/flooded+house+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<o:p>Image credit: David J. Phillip, AP</o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8MV2H_icfuRHPhxKnC-WMF2sAMqPOgxYeH6DMDKOhG5-2t6nJ7DYAbHOxg-fjGIOdsFvKKfuZSATjt1_ATxFpZi_AgQOraNWNC2sErwccxsEIHvKBZ3gptJ5tu10RZ8lGxd_U0v8pQHBw/s1600/Harvey+flood+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8MV2H_icfuRHPhxKnC-WMF2sAMqPOgxYeH6DMDKOhG5-2t6nJ7DYAbHOxg-fjGIOdsFvKKfuZSATjt1_ATxFpZi_AgQOraNWNC2sErwccxsEIHvKBZ3gptJ5tu10RZ8lGxd_U0v8pQHBw/s400/Harvey+flood+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit: T.B. Shea, AFP/Getty</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOtrAavV0IK2DtTt8OmrTChllF8dE1-wwxn1f0kMcBEwkMt_x_xVspzidzzFM_rSS9xh1nVpS7w24aGAqmT65Z96obcXy1jRKzE2Tqx_PwQgeCwRVFApGd5L9tFiDXIdU-wSwUs0sDYVMj/s1600/Harvey+flood+4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="739" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOtrAavV0IK2DtTt8OmrTChllF8dE1-wwxn1f0kMcBEwkMt_x_xVspzidzzFM_rSS9xh1nVpS7w24aGAqmT65Z96obcXy1jRKzE2Tqx_PwQgeCwRVFApGd5L9tFiDXIdU-wSwUs0sDYVMj/s400/Harvey+flood+4.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<o:p>Image credit: AP</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Climate Change: Prediction and Consequences</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2014 Report includes this statement: “It is very likely that heat waves will
occur more often and last longer, and that <u><b>extreme precipitation events will
become more intense and frequent in many regions</b></u>.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On August 27, 2017, the National Weather Service tweeted
this statement regarding Hurricane Harvey: “<u><b>This event is unprecedented & all impacts are unknown &
beyond anything experienced</b>.</u> Follow orders from officials to ensure safety. #Harvey”.
[Emphasis mine.] <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These statements are not unrelated. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Scientific Analysis</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The full scientific analysis of Hurricane Harvey will not be
known for a long time, probably years.
And uncertainties will remain after the full analysis of all available
data. There are a number of known factors
relating to climate change which will increase hurricane severity – it is
simply physics. These factors include
higher temperatures at the ocean surface, higher temperatures in the upper 200
meters of the ocean, and higher humidity.
The factors are well-established -- the changing temperature of ocean
waters have been observed by NOAA’s ARGO system of buoys since 2004, and by
satellite since the 1980s. Some
scientists have also suggested that climate change is reducing the strength of
upper level winds, though this proposal is not yet considered proved.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Higher temperatures at the ocean surface are believed to
have caused a rapid, late intensification of the storm from category 2 to
category 4 immediately before landfall. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Higher temperatures in the water column are believed to have
reduced the tendency of wave action to bring cooler water to the surface,
weakening the hurricane. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Higher humidity, relating to higher water temperatures and
higher air temperatures, allowed the storm to carry more water than other
storms. Higher humidity and higher
temperatures also lower air density, contributing to the strength of convection and wind speed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At this time, it is unknown how much wind systems have
changed due to climate change, or how much these changes might have affected
Hurricane Harvey. Hurricane Harvey
stalled after moving onshore, caught between stationary high-pressure
systems. High-level winds, which
sometimes reduce convection through wind shear, were also weak through the
hurricane. Quantifying these impacts
using new observations and modeling is the job ahead for scientists. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The specific magnitude of these changes is unknown, but the
known factors contributing to the severity of the hurricane are clear. According to one preliminary estimate, factors
relating to climate change increased the volume of rainfall from Hurricane Harvey by 30%. While this may seem to be only a moderate
increment, thirty percent of extra water is what exceeded the capacity of
flood-control reservoirs, caused neighborhoods to flood, and caused a number of
deaths. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The earliest warning that climate change could result in more frequent and severe hurricanes was published in 1992, and incorporated into the IPCC Second Assessment Report. At that time, there was sparse statistical evidence that hurricanes were becoming worse. In 2017, statistical evidence is still weak. However, science is not all about empiricism. Explanations matter. We understand the physical processes of hurricane convection, the Coriolis effect, and the importance of water temperature, air temperature, humidity and air density. We have observed that these factors are changing due to accumulating greenhouse heat, and will increase the frequency and intensity of hurricanes. <br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At this time, we do not know the specific amount that
climate change contributed to the Hurricane Harvey disaster. But there is a simple, shortcut analysis that
we can do now. Simply consider which
possibility is more likely: whether Hurricane Harvey was an extreme event with
a probability of 1:1000, or whether climate change intensified an ordinary
storm, as predicted by scientists for over twenty years?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWaoehraBbco8ZsvVnfTC4SurOUXUfvzI2LDinB6kYge36J9bHc-PbU5Loo3cZrG4_NuZoVHegyQAium9eSfebSqHPlzUUmzpVx0VKuAbV06QfCZTOO7uh1LNf0kFfoM10MnQNrQHv_veo/s1600/Probability+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWaoehraBbco8ZsvVnfTC4SurOUXUfvzI2LDinB6kYge36J9bHc-PbU5Loo3cZrG4_NuZoVHegyQAium9eSfebSqHPlzUUmzpVx0VKuAbV06QfCZTOO7uh1LNf0kFfoM10MnQNrQHv_veo/s640/Probability+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<o:p> Graphical Representation of 1:1000 Probability Event</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> -------------</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 12.0pt;">References</span></u></b></div>
<a href="http://www.npr.org/2017/09/01/547598676/at-least-100-000-homes-were-affected-by-harvey-moving-back-in-wont-be-easy">http://www.npr.org/2017/09/01/547598676/at-least-100-000-homes-were-affected-by-harvey-moving-back-in-wont-be-easy</a><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/what-are-the-odds-of-a-super-storm-like-harvey/">https://www.wired.com/story/what-are-the-odds-of-a-super-storm-like-harvey/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Long-term temperature is about one degree higher than a few
decades ago. Local conditions were 2.7
degrees to 7.2 degrees F higher than usual.
Humidity rises at about 3 percent per degree C., so humidity during
Harvey was 3% to 5% higher than usual.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
High level winds that typically steer tropical storms
collapsed in 2010. Although a
meteorologist expects the winds to return in a few years, long-term climate
modeling suggests that collapse of steering currents may become more
common. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Speech by Mike Pence<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EO_HH780Jk">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EO_HH780Jk</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06092017/hurricane-irma-harvey-climate-change-warm-atlantic-ocean-questions">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06092017/hurricane-irma-harvey-climate-change-warm-atlantic-ocean-questions</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546748502/how-a-warmer-climate-helped-shape-harvey">http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546748502/how-a-warmer-climate-helped-shape-harvey</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Immediately prior to landfall, and during the time of
intensification to category 4, Harvey over water 4 degrees F warmer than
average.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://cleantechnica.com/2017/08/28/85-degree-water-warmer-normal-air-contributed-hurricane-harvey-strength/">https://cleantechnica.com/2017/08/28/85-degree-water-warmer-normal-air-contributed-hurricane-harvey-strength/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Waters off South Texas were 5 degrees warmer than usual
during Hurricane Harvey.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/article171632462.html">http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/article171632462.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Warm water extended deeper into the water column.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/08/human-influence-may-prolong-ocean-cycle-gave-birth-harvey">http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/08/human-influence-may-prolong-ocean-cycle-gave-birth-harvey</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Atlantic Decadal Oscillation is trending to cooler
temperatures, which may bring cooler waters to the tropics and weaken storms in
coming years. Another researcher suggests that GHG warming
may keep the ADO positive for the coming decade.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/25/16207190/hurricane-harvey-category-four-intensity-warm-water-gulf">https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/25/16207190/hurricane-harvey-category-four-intensity-warm-water-gulf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Background conditions were about 2 degrees warmer than
average, and then warmed further by an eddy of the Gulf Stream Loop Current.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/did-climate-change-intensify-hurricane-harvey/538158/">https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/did-climate-change-intensify-hurricane-harvey/538158/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“The human contribution can be up to 30 percent or so of the
total rainfall coming out of the storm”.
Hurricane waves usually bring cooler water to the surface, which acts as
a buffer to moderate the strength of the storm.
But Hurricane Harvey churned up water 100 m to 200 m below the ocean
surface, but this water was <i>still </i>warm. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/28/16217626/harvey-houston-flood-water-visualized">https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/28/16217626/harvey-houston-flood-water-visualized</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Graphics representing 27 trillion gallons (about 25 cubic
miles) of water. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/31/hurricane-harvey-1000-year-flood/">http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/31/hurricane-harvey-1000-year-flood/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Probability of Hurricane Harvey, based on historical statistics, is 1:1000.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/9/19/16325044/hurricane-2017-health-risks-irma-harvey-pollution-mold-mosquitoes-depression">https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/9/19/16325044/hurricane-2017-health-risks-irma-harvey-pollution-mold-mosquitoes-depression</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Immediate death toll from Hurricane Harvey was 82. A number of serious health effects could
persist for years. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.c2es.org/publications/extreme-weather-and-climate-change">https://www.c2es.org/publications/extreme-weather-and-climate-change</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Daniel Huber, Jay Gulledge, Center for Climate and Energy
Solutions, <u>Extreme Weather and Climate Change</u>, 2011.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“There is a physical basis for expecting hurricanes to have
stronger winds and produce more rainfall due to global warming, and models with
enhanced greenhouse gas levels show an increase in the number of such storms….However,
observational evidence is insufficient to confirm that such a response has
already begun.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sar/wg_II/ipcc_sar_wg_II_full_report.pdf">http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sar/wg_II/ipcc_sar_wg_II_full_report.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
IPCC Second Assessment Report, 1995.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"Direct impacts on infrastructure would most likely occur as
a result of <b>changes in the frequency and
intensity of extreme events</b>. These include coastal storm surges, floods and
landslides induced by local downpours, windstorms, rapid snowmelt, <b>tropical cyclones and hurricanes,</b> and
forest and brush fires made possible in part by more intense or lengthier
droughts."<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“It is presently uncertain whether the frequency and
severity of tropical cyclones will increase due to climate change.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
O'Brien, S.T., B.P Hayden, and H.H. Shugart, 1992: Global
climatic change, hurricanes, and a tropical forest. Climatic Change , 22 ,
1750-1790.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-11849082099311052472017-08-28T16:59:00.000-07:002017-10-26T22:18:44.753-07:00Where is the Dark Matter in the Earth's Core?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
I just finished reading “Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs” by
Harvard University physicist Lisa Randall.
Dr. Randall is an excellent popular science writer, as well as being a
top-flight theoretical physicist. Her
exposition on dark matter gave me most of my exposure to this arcane topic in
modern physics. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My understanding of the topic is shallow, but I think some common-sense
observations provide constraints on the distribution of dark matter, which need
to be recognized in models of dark matter and experiments to find it.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
My biggest question about dark matter is: Where is the dark matter in the earth's core? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Nature of Dark Matter<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dark matter is a form of matter that does not interact with
ordinary matter or energy, except through the force of gravity. A better name for dark matter might be “ghost
matter”, as the lack of interaction with ordinary matter means the dark matter
can occupy the same space as ordinary matter, or pass right through it, undetected. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4BsNxGUE5LYpQGh_Nx90bOesRuXchyphenhyphen9BXjDLM5ySNnmybMpg-R61XOar8zfacc1N3a3u2MRO_aTDFE4m0N4S_MS_l7-heQ5SVWZDXeKHIpPrxSXdLTXEWOAKcTDIcufjioNefcC7hbbcN/s1600/casper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1168" data-original-width="937" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4BsNxGUE5LYpQGh_Nx90bOesRuXchyphenhyphen9BXjDLM5ySNnmybMpg-R61XOar8zfacc1N3a3u2MRO_aTDFE4m0N4S_MS_l7-heQ5SVWZDXeKHIpPrxSXdLTXEWOAKcTDIcufjioNefcC7hbbcN/s320/casper.jpg" width="256" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lisa Randall writes: “Dark matter passes right through our
bodies, and resides in the outside world as well…. Every cubic centimeter
around you contains about a proton’s mass worth of [dark] matter….if those
particles travel at the velocity we expect based on well-understood dynamics,
billions of dark matter particles pass through each of us every second. Yet no one notices that they are there.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is unknown whether dark matter can interact with ordinary
matter at all, except through gravity.
Nevertheless, some theoretical results suggest there may be very weak
interactions, and experiments are in progress seeking to detect dark matter,
either directly or indirectly, through some kind of interaction with ordinary
matter. According to Dr. Randall, it is
also unknown whether dark-matter interacts with itself. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It seems to me that
dark matter is <u>necessarily</u> self-interacting. Evidence (the lack of a distinct dark matter core in the earth) indicates that dark matter has a very low maximum density. Dark matter must exclude other dark matter from occupying the same space. The density of dark matter is much, much lower than regular matter. Dr. Randall states that every cubic
centimeter around you contains about 1 proton’s worth of dark matter. Accordingly, the density of dark matter at
the surface of the earth is only 1.7 x 10<sup>-24</sup> gm/cc, or
1.7/1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000<sup>th</sup> of the density of water.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Evidence of Dark Matter<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dark matter is known through its influence on ordinary
matter, via the force of gravity. It is
observed only on the scale of galaxies or larger structures. Observed gravitational effects suggest that
dark matter actually comprises 85% of the matter in the universe. The evidence for dark matter is mostly derived
from deep-space astronomy and cosmology, as follows.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>The orbital velocities of stars in galaxies are much too
high, given the quantity of ordinary matter in the galaxy. Additional mass, in the form of dark matter,
is required to explain the cohesion of galaxies.</li>
<li>The gravitational lensing of light around galaxies indicates
a much greater mass in the galaxy than can be seen in ordinary matter.</li>
<li>The background radiation of the universe which formed
shortly after the Big Bang shows an irregular distribution, which can only be
explained by gravitational accumulation, requiring more mass than is known to
exist as ordinary matter.</li>
<li>Modeling the development of the universe since the Big Bang
shows that the gravitational influence of dark matter is necessary to create
galaxies in the primordial universe. </li>
<li>Evidence of dark matter can also be seen in the
gravitational lensing of distant objects near colliding galaxies, such as the
spectacular Bullet Cluster. In such
events, dark matter becomes separated from ordinary matter, and is revealed by
observations of separate patches of magnification by gravity lensing.</li>
</ol>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6o5dFeku3HaF-ZMaYwUCvWwtYTI-Jy1be4BCOXLPxoZ7FinCRTdAwmu61ubthySEFyJZLx3N9FihqXh2cJeYjCl3g5w5dvhDsVHDp8dmx04dJUziRNaWIzLmL9lWreb0bxxcR2vDe2op-/s1600/bulletcluster_comp_f2048.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1157" data-original-width="1600" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6o5dFeku3HaF-ZMaYwUCvWwtYTI-Jy1be4BCOXLPxoZ7FinCRTdAwmu61ubthySEFyJZLx3N9FihqXh2cJeYjCl3g5w5dvhDsVHDp8dmx04dJUziRNaWIzLmL9lWreb0bxxcR2vDe2op-/s640/bulletcluster_comp_f2048.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Bullet-Cluster Galaxy. Image credit: NASA</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Local Dark Matter and
Self-Interaction of Dark Matter<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dark matter reveals itself through the force of gravity on a
very large scale – the scale of galaxies or larger structures. But what about smaller settings? What can we deduce about dark matter by its
small-scale behavior?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Black Holes of
Dark Matter<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If there was no exclusionary force to dark matter, particles
of dark matter (which do interact through gravity) would fall together,
presumably to a very high or infinite density.
Without an exclusionary force, dark matter would be particularly prone
to forming black holes from small quantities of dark matter, collapsing to very high density. [Despite the similarity in names and difficulty of observation, dark matter and
black holes are quite different things, and should not be confused.] But we don’t observe the gravitational
influence of lots of small black holes, within the galaxy. If they existed we would notice their
presence by abnormalities in the velocities of stars in the Milky Way, by
gravitational lensing of distant starlight, and by deflections in clouds of
interstellar gas. We don’t see those
things, so there must be an exclusionary force prohibiting the close
association of particles of dark matter. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Dark Matter at the
Center of the Earth<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Also, since dark matter interacts with normal matter only
through gravity, we might expect all of the dark matter in the neighborhood
(that is traveling at less than escape velocity) to fall through the crust and
mantle of the earth, and accumulate in the earth’s center. Since dark matter comprises 80% of the matter
in the universe, we ought to find a substantial gravity anomaly in the earth’s
core, unexplained by the density of normal matter in the core. <br />
<br />
We don’t.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Earth’s
Structure and Core<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We have a very good understanding of the structure and
composition of the earth’s core. The
structure of the core is revealed by the behavior of earthquake seismic energy
as it is transmitted through the earth. Seismic
waves generated by earthquakes travel through the earth, and can be recorded at
most places around the earth following a major earthquake. Compression waves and shear waves travel at
different speeds, and behave differently depending on the nature of the
transmitting media, whether solid or liquid.
The speed of the waves depends mostly on density, and interfaces between
materials of different composition produce both reflections and refraction of
the waves. All of this information
allows us to construct the specific solution of layers, mineral composition,
and phase (liquid or solid) of the interior of the earth. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitmnKN6sJb3X23-AdQKWJMXDTIdhJZKN9fz-TdHgDqFCWG8gBqB6s4eIwDlGqaQQs9MlsnFrheAiSLlvxLdu7Xo5274S5rHwYdykPb6LRU6BVUnd4ib9TDy6HyNjmR0Dje_Z70wTV-NjZw/s1600/seismicb.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="404" data-original-width="541" height="476" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitmnKN6sJb3X23-AdQKWJMXDTIdhJZKN9fz-TdHgDqFCWG8gBqB6s4eIwDlGqaQQs9MlsnFrheAiSLlvxLdu7Xo5274S5rHwYdykPb6LRU6BVUnd4ib9TDy6HyNjmR0Dje_Z70wTV-NjZw/s640/seismicb.gif" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Image credit: Charles Sturt University, via Ethan on ScienceBlogs.com</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The interior of the earth consists of a number of concentric
shells of varying composition and consistency.
