Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
iapennell

Stopping Dangerous Global Warming

Recommended Posts

Ryan Maue has tweeted "Whatever Tim Palmer is selling -- I am buying in bulk."

palmer.thumb.jpg.e051e71c643ef11f3311451e83077f69.jpg

I don't know the context of the quote but at first glance it's very much in line with previous research papers by him to do with dynamics of the atmosphere and blocking patterns. The west North American ridge seems to have been, at least partially, responsible for the lack of movement of Harvey.

Climate extremes and the role of dynamics

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/14/5281.full

also

Quasi-resonant circulation regimes and hemispheric synchronization of extreme weather in boreal summer

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/34/12331

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, knocker said:

The west North American ridge seems to have been, at least partially, responsible for the lack of movement of Harvey.

I don't think the ridge in the west was so unusual. What stopped Harvey was the trough so far south. I don't think such patterns are so unusual with mjo phase 2.

More research should be done on hurricanes and I would really hope this is well funded. I'm not sure if super computers are the answer to that at the initial stage, but certainly can be useful later on. There is still a lot of unknowns as to what dictates a storm developing into a cyclone, from the initial circulation wave (usually from Africa) to the land fall. 

If something is happening to make these things more likely in the future, by all means research, but so far it was the first category 3+ hurricane in 12 years to strike the US and it would be a little premature to start fanciful thinking that this is the future of hurricanes, based on a single one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jvenge said:

I don't think the ridge in the west was so unusual. What stopped Harvey was the trough so far south. I don't think such patterns are so unusual with mjo phase 2.

More research should be done on hurricanes and I would really hope this is well funded. I'm not sure if super computers are the answer to that at the initial stage, but certainly can be useful later on. There is still a lot of unknowns as to what dictates a storm developing into a cyclone, from the initial circulation wave (usually from Africa) to the land fall. 

If something is happening to make these things more likely in the future, by all means research, but so far it was the first category 3+ hurricane in 12 years to strike the US and it would be a little premature to start fanciful thinking that this is the future of hurricanes, based on a single one.

 

Could you kindly go into a little more detail about the the trough being too far south stopping Harvey as any early assessments that I've seen have specifically mentioned the ridge. I'm afraid I don't follow the MJO point either

mjo.thumb.gif.2bcea45314153a8eca693095248d8198.gif

And

Quote

it would be a little premature to start fanciful thinking that this is the future of hurricanes, based on a single one.

I quite agree but I'm not actually aware of any responsible climate scientists that are doing this. Essentially this is just Maue on his bulverist skeptical global warming bike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And perhaps worth another listen, Kerry Emanuel on Climate and Stronger Hurricanes

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, knocker said:

Could you kindly go into a little more detail about the the trough being too far south stopping Harvey as any early assessments that I've seen have specifically mentioned the ridge.

Knocker, I don't have too much in the way of model access until winter, but if you are still using weather bell, look at the 5 day means between August 26th and August 31st for both 500 hPa geopotential height & anomaly, along with 850 temperature anomaly for the same period. ECMWF would be better.

Then have a look at how MJO phase 2 looks for the period in question for North America at http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/Composites/Temperature/

A ridge in the west is not so unusual when you see storms, cold in the east. The trough appears to be what trapped the storm in this case, otherwise you would have needed to see a sub tropical ridge if it was the culprit, rather than the trough you see.

Harvey itself wasn't a remarkable hurricane in terms of power or the amount of precipitation it brought. There have been stronger hurricanes, MANY.

I'm not saying Harvey was the norm. It is very rare for a hurricane to stall like that, but I think it can be explained from what we know about meteorology, without sacrificing a virgin into  a volcano to appease the gods :-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jvenge said:

Knocker, I don't have too much in the way of model access until winter, but if you are still using weather bell, look at the 5 day means between August 26th and August 31st for both 500 hPa geopotential height & anomaly, along with 850 temperature anomaly for the same period. ECMWF would be better.