Below the atmosphere and oceans, there is the earth’s crust, which
occurs as oceanic and continental components.
Below the crust, the upper mantle
is divided into the lithosphere and asthenosphere. The crust and mantle are composed of silicate
minerals. The crust and lithosphere are
rigid, and move as plates on the ductile asthenosphere. The lower mantle is also ductile, and deforms
plastically to form convection cells, driving the motions of the shallower
plates. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKZJG0yvbb3qCyQkwCtutYffX-u28edu6ZHLaJ2xJtDAuSlbBrkktJEz1xYGoWi7_FcfWgFGNgoDyNvfTNHopAcV3JIXZJ4DSxBbyBdFe2TS0K_TUTRk2hYxlqe9mEhNh4o9ghpVOAebA_/s1600/dreamstime_xl_27140980-Custom.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="900" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKZJG0yvbb3qCyQkwCtutYffX-u28edu6ZHLaJ2xJtDAuSlbBrkktJEz1xYGoWi7_FcfWgFGNgoDyNvfTNHopAcV3JIXZJ4DSxBbyBdFe2TS0K_TUTRk2hYxlqe9mEhNh4o9ghpVOAebA_/s640/dreamstime_xl_27140980-Custom.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Image Credit: Wonderopolis.org</div>
<br />
The earth’s core is primarily composed of iron and nickel, with
a small amount of lighter elements. A
huge clue to the composition of the core exists in form of iron-nickel
meteorites, which are derived from some proto-planet in the early solar system. Iron-nickel meteorites typically contain
nickel in concentrations of about 6% to 10%.
Gravity shows that the density of the core is about 3% lighter than pure
iron, implying about 10% of lighter constituents, probably silicon, oxygen and
sulfur. Nickel is slightly denser than
iron, so higher nickel concentrations would imply correspondingly higher
concentrations of light elements to compensate in overall density.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Seismic studies show that the inner core is solid, and the
outer core is liquid. Convection in the
liquid outer core accounts for the earth’s magnetic field. The mineral composition of the inner core can
be replicated and studied using high-pressure tools in the laboratory. The combination of seismic studies, gravity
studies, mineral composition studies, meteorite studies, and magnetic studies
yields a model that fully explains all observations about the earth’s
core. No dark matter is indicated by the
observations; rather, the introduction of dark matter would require
unreasonable changes to the most logical interpretation for the composition of
the core. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYQCiyK2UUl1enZ9jsB3nfjSTkDPyQFxvammICipSVPTH6IJyrYbROu4cTMy04YZb3aaZXmKSHWp7B1I05A2aVP7OD_FWXK_V6ppH7Il21PLWtjyRAuYz6uShjRWRgxcYNLrIns-lrRz_w/s1600/RadialDensityPREM.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="606" data-original-width="919" height="422" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYQCiyK2UUl1enZ9jsB3nfjSTkDPyQFxvammICipSVPTH6IJyrYbROu4cTMy04YZb3aaZXmKSHWp7B1I05A2aVP7OD_FWXK_V6ppH7Il21PLWtjyRAuYz6uShjRWRgxcYNLrIns-lrRz_w/s640/RadialDensityPREM.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Model of the Earth's density from the center to the surface. Image credit Wikipedia.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6fxrKUwqGnviEU5wvIClcixux_Sru6MeWoaQsvT5DPEaTLdsfVmi_5fl60TXKuW8ecRzPzrcWvEuVcUV-4kNr_OvUOBEn1IokDZqUSHOK03W1ppw_MadWeHneszZ5q6jwCqAuEA7u6lhi/s1600/EarthGravityPREM.svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="510" data-original-width="750" height="434" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6fxrKUwqGnviEU5wvIClcixux_Sru6MeWoaQsvT5DPEaTLdsfVmi_5fl60TXKuW8ecRzPzrcWvEuVcUV-4kNr_OvUOBEn1IokDZqUSHOK03W1ppw_MadWeHneszZ5q6jwCqAuEA7u6lhi/s640/EarthGravityPREM.svg.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Model of the Earth's gravity from the center to outer space. Image credit: Wikipedia</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Dark Matter in the
Cores of Stars<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The sun is a delicately balanced fusion engine. The heat generated by hydrogen fusion
produces an expansion force, which is balanced by the gravity of the star. When the balance is disrupted by the
exhaustion of nuclear fuel, the star becomes unstable, exploding as a nova or
supernova, or collapsing into a white dwarf, a neutron star or a black
hole. The processes of nuclear fusion
are known and well-quantified as a result of nuclear weapons research and
super-collider experiments. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Any gravitational anomaly in the sun or in the theoretical
models of other stars would surely be noticed, and would be glaringly apparent
to scientists studying stars. We have to
conclude that there is no dark matter accumulated in the cores of stars. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Evidence from Spacecraft<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dark matter may exist as a “soup” of uniform density larger
than the solar system, so that there is equal gravitational attraction in all
directions. In this case, no anomaly
could be detected, because the gravitational influence of dark matter would be
the same in all directions. By analogy,
a point at the exact center of the earth would be weightless, subject to equal
gravity in all directions. But even in
this case, as objects move in some direction through the soup, differential
gravity should be detectable if there are heterogeneities or nearby limits to
the dark matter soup. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Our best experiments to find dark matter in the Solar System
are the Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft. Data from the Pioneer spacecraft was last
received in 2002 and 1995, respectively, but the probes lasted long enough to
identify a potential gravity anomaly in the solar system, the Pioneer Anomaly. As I read Lisa Randall’s book about Dark
Matter, I initially thought that the Pioneer Anomaly might be the expression of
dark matter in the solar system, but subsequent reading revealed that the
anomaly was robustly explained in 2012 as a thermal recoil phenomenon relating
to the spacecraft itself. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Voyager spacecraft are now the most distant man-made
objects from earth. Both are still
transmitting, at distances of 12.9 billion miles (19 light-hours) away, and
10.7 billion miles (16 light-hours) away, respectively. The craft are traveling at roughly a right
angle to each other, providing two long baselines to measure any gravity
anomalies in those directions, revealed by an unaccounted-for acceleration of
the spacecraft. None have been detected.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusions<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Any theory of dark matter must account for the lack of
detectable dark matter in the cores of planets and stars. The lack of a detectable dark matter core in
these places is strong evidence that dark matter is self-interacting. There must be a property of dark matter that
prevents dark matter from accumulating at high density. This exclusionary force must act on at least
the scale of a planet, and probably on the scale of the solar system. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The exclusionary force places a limit on the maximum density
of dark matter. To the best we can now
recognize, that limit is the detectable limit of density anomalies in the sun
or the earth. It is a very small density
compared to the density of ordinary matter.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The lack of acceleration anomalies in distant spacecraft
shows the large-scale homogeneity of dark matter surrounding the solar
system. At this time, I don’t know the
limits of velocity determinations of the Voyager spacecraft, but I think that
these long-distance measurements would be quite sensitive to a local density anomaly. It would be a worthwhile exercise to
calculate the effect of a dark-matter accumulation (such as Dr. Randall’s
posited dark-matter disk within the Milky Way) on the velocities of the
spacecraft, and see if the results would be within the tolerance of the
spacecraft velocity measurements. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If not for the robust evidence of dark matter in cosmology, it
would be tempting to dismiss the idea of dark matter entirely. But perhaps the finding that there is an
exclusionary force limiting the density of dark matter can be a clue to
identifying the true nature of dark matter.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Maybe dark matter doesn’t fit the particle model of matter
at all. At this time, all we know is
that it is very sparsely dispersed gravity.
But the particle theory of matter has proven very useful at explaining
most of our reality. We shouldn’t give
up on it too easily. We should think for
a moment about what constraints our observations put on a particle theory of
dark matter. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ordinary matter and dark matter are clearly different in
scale. A proton excludes other protons
on the scale of 0.8414 x 10<sup>-15</sup> linear meters. If we assume a particle of dark matter has
the same density as a proton, each dark matter particle must exclude other dark
particles on the scale of 0.02 linear meters.
The ordinary proton occupies a volume of about 3 x 10<sup>-46</sup>
cubic meters, and a dark matter particle of the same mass would occupy a volume
of 1 x 10<sup>-6</sup> cubic meters, a difference of 40 orders of magnitude. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps the difference in size between ordinary matter and
dark matter is the sole reason for the undetectability of dark matter. It seems to me that electrical and other
interactions between normal particles occur because the wave properties of the
particles have similar wavelengths. The
waves can interfere, and therefore interact.
With wave properties of vastly different sizes, there is no
interference, and therefore no interaction.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I am not optimistic about the present round of experiments
looking for dark matter, as described by Dr. Randall. If you are looking for an elephant with an
electron microscope, you are likely to be unsuccessful. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What kind of experiments could reveal particles which exist
at a scale many orders of magnitude larger than ordinary matter? I don’t know.
The electromagnetic spectrum is well-explored on that scale, and reveals
nothing. Perhaps other forces need to be
synthesized, and examined at larger scales.
There may be practical technological benefits if instruments can be
developed that directly detect dark matter.
Perhaps, such instruments could provide the ability to manipulate other
forces, such as a way to generate, shape and manipulate artificial gravitational
fields, in the way that artificial magnetic fields have been generated and used
for almost 200 years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That would be a real advance for mankind.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>References<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lisa Randall, <u>Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs; The
Astonishing Interconnectedness of the Universe,</u> 2015, 432p.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://jersey.uoregon.edu/~mstrick/AskGeoMan/geoQuerry57.html">http://jersey.uoregon.edu/~mstrick/AskGeoMan/geoQuerry57.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Density of the Outer Core (liquid): 9.9 to 12.2 gm/cc<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Density of the Inner Core (solid): 12.6 to 13.0 gm/cc<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Geophys/earthstruct.html">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Geophys/earthstruct.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="background: #FFE4C8; mso-cellspacing: 1.5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Thickness (km)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td colspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Density (g/cm<sup>3</sup>)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Types of rock found<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Top<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Bottom<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Crust<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
30<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
2.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Silicic rocks<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
2.9<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Andesite, basalt at base<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Upper mantle<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
720<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
3.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Peridotite, eclogite, olivine, spinel, garnet, pyroxene<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
4.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Perovskite, oxides<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Lower mantle<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
2,171<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
4.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Magnesium and silicon oxides<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
5.6<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Outer core<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
2,259<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
9.9<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Iron + oxygen, sulfur, nickel alloy<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
12.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Inner core<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,221<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
12.8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td rowspan="2" style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Iron + oxygen, sulfur, nickel alloy<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"></td>
<td style="padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
13.1<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.spring8.or.jp/pdf/en/res_fro/11/106-107.pdf">http://www.spring8.or.jp/pdf/en/res_fro/11/106-107.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://slideplayer.com/slide/6951274/">http://slideplayer.com/slide/6951274/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRtGUCLjQ3w">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRtGUCLjQ3w</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1068797116000043">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1068797116000043</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Composition of the earth’s core.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_core">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_core</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The core is about 3% lighter than pure iron, implying about
10% of lighter constituents, probably silicon, oxygen, and sulfur.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/voyager/mission/status/">https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/voyager/mission/status/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_Hlk491052505">Voyager 1: 12.9 billion miles (19
light-hours) away. <o:p></o:p></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Voyager 2: 10.7
billion miles (16 light-hours) away.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/missions/archive/pioneer.html">https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/missions/archive/pioneer.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The last data received from Pioneer 10 was in 2002. The last data received from Pioneer 11 was in
1995.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/07/12/the-size-of-the-proton/">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/07/12/the-size-of-the-proton/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
[The new] measurement measured [a proton] to be
0.8418±0.0007 fm. A femtometer is 10<sup>-15</sup>
meters<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-76666266906166273762017-07-04T17:07:00.000-07:002017-07-25T23:23:40.063-07:00The Global Heat Budget<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Something odd is going on in the oceans. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The oceans are apparently becoming more efficient at absorbing
greenhouse gas heat from the atmosphere. Or, we are becoming better at quantifying the amount of man-made heat entering into earth systems.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to published figures, the percentage of greenhouse
gas heat entering the ocean has risen from less than 50% in the 1970s to over 92% today. While the data from earlier
years might be suspect, recent, high-quality data confirms the earlier pattern. The apparent change suggests we need to understand the cause of the higher rate of heat transfer to the oceans. It may be that the rising rate of heat
transfer is due to higher air temperatures, or there may be another explanation
for the change. If the rising rate of
heat transfer is real, it begs the question of what was happening to the excess
heat in earlier years.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
In this post, I include other sources of man-made heat to calculate a world heat budget, comparing the quantity of man-made heat with the quantity of heat observed entering the oceans, atmosphere and melting ice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Part I. Anthropogenic Heat<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b>Greenhouse Gases<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In this post, we’ll look at the earth’s heat budget relating
to greenhouse gases and other man-made sources of heat. Greenhouse gases retain heat in the atmosphere,
because they are transparent to much of the sun’s radiation spectrum, but
opaque to most of the infrared thermal radiation. Visible radiation from the sun penetrates the
atmosphere and strikes the earth, but is trapped after being converted to infrared
thermal radiation, instead of radiating back into space. Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases
trap increasing amounts of the sun’s heat.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We can calculate how much heat is retained, depending on the
concentration of the gas. We can look at
the history of how greenhouse gas concentrations have changed, and calculate
how much heat was retained a few years ago as compared to today. And we can forecast how much heat will be
retained in the future, and estimate what will happen because of the extra
heat.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The amount of heat trapped by greenhouse gases was measured
in laboratory measurements beginning in the late 1800s. The Swedish chemist Arrhenius calculated the
planetary warming that would result from doubling the amount of CO2 in the air,
and published his results in 1896. The
high-altitude chemistry of the atmosphere was measured in high-altitude flights
around the globe, improving the estimates of how much heat was trapped at
varying concentrations of greenhouse gases.
Upcoming satellite missions will define the incoming and outgoing heat
budget with even greater detail, unless cancelled by the current
administration. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
publishes a measure of the heat retained due to greenhouse gases, termed
radiative forcing, reported in units of watts per meter squared (W/m2),
equivalent to joules per second per meter squared (J/sm2). NOAA's figures are global averages, with corrections for angle of incidence and cloudiness included. From radiative forcing, we can calculate the
global heat retained by each gas by multiplying by the cross-sectional area of
the earth, and the time interval of interest.
Here is the annual global heat retained by various greenhouse gases, as
reported by NOAA. The heat retained by
non-CO2 greenhouse gases was extrapolated for years that no data was available
(1955 – 1978), assuming a constant ratio to CO2 for the earliest data
available. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 1. Annual Heat from Greenhouse Gases</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOCEC2wYj8hnSRH1AqfxMPjty8sr7H253A93fcCUcYmEsy3wTFZsqxoUIb4yaJ3AVTgpjLHOUKg2aqYqD_GdJoSH1xgTZc07bvtVkOWkP0Hy1B66ZTv8tQDgdL2TZhb-6o9JYsVpthyyi2/s1600/Figure+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1029" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOCEC2wYj8hnSRH1AqfxMPjty8sr7H253A93fcCUcYmEsy3wTFZsqxoUIb4yaJ3AVTgpjLHOUKg2aqYqD_GdJoSH1xgTZc07bvtVkOWkP0Hy1B66ZTv8tQDgdL2TZhb-6o9JYsVpthyyi2/s640/Figure+1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The annual heat retained by greenhouse gases has increased
by 75% since 1979, driven primarily by increases in atmospheric CO2
concentrations. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The amount of heat retained by greenhouse gases is huge. The annual heat retained by greenhouse gases
in 2016 is 1.23 x 10<sup>22</sup> joules, which is equivalent to about 533,000 Hiroshima-sized
atomic bombs, every day, or one bomb a day on a grid of about 20 miles spacing,
all over the world. Fortunately, only a
small fraction of that heat remains in the atmosphere, as we will see when we discuss
heat sinks.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Primary Heat
from Fossil Fuels, Nuclear Energy and Deforestation<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For completeness and to give a sense of scale to the
greenhouse effect, we can add other man-made additions to the earth’s heat
budget. Primary heat from fossil fuels and
nuclear energy is published by the Energy Information Administration. The volumes of biomass consumed by
deforestation are uncertain, but I used published figures to estimate the
primary heat derived from deforestation, through combustion or decay, using
thermal values for combustion of wood, after corrections for moisture.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Heat from Agriculture<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Heat from agriculture is another source of anthropogenic
heat, through the decay, combustion or consumption of agricultural
biomass. For the volume of agricultural
biomass, I used data from the United Nations Environment Programme for the year 2009, and scaled that number in
other years in proportion to world population.
Agricultural biomass displaces natural biomass, so I assumed an
arbitrary 50% gain in productivity in agricultural biomass, as a result of
irrigation and fertilizer. I again used
the thermal values for the combustion of wood, after corrections for moisture.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The sum of these inputs provides the history of human-caused
heat to the earth’s heat budget, from 1955 – 2016.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 2. Man-made Heat from All Sources, 1955 - 2015.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOBsmvWTArbxMxOoa4QPJW6Dv0s26iqsSX1J9uqsQKdS1-y00c2XaROSSVc8A7_s8hFqKhxL2O3y2yEDjTTimewdUrhUPllOj4tsnxuKJthrylTfXndbNRTxpwUKdMfFdppMTOngU5ee7o/s1600/Figure+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOBsmvWTArbxMxOoa4QPJW6Dv0s26iqsSX1J9uqsQKdS1-y00c2XaROSSVc8A7_s8hFqKhxL2O3y2yEDjTTimewdUrhUPllOj4tsnxuKJthrylTfXndbNRTxpwUKdMfFdppMTOngU5ee7o/s640/Figure+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Part II. Heat Sinks<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To understand climate change, it is necessary to understand
what happens to the heat retained by greenhouse gases. Where is the heat going, and what is it doing
to the planet? The goal is to quantify
the heat budget for the earth, and look at how it has changed over the past
several decades. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are three main heat sinks we can measure: the ocean,
the atmosphere, and volumes of melted ice.
I have used different methods to estimate the heat consumed by these
processes, depending upon the data available.
It is quickly apparent that the ocean is the most significant heat sink.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Ocean
Temperature<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The temperature distribution of the ocean is seasonal,
heterogeneous, and changing. Maps of
ocean temperatures at various depths can be seen on NOAA’s website. Temperature data prior to 2000 was dependent
on ship tracks, and variable methods of data collection. These datasets had clusters of dense
measurements in shipping lanes, and large gaps with no data. The calculation of heat content is somewhat
uncertain. Beginning in 2000, NOAA
launched ARGO, a system of free-floating buoys measuring ocean
temperatures. Today there are 3849
active buoys, which periodically dive to depths of 2000 meters, measuring
temperatures within one-thousandth of a degree C, and returning to the surface
every ten days to broadcast measurements to satellite receivers. Here is a map of the current buoy locations. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 3. Map of
Current Location of ARGO Temperature Buoys, June 27, 2017.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-sizt-0QM3BX6O2vId7x_h2aVxvUgAf_ajeewrvv02u95PiWNrCHui4-gQvz6dS7vSPUUz1Ghg98zGsWq6WIwnnUZzffrlk5PUiwhS1Jf1IvwqSMrQSU_3eYlXRzYsiZzHZEZqKVdo3tm/s1600/ARGO.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="732" data-original-width="1600" height="292" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-sizt-0QM3BX6O2vId7x_h2aVxvUgAf_ajeewrvv02u95PiWNrCHui4-gQvz6dS7vSPUUz1Ghg98zGsWq6WIwnnUZzffrlk5PUiwhS1Jf1IvwqSMrQSU_3eYlXRzYsiZzHZEZqKVdo3tm/s640/ARGO.gif" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The temperature rise noted over the past 50 years is
relatively small, at 0.1 degrees C, but is two orders of magnitude more than
the sensitivity of the ARGO instruments.
This temperature change represents an enormous amount of heat because of
the huge volume of water and large heat capacity of the ocean. As we might expect, the temperature of the shallow ocean is rising much faster than the temperature of the deep ocean.<o:p></o:p><br />
Figure 4. Ocean Temperature 0 -- 100 meters, NOAA<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhatCsPvusBavIAcWSbVNWk6gkuggkE5dxAKXGMySTRgDSLNFKI5G0dd2R0XTrr9tKhyYXtoBb-wpbbNlACrWAjPLe74qGoDNg1fnW3XuKoBjatRY8lkqJMAvB0eJwvZfhzJZ3qcdI1iefr/s1600/meantemp_0-100m.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="381" data-original-width="567" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhatCsPvusBavIAcWSbVNWk6gkuggkE5dxAKXGMySTRgDSLNFKI5G0dd2R0XTrr9tKhyYXtoBb-wpbbNlACrWAjPLe74qGoDNg1fnW3XuKoBjatRY8lkqJMAvB0eJwvZfhzJZ3qcdI1iefr/s640/meantemp_0-100m.png" width="640" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 5. Ocean
Temperature 0 – 700 meters, NOAA<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigBXr13Xtylw8FmZzERIebMR8zvY5mHLGPNQTP6SaNOH7yDSE0AU5RDAEg1GVeTZ4qt54XgvK81hYWC9Ur3cYm_LaO4yH_bsAFchlaSnOSso_mpq7f43GueMWub0WQkpS8LLTAdW8lRX7-/s1600/ocean+temp+700m.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="570" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigBXr13Xtylw8FmZzERIebMR8zvY5mHLGPNQTP6SaNOH7yDSE0AU5RDAEg1GVeTZ4qt54XgvK81hYWC9Ur3cYm_LaO4yH_bsAFchlaSnOSso_mpq7f43GueMWub0WQkpS8LLTAdW8lRX7-/s640/ocean+temp+700m.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 6. Ocean
Temperature 0 – 2000 meters, NOAA<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-3UW2YkEbFVcsIH945NXs4tjjup3sxrS-2eQBe0nO5XjdQdaIMog98MO8I3ZMrUhfquZ81cUyikA9ZceUEWcv8Ok66RFqeR8ot1S5X4zlNeWu2PwnnQFqGC9EH825pQvP3m82mhZKav7S/s1600/ocean+temp+2000m.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="571" height="428" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-3UW2YkEbFVcsIH945NXs4tjjup3sxrS-2eQBe0nO5XjdQdaIMog98MO8I3ZMrUhfquZ81cUyikA9ZceUEWcv8Ok66RFqeR8ot1S5X4zlNeWu2PwnnQFqGC9EH825pQvP3m82mhZKav7S/s640/ocean+temp+2000m.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) published a chart of ocean heat content from 1957 through 2016. NOAA did not publish the specific data used
to generate the plot, so I have made an eye-ball fit to the data using a smooth
function in Excel. The NOAA chart, and
my overlay of a smoothed function, is shown below. The smoothed function allows me to calculate
the annual change in ocean heat content. As we will see when we compare heat sources to heat sinks, the heat absorbed by the ocean is very close to the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 7. Cumulative
Ocean Heat Content, NOAA, 1956 - 2016.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ531yGLa5KzKczSi-rrQXtN1V9yuB5avhlhRN_XJ4KDNeJcAHOjz4-zqS02oqQ3UVfKmuSX-MMnwOJGgL096nnKifRdmKePLLj9bcHXmQVDR3_-9-17IsDdNZXnY5UvpJ4B_uq3qfXT0U/s1600/Figure+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="989" data-original-width="1469" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ531yGLa5KzKczSi-rrQXtN1V9yuB5avhlhRN_XJ4KDNeJcAHOjz4-zqS02oqQ3UVfKmuSX-MMnwOJGgL096nnKifRdmKePLLj9bcHXmQVDR3_-9-17IsDdNZXnY5UvpJ4B_uq3qfXT0U/s640/Figure+3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 8. Annual Change in Ocean Heat Content.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhDkE5sxrF3AqdnF2C7I_KQhm7O3tqOv2lcF2JwbPt0Aj8Ojltt4DYVw6YmnFr6sxn6JCRq6m-iFnl3Zy1vCfERPFax4YulylvZeJ8EuNfutZAuLnnPTXj4CFcDRvrWU2-R784f0PJJUr6/s1600/Figure+4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhDkE5sxrF3AqdnF2C7I_KQhm7O3tqOv2lcF2JwbPt0Aj8Ojltt4DYVw6YmnFr6sxn6JCRq6m-iFnl3Zy1vCfERPFax4YulylvZeJ8EuNfutZAuLnnPTXj4CFcDRvrWU2-R784f0PJJUr6/s640/Figure+4.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 8 shows the annualized change in ocean heat content from my smoothed
version of NOAA’s heat content chart, 0 – 2000 meters. The change in heat content is constantly
positive, but the rate of change dipped in the 1960s, before a continuous
acceleration in heat content from the 1970s to the present.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Atmosphere<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Similarly, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) published a table of average global surface air temperatures. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 9. Surface air
temperature, 1880 – 2016, NOAA.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8vge5PmDwpe4eFEOwLwOmePmYFNZ7rUAV_4clws153s_yuu7RyFGxTM_7Z4capABhOr37SLsaEbW8nyog0GMkmxp-CrK2hJX0g0d8jvMJlZ4L0TLcUesPCB_DWzfNKVarrwKNUxszbJbW/s1600/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="427" data-original-width="825" height="330" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8vge5PmDwpe4eFEOwLwOmePmYFNZ7rUAV_4clws153s_yuu7RyFGxTM_7Z4capABhOr37SLsaEbW8nyog0GMkmxp-CrK2hJX0g0d8jvMJlZ4L0TLcUesPCB_DWzfNKVarrwKNUxszbJbW/s640/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 10. Surface air
temperature, 1955 – 2016, with polynomial regression to the data, NASA.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj11nemHJCtByCwFdp4EqS3UsuOFT47f4g49aFM968flnJlaiTLey7joVpaypOBWbaAsR3l3IEDJAitjHyuoEoO-21Vcqq6YtV6NVhV-rRfTn47Pxbh1g7SBCPCXoqSvk7PIzvwfY53hQo-/s1600/Air+Temp+1955_2016.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1030" data-original-width="1422" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj11nemHJCtByCwFdp4EqS3UsuOFT47f4g49aFM968flnJlaiTLey7joVpaypOBWbaAsR3l3IEDJAitjHyuoEoO-21Vcqq6YtV6NVhV-rRfTn47Pxbh1g7SBCPCXoqSvk7PIzvwfY53hQo-/s640/Air+Temp+1955_2016.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Assuming that the surface temperature change is
representative of the atmosphere as a whole (or at least, the majority of the
heat content), I calculated the annual change in atmospheric heat content. The heat content of the atmosphere is
significantly smaller than the heat content of the oceans despite a larger
change in temperature, due to the very high heat capacity of water compared to
air. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 11. Annual
change in Atmospheric Heat Content.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBAIpU6FrbvEQv-zNb2S4Qcirn8oX80qYJ-6Qu9ISWEuzvNAVHMxf209RG3FPs8fL8HEIFu4uWJ49-qZ2GnsMeMTjy0cexD_AypWFOARSTvDlttzEHSDXM4db1mnK4IsRBZVTu8pAoa5Hg/s1600/atmosphere+heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBAIpU6FrbvEQv-zNb2S4Qcirn8oX80qYJ-6Qu9ISWEuzvNAVHMxf209RG3FPs8fL8HEIFu4uWJ49-qZ2GnsMeMTjy0cexD_AypWFOARSTvDlttzEHSDXM4db1mnK4IsRBZVTu8pAoa5Hg/s640/atmosphere+heat.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Melting Ice<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA has used satellites and overflights to measure the
changing volumes of ice on the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. The determinations have been based on a
combination of satellite gravity measurements, surface elevation measurements,
and ice-penetrating radar measurements (from overflights). Most of the high-quality surveys have
occurred since the early 2000s, in particular NASA’s GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) gravity-measurement
satellite, which was launched in 2002.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 12. Mass loss in Antarctica measured by NASA's GRACE satellite.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJP6iaSUJKID1a0tUAcPMKQHnrqPiT49gubON1wXccEkZL7SV0kGQArFurzlDqtVEdJ70sWOixZeafJVIcz82yur1WB59kOmNPDo-OBgN7O3tuFJDl41M5YKvxyHTTiOanotdJ2gBS6mdO/s1600/LandIceAntarctica+%25282%2529.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="590" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJP6iaSUJKID1a0tUAcPMKQHnrqPiT49gubON1wXccEkZL7SV0kGQArFurzlDqtVEdJ70sWOixZeafJVIcz82yur1WB59kOmNPDo-OBgN7O3tuFJDl41M5YKvxyHTTiOanotdJ2gBS6mdO/s640/LandIceAntarctica+%25282%2529.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 13. Mass loss in Greenland measured by NASA's GRACE satellite.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhv-TlvTm0BV04pvK1Gd21dIg_smWV_GJb0xfz89Ifp88LHhrweK24sin7yRUFLznvyilbnTRMS6caxT_motpRUM-WD_9Jh3GOut9iIfZfDvqEmgFfkF3H8ihPjkAvU1y3SDhI41ADUSynR/s1600/LandIceGreenland+%25282%2529.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="590" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhv-TlvTm0BV04pvK1Gd21dIg_smWV_GJb0xfz89Ifp88LHhrweK24sin7yRUFLznvyilbnTRMS6caxT_motpRUM-WD_9Jh3GOut9iIfZfDvqEmgFfkF3H8ihPjkAvU1y3SDhI41ADUSynR/s640/LandIceGreenland+%25282%2529.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Separately, the volumes of continental glaciers and ice sheets (other than Greenland and Antarctica) have been separately studied through an inventory of photos and elevation maps, and published as a time-series of melted ice volumes. Volumes of melted ice from all three sources were reported in a single chart by Shuang Yi, et al, 2015. As I did with NOAA data for oceans and temperatures, I fitted a smooth polynomial function to the published charts, and then extracted the annual change in melted ice for all three sources. I should note that mass-loss data from NASA’s GRACE satellite shows about 10% smaller volume of ice loss than Shuang et al. Shuang et al presumably incorporated other sources of information, including ice-penetrating radar, altimetry and flow measurements from other studies.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 14. Ice Loss
from Antarctica, Greenland, and other Glaciers, Shuang Yi et al, 2015, with
overlay of smoothed polynomial functions.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbUEwUoE39rJiGFie-kyNZyikDsQxivr3dvyoqpfQlfvXtOPQK-CyHkLS1Byr6LGooFTqBdYssZ5QXXuysNDvCxeRMQfaWROTHKvxym-_Ua910YhzbXp-3tHyBSP6LsiD-JuXKYzcSIqwp/s1600/Ice+Loss.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1079" data-original-width="1176" height="586" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbUEwUoE39rJiGFie-kyNZyikDsQxivr3dvyoqpfQlfvXtOPQK-CyHkLS1Byr6LGooFTqBdYssZ5QXXuysNDvCxeRMQfaWROTHKvxym-_Ua910YhzbXp-3tHyBSP6LsiD-JuXKYzcSIqwp/s640/Ice+Loss.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Image Credit: Shuang Yi et al, 2015.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Finally, I calculated a volume of ice melted in the Arctic
sea-ice, based on simple assumptions of new ice thickness (1 m) and multi-year
ice (2 m), and the changing areas reported for new and multi-year ice. The volume of melting Arctic sea-ice is
relatively trivial compared to the volumes melting from glaciers and
ice-sheets, but is still indicative of the overall melting trend in the Arctic.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 15. Diminishing Arctic Sea Ice, 1953 - 2010, image credit, National Snow and Ice Center.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUpJdDOgX5rRxLW_LEFsHNBB1g6DGCHCZQS0K3IdT03e-RPGn278NzanmT8NFtLnXg8WsFNsW_U6IzuBY7msOAkDYV5JuRliuv504XtJqdJeuZ7W2JM9PcfTZV82DY7B8AIJCUsNo3VXfT/s1600/mean_anomaly_1953-2010.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="380" data-original-width="600" height="404" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUpJdDOgX5rRxLW_LEFsHNBB1g6DGCHCZQS0K3IdT03e-RPGn278NzanmT8NFtLnXg8WsFNsW_U6IzuBY7msOAkDYV5JuRliuv504XtJqdJeuZ7W2JM9PcfTZV82DY7B8AIJCUsNo3VXfT/s640/mean_anomaly_1953-2010.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I assumed that the volume of ice would need to be heated by
10 degrees Celsius before melting, based on temperature profiles from drilling on
the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
I then applied the heat of crystallization to the volumes of ice melted
to obtain the total heat absorbed by melting ice. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 16. Heat
consumed by Global Melting Ice, 2004 – 2015.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhk9In0g4KYKjNFnMBFN-6TXkm4dcGqPKY4yMfdb18W0_p3sraf1WCJLN40HrZSOZcqbyYnkloSGIRlTdwXVOwDzcARBecfs1OwqGWgTJsRi-Ekk0yurlFw1xZKr-g8X1VHxsufpMZ5mx3T/s1600/Ice+Melt+Heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhk9In0g4KYKjNFnMBFN-6TXkm4dcGqPKY4yMfdb18W0_p3sraf1WCJLN40HrZSOZcqbyYnkloSGIRlTdwXVOwDzcARBecfs1OwqGWgTJsRi-Ekk0yurlFw1xZKr-g8X1VHxsufpMZ5mx3T/s640/Ice+Melt+Heat.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The sum of oceanic, atmospheric, and melting ice heat sinks
is shown below. The ocean is by far the
dominant heat sink. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 17. Global
Heat Absorbed by Heat Sinks.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfA9-biBSCt5crq4npw8L2aZMYWA5zJyq4wjWelXI_nB9L01FW5pfHpQFdJVHUQth3i9hC27r1Zf_HqUWBKFDtzZKAQRFasD613xhylxQhAkXXRFg3QywNVADmfzdykWcXPs7B6iJtkdvk/s1600/New+heat+sinks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfA9-biBSCt5crq4npw8L2aZMYWA5zJyq4wjWelXI_nB9L01FW5pfHpQFdJVHUQth3i9hC27r1Zf_HqUWBKFDtzZKAQRFasD613xhylxQhAkXXRFg3QywNVADmfzdykWcXPs7B6iJtkdvk/s640/New+heat+sinks.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite all of the news about rising atmospheric temperatures
and volumes of melted ice, the ocean is absorbing the lion’s share of heat
around the earth. By comparison to the
oceans, heat consumed by atmospheric heating and melting ice is
negligible. In 2016, the ocean absorbed
about 96% of rising heat, compared to a little over 1% for the atmosphere, and
3% for melting ice. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Part III. The Heat Budget: Retained Heat and Heat Consumed<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Greenhouse Gas
Heat and Ocean Heat Content<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The simplest (but incomplete) expression of the planetary
heat budget is the comparison between annual heat retained by greenhouse gases
and the rising heat content of the oceans. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 18. Annual
Greenhouse Gas Heat and Annual Change in Ocean Heat Content<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicC0NoN7NfrrXfeBmmGVqvFtEbfE5oz6umGy4QSWO4En0sSn6bornB3XQZ3qSJ75V5Gh-sCyedKmvYHXH7CaPf1_wJFTjnrfDFJZHBcHQjhwsJ-TdgK1bYUEsUIrc-JXvisxv6bZip0L4Q/s1600/13+GHG+and+Ocean+Heat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicC0NoN7NfrrXfeBmmGVqvFtEbfE5oz6umGy4QSWO4En0sSn6bornB3XQZ3qSJ75V5Gh-sCyedKmvYHXH7CaPf1_wJFTjnrfDFJZHBcHQjhwsJ-TdgK1bYUEsUIrc-JXvisxv6bZip0L4Q/s640/13+GHG+and+Ocean+Heat.jpg" width="640" /></a><b style="text-align: left;">The first observation to make from this chart is that heat retained in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases and heat warming the oceans are very close to the same quantities.</b><span style="text-align: left;"> Greenhouse gases are retaining about </span><span style="text-align: left;">1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of excess heat in the atmosphere annually, and about </span><span style="text-align: left;">1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of unexplained heat is showing up annually in the oceans.</span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><span style="text-align: left;">There is no known natural source of new heat warming the oceans.</span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><span style="text-align: left;">It cannot be a coincidence.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>The second, startling
observation from this chart is that the rate of heat transfer from the
atmosphere to the oceans is changing.</b>
The amount of heat annually absorbed by the oceans apparently fell in
the 1960s, although the data supporting this observation is weak. However, continuing forward into the era of
good data, the volume of heat absorbed by the oceans since 2000 has rapidly
increased, and the fraction of man-made heat absorbed by the oceans has also rapidly increased. As temperatures
rise, the oceans appear to be becoming more efficient at absorbing heat from
the atmosphere. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
This raises a number of questions. First, is the measurement of ocean heat content correct? The quality and sensitivity of the ARGO system would suggest that the numbers are good since 2004. Second, are the calculations for man-made heat correct? These numbers contain many assumptions, and are more likely to be uncertain than the ocean heat content. Or third, was there another heat sink functioning in prior years, which is no longer working? This seems unlikely. Rather, the effort to align the sources and sinks in the earth's heat budget should focus on better quantifying of the sources of man-made heat. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Full Heat
Budget: Anthropogenic Heat and Heat Consumed in Heat Sinks<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We can compare all sources of man-made heat from Part I to
all heat sinks identified in Part II, to construct a heat budget for
human-induced climate change. Let’s
look again at all sources of man-made heat, 1955 – 2015.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 19. Anthropogenic
Heat, 1955 – 2015.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjMlqdsI0fOCGLbxGZl17_aPm8zFMhNFfpj1GEeTtT7rvxtBokKwrXHmr9pezuObI_ICQU3fTmpqcFuXpXkMJF_3lLZXmBt5OOKMbuzJdsCPGXw4Rj2ysFSmH3N8zzOqEhJegQxuoToDDC/s1600/anthro+heat+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjMlqdsI0fOCGLbxGZl17_aPm8zFMhNFfpj1GEeTtT7rvxtBokKwrXHmr9pezuObI_ICQU3fTmpqcFuXpXkMJF_3lLZXmBt5OOKMbuzJdsCPGXw4Rj2ysFSmH3N8zzOqEhJegQxuoToDDC/s640/anthro+heat+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<o:p></o:p>The red line indicates the sum of all man-made heat added to the earth’s atmosphere.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And let’s look again at the heat taken up by the oceans,
atmosphere and ice. As we noted before,
the amount of heat entering the ocean overwhelmingly dominates heat entering
the atmosphere or melting ice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 20. Heat