Then have a look at how MJO phase 2 looks for the period in question for North America at http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/Composites/Temperature/

A ridge in the west is not so unusual when you see storms, cold in the east. The trough appears to be what trapped the storm in this case, otherwise you would have needed to see a sub tropical ridge if it was the culprit, rather than the trough you see.

Harvey itself wasn't a remarkable hurricane in terms of power or the amount of precipitation it brought. There have been stronger hurricanes, MANY.

I'm not saying Harvey was the norm. It is very rare for a hurricane to stall like that, but I think it can be explained from what we know about meteorology, without sacrificing a virgin into  a volcano to appease the gods :-)

 

 

I am well aware of the recent and upcoming North American 500mb height anomalies and this is the chart for Monday. All I'm suggesting is that the ridge(s) is stalling any northward movement of Harvey. At the end of the day the complex meteorological mechanisms at play here are above my pay grade (as well as access to the relevant more detailed upper air charts) so will await the bevy of detailed analysis that will appear shortly.

But a couple of points.

• I'm not suggesting that the ridge in itself is unusual on this occasion

• The MJO composites are worthless

• I'm gobsmacked that you think the rainfall wasn't remarkable.

• Like Maue you, for reasons unknown, seem to automatically adopt a bulveristic approach. Your making a defense against something I have not claimed.

ecm_z500_anom_noram_1.thumb.png.fdde3d1740ffb9f33a8e714535c4359d.png

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, knocker said:

• I'm gobsmacked that you think the rainfall wasn't remarkable.

 

The accumulations are likely to be at record levels (since the 1950, when they checked in more detail) over the period. I wouldn't have thought it would have broken any records for 24 hours or 48 hours. So at that stage you are likely looking at the 72+ plus range and then, for accumulations. I think the overall event was remarkable, but truth be told, it will only be remembered because it stalled.

57 minutes ago, knocker said:

• Like Maue you, for reasons unknown, seem to automatically adopt a bulveristic approach. Your making a defense against something I have not claimed.

 

Could be. I read a rather outlandish Guardian article about it yesterday and some of the things mentioned in it put my back up a bit :-) I think most people on Netweather stay around because they have an interest in the weather (I hope) and part of having an interest is trying to understand what happened and what is happening and putting it into context. For me personally, I live in a country with fairly well defined seasons, so all summer I tend to check the models only a few times a week to see if there are any noteworthy storms showing up. So when I see news stories about something interesting much further away, I'll take note and maybe turn some attention to it. Truth be told, if that hurricane hadn't have stalled, I wouldn't have even bothered reading this thread or checking some models and trying to understand them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jvenge said:

The accumulations are likely to be at record levels (since the 1950, when they checked in more detail) over the period. I wouldn't have thought it would have broken any records for 24 hours or 48 hours. So at that stage you are likely looking at the 72+ plus range and then, for accumulations. I think the overall event was remarkable, but truth be told, it will only be remembered because it stalled.

Could be. I read a rather outlandish Guardian article about it yesterday and some of the things mentioned in it put my back up a bit :-) I think most people on Netweather stay around because they have an interest in the weather (I hope) and part of having an interest is trying to understand what happened and what is happening and putting it into context. For me personally, I live in a country with fairly well defined seasons, so all summer I tend to check the models only a few times a week to see if there are any noteworthy storms showing up. So when I see news stories about something interesting much further away, I'll take note and maybe turn some attention to it. Truth be told, if that hurricane hadn't have stalled, I wouldn't have even bothered reading this thread or checking some models and trying to understand them.

 

Totally irrelevant but if you are talking record rainfalls you would need to go some to beat this

A Drop Of Rain At Holt, Missouri

https://www.netweather.tv/forum/topic/70204-a-drop-of-rain-at-holt-missouri/

But further to my original post :shok:

Quote

Upper-level winds in the atmosphere usually steer big hurricanes and keep them moving after they make landfall. With Harvey, those steering winds broke down, and a high pressure system to the northwest kept Harvey locked in place

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/science-and-health/2017/8/29/16216568/hurricane-havery-houston-flooding-experts?utm_content=bufferb58f3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, knocker said:

Upper-level winds in the atmosphere usually steer big hurricanes and keep them moving after they make landfall. With Harvey, those steering winds broke down, and a high pressure system to the northwest kept Harvey locked in place

Each to their own. I'm sure some of the pros will describe it over the coming days, but I just really don't see that ridge in the west being the key player. Happy to be wrong though ;-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see the schoolkids demonstrating, in Downing St. Big thumbs - up for the youngsters!👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Stone said:

Great to see the schoolkids demonstrating, in Downing St. Big thumbs - up for the youngsters!👍

who is actually demonstrating the kids or the teachers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

Great to see the schoolkids demonstrating, in Downing St. Big thumbs - up for the youngsters!👍

I don't think the UK is to blame for "Dangerous Global Warming" Perhaps their well meaning demonstration would have been better suited ambling through China town, stopping off at a few well chosen embassies  on the way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DAVID SNOW said:

I don't think the UK is to blame for "Dangerous Global Warming" Perhaps their well meaning demonstration would have been better suited ambling through China town, stopping off at a few well chosen embassies  on the way!

Well the UK is in a position where it can lead by example and invest in renewable energies so why not invest in it? The Tory government stopped investment in carbon capture storage (why? CO2 emissions wouldn't have to drop so much) and regardless of your views on climate change, better air quality and cheaper bills is undoubtedly a good thing.

Yet our government is doing little so they have every right to be protesting.

If we become a pioneer in renewable technology then this may encourage other countries to follow? and it may help us economically post brexit.

So good on the kids for protesting. If no one speaks nothing changes. 

Edited by Quicksilver1989

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Quicksilver1989 said:

Well the UK is in a position where it can lead by example and invest in renewable energies so why not invest in it. The Tory government stopped investment in carbon capture storage (why?) and regardless of your views on climate change, better air quality and cheaper bills is undoubtedly a good thing.

Yet our government is doing little so they have every right to be protesting.

If we become a pioneer in renewable technology then this may encourage other countries to follow? and it may help us economically post brexit.

So good on the kids for protesting. If no one speaks nothing changes. 

Air quality/pollution is a huge and damaging fact in our towns and cities and unfortunately  I (for a few reasons) can only see it deteriorating further.

I cant see Russia,China,Brazil,India or the USA  giving a damn what the UK does, they will do whatever  it takes so long as their economies keep growing, whatever the long term damage.

I don't think the 'kids' were protesting about the awful pollution in London though, it was a demo about climate change which of course is a global affair, so in light of that fact perhaps they should have directed their protest towards the worlds big hitters, not in Parliament square, but in 'other' parts of London...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bunch of comments have been removed. If folks need to resort to conspiracy theories about climate change to make their point, there are plenty of forums and blogs that simply love that nonsense. This ain't one of them though.
Please report blatant anti-science comments rather than reply to them.
Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The protests are global but to fair to the children I don't think China, Russia or the USA will care what British children are saying.  There are children across the world taking part in this so hopefully they will help to influence other countries policies.  However, they can influence our government and we are still a member of the G7 etc. so we do have a lot of influence.  We are also doing nowhere near enough ourselves and have a long way to go so they have every right to hold our government to account for their future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm solidly behind the kids on this one.

Maybe they have a far clearer picture of how bad things are , and how bad they will become, (if we do not get serious about tackling Climate change) than some of the posters that were posting here?

Many of those demonstrating will be doing either 'O's or 'A's in geography and so be pretty clear what Mr keeling's curve is showing us esp. over the past few years?

The kids might point out that if we had got serious about climate change, as we should have over the last two decades, then the levels of warming that now fuel natural CO2 feedbacks ( keeping total CO2 outputs for the year in the 'business as usual' range?) would not have occurred?

Some of us posting here are parents or aunts/uncles so we will have helped our kids grow and discover the world they live on. I guess pretty soon they will be asking us what we did over the last 2 decades to push for climate action, they may even ask us to help support them in their climate action?