sinks, 1955 – 2015.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHlB3PdJ06FyYd-SgSly3uuYrOlqoLHx5oZRsnllQXlFI7kIyNjXb_MnYOnfZOUdyPjKDDlSOOgeJMU3eMkuP8mUAXaq60BLH_Ovs4qehIWgx-ILvKW0jDIjcXQybSYYoM7pRbWLXLhP9C/s1600/Figure+16+Heat+Sinks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHlB3PdJ06FyYd-SgSly3uuYrOlqoLHx5oZRsnllQXlFI7kIyNjXb_MnYOnfZOUdyPjKDDlSOOgeJMU3eMkuP8mUAXaq60BLH_Ovs4qehIWgx-ILvKW0jDIjcXQybSYYoM7pRbWLXLhP9C/s640/Figure+16+Heat+Sinks.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s combine the two charts to see the full heat budget. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 21. Man-made Heat and Heat Sinks, 1955 - 2016.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_4DfW0hkeltnozsVFQabuVBJh0Rn2ibkLpyn9oGsS8NarJwDQm4jhTPik3bmfbDg4yxs3DYxe9_-1w_lzAW7Cu3fkTw_TXNCRUdkcjzL361XQQyKcFlo32iyI5YIAqLkITXmvSc5G6mmc/s1600/Final+Heat+Budget.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_4DfW0hkeltnozsVFQabuVBJh0Rn2ibkLpyn9oGsS8NarJwDQm4jhTPik3bmfbDg4yxs3DYxe9_-1w_lzAW7Cu3fkTw_TXNCRUdkcjzL361XQQyKcFlo32iyI5YIAqLkITXmvSc5G6mmc/s640/Final+Heat+Budget.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As we see, the gap between known sources of
man-made heat and the observed amount of heat entering earth systems has
narrowed, primarily due to an increasing amount of heat observed entering the
oceans. The amount of man-made heat that
we can observe entering the oceans has risen from about 40% in the 1970s to
nearly 90% today. Much of that
difference is probably due to the inadequacy of data prior to the deployment of
the ARGO system of ocean buoys in the early 2000s. However, there is a very real possibility that
it also reflects a physical change in the process of transferring heat from the
atmosphere to the ocean.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s exclude questionable data, and only look at data from
2004. First, man-made heat: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Figure 22. Anthropogenic
Heat, 2004 – 2016.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCEdgbnHuGTWleyWm66Pw4DkNEu5BrUt3LcHMmukuXbFBVs9hxjyFl65ALKxqgfzHcUj2X_4J9IwRGBxXGBn1dmf8Z1hNVjk5VziWfNn31mSJpxbOeMkS13HQjrxfLxMLo3ZtNhbbrWrSJ/s1600/Total+Heat+2004_2015.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCEdgbnHuGTWleyWm66Pw4DkNEu5BrUt3LcHMmukuXbFBVs9hxjyFl65ALKxqgfzHcUj2X_4J9IwRGBxXGBn1dmf8Z1hNVjk5VziWfNn31mSJpxbOeMkS13HQjrxfLxMLo3ZtNhbbrWrSJ/s640/Total+Heat+2004_2015.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
And second, the heat budget including heat sinks in the oceans, atmosphere, and melting ice.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Figure 23. Global Heat Budget, 2004 - 2016.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisMluJUYaftfzFVCgMRwXvIiWpyVHcFo7xuG4CVAZNUnLAEL4_4Q5uHdmzNP-8YmeVKRXGpS5hKIT7xJP8PmgYaKOsafAy7Lpnz2n1ImxN4LRkkNBVUgElGJDhW-6QTrB8h_o3utt0jaoS/s1600/Heat+budget+2004_2016.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1035" data-original-width="1426" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisMluJUYaftfzFVCgMRwXvIiWpyVHcFo7xuG4CVAZNUnLAEL4_4Q5uHdmzNP-8YmeVKRXGpS5hKIT7xJP8PmgYaKOsafAy7Lpnz2n1ImxN4LRkkNBVUgElGJDhW-6QTrB8h_o3utt0jaoS/s640/Heat+budget+2004_2016.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We are still left with the striking observation that between
2004 and 2016 the fraction of man-made heat absorbed by the ocean changed from
67 percent to 87 percent. Given the high
quality of recent observations, it seems that this is a real change in the rate
of heat absorption by the ocean. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusions<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>People are the cause
of rising temperatures and melting ice on earth</b>. Rising temperatures are observed in the
atmosphere and oceans, and accelerating melting of ice in glaciers, arctic sea
ice, and the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. The heat responsible for these changes can be
quantified and compared to the heat known to be retained in the atmosphere by human
activities: CO2 and other greenhouse gases, primary heat from energy
production, primary heat from deforestation, and heat produced from
agricultural biomass. There is a close
correspondence between the quantity of man-made heat and observed heat appearing
in natural systems; 89% of the heat generated by humans can be accounted for in
known heat sinks. Further, there is no known
natural process which can be observed and measured presently warming the earth.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In more striking terms, people added 13,800,000,000,000,000,000,000
joules of heat to the atmosphere in 2016.
We observed 12,500,000,000,000,000,000,000
joules appearing in oceans, atmosphere, and melting ice with no known
alternative cause. This is not a
coincidence.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>The largest source of
man-made heat is carbon dioxide from fossil fuels</b>, which accounts for 57%
of heat input into the Earth’s heat budget.
Greenhouse gases other than CO2 account for an additional 32%, bringing
the total fraction due to greenhouse gases to 89% of man-made heat. When I began this project, I focused on only
greenhouse gases, but I found that heat appearing in heat sinks exceeded 100%
of the heat retained by greenhouse gases.
I then added other sources of man-made heat that occurred to me: primary
heat from fossil fuels and nuclear energy, primary heat from deforestation, and
primary heat from the decay of agricultural biomass. These other sources account for a smaller,
but significant 11% fraction of man-made heat. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Large quantities of
heat are retained in the atmosphere prior to absorption by other heat sinks.</b> Heat from human sources is put into the
atmosphere before being transferred other to heat sinks. Total man-made heat delivered to the
atmosphere is equivalent to about 585,000 Hiroshima-sized bombs (533,000 from greenhouse gases alone) exploding in
the atmosphere daily, or on a world-wide grid with a spacing of about 17 miles. It seems likely that there will be
increasingly severe consequences to weather systems, as such quantities of heat
are moved from the atmosphere to their ultimate repository in heat sinks. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Oceans are absorbing
the bulk of heat produced by humans.</b>
Oceans are absorbing 96% of the heat that can be observed going into
heat sinks on earth; with atmospheric warming and melting ice accounting for
only about 1% and 3% of the heat we can observe going into heat sinks. If the oceans were not absorbing heat from
the atmosphere, average temperatures would increase by 5 degrees C in about two
years, equivalent to the temperature change between the current climate and the
ice ages. Without oceans on earth to
absorb heat, man-made heat would quickly destroy civilization. As climate scientist John Abraham said, “Global
warming is really ocean warming.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>The fraction of
man-made heat absorbed by the oceans is increasing rapidly, </b>according to
recent, high quality data. The fraction
of man-made heat absorbed by the ocean rose from 67% to 87% between 2004 and
2016. The cause of the changing rate of
heat absorption is not known. Some
likely possibilities include higher air temperatures and increased wave and
wind activity at the ocean’s surface.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Explanations matter.</b> As I wrote in an earlier post, science is
about delivering explanations in terms of physical processes. Unfortunately, I could not find any physics
describing the rate of heat transfer between the atmosphere and the ocean. It is certain that higher surface air
temperatures will mean a higher rate of heat transfer to the ocean, but it
would be good to quantify that effect. Other
aspects of climate change, such has higher wind speeds and larger waves, may
also play an important role. Identifying
the processes involved and quantifying the rate of heat transfer is unfinished
work.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Future predictions of the consequences of anthropogenic heat
depend on understanding the changing rate at which the ocean is absorbing heat
from the atmosphere. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
--<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Appendix I.<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Other Potential Sources of
Heat<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When I began this study, the only source of anthropogenic
heat I considered was from greenhouse gases.
I calculated the heat retained by greenhouse gases based on NOAA’s on-line
publication of annual radiative forcing figures for each kind of greenhouse
gas. When I calculated the heat absorbed
by heat sinks for 2015, I found that new heat showing up in earth systems exceeded
the heat from greenhouse gases by a little bit.
So I went looking for other sources of man-made heat, and added primary
heat from energy production, primary heat from deforestation, and net heat
resulting from agriculture. This brought
the heat observed in earth systems to less than the sources of anthropogenic
heat.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the rapidly changing heat content of the ocean concerns
me, and makes me think that I have not yet captured all of the sources of
anthropogenic heat, or properly quantified heat from greenhouse gases. In particular, it seems to me that published
figures on radiative forcing are only considering the proportion of the sun’s
radiant heat which is retained in the atmosphere due to the greenhouse effect. However, greenhouse gases will affect all
out-going thermal radiation from earth.
Thus, geothermal heat will also be retained in the earth’s atmosphere by
greenhouse gases. Geothermal heat is a
steady-state process, adding about 1.4 x 10^21 joules to the earth’s heat
budget (about 10% of total anthropogenic heat).
I ignored geothermal energy in this study because it is constant. But if the amount of geothermal energy
retained in the atmosphere is changing due to greenhouse gases, I may need to
add additional heat to the analysis. Similarly,
natural biomass is a large part of the earth’s heat budget. Like geothermal heat, I assumed that it is
constant (except where displaced by agriculture). Presumably, heat from all natural biomass is
accounted for in the sun’s radiant heat, and therefore accounted for in the
radiative forcing figures published by NOAA.
But it might be worth a question for clarification. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Appendix II.</span></b></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Assumptions for Global Heat Budget study: <o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I made a number of simplifying assumptions in order to calculate the global heat budget. Those assumptions are fairly sweeping in some cases, but all are based on reasoning, as explained below, and the results of the study are robust with respect to the simplifying assumptions made.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA published data for radiative forcing for fifteen greenhouse gases other than CO2, for the years 1979 – 2016. I extrapolated the radiative forcing for these gases for the years 1979 – 1974, scaling the radiative forcing for non-CO2 gases proportionally with CO2 for the years 1955 – 1978, for Figures 17, 18 and 20.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I assumed that volumes of deforestation biomass decayed or were burned, generating heat according to the heat content of wood fuel with an initial moisture content of 50%. I used published figures for annual deforestation biomass through 2008, and assumed deforestation was constant at 2008 levels for all later years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I assumed that net agricultural biomass was proportional to global population, and scaled reported biomass from 2009 for each year accordingly. I also arbitrarily assumed that agricultural biomass productivity was 50% greater than the natural productivity it displaced, allowing me to calculate the net heat attributable to agricultural production, in excess of natural biomass production. I assumed that the heat produced during decay is equal to the heat of combustion for wood, after corrections for moisture content. Moisture was assumed to be 50%. The heat of combustion for dry wood was used to calculate heat produced from dry agricultural biomass during decay.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I used a smooth 2<sup>nd</sup> order polynomial function for global ocean heat content (0 – 2000m). I created the function as a visual overlay on NOAA’s plot of heat content, as I was unable to obtain digital data from NOAA for this parameter.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I used smooth 2<sup>nd</sup> order polynomial functions for ice melt from Greenland, Antarctica and other Glaciers and Ice Sheets, created by visual overlays on a figure from Shuang, 2015. The functions for Antarctica and Greenland compare very well (about 10% higher) to digits available from NASA for the gravity-indicated mass losses from Greenland and Antarctica. Numerous papers document ice loss from other glaciers and ice sheets, but without documented volumetric data.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I estimated the thickness of “multi-year [‘old’] ice” as 2 meters, and “new ice” as 1 meter, in calculating loss of Arctic sea ice. Old ice diminished from 1,860,000 km2 in 1984 to only 110,00 km2 in 2016, a decline of 96%. (Imster, E., in EarthSky, Nov. 8, 2016). Declining areas of multi-year ice and new ice were calculated separately, and attributed as a constant annual average, resulting in an estimate of 145 gigatonnes of Arctic sea ice melted annually. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I assumed that all ice needed to be warmed 10 degrees C before melting. This figure was an eyeball estimate based on temperature profiles of ice cores in Antarctica and Greenland.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I used a figure for the heat capacity for the atmosphere from college physics lecture notes available on-line. I assumed that the temperature of the atmosphere changed proportionately with surface temperature when calculating atmospheric heat content. I would note that recent satellite studies have shown that the troposphere is cooling, perhaps as the result of greater water content. In any event, the bulk of the atmosphere’s mass, density and heat content are near the surface. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References</span></b><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Heat Sources<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Greenhouse
Gases<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
James.H.Butler and Stephen.A.Montzka, 2017, THE NOAA ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS INDEX (AGGI),<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html">https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source for radiative forcing data used in greenhouse gas heat
calculations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Fossil
Fuels<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Conti, J., et al, 2013.
International Energy Outlook, U. S. Energy Information Administration,
Office of Energy Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. DOE/EIA-0484(2013)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2013).pdf">http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2013).pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
U.S. Energy Information Agency, Data Tables, U.S. Energy
Information Agency, Office of Energy Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington
D.C. data tables, 2014<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/">http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source for data on primary heat from fossil fuel and nuclear
energy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Deforestation<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Houghton, R.A. 2008. Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land-Use
Changes: 1850-2005. In TRENDS: A Compendium of Data on Global Change. Carbon
Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source for biomass used in calculation of primary heat generated
by deforestation. Volumes of
deforestation were assumed constant after 2008.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Adam Martin, 2011, A Reassessment of Carbon Content of Tropical Trees. Average carbon content of dry wood is
47.2%. This analysis includes volatiles,
determined by the process of freeze-drying, instead of heat-drying the wood. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023533">http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023533</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Agriculture<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
UNEP, 2009, Converting Waste Biomass Into a Resource<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7614/WasteAgriculturalBiomassEST_Compendium.pdf">https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7614/WasteAgriculturalBiomassEST_Compendium.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Heat Sinks<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Atmosphere<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA, 2017, Global Annual Mean Surface Air Temperature Change<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tabular data and chart<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/">https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dennis Hartman, 2017, University of Washington, Heat capacity of
ocean, atmosphere and land.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.atmos.washington.edu/~dennis/321/321_Lecture_12.pdf">https://www.atmos.washington.edu/~dennis/321/321_Lecture_12.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Heat capacity of atmosphere used to calculate changing heat
content.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Oceans<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NOAA, National Centers for Environmental Information<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/">https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source of charts used with overlays to generate smoothed functions
for ocean heat content and temperature.
Note: the charts showing average ocean temperature changes for 0 – 700
meters and 0 – 2000 meters were accessed on this site in June, 2017, but are no
longer available.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analysis.html#temp">http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analysis.html#temp</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The ARGO system and the Jason altimeter system allow separation of
sea level rise into steric (heat & salinity; i.e. density) and mass
components. The steric component is
dominant over the mass component in regional sea level variability and on a
global basis it accounts for about 1/3 of total sea level increase in the past
half century (Domingues et al 2008).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.bickfordscience.com/03-05_State_Changes/PDF/Specific_Heat.pdf">http://www.bickfordscience.com/03-05_State_Changes/PDF/Specific_Heat.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
specific heat of seawater = 3.9 joules/g<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
John Abraham, 2017, New study confirms the oceans are warming
rapidly, The Guardian.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jun/26/new-study-confirms-the-oceans-are-warming-rapidly">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jun/26/new-study-confirms-the-oceans-are-warming-rapidly</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dr. John Abraham is a professor of thermal sciences. He researches
in climate monitoring and renewable energy generation for the developing world.
His energy development work has extended to Africa, South America and
Asia. “Global warming is really ocean
warming.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Ice Melt<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Greenland,
Iceland, and Antarctica<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Shuang Yi, Wenke Sun, Kosuke Heki, and An Qia, 2015, An increase
in the rate of global mean sea level rise since 2010, Geophysical Research
Letters<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063902/full">http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063902/full</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA Global Climate Change, Vital Signs of the Planet<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/land-ice/">https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/land-ice/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source of charts and data tables for ice mass loss from Greenland
and Antarctica.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n7/full/ngeo1829.html">http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n7/full/ngeo1829.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Contribution of ice sheet and mountain glacier melt to recent sea
level rise<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
J. L. Chen, C. R. Wilson, & B. D. Tapley<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Arctic Sea
Ice<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://earthsky.org/earth/decline-of-arctics-thickest-sea-ice">http://earthsky.org/earth/decline-of-arctics-thickest-sea-ice</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Imster, E., in EarthSky, Nov. 8, 2016, Decline of Arctic’s thickest sea ice. Multi-year ice grows up to 4 meters thick, while
single-year ice is 2 meters thick at most. <o:p></o:p>The area covered by Arctic sea ice at least four years old has decreased from 1,860,000 square kilometres in September 1984 to 110,000 square kilometres in September 2016.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-59816228351432567672017-06-12T22:46:00.001-07:002021-01-30T20:58:08.758-08:00Volcanic CO2 Emissions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
An internet meme was recently posted in the Facebook group
March For Science, by a frustrated scientist looking for ways to counter
nonsense. The meme claims that Mt. Etna
has already put 10,000 times more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of the
man-made emissions in history. That
claim is not remotely true. Somebody just
made it up, and put it on a photo of a volcano, and it has been shared
thousands of times by people who don’t want to believe in science. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As readers of my blog know, I have been looking at data on
global CO2 for a number of years. I
recently researched natural CO2 emissions, and added those emissions to my
chart of annual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, cement manufacturing, and
deforestation. Natural CO2 emissions are
shown as the small purple bar at the top of the stacked-bar graph. Shown on the graph are CO2 emissions from
natural gas, oil, coal, cement manufacturing, flaring, deforestation, and
natural volcanism. Industrial emissions are from Boden et al, 2013, Deforestation is from Houghton, 2008, and volcanic emissions from Burton et al, 2013 and Lee et al, 2016.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8IiqRD3cgB09XzZ0tCCtdGLBebwdvtC8S2-2SCgc40_3LIir_Zlg6NYTMH0kZFbD_IgMmVd3snMz9l1KOUkHvpJJdT35bZ0AKIwr_VmVr5w2dR7AoFfgb4Wdhgkj9mq_euddIa-SxHcQT/s1600/CO2+emissions.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1033" data-original-width="1424" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8IiqRD3cgB09XzZ0tCCtdGLBebwdvtC8S2-2SCgc40_3LIir_Zlg6NYTMH0kZFbD_IgMmVd3snMz9l1KOUkHvpJJdT35bZ0AKIwr_VmVr5w2dR7AoFfgb4Wdhgkj9mq_euddIa-SxHcQT/s640/CO2+emissions.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Measurement of Volcanic CO2
Emissions</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Measurement of CO2 emissions from volcanos is accomplished
by surface observations, aerial surveys (including manned flights and drones),
satellite observations and soil-gas surveys.
A variety of methods are used, as described by Burton (2013). Direct measurements of CO2 concentrations are
supplemented by measurements of SO2 or tracer gases, when the relative
concentrations of CO2 and the other gases is accurately known. This process allows greater precision in CO2
determinations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Volcanic sources of CO2 include eruptive events,
point-source passive degassing from active volcanoes, diffuse emissions from
active volcanoes, emissions from tectonic, hydrothermal, or inactive volcanic
areas, volcanic lakes, and mid-oceanic ridges.
Eruptive events are popularly believed to contribute greatly to
atmospheric CO2, but in fact, these events are completely trivial.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Volumes of Volcanic CO2
Emissions from Eruptive Events</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The largest eruptive event of the past 100 years was the
eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in Indonesia in 1991.
That eruption was estimated to have released 50 million tonnes of CO2 into
the atmosphere (Gerlach et al. 2011, cited by Burton). The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo released only
one-tenth of one percent of the man-made CO2 emissions of 37 gigatonnes in the
single year of 2009.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The volume of CO2 emitted by the four largest eruptions of
the past 200 years is about 600 Mt of CO2,
based on volumes of ejecta and the CO2 content of magma (Burton, 2013). An earlier estimate of the average volume of
all eruptions of the past 300 years gives an annual CO2 volume of only about 1
Mt per year (Crisp, 1984, cited by Burton).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Total Volumes of Volcanic
CO2 Emissions<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Estimates of natural CO2 emissions have increased markedly
over the past 25 years, from about 70 million tonnes per year to about 700
million tonnes per year. Newer work has
recognized passive and diffuse CO2 emissions from inactive volcanoes and
tectonically active terranes, and measured emissions from these sources. The current best estimate is 708 million
tonnes per year, after adding in estimates for emissions from mid-oceanic
ridges and the East African rift (Lee et al, 2016). By comparison, man-made emissions of CO2 (including
deforestation) were about 37 gigatonnes (37,000 million tonnes) in 2009.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Carbon Cycle<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Natural processes which add and subtract CO2 from the
atmosphere and oceans necessarily become balanced over geologic time. Natural processes which add CO2 include
eruptive volcanism, passive volcanic emissions, diffuse volcanic sources,
volcanic lakes, mid-oceanic rifts, onshore rifts and metamorphism of carbonate
rocks. Natural processes which remove
CO2 include the formation of limestone, by biologic and chemical processes,
weathering of silicate rocks, deposition of land plants in bogs forming coal,
and deposition of algae in anoxic marine environments, forming black shales. There is debate about the importance of tectonic
subduction in permanently removing carbon from surface environments, and the
volumes of carbon which might be permanently removed by that process. Although some of these processes are not well
quantified, the volumes proposed are typically in the range of hundreds of
million tonnes, far less than the gigatonnes of man-made carbon emissions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Volcanic processes add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, but
far less than human activities. Eruptive
events, such as the frequent eruptions at Mt. Etna in Italy, or the giant 1991
eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in Indonesia, add a surprisingly trivial amount of
carbon to the atmosphere. On average,
all modern eruptive volcanic events add an average of 1 to 3 million tonnes of
CO2 to the atmosphere each year. By
contrast, quiet, passive outgassing and diffuse volcanic sources add about 540
million tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Mid-oceanic ridges and the East African rift
add approximately 160 million tonnes more CO2.
In all, volcanic sources add about 1.9% of the CO2 emissions from human
sources, including deforestation. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Since this investigation began with an Internet meme, I
decided to make my own, with a quantitative truthful statement and scientific
references. Here it is.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLxeUkjFKSEgEqu9CaZ2Sd4siX-BpbSpejR6dcK9aek3HOq4piHzL9CiF0_FNhJ-AzJkSjYtj7IeDVII-wqvjQDC56XlHkI01CMTjyUb4mGLu68ADyt3KXn3IaSWEXPDONuTY6GbVMWiXa/s1600/volcano+meme+2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLxeUkjFKSEgEqu9CaZ2Sd4siX-BpbSpejR6dcK9aek3HOq4piHzL9CiF0_FNhJ-AzJkSjYtj7IeDVII-wqvjQDC56XlHkI01CMTjyUb4mGLu68ADyt3KXn3IaSWEXPDONuTY6GbVMWiXa/s640/volcano+meme+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Boden, et al, 2013, Global and National Fossil-fuel CO2
Emissions, in Global Carbon Atlas<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/content/fossil-fuel-emissions<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/docs/Public_Presentation_of_the_GCA_Paris_EN.pdf<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/" target="_blank">http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Burton et al, 2013,
Deep Carbon Emissions from Volcanoes<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.minsocam.org/msa/rim/RiMG075/RiMG075_Ch11.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.minsocam.org/msa/rim/RiMG075/RiMG075_Ch11.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Discussion of CO2 flux from subaerial volcanic eruptions on
page 332.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Total CO2 flux from volcanic sources: 637 mT per year, p. 341, table 6.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 was the largest
volcanic eruption since 1912. That
eruption produced ~50 Mt of CO2 (Gerlach et al. 2011). Individual eruptions are dwarfed by the
time-averaged continuous CO2 emissions from global volcanism. The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo was equivalent to
only 5 weeks of global subaerial volcanic emissions. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The average volume of eruptive CO2 emissions over the past
300 years was only 0.1 cubic kilometers, which suggests an annual rate of about
1 million tonnes of CO2 annually (Crisp, 1984, cited in Burton). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
CO2 consumption from continental silicate weathering was 515
Mt/yr, (Gaillardet et al., 1999, cited in Burton).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Metamorphism accounts for the release of about 300 million
tonnes of CO2 annually. (Mörner and
Etiope, 2002, Carbon degassing from the lithosphere. Global Planet Change
33:185-203, cited in Burton). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Lee et al, 2016, Massive and prolonged deep carbon emissions
associated with continental rifting,
Nature Geoscience Letters, Jan.18, 2016.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf" target="_blank">http://csi.unm.edu/sites/default/files/public/2016_Lee_etal_ngeo.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paper accounts for additional CO2 emissions from East
African Rift, potentially bringing natural world CO2 emissions to 708 mT, an
increase of 11% from previous estimates.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Houghton, R.A. 2008. Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from
Land-Use Changes: 1850-2005. In TRENDS: A Compendium of Data on Global Change.
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html" target="_blank">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marland, G., T.A. Boden, and R.J. Andres. 2008. Global,
Regional, and National Fossil Fuel CO2 Emissions. In Trends: A Compendium of
Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview" target="_blank">http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview</a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Individual Volcanic Eruptions</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Judy Fierstein, USGS, in Forbes, Ethan Siegel, "How Much CO2 Does a Single Volcano Emit?"</div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/">https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/</a><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<o:p></o:p></div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-19001656908710246762017-03-21T00:16:00.002-07:002017-04-03T23:59:40.131-07:00Asteroid 16-Psyche, Crown Jewel of the Solar System<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Psyche is a special asteroid. It is the crown jewel of the Solar System,
the literal heart of the asteroid belt.
Psyche is the only known pure iron-nickel asteroid, presumably the core of a
former planet, ancestor to many of the asteroids. Without question, Psyche
is the largest source of workable metal in space, and is therefore the key to
mankind’s future expansion in space. The world’s space agencies should recognize the unique
potential of this asteroid, and expect competition between nations and companies for this
critical resource. Action by the UN may
be necessary to establish rules for fair sharing of the resources on Psyche. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Iron from Psyche may be essential to constructing an artificial magnetosphere over Mars. An artificial magnetic field is believed necessary to re-establish the Martian atmosphere, liquid water, and warmth to make Mars suitable for human habitation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOL3-MNgxS0HtZOKg8lHipEAeCCHQcucn8zGuW82jHXaoAvb1R24wrj5FdCYDir1Sug9jqpsEpfJvP-MTZdpe7GdopNOwpntmLF8Wp47mfpJj-hND1-Cdzw03mEN539ZNxSDJ2YQkoFuaD/s1600/Psyche+NASA.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="354" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOL3-MNgxS0HtZOKg8lHipEAeCCHQcucn8zGuW82jHXaoAvb1R24wrj5FdCYDir1Sug9jqpsEpfJvP-MTZdpe7GdopNOwpntmLF8Wp47mfpJj-hND1-Cdzw03mEN539ZNxSDJ2YQkoFuaD/s640/Psyche+NASA.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Artist's conception of Psyche, with orbiter spacecraft.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit NASA</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Heart of the
Asteroid Belt<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The asteroid belt lies between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter,
at a distance from the sun of 2.2 to 3.2 astronomical units (au), where an
astronomical unit is the distance of the earth from the sun. The belt is actually a set of three belts of
objects, with narrow divisions between them.
Asteroids are widely spaced, at an average distance of about 600,000
miles, or about 2.4 times the distance from the earth to the moon. Scenes of densely clustered colliding rocks
in science fiction movies are not accurate depictions of an asteroid belt, at
least in our solar system. (But we have
not yet been to the Hoth system of the Star Wars universe.) Evidence from meteorites suggests that
asteroids are the remnants of one or more proto-planets formed in the earliest
days of the solar system. The planet which
originally contained Psyche broke apart for unknown reasons, perhaps due to a
collision with another planetary body.
Jupiter’s gravity plays a role in keeping the asteroids from
re-assembling into a planet. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7AxVFNGb4ifuE6tUD1YQu1F1HTWTZZ9VuDsS7usj6Y1G2E0oxfEg6OiypCFH7a5O3Zgn66cKG-ZZf49Pmfg5uAssSIj5Rz8U9LJiTpAR1GufWN512l8rq0m02VNYwxGDlScTWC5QJfRoD/s1600/Credit+Space_comKarl+Tate.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="444" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7AxVFNGb4ifuE6tUD1YQu1F1HTWTZZ9VuDsS7usj6Y1G2E0oxfEg6OiypCFH7a5O3Zgn66cKG-ZZf49Pmfg5uAssSIj5Rz8U9LJiTpAR1GufWN512l8rq0m02VNYwxGDlScTWC5QJfRoD/s640/Credit+Space_comKarl+Tate.jpg" width="640" /></a></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit: Karl Tate, Space.com</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Formation of an
Iron-Nickel Core<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The meteorites we find on earth are a rock collection
telling the story of the solar system.
Many meteors were thrown into space by collisions between comets,
asteroids, and planets. After untold
years circling the sun some of them fall to earth. Scientists have found meteorites from the
moon and from Mars. Some meteorites are
composed of the primordial material of the solar system, and some represent a
cross-section through a planet like earth.
There are meteorites which contain the common minerals which compose the
earth’s mantle -- olivine and pyroxene.
Then, there are other meteorites which are made of iron and nickel, the
materials which compose the earth’s core.
In the early days of geology, the composition of meteorites was a strong
hint to geologists about the structure and mineral composition of the deep
earth. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A rocky planet is formed by the agglomeration of debris in
space, through mutual gravitational attraction.
As the adolescent planet grows through accretion, the falling debris add
heat, producing a partially or completely molten planet. The abundant heavy metals, iron and nickel,
coalesce in droplets and sink to the center, forming the metallic core. The differentiation of a planet into the
rocky mantle and metallic core implies a melting history, and enough mass for
gravitational separation of iron and nickel.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhATM288T1ntljbTLOBDa1yrBids-eYiuIDhVotyzO9D965V1ZEvHcT9fjyYD0WCoPcZKiSRdMhaFxAN-Nzpnh7lQIvBCDrq2aZQoR4eOV5ehtiq-RQro9h5xKrzCXOWm9b-e7oQr_m0iD1/s1600/psyche+16.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhATM288T1ntljbTLOBDa1yrBids-eYiuIDhVotyzO9D965V1ZEvHcT9fjyYD0WCoPcZKiSRdMhaFxAN-Nzpnh7lQIvBCDrq2aZQoR4eOV5ehtiq-RQro9h5xKrzCXOWm9b-e7oQr_m0iD1/s640/psyche+16.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
3D Model of Psyche</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit: <span style="text-align: left;">Josef Ďurech, Vojtěch Sidorin, Astronomical Institute of the
Charles University</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div>
<b><u>Mineralogy of the
Core</u></b><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Iron-Nickel meteorites give us our only direct look at a
planetary core. These meteorites
originated from the disintegration of early planets, or from the object which
collided with earth to produce the earth’s moon. These meteorites are predominantly iron,
alloyed with 5% to 25% nickel. The
typical mineral texture is octahedrite, which is a laminated composite of
iron/nickel alloys kamacite and taenite.
The laminated structure forms by exsolution of the alloys during
crystallization, and is known as the Widmanstatten pattern. The pattern is quite beautiful, and
individual crystals are often several centimeters to tens of centimeters in
size. Widmanstatten pattern in iron-nickel
crystals grow slowly, and such crystal sizes imply slow cooling (millions of
years) within a planetary body of considerable size. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF-8MaElS8SFYw_2wJLSBQ3tuKvzKdJZ6ArDOF91hyphenhyphenA07PMFtyUMgg4YlUhbkWy2_Ut0fb-xc1DurJ5o_vGW7IMNobNslj1zDlIzHfjETTMjV2FM4m5SbotzW81bUmS0IfUQv84JolTK4t/s1600/octahedrite.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF-8MaElS8SFYw_2wJLSBQ3tuKvzKdJZ6ArDOF91hyphenhyphenA07PMFtyUMgg4YlUhbkWy2_Ut0fb-xc1DurJ5o_vGW7IMNobNslj1zDlIzHfjETTMjV2FM4m5SbotzW81bUmS0IfUQv84JolTK4t/s640/octahedrite.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Octahedrite, with Widmanstatten texture</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Psyche<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The asteroid Psyche is the only known asteroid with the
reflective properties (albedo) and density of iron-nickel. The density of Psyche is estimated according to
its size and gravitational influence on neighboring asteroids.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
The mean diameter of Psyche is about 180 to 200 km, with a mass of 2.3 x 1019 kg, or 23,000,000 billion metric tonnes. That’s a lot of iron. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The name Psyche is drawn from Greek mythology, for a mortal
woman who married Cupid (Eros) and was granted immortality. The asteroid Psyche was the sixteenth
asteroid to be given a symbol, and is therefore sometimes known as
16-Psyche. The symbol is an inverted
semicircle, representing a butterfly wing (a symbol of innocence from
Renaissance paintings), with a star above it. [in this post I have dropped the irrelevant “16”
in the asteroid name.]<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkKjbfoCK1aWpGYUS3XAJ0iVFjDCRk3yVntNymxie3oKRd1zhJO3hLqOKOTFtNNMxgNnA7TbMSf_oLQJznIHfqy8shsrnao3Jhk1yruze9oY6KChjFG_Ro38I8AeG_QuCX_BIRzRNH2547/s1600/Gerard_FrancoisPascalSimon-Cupid_Psyche_end.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkKjbfoCK1aWpGYUS3XAJ0iVFjDCRk3yVntNymxie3oKRd1zhJO3hLqOKOTFtNNMxgNnA7TbMSf_oLQJznIHfqy8shsrnao3Jhk1yruze9oY6KChjFG_Ro38I8AeG_QuCX_BIRzRNH2547/s400/Gerard_FrancoisPascalSimon-Cupid_Psyche_end.jpg" width="282" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Psyche and Eros, Francois Gerard, 1798</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Costs to Earth
Orbit</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The cost to launch material from earth to space is
high. Using the United States’ space
shuttle, the cost to launch one kilogram to low earth orbit (LEO) was
$22,000. When the fleet of space
shuttles was retired following two disasters, the cost rose to $33,000/kg. Costs are now falling rapidly, thanks to
intense innovation and competition from private companies, such as SpaceX and
Blue Origin. SpaceX’s newest Falcon 9
will launch payloads to LEO for $4100/kg, and the planned Falcon Heavy rocket
will bring costs down to $2200/kg. Higher
orbits are necessarily more expensive, typically double the cost of low earth
orbit.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
The International Space Station has a mass of 419,455. Most of the station was built during the time that costs were greater than $20,000 per kg. If we were to rebuild the station, using the expected costs of the Falcon Heavy rocket, the costs of launching the material would be just under one billion dollars. But suppose we wanted to build something big? Let's take a large cruise ship, capable of carrying 1000 passengers, as an example. The Crystal Serenity has a mass of 68,870 gross tons, or 62.6 million kilograms. The cost to launch the material to rebuild the Serenity in orbit would be about 138 billion dollars. Just think how much cheaper and easier it would be if the material to build things was already in space!<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In short, launching stuff from earth to space is insanely
expensive. To build anything large in
space, we must make use of materials that are already in space, and preferably
already smelted by nature into metal.
In short, we need Psyche. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6cOYQlUjTmwkKy_0bqEmgmRRGQRq-ueKCipZ8tzf2DIhrOoXr5PUL8KHrEaZsWHSGIi_J5riaqO3zyh7Wgjdp02lLLBxSt1N3ZsVrOHLrb_BSbmfg5IUxkD3c-LNVGbnfHmZUv2OO3BNo/s1600/ac25f429e17bd2bf52bce19867f09086.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6cOYQlUjTmwkKy_0bqEmgmRRGQRq-ueKCipZ8tzf2DIhrOoXr5PUL8KHrEaZsWHSGIi_J5riaqO3zyh7Wgjdp02lLLBxSt1N3ZsVrOHLrb_BSbmfg5IUxkD3c-LNVGbnfHmZUv2OO3BNo/s640/ac25f429e17bd2bf52bce19867f09086.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Image Credit: Greybox.com</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>What We Will Do<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Novelist Neal Stephenson wrote a detailed description of
what could be done with a metallic planetary core in his novel “Seven
Eves”. In Stephenson’s novel, the moon
has improbably disintegrated, providing the metallic core which will give
humankind (or rather, womankind) the means to build a society in space. Setting aside the improbability of
Stephenson’s plot, his account gives a clear idea of the value of the asteroid
Psyche. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cheap, abundant energy is necessary for exploitation of
Psyche. Today’s technical options would
be a nuclear fission reactor or giant solar panels. It is possible that fusion technology may be
available in time to provide energy for the project. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Initially, Psyche will be mined. Pieces small enough to be moved will be cut
from the asteroid, and sent into lower solar orbit. The orbital velocity of Psyche is about 17
km/sec. I admit that I don’t know the
delta V or energy required to drop a ton of iron from Psyche to earth’s orbit,
but I believe it is possible. A magnetic
accelerator or rail gun could launch the packets of iron from the asteroid,
adjusting the orbit to deliver the packets toward earth. A nuclear reactor (or perhaps fusion reactor)
would provide electricity for the rail gun.
Energy could be stored in a large capacitor or set of capacitors until
needed for launch. Conditions are
perfect for building such a capacitor – there is vacuum and lots of iron. At the receiving end, the packets of iron
would be captured using a gravitational assist from the earth and moon, and set
into an orbit for construction purposes.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Subsequently, the interior of the asteroid will then become
a place of habitation, perhaps the first sustaining human colony in space. The exterior of the asteroid will shield the
colony from radiation, and spinning the asteroid can provide artificial
gravity, thus solving two of the most damaging aspects of long-term survival in
space. In the long term, the capture of
a comet or ice-bearing asteroid would give the colony much of the physical
material necessary for sustainability.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Current Plans<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NASA is now planning a mission to Psyche. The spacecraft will be an unmanned probe that
will orbit Psyche. Instrumentation
planned for the probe appears fairly basic, providing for imaging and basic
mineralogic identification, including ice, if it exists. Propulsion would be by a relatively low-power
solar-electric engine, probably an ion-drive. NASA says that the probe will be launched in
2023, and will not arrive at Psyche until 2030 (although there is a 2-year discrepancy
in the indicated transit time and arrival date in the official
announcement). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
International law governing the commercial use of asteroids
was established in 1967, in the Outer Space Treaty signed by 98 nations. Three updates to the treaty were signed in
the late 1960s and 1970s. The treaty
prohibits any territorial claims, but allows mineral extraction. Of course, the treaty does not address how
programs competing for the same resources would be adjudicated, or how
interference between programs would be resolved. It is likely that primacy would be an
important factor in any dispute over access to Psyche’s resources.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At least three well-funded companies and a government-led
effort in Luxembourg are specifically interested in asteroid mining. In addition, there are a number of private
companies developing technologies and actively seeking profit in space. These companies must surely be considering
plans for the exploration and development of the resources on Psyche. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my opinion, NASA’s schedule for the mission to Psyche is
far too slow. I am not the only person
to realize that Psyche represents a unique commercial opportunity, and
development opportunity for mankind. If
NASA continues on the proposed schedule, they may be late to the party. NASA may find that private companies and
foreign governments have already placed their flags on Psyche. These other parties may be well ahead of the
United States in developing plans for the exploitation of the asteroid.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Mars</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Within the past year, NASA’s MAVEN Mars orbiter proved that
the solar wind stripped away Mars’ atmosphere, leading to the frozen world that
exists today. In Mars’ earliest history,
it had a magnetic field that protected the atmosphere from the solar wind, as
earth’s magnetic field now protects earth’s atmosphere. That magnetic field died long ago. When the atmosphere was blown away, the
temperature plummeted, the water froze, and the planet became a frozen, barren
world.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Scientists at NASA recently proposed an audacious plan for
restoring atmosphere, warmth and water to Mars.
Scientist Jim Green proposed
putting an artificial magnet in between Mars and the Sun, stationed permanently
at the L1 (LaGrange 1) position, where gravity from the Sun and Mars are
perfectly balanced. A magnetic field
large enough and strong enough would shield the planet, allowing the atmosphere
to naturally recover. Initially, atmosphere
would accumulate from volcanic emissions.
After some atmosphere had accumulated, the Martian icecaps would sublimate
and melt, releasing carbon dioxide and water.
Atmospheric pressure is expected to recover to about half of the
pressure of earth’s atmosphere at sea level (equivalent to about 15,000’ of
elevation on earth). The scientists
believe that Mars’ atmosphere and liquid water could be restored within 100
years. Converting CO2 to breathable
oxygen would take somewhat longer. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3uBXPgi8Nub0fmPM8_iJANUHLw5aSAr3JaC_mFz-Gc2keie6g7IG6vynsz2B6xc1ZjpXns2f8-iRVCYe-EG5_xCdwBC8ByIU08AosYh6ERNW59JYeOb57o_6LZ9ptqIDEl1FZHDg8rydd/s1600/magnetosphere.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="454" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3uBXPgi8Nub0fmPM8_iJANUHLw5aSAr3JaC_mFz-Gc2keie6g7IG6vynsz2B6xc1ZjpXns2f8-iRVCYe-EG5_xCdwBC8ByIU08AosYh6ERNW59JYeOb57o_6LZ9ptqIDEl1FZHDg8rydd/s640/magnetosphere.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
Image Credit: NASA</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
But how would you build an electromagnet large enough to
protect a planet?<br />
You would need a lot
of conductive metal, and a magnetic core….<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Clearly, the asteroid Psyche could be essential to the idea of
terraforming Mars by building an artificial magnetosphere. Psyche is the only readily available source
of sufficient metal to build such a magnet.
Which gives even more urgency to the exploration of Psyche, the crown
jewel of the Solar System.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Meteorites<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.pibburns.com/catastro/meteors.htm">https://www.pibburns.com/catastro/meteors.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://geology.com/meteorites/meteorite-types-and-classification.shtml">http://geology.com/meteorites/meteorite-types-and-classification.shtml</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Launch Costs<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/2015/what-is-the-current-cost-per-kg-to-send-something-into-gso-geo">http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/2015/what-is-the-current-cost-per-kg-to-send-something-into-gso-geo</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-rocket-cargo-price-by-weight-2016-6/#bottle-of-water-9100-to-43180-1">http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-rocket-cargo-price-by-weight-2016-6/#bottle-of-water-9100-to-43180-1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/1989/what-is-the-current-cost-per-pound-to-send-something-into-leo">http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/1989/what-is-the-current-cost-per-pound-to-send-something-into-leo</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Image credit<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://starfrontiers.wikia.com/wiki/Ship_Construction_Centers">http://starfrontiers.wikia.com/wiki/Ship_Construction_Centers</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>NASA Psyche Mission<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><a href="http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/V2050/pdf/8250.pdf"><span style="font-weight: normal;">http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/V2050/pdf/8250.pdf</span></a><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">A FUTURE MARS ENVIRONMENT FOR SCIENCE AND EXPLORATION. J. L.
Green1, J. Hollingsworth2, D. Brain3, V. Airapetian4, A. Glocer4, A. Pulkkinen4, C.
Dong5 and R. Bamford6 (1NASA HQ, 2ARC, 3U of Colorado, 4GSFC, 5Princeton University,
6Rutherford Appleton Laboratory)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-selects-two-missions-to-explore-the-early-solar-system">https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-selects-two-missions-to-explore-the-early-solar-system</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/psyche/">https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/psyche/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psyche_(spacecraft)">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psyche_(spacecraft)</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Asteroid Mining<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.planetaryresources.com/#home-intro">http://www.planetaryresources.com/#home-intro</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Planetary Resources.
Company is financed by a bevy of billionaires. Backers include Larry Page, Eric Schmidt,
Ross Perot, James Cameron, Charles Simonyi and K Ram Shiram. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.kesellc.com/">http://www.kesellc.com/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Kepler Energy and Space Engineering<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://deepspaceindustries.com/">http://deepspaceindustries.com/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
Deep Space Industries<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<b>Science Fiction Inspiration</b><br />
Neal Stephenson, 2015, <u>SevenEves</u>, 880p.<br />
Stephenson's plot involves survivors of global disaster building a sustaining colony in a metallic planetary core.<br />
<br />
Robert Heinlein, 1966, <u>The Moon is a Harsh Mistress</u>, 382p.<br />
Heinlein uses magnetic accelerators to launch cargo capsules from the Moon to the Earth.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Harold Goodwin, 1952, <u>Rip Foster Rides the Grey Planet</u>, 250p. <br />
A cold-war youth novel about international struggle for control of a unique asteroid made of Thorium. <br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And here are a couple more space art images, because they are cool.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivWWKOVon2Z1uIapd5CXwdxHVeAzHXsV-coFl-uus9ELoGrUTu3RIWCiDKME08s321DrJWFEw2Cf5T5SUD0NiOgjqzsacaKw0Cpk-ZHpUpiCdZ-K2_CY3RMLBYDUNbl8QHn1V0ZZWCJZ7m/s1600/AKG4738985.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="352" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivWWKOVon2Z1uIapd5CXwdxHVeAzHXsV-coFl-uus9ELoGrUTu3RIWCiDKME08s321DrJWFEw2Cf5T5SUD0NiOgjqzsacaKw0Cpk-ZHpUpiCdZ-K2_CY3RMLBYDUNbl8QHn1V0ZZWCJZ7m/s640/AKG4738985.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDtXVxUkznCULxE1vvh7DqkzFSnF7rHg3iH9QjTPhnvXkvauc9gfr2h873pjwju6eiNaNftxF3H9mCI-dEY0BlFNToxPrPSryWkERUVXKuMkH2nKVUeuMDBcZQiCjn4jZvnGCNMi4fhS10/s1600/SCC_04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDtXVxUkznCULxE1vvh7DqkzFSnF7rHg3iH9QjTPhnvXkvauc9gfr2h873pjwju6eiNaNftxF3H9mCI-dEY0BlFNToxPrPSryWkERUVXKuMkH2nKVUeuMDBcZQiCjn4jZvnGCNMi4fhS10/s640/SCC_04.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-13411935902535159522017-03-12T00:28:00.000-08:002017-06-12T23:28:34.290-07:00Taxes on Wages and Capital Returns<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Note: I have discovered that some of my numbers in this post are in error. I will fix it as soon as I can. My apologies, Doug</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Summary:</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The total economic productivity of the United States in 2015
was 18 trillion dollars. Of this total,
$7.7 trillion was paid to workers as wages.
The remaining 10.3 trillion accrued to owners of capital. Although Federal taxes are paid in several
forms, the total tax burden on wages is 25 percent, while Federal taxes paid on
capital returns is only 12.5 percent, half of the rate paid by wage-earners.<br />
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7TAp4z8snjmesTteBM423soYhVbfn8WSHEvExM1W2F-tBaFqmwJ7wjjsDAbgBED6kg2yuF-s2FLN5vc1nz384-il8L6JmQq6KDkm6TdcpV4C33QEUbBr3QM4mAplaTxsW7fk5nmf-DUaw/s1600/Taxes+by+source.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7TAp4z8snjmesTteBM423soYhVbfn8WSHEvExM1W2F-tBaFqmwJ7wjjsDAbgBED6kg2yuF-s2FLN5vc1nz384-il8L6JmQq6KDkm6TdcpV4C33QEUbBr3QM4mAplaTxsW7fk5nmf-DUaw/s640/Taxes+by+source.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
--</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Wages and Return on Capital<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Economic productivity can be divided into the contributions
of Labor and Capital. More accurately,
Labor and Capital, working together, both contribute to productivity. Labor requires Capital to be productive, and
Capital requires Labor to be productive.
But the benefits of productivity are divided – Labor and Capital are
allocated different shares in terms of earnings, and carry away different piles
of money. The shares allocated to Labor
and Capital are largely determined by actions of the free market, modified
somewhat by regulations such as the minimum wage law. But taxes on earnings of Labor and Capital
are entirely arbitrary, determined by the complex rules of the Federal tax law.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The United States produced about 18 trillion dollars of
income in 2015. The measure, Gross
Domestic Income (GDI), is roughly equivalent to Gross Domestic Product,
(GDP). Wages and salaries comprised 42.9
percent of GDI, or $7.7 trillion (source: Federal Reserve Database).
Capital returns represent the remainder, or about $10.3 trillion. It should be noted that capital returns do
not include unrealized capital gains.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Labor’s share of Gross Domestic Income has fallen from 51%
in 1970 to about 43% today.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ75rZ5yVzcTCt9fdvHwM7LYeY0Hq_xvoNokvgjVK2MegA6ijMpQs-cwt3SASmoDbSq4u5erLphzzqfEQSpL1IejKNynpNLtAMMupmUZMjTCMt2poZM2R5jnUWigcXTpLjsAKOGWjzFkJp/s1600/shares.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ75rZ5yVzcTCt9fdvHwM7LYeY0Hq_xvoNokvgjVK2MegA6ijMpQs-cwt3SASmoDbSq4u5erLphzzqfEQSpL1IejKNynpNLtAMMupmUZMjTCMt2poZM2R5jnUWigcXTpLjsAKOGWjzFkJp/s640/shares.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 324px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td colspan="2" nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 243.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="324"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b> Gross Domestic Income
($MM)<o:p></o:p></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 2.25in;" valign="bottom" width="216"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Wages<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Capital
Return<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 2.25in;" valign="bottom" width="216"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
7,758,250<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 81.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="108"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
10,326,250<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Federal Taxes<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Federal taxation is
complex. Wages are subject to individual
income taxes and payroll (social insurance) taxes. Wage earners also pay most excise
taxes, such as tobacco, alcohol, gasoline and health insurance taxes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Capital Returns are taxed as corporate income taxes, and
taxed again as individual income taxes on dividends, interest, and capital
gains when returns are distributed.
Corporations also pay a share of payroll taxes equal to employee
contributions, and pay a
variety of Federal taxes and rents such as mineral royalties. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2015, the Federal Government collected 3.25 trillion
dollars in taxes, out of 18 trillion dollars in GDI, for a total Federal take
of 18 percent. Of those taxes, about 2 trillion dollars were paid out of wages and salaries, and 1.3 trillion dollars were paid out of capital returns.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVKTAD4DUCOKq3Gl5nNKxlb9PUcbPOALnWauZlsyvxT64vsrN4VlIoVai8gRpnXaScrQu12BZPiodlaltEjmcF-cRW76u_dwbmPNNnBTB-rTJCxAjRpHwvxng7K64NfR6snJDzOueKNFEQ/s1600/Taxes+by+source.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVKTAD4DUCOKq3Gl5nNKxlb9PUcbPOALnWauZlsyvxT64vsrN4VlIoVai8gRpnXaScrQu12BZPiodlaltEjmcF-cRW76u_dwbmPNNnBTB-rTJCxAjRpHwvxng7K64NfR6snJDzOueKNFEQ/s640/Taxes+by+source.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Taxes on Wages and Salaries,
millions of dollars</span><br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 356px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Individual Income Taxes<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
1,325,860<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Payroll (Social Insurance) Tax<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
532,629<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.75pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Excise Taxes<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
98,279<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Total <o:p></o:p></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
<b>1,956,768<o:p></o:p></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Taxes on Capital Returns,
millions of dollars<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 356px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Corporate Income Tax<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
343,797<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Corporate Payroll Tax<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
532,629<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Capital Gains Tax<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
141,754<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Dividends & Interest Tax<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
73,188<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.75pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
Other<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
201,751<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 181.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="241"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b> Total<o:p></o:p></b></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 86.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="115"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
<b>1,293,119<o:p></o:p></b></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>The Federal
Government taxes Capital Returns at 12.5 percent of earnings, on a 57 percent
share of GDI, collecting a total of 1.29 trillion dollars.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>By contrast, the
Federal Government taxes Wages and Salaries at double the rate of Capital
Returns. The government taxes Wages and
Salaries at 25.2 percent of earnings, on a 43 percent share of GDI, collecting
a total of 1.96 trillion dollars.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgupyIpI7GmzSX5r6uxus6EjRtLN-TGlnp3CkycUuu4Pnx2IEEGi6owel5YENgRuzP8Czd-NTVZca1MgnluPA5ka1PjssB7Y5lRodow0lj0NCcJ7PmWYv2t9VG5tQucm8wV4OgiIgSCEpfU/s1600/Tax+Rate.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgupyIpI7GmzSX5r6uxus6EjRtLN-TGlnp3CkycUuu4Pnx2IEEGi6owel5YENgRuzP8Czd-NTVZca1MgnluPA5ka1PjssB7Y5lRodow0lj0NCcJ7PmWYv2t9VG5tQucm8wV4OgiIgSCEpfU/s640/Tax+Rate.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Individual workers are receiving a smaller share of the
nation’s productivity than owners of capital.
Moreover, Wages and Salaries are taxed at double the rate of Capital
Returns. This disproportional taxation
doesn’t seem fair, or in the best interest of the economy. The distribution of earnings to working-class
households is more likely to see those dollars recycled into consumer demand than
dollars distributed as investment earnings.
<b>In the interest of economic
fairness, economic efficiency, and the reduction of wealth inequality, it makes
sense to raise taxes on capital returns, and give tax relief to wage-earners.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Note: This study did
not include unrealized capital gains, which allow the owners of capital to
roll-over gains from year to year without paying tax. So, the effective tax rate paid on capital
returns is actually less than reported in this post. Taxes on unrealized gains are effectively never
paid if the underlying assets are never sold, unless taxed at death by the
estate tax. I have not yet figured out a
clear way to calculate (or efficiently tax) unrealized capital gains. </b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
-----------------------------------------------<br />
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Calculations and Assumptions<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Income </b>(Federal Reserve Database)<b><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Income attributed to Wages includes 42.9 % of Gross Domestic
Income,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Income attributed to Capital is GDI minus income
attributable to wages.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Taxes </b>(Tax Policy Center and JustFacts.com)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b> Taxes attributed to
Wages include:<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>All individual income taxes, minus 9.2 % for capital gains,
and 4.75% for dividends and Interest.</li>
<li>Employee payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare)</li>
<li>Federal excise taxes (alcohol, tobacco, fuel and health
insurance).</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b> Taxes attributed to
Capital Returns include:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Business income taxes</li>
<li>Corporate payroll taxes</li>
<li>Individual capital gains taxes</li>
<li>Individual dividends and interest taxes</li>
<li> “Other” taxes,
representing diverse sources such as mineral royalty payments</li>
</ul>
<o:p> </o:p><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Assumptions</span></b><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The 2016 component percentages of individual taxes (wages, capital
gains, dividends and interest) were assumed to apply to 2015 taxes.</li>
<li>The percentage of taxes paid on capital gains was applied to
dividends and interest.</li>
<li>Federal Excise taxes were entirely allocated to Wages.</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
---------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Federal Tax Receipts by Source, 1934 – 2021 (forecast from
2016)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.justfacts.com/taxes.asp">http://www.justfacts.com/taxes.asp</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“* In 2015, 9.2% of federal individual income tax receipts
came from capital gain taxes.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“* For 2016, the Joint Committee on Taxation projects that
6.2% of gross income earned by individuals will come from capital gains, 2.2%
from dividends, and 1.0% from interest income.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/">https://fred.stlouisfed.org</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tables on Gross Domestic Income, and Wages and Salary share
of GDI. <o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-19381519408438697672017-03-09T00:21:00.000-08:002017-05-02T15:30:31.425-07:00Taxing Robots or Rewarding Jobs<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my early days as a middle manager, senior management
challenged middle managers to answer the question: “Are employees an asset or a
cost?” The answer, from the point of
view of the corporation, became evident over the next two decades. Employees cost money. The company “downsized”, reducing employment
by about 70%, while maintaining roughly the same production volumes. Efficiency was vastly improved by capital
investments and technology, but the burden of providing employment to the
down-sized employees was shifted to government, to other businesses, and to the
employees and their families.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Both political parties are concerned about jobs – about the
number, quality, and pay of jobs in America.
Republicans also want to decrease
corporate tax rates, to improve the competitiveness of American companies in
global markets. It seems to me that all
of these goals can be achieved by enacting a tax benefit that is based on the
number of good jobs that a company provides to its employees.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bill Gates proposes taxing robots that take away jobs from
humans. This is incomplete, because
there are many aspects of technology and capital which eliminate human jobs. Rather than taxing robots, it makes sense to
do the converse – to offer tax benefits to companies that provide human jobs.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The tax break should be significant, and help compensate for
the extra costs that a company incurs in providing benefits to an
employee. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Robots and the Cost of Human
Employees<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bill Gates thinks robots should pay taxes. Donald Trump thinks everybody should have access
to a high-paying job. These are two
facets of the same problem in the modern economy. Let’s
look at how we could make that happen.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvLlgfuvY0Sx6H28u_9VUexEvEEqktUBRAH7ALQQlcasmoHWRisDNn7eCAXRqkKONq1grHwCAGX2yrlQsDjl7jflVMFPbypqmRDtMfT8pyd7MJ7moQscVXWHCq2t1EzKbwRMJm5rWKiQ6U/s1600/robots-and-humans-manufacturing.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="342" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvLlgfuvY0Sx6H28u_9VUexEvEEqktUBRAH7ALQQlcasmoHWRisDNn7eCAXRqkKONq1grHwCAGX2yrlQsDjl7jflVMFPbypqmRDtMfT8pyd7MJ7moQscVXWHCq2t1EzKbwRMJm5rWKiQ6U/s640/robots-and-humans-manufacturing.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bill Gates proposed taxing robots in a recent interview with
the on-line news site Quartz. Gates’
logic is clear: if a robot replaces a worker who is paying Social Security,
Medicare, and Income taxes, the robot should be responsible for paying
equivalent taxes. It should be noted
that the employer is partly responsible for paying payroll taxes for Social
Security and Medicare. When a business
replaces an employee with a robot, the business saves money by not paying
payroll taxes, health insurance and many other mandatory employee
benefits. There may not be any intrinsic
efficiency of automation – the advantage lies simply in shirking the social
responsibility of taking care of working citizens. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Our laws require businesses to share the social costs of
taking care of people. Businesses must
provide health insurance to employees, must pay into Medicare and Social Security
funds for workers’ retirement care, and usually provide retirement savings
plans and other benefits. We have
structured society to care for people in this way for nearly 100 years. Some economists argue that we need to break
that tie between employment and social care, in order to allow business to
operate more efficiently, and to value labor strictly on the basis of
productivity. This is one of the
arguments for adopting a government-run, “single-payer” health system. But even if the country adopted this health
system, the issue of other employee benefits would remain. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is not an even playing field, and the robot is given a
huge advantage in this competition.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of my friends pointed out that taxes are providing for
the needs of workers, and that robots don’t have those needs. However, the needs of the displaced workers
have not gone away – the responsibility of providing for those needs has been
shifted – to another company, to the government, or to the individuals
themselves. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Capital and Technology<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fortune magazine critiqued Gates’ proposal to tax robots,
saying: “The principle Gates proposes would seem to require taxing any
technology that eliminates human labor, presumably starting with the wheel.” Well, yes.
That is exactly what is needed.
Fortune says further “To tax the robot’s owner as a human earning
$50,000 would in effect make efficiency illegal.” No, that is ridiculous. To be adopted, any technology must provide
more efficiency than providing benefits to the human employee. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In Gates’ vision, robots are discrete, individual
replacements for human workers. But
that’s not how it happens (as Gates should know very well). Technology, in many forms, makes workers
redundant or irrelevant through incremental efficiencies. During my 26-year career, secretaries were
made obsolete when managers were given desk-top computers to do their own
correspondence. Accountants were made
obsolete by enterprise-wide accounting software. Draftsmen were made obsolete when geologists
could produce presentation-quality color maps directly from seismic
workstations. In the beginning of my
career, geologists made maps by hand, with colored pencils on paper. But with a workstation, a single geologist
can do the work of five or ten geologists working with paper, and do the work
with greater depth. My career was marked
by company layoffs about every 3 or 4 years.
By the end of my career, the company was producing as much oil as when I
started, with about one-third of the employees.
And all without a single robot.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The simple way to look at the process of job losses is that
capital investment, enabled by technology, replaces workers. This represents all kinds of automation,
including robots. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Capital investment can create jobs – in fact, it is
necessary to create jobs. Capital
investment can also destroy jobs. There
is a paradigm belief that technology always develops new jobs to replace the jobs
it eliminates. The paradigm is usually
expressed with a reference to buggy-whip manufacturing jobs. Certainly, in the past, new jobs have
eventually developed. But the cycle time
to develop new jobs is getting longer as technology becomes more
sophisticated. There is no guarantee
that the new jobs will be timely enough for displaced workers, or that the
displaced workers can develop the skills necessary for the new jobs, or that
the new jobs will be located where displaced workers can find work, or that new
jobs will earn as much as the old jobs. The
decline of the Rust Belt manufacturing centers gives ample evidence that new
jobs do not necessarily appear. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Corporate Income Taxes and
Employment<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here are a few real numbers which give a sense of labor
market complexity and the costs to employ a human instead of a robot.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2015, American workers earned the following wages. The median wage (50% of wages lower, and 50%
of wages higher) is lower than the average, because the average wage is pulled
higher by a small number of very high wages.
The median is therefore more representative of typical wages. The cost
for employers to provide benefits to full-time employees averages about
$10.70/hour, adding about 45% to the cost of the average employee. In the table below, I assumed that Annual
Benefit Costs are linear with hourly wages; this may not be correct. The figure for Annual Benefit Costs for
Average Wages is correct.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 500px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 36.75pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 36.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"></td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 36.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.1in;" valign="bottom" width="106"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Hourly
Wage<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 36.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Annual
Wage<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 36.75pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.35pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Annual
Benefits Cost<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.35pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal">
Minimum Wage<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.1in;" valign="bottom" width="106"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$7.25<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$15,080<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.35pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$6,967<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.35pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal">
Median Wage<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.1in;" valign="bottom" width="106"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$17.40<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$36,192<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.35pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$16,717<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.35pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal">
Average Wage<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.1in;" valign="bottom" width="106"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$23.23<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.15pt;" valign="bottom" width="126"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$48,318<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 18.35pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.35pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$22,318<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">2015 Profits,
Employees and Taxes for Selected Companies<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Sorted by Net Profit
per Employee</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype
id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t"
path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f">
<v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/>
<v:formulas>
<v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/>
<v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/>
<v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/>
<v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/>
<v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/>
<v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/>
<v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/>
</v:formulas>
<v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/>
<o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/>
</v:shapetype><v:shape id="Picture_x0020_1" o:spid="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75"
style='width:468pt;height:195.75pt;visibility:visible;mso-wrap-style:square'>
<v:imagedata src="file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.emz"
o:title=""/>
</v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQv4Abr6S9iTv0D2zTc7OpoF6-xi-sg9iBxJ0ixN9VOZJPSqbIi4mT5G3STgx3_Hzlky64qrKI8Lg2Pi7sQeqbbLh-1ZTMP52OM4Bjvr7sDYgY_15Rg-oOzIOfCRfmY9S_DBHkWhpdw0Jb/s1600/employment+table+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="286" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQv4Abr6S9iTv0D2zTc7OpoF6-xi-sg9iBxJ0ixN9VOZJPSqbIi4mT5G3STgx3_Hzlky64qrKI8Lg2Pi7sQeqbbLh-1ZTMP52OM4Bjvr7sDYgY_15Rg-oOzIOfCRfmY9S_DBHkWhpdw0Jb/s640/employment+table+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a wide diversity in labor-intensity of American
companies. The financial firm Goldman
Sachs earns over one million dollars per employee, whereas Wal-Mart earns only
$6,000 per employee. The corporate
income tax paid per employee varies widely as well. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Employers’ Tax Break<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How should we encourage capital investment which produces
high-paying jobs? I suggest giving
companies a tax break for every good job they provide for society. The tax break should be at least sufficient
to level the playing field between automation and human employees. The tax break should compensate companies
for some of the costs related to human employment – health insurance costs,
social security contributions, retirement plans and human resources
administration. Because robots shouldn’t
have an inherent advantage when it comes to a company’s decision to invest in
automation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Employers should be
encouraged to pay employees a living wage.
As President Trump says, every American deserves a chance at a
high-paying job. A proactive tax policy
would help that happen. I would suggest
minimum tax benefits for minimum wages.
We should set the threshold for the significant tax benefit well above
minimum wage, perhaps 150% of minimum wage.
This is close to the threshold established for insurance benefits under
Obamacare, which is 138% of the Federal Poverty Level. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a way, companies hiring workers for minimum-wage jobs are
already receiving a corporate subsidy, through government welfare programs,
Medicaid, and other assistance for the poor.
The costs of providing for the well-being of these employees is being
shirked by the company and borne by other taxpayers. (Thanks to my son for that insight.)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is not possible to give companies enough income tax
credits to fully compensate for the cost of benefits to employees. American companies employ about 123,000,000
full-time employees. The average cost
of benefits per employee is about $15,000, for a total cost of a little more
than two trillion dollars. By contrast, in 2015, American companies paid
only 344 billion dollars in income tax. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A tiered system of tax relief would provide an incentive to
companies that provide good-paying jobs.
Companies with a large number of low-paying jobs cannot be compensated
more than they are paying in taxes through tax relief; and we are not trying to
give incentive for low-paying jobs anyway.
As a starting point, I would suggest $1000 of tax relief for every job less
than $15.00/hour, $2,000 of tax relief for each job between $17/hour and $17.50/hour,
and $4,000 of tax relief for every job with greater than $17.50/hour. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>LINK Excel.Sheet.12
"C:\\Users\\Doug\\Documents\\Blog Working\\Taxes\\capital tax\\Companies
and employees.xlsx" Sheet2!R17C1:R21C4 \a \f 4 \h <span style='mso-element:
field-separator'></span><![endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 560px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 150.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="200"></td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Full-time
Employees<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 69.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="92"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Tax
Break<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="125"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Tax
Cost, millions<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 150.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="200"><div class="MsoNormal">
Number of Jobs <$15/hr.<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
43,571,670<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 69.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="92"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$1,000<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="125"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$43,572<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 150.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="200"><div class="MsoNormal">
Number of Jobs $15 - $17.50<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
10,480,000<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 69.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="92"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$2,000<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="125"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$20,960<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 150.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="200"><div class="MsoNormal">
Number of Jobs > $17.50<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
68,948,330<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 69.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="92"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$4,000<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="125"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$275,793<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 150.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="200"><div class="MsoNormal">
Totals<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 107.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="143"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
123,000,000<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 69.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="92"></td>
<td nowrap="" style="height: 15.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 94.0pt;" valign="bottom" width="125"><div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
$340,325<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The total tax cost of the program would be about equal to
the current total business income tax collected.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A major theme of the Trump presidency is to improve American
jobs – to give every American the chance for a high-paying job. The Trump administration is proposing to
reduce corporate tax rates to improve the competitiveness of American
businesses in the global market and enhance shareholder value. It seems to me that both goals could be
accomplished by changing the tax rates on businesses that provide good jobs, in
comparison to those companies that replace human jobs with technology and
capital. In fact, any combination of
taxes or tax breaks could accomplish the same goal, by making the number of
full-time jobs and the quality of those jobs a factor in the tax rate.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It might be that this tax incentive is too small. An employer’s cost for an employee earning
$17.40/hour is nearly $53,000; $36,200 for wages and $16,700 for benefits. A tax credit of $2000 might not be material. This suggested tax break is a nudge, rather
than a shove, in the right direction. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternatively, rather than a tax credit, we might consider
raising the tax on corporate profits, for profits which are not supporting
workers. Raising taxes on business
might seem unlikely in this political climate, but perhaps in a few years that
may change. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The topic of taxes on business deserves deeper
consideration. We should be able to measure
the economic wealth generated by labor and capital, and look at the tax burden
on each sector. I have never seen a
clear analysis of this problem, and I would like to know if the tax burden
placed on capital returns is equitable with the tax burden on labor. Perhaps this will be the topic of a future
blog post.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
-----------------</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://qz.com/911968/bill-gates-the-robot-that-takes-your-job-should-pay-taxes/">https://qz.com/911968/bill-gates-the-robot-that-takes-your-job-should-pay-taxes/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Original interview, with video.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Gates:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Right now, the human worker who does, say, $50,000 worth of
work in a factory, that income is taxed and you get income tax, social security
tax, all those things. If a robot comes in to do the same thing, you’d think
that we’d tax the robot at a similar level.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://fortune.com/2017/02/22/bill-gates-proposes-a-robot-tax/">http://fortune.com/2017/02/22/bill-gates-proposes-a-robot-tax/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fortune argues: “<span style="background: white; font-family: "georgia" , serif;">To tax the
robot’s owner as a human earning $50,000 would in effect make efficiency
illegal. In addition, the principle Gates proposes would seem to require taxing
any technology that eliminates human labor, presumably starting with the wheel.”</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-02-28/what-s-wrong-with-bill-gates-robot-tax">https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-02-28/what-s-wrong-with-bill-gates-robot-tax</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“So there are probably better ways than taxing robots to
help humans avoid the harms of automation. Instead of slowing innovation, the
government should think about taxing humans less and redistributing the income
of robots more.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bill-gates-robot-tax-automation-jobs/">http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bill-gates-robot-tax-automation-jobs/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“So Gates is right about the need to provide funds to
retrain workers and to support them in making these job transitions, but taxing
robots will just slow job creation. Automation is creating more jobs than it is
destroying.” -- A paradigm-type
statement, given without evidence.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/03/economist-explains-1">http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/03/economist-explains-1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Article partly agrees with Gates’ proposal to tax robots,
but offers several caveats. E.g., some
robots make humans more productive; some industries, such as health, deserve to
have the best technologies available. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.vox.com/2017/2/28/14772568/trump-speech-congress-transcript">http://www.vox.com/2017/2/28/14772568/trump-speech-congress-transcript</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Every American child should be able to grow up in a safe
community, to attend a great school, and to have access to a high-paying job.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/confusion-over-median-hourly-wages-5527">http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/confusion-over-median-hourly-wages-5527</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000">https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
May 2015, Median hourly wages, all occupations: $17.40<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
May 2015, Average hourly wage, all occupations: $23.23<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm">https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
OECD statistics – US GDP/hour worked = $62.89, 2015, in
constant 2010 dollars.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
4<sup>th</sup> highest, behind Luxemburg, Ireland, and
Norway.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/">https://fred.stlouisfed.org</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Real output of all persons, non-farm business sector =
$107.39, constant 2010 dollars<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Labor Statistics<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?rid=53&eid=42211">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?rid=53&eid=42211</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm">https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2015/home.htm">https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2015/home.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://fortune.com/2015/04/13/who-makes-15-per-hour/">http://fortune.com/2015/04/13/who-makes-15-per-hour/</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
2017 minimum wage $7.25/hour
$15,080/year<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Median
wage $17.40/hour $36,192/year<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Average
wage $23.23/hour $48,318/year<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
Data on number of Employees, profits, and tax rate for selected companies: A prominent stock market appraisal service.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf">https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Average wages total $23.42/hour, or about 69% of total
employer costs. Benefits cost
$10.73/hour, or about 31% of total costs.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Corporate Income Taxes represent 10.6% of total Federal tax
receipts. Corporations are also
responsible for significant contributions to payroll taxes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Corporations paid $ 344 billion in income taxes, out of
$3250 billion in total tax receipts.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.justfacts.com/taxes.asp">http://www.justfacts.com/taxes.asp</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
* In 2015, 9.2% of federal individual income tax receipts
came from capital gain taxes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
* For 2016, the Joint Committee on Taxation projects that
6.2% of gross income earned by individuals will come from capital gains, 2.2%
from dividends, and 1.0% from interest income.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Estimated percentage of Federal Individual Income tax from
dividends & Interest: 4.75%<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://thefinancebase.com/percent-irs-revenue-comes-capital-gains-tax-1105.html">http://thefinancebase.com/percent-irs-revenue-comes-capital-gains-tax-1105.html</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Capital gains represent 9.2 percent of individual income
taxes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-capital-gains-and-taxes">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-capital-gains-and-taxes</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Table of capital gains and taxes paid to 2009.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-federal-tax-revenues-come-from">http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-federal-tax-revenues-come-from</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sources of Federal Tax collections. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/192361/unadjusted-monthly-number-of-full-time-employees-in-the-us/">https://www.statista.com/statistics/192361/unadjusted-monthly-number-of-full-time-employees-in-the-us/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
123 million full time workers in the US in Jan. 2017.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8486739823102464023.post-36289027628408013762017-01-13T15:27:00.000-08:002017-03-21T22:11:34.967-07:00The Next 100 Years<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
The New Year is a time to look forward, backward, and to
contemplate the passage of time. In that
spirit, I wrote a list of predictions for the next 100 years. I also asked my son and a good friend to
write similar lists. When I compared the
lists, I was amazed at the convergence between our forecasts. We envision sweeping changes that span the
range of human experience; life in 100 years will be quite different than life
today. But for the most part, our
forecasts represent the extrapolation of trends that are apparent today, using
knowledge that we already possess or are actively seeking. In general, this post is drawn from predictions that at least two of the three forecasters had in common.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I believe that we already have much of the knowledge that
will change life in the next hundred years.
The fabric biplanes of 1917 foretold the Boeing 747 jetliners which were
built 50 years later. Einstein’s publication of E = MC<sup>2</sup> in 1905
foretold the atomic bomb in 1945.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is clear from current trends that the scientific and
technological achievements of mankind have just begun. In one hundred years, society will have a
ten-fold increase in its ability to produce wealth, but it will struggle with
equitable distribution and meaningful employment, as it does today. Our ability to produce technological
advancement greatly exceeds our ability to produce social, political, and
economic advancements. In other words, our ability to build new gadgets is much better than our ability to work together, to
avoid conflict, and to share our wealth.
Most of the positive developments of the next hundred years will come from technology. Most of the
scary stuff will come from social problems. <br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Science is just beginning to solve deep mysteries of reality
and life. The technologies which might
result from these discoveries will fundamentally change how people live on
earth, and where we go from here.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
This post is organized into four parts: Technology, Environment, Society and Science.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpn773vPybnK_oaj8VG4DcH_YUcPtrgK5l7ut-VHAvW8M56IManKV3clozAo3XW5UBfR77f1frbRZkAWLTqywMhmZwS4Acfs7SI7o3wUywVqUHDf6q9CVX_ITQ08w_pD0LKH1jIDhVs2oE/s1600/calendar+5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="438" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpn773vPybnK_oaj8VG4DcH_YUcPtrgK5l7ut-VHAvW8M56IManKV3clozAo3XW5UBfR77f1frbRZkAWLTqywMhmZwS4Acfs7SI7o3wUywVqUHDf6q9CVX_ITQ08w_pD0LKH1jIDhVs2oE/s640/calendar+5.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<o:p> </o:p><b style="text-align: center;"><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Technology</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Energy<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>A breakthrough technology will make energy much cheaper than today, and enable the reversal of CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere.
The breakthrough may be fusion energy, or solar power, in combination with advances in storage and transmission technology. Cheap energy should enable huge strides in
global prosperity, but results will depend on how wealth is distributed.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Transportation<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Self-driving cars will be the norm; only hobbyists will own
drivable cars.</li>
<li>Domestic airline travel will soon reach a gridlock limit;
alternatives of high-speed rail and/or hyperloop tube transport will be built
within 50 years between American cities.
Trans-ocean hyperloops will be built by the second half of the century.</li>
<li>Sub-orbital passenger aircraft will briefly compete with
hyperloops, but will be less economical.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p><b>Health</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Most cancers will be curable within 50 years, possibly
sooner.</li>
<li>Spinal cord injuries will be curable, as well as other
injuries requiring cellular regeneration, such as blindness, deafness, and
paralysis. </li>
<li>Mechanical aids will be better integrated with human bodies
through bio-engineering, solving a variety of human illnesses. Implanted mechanical aids will also offer the
possibility of enhanced human performance for military or other purposes.</li>
<li>Lifespans will (potentially) be much longer. Science will decisively solve the mechanisms
of aging, and develop effective therapies to extend healthy life. Availability of those therapies may be
limited by cost and affordability of extended life.</li>
<li>Global population will not peak at 9 billion in 2050, as currently
predicted, but will grow throughout the century due to extended lifespans.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p><b>Biotechnology</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Genetic therapies will be available to cure genetic
diseases, especially in children. </li>
<li>Genetic selection or modification will be available to create designer
children, but with limited legality. The
topic of genetic child improvement will be as socially intractable as the
abortion debate today.</li>
<li>Hybrid and synthetic life forms will offer solutions to some
problems, but will be the subject of sharp ethical controversy.</li>
<li>All standard consumer meat will be synthetic. Synthetic meat and food will provide
healthier diets in developed countries, and eliminate malnutrition in currently
undeveloped countries.</li>
<li>A number of Pleistocene extinct species will be restored,
including wooly mammoths and mastodons.
There will be an ethical argument about restoring Neanderthal and
Denisovan people –they will not be restored.</li>
<li>Biotechnology will emerge as the major threat in terrorism,
assassination, and warfare.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p><b>Computer Technology</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Quantum computing will be as common as flash memory is
today. There will be huge progress in
miniaturization and efficiencies.
Artificial intelligence will eliminate many jobs. Deep technical problems in mathematics and
computing will be solved. [For example,
my son informs me that the NP-complete solution will be discovered – whatever
that is!]</li>
<li>Artificial sentience will not yet be a reality, but
technologists will have a much clearer idea of what would be required to
produce a sentient machine.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Space (Solar System)</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Thousands of people will be living and working off-world.</li>
<li>Manned missions to Mars will be routine, but a permanent
base will not yet exist.</li>
<li>A permanent base will exist on the moon, but will be fully
dependent on support from Earth.</li>
<li>Asteroid mining will be a reality in the asteroid belt. Projects will be underway to place asteroids
into Earth orbit, lunar orbit, or Lagrange points. The first sustainable colonies away from
earth will revolve around asteroid mining activities. International tensions will flare over the
ownership of asteroids and the rights for colonization.</li>
<li>Simple life will be discovered in the solar system, with the
possibility of fossilized multicellular life on Mars.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<o:p></o:p>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Space (Interstellar
Exploration)<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Interstellar probes will be returning the first data from
other stars.</li>
<li>Planning will be under way for a manned interstellar voyage.</li>
<li>Signals from a distant alien civilization will be detected,
but so far away (and long ago) that communication is impossible.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Environment</span><o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Wilderness and
Wildlife<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Many extinctions will occur due to climate change and
pressures from a larger human population. </li>
<li>Environmental degradation will be extreme in China, India,
Africa and Latin America by mid-century.
Efforts to restore the environment will be a high priority by the end of
the century.</li>
<li>New large park systems will seek to re-establish wilderness
ecosystems, including large predators and herd animals which are now extinct or
will become extinct.</li>
<li>Wilderness areas will be greatly diminished globally, and
wildlife will be similarly diminished. </li>
</ul>
<br />
<o:p></o:p>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Oceans<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Wild fish stocks will be recovering from severe depletion
due to overfishing. Commercial fishing
will be illegal; fish for human consumption will be raised in fish farms. Restoration projects for coral reefs will be
underway, after the near-extinction of most reefs on earth. </li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Climate Change<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Sea level will be 1 to 2 meters higher than today,
sufficient to cause flooding in many coastal cities and communities, and
abandonment of some communities.
Substantial melting will be occurring from the Greenland and Antarctic
ice-caps. Rising sea level will be
accelerating and inexorable, with the greatest impact expected in the second
hundred years. </li>
<li><o:p>D</o:p>rought and desertification will spread northward and
southward from the lines of 30 and -30 degrees of latitude as atmospheric
convection cells grow stronger. Areas
affected will include Southwest and south-central United States, southern
Europe, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, parts of China, Argentina and
southeast Australia. Famines are likely
to occur in affected areas. The extent
of the problem will depend on how quickly mankind can implement low-CO2 energy
technologies. </li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Society</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Economy<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The world will endure a severe global financial meltdown,
based on failure of credit systems. The
crisis will cause an extended depression, and result in re-organization of
political, economic, and financial systems. </li>
<li>Fewer than 15% of American workers are now working in industries with
physical products. Robots and
artificial intelligence will continue to replace workers, as capital is more
cost-effective than labor in many industries.</li>
<li>Automation of the economy will leave the majority of
people unemployed. This will cause
significant civil unrest and conflict.
The world will be divided into three groups: 1) the talented elite who
work; 2) a minority of people who own capital, do little and earn
much, and 3) those who do not own capital, do little, and earn very little.</li>
<li>Sustained productivity growth of 2% to 2.5% annually will
result in 7x to 12x total growth. If
distributed equally, average household income in the United States would
increase from $52,000/year to about $500,000/year, adjusted for inflation. Wealth inequality can be expected to grow for
the foreseeable future, resulting in an extremely wealthy aristocracy and a
moderately well-off middle class. </li>
<li>The problems of what people will do for employment and how
wealth is distributed will be the root cause of most social conflict in the
next century.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Politics</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The United States, as we know it, will be greatly changed or
no longer exist. The political
organization of states will be changed, and the external borders will probably
change. There will be a slow regional
consolidation of North America; economic integration will be followed by
political integration. Other megastates
will also form, in Europe, Southeast Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Union. </li>
<li>A third (or fourth) political party will emerge in the United States, winning substantial power in Congress and the Presidency. One or both of the existing political parties will expire or be completely changed in a political transformation. </li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>International
Relations<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Most of Africa will be economically developed. The African Union will exist as a meaningful
political and military bloc.</li>
<li>There will be conflict between the major nationalistic
interests (China, Russia, USA) and major trading block associations. China will be involved in a major war
against one or more of its neighbors. </li>
<li>There is a high probability of another World War. The war will involve many advanced weapons
(AI, drones, space-based weapons, and computer warfare), but probably not
nuclear warheads.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Natural Disaster</b></div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>A global epidemic will result in up to 30% population loss. </li>
<li>A solar flare will devastate electrical infrastructure, electronic
communications and satellites.
Rebuilding the lost infrastructure will be uneven, and will require most
of a decade.</li>
<li>Major earthquakes with huge damage and loss of life will
occur in Turkey (south of Istanbul), California, Oregon, Italy, Chile, Japan,
and Indonesia. </li>
<li>The Mosul dam in Iraq will fail, with large loss of life
downstream.</li>
<li>One or more meteors will hit the earth with enough power to
obliterate a city.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Terrorism<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>A major terrorist attack will occur causing tens-to-hundreds
of thousands of deaths. The incident may
spark a major war, possibly along the Christian/Muslim divide. The incident will increase global
surveillance and eliminate most privacy protections around the world. </li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Civil Rights<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>In the United States, the trend of acceptance of alternative
lifestyles will continue. Some
structural change will occur in a small percentage of American families,
equivalent to the legalization of gay marriage.
The change may be in terms of polygamy or polyamory, limited marriage
contracts, three-parent children or children raised by communities instead of
families. In other words, something
weird by today’s standards.</li>
<li>A number of forces, including the threat of terrorism, will
challenge the principles of privacy in most countries. Most people in the world will live in what we
consider to be surveillance states.</li>
<li>Racism will diminish as genetic mixing makes the separation
of races less distinct.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Science and New Technology<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There will be at least one completely revolutionary discovery
in physics in the next century, which will enable some transformative new
technology. In the last century, most of
the science for 20<sup>th</sup> century technologies was already known by 1917
(airplanes, E = MC<sup>2, </sup>etc.).
Application and implementation of that knowledge produced the new
technologies which changed the world.
Likewise, I believe that we already have the science for the
technologies of the next century. The
breakthrough scientific discoveries of the next one hundred years will produce
the transformative technologies of the following century. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first list shows potential revolutionary scientific
discoveries, in order of likelihood. All
of the items on the list are areas of current research. I excluded potential discoveries which are
outside the boundaries of known physics, such as faster-than-light travel or
telepathic telekinetic dragons.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second list is of potential technologies which might
result from such discoveries and completely transform human life and human
destiny, also listed in order of likelihood.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Potential Scientific
Discoveries</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Full understanding of the processes of human aging.</li>
<li>The discovery of a habitable planet orbiting a nearby star.</li>
<li>Full understanding of gravity, and how it produces
distortion of space-time, or the discovery that gravity is an emergent
phenomenon, i.e., a product of other, more fundamental forces.</li>
<li>The ability to alter time for small, table-top objects: to
accelerate or decelerate time; to reverse time, or to put objects into a closed
time-loop.</li>
<li>The discovery and proof of sentient machines.</li>
<li>Discovery of intelligent alien life.</li>
<li>Discovery of how to manipulate space-time. </li>
<li>Proof that we live in a multiverse.</li>
<li>Proof that reality is non-material.</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Potential Transformative
Technologies</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Cheap fusion power.</li>
<li>Asteroid mining and orbital manipulation.</li>
<li>Permanent, independent, communities in space.</li>
<li>A practical and efficient space-drive which does not require
thruster propellant.</li>
<li>Artificial Intelligence smarter than people, and capable of
self-design with improvements.</li>
<li>A cure for aging. </li>
<li>The ability to generate localized, focused artificial
gravitational fields.</li>
<li>Faster-than-light communication, using separated quantum
entangled particles.</li>
<li>Sentient machines.</li>
<li>Terraforming planets in our solar system.</li>
<li>Manipulation of planetary orbits.</li>
<li>Teleportation of physical objects.</li>
<li>The ability to adjust current reality, in terms of modifying
physical laws, physical objects or actions, or past events, based on a new
understanding of reality.</li>
<li>Communication with parallel universes.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Black Swan<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Most of the predictions in this post are consensus ideas, given by
at least two of the three forecasters. But life-changing developments may be completely unexpected, in the sense of Nassim Taleb’s
Black Swan events. (Even if, as Taleb
writes, the Black Swan events are completely predictable in hindsight.) <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">It
is therefore worth noting a few of the non-consensus predictions. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Science
will find evidence that the human soul exists beyond death.</li>
<li>Marine
archeology will discover ancient civilizations flooded by sea level rise, dating
back to 30,000 years or more.</li>
<li>Society-wide
panopticon surveillance will challenge and possibly end the liberal,
democratic, rule of law society of the west.</li>
<li>Wealth
inequality will bottom out, having reached a nadir in about 20-40 years, and be
improved in 100 years compared to today.</li>
</ul>
It is entirely appropriate that these last predictions are about what we are, who we have been, and how we will live.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"> -----------------------</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">References and Credits<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Many
thanks to Steve R. and Greg B., whose thoughtful correspondence enabled me to
write this post and in other ways enrich my life.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Bill
Gates, February 2016, interview with Charlie Rose, <a href="https://charlierose.com/videos/23144">https://charlierose.com/videos/23144</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">David
Deutsch, 1997, <u>The Fabric of Reality</u>, 390 p. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">David
Deutsch, 2011, <u>The Beginning of Infinity</u>, 496 p. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Jacob
Bronowski, 1973, <u>The Ascent of Man</u>, 448 p. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">--<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Coda<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Boeing 747<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not long ago, I watched a Boeing 747 airplane take off from
our local airport – that was the inspiration for this post. The 747 is a massive airplane, and appears to
hang in the air as it is gaining altitude.
The 747 has been in service since 1970 – nearly 50 years. The plane’s startling size immediately
garnered nicknames: jumbo jet, queen of the skies, and my favorite, the
aluminum overcast. Recent versions of
the plane are still among the largest passenger planes in the world. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite the fact that the plane has been in service for 46
years, the sight still inspires awe. It
made me wonder what people would have thought, if they had seen this aircraft
one hundred years ago. The year 1916 was
the midpoint of World War I, and airplanes were still crude novelties made of
fabric and wood. The idea of an
airplane weighing nearly one-half million pounds, capable of carrying up to 600
passengers, or another half-million pounds of cargo, would have seemed beyond
comprehension. And yet within little
more than 50 years, such planes flew. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The sight of this plane made me wonder what the world will
see in the next one hundred years. What
technologies will become commonplace in our grandchildren’s lifetimes that are
beyond our comprehension today?</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Doug Robbinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01898643432335324941noreply@blogger.com1