How do you think we will scrub up?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many of the protesting kids ( taking time out from class ) have made a practical pledge to change their own lifestyle.. to be minimal consumers and be environmentally conscious in everything they do? The only way major change is going to happen is by mass individual action on a practical level. I don't observe a mass global movement of people practically overhauling their value set which would drive dramatic change. Like it or not, we live in a capitalist society based on supply and demand - freedom of the people to decide what they want and how much they are willing to pay....and our democratic system is based on satisfying people's lifestyle and giving them what they want. I am a little bit pessimistic about the future because the rapid change which is required is just not politically feasible. The majority will not tolerate their freedoms as consumers being curtailed,  paying more for product or electricity, or even sacraficing their job because it is in an environmentally damaging industry. Sorry for the negative post but I think we are not seeing the big changes that are required based on these hard truths. 

Edited by Styx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Styx said:

How many of the protesting kids ( taking time out from class ) have made a practical pledge to change their own lifestyle.. to be minimal consumers and be environmentally conscious in everything they do? The only way major change is going to happen is by mass individual action on a practical level. I don't observe a mass global movement of people practically overhauling their value set which would drive dramatic change. Like it or not, we live in a capitalist society based on supply and demand - freedom of the people to decide what they want and how much they are willing to pay....and our democratic system is based on satisfying people's lifestyle and giving them what they want. I am a little bit pessimistic about the future because the rapid change which is required is just not politically feasible. The majority will not tolerate their freedoms as consumers being curtailed,  paying more for product or electricity, or even sacraficing their job because it is in an environmentally damaging industry. Sorry for the negative post but I think we are not seeing the big changes that are required based on these hard truths. 

Yes, change is difficult but let me rewrite your post to make a point. Lets take ourselves back to an imaginary protest in London in the late1940s/early 1950s:

How many of the protesting kids ( taking time out from class ) have made a practical pledge to change their own lifestyle.. to stop burning coal on their fires? The only way such major change is going to happen is by mass individual action on a practical level. I don't observe a mass London movement of people stopping burning coal on their fires. Like it or not, we live in a capitalist society based on supply and demand - freedom of the people to decide what they burn on their fires....and our democratic system is based on satisfying people's lifestyle and giving them what they want. I am a little bit pessimistic about the future because the rapid change which is required to get rid of dangerous London smogs is just not politically feasible. The majority will not tolerate their freedoms as consumers to burn coal being curtailed,  paying more for clean fuel, or even sacrificing their job because it is in an lung health damaging industry. Sorry for the negative post but I think we are not seeing the big changes that are required based on these hard truths.

Change doesn't come about by people doing nothing. In the end (in the teeth of Govt opposition) the Uk brought in a clean air act. This is worth reading "It quickly became clear that pollution had become a real and deadly problem, and the smog's terrible effects may have helped inspire the modern environmental movement. Despite this, however, and data from the Ministry of Health indicative of substantially elevated death rates in London, the Government initially resisted pressure to act, and was keen to downplay the scale of the problem due to economic pressures.".

 

Edited by Devonian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the clean air acts also cost us the 'dimming' that was effectively helping keep temps from rising at the rates the atmosphere was capable of maintaining.

Had China not engaged on its headlong dash for modernisation then those increases in the rate of change of global temp, that we witnessed over the 80's/90's, would have continued as we continued to clean up our acts ( and the USSR collapsed closing much of its dirty industry for a period) up to the present day.

Now we have China rapidly cleaning up its act and , again, we see the rate of change in warming increasing.

It is very difficult to figure just where we should be under current forcings had we not had the flip side of our pollution 'dim' out some of our near stable levels of incoming solar energy.

As I witness things we ( in the developed world?) are focussing on some very conservative estimates of the change we ought expect instead of taking note of the 'Fat Tail' of worse than expected outcomes and making contingencies for them also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/02/2019 at 13:10, Ed Stone said:

Great to see the schoolkids demonstrating, in Downing St. Big thumbs - up for the youngsters!👍

I wonder how many of them will refuse to board their 'holiday plane' in the Summer, as their parents drag them screaming and kicking to the plane?

And will their headteachers be so tolerant if their parents take them out of school before school holidays actually start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bristle boy said:

I wonder how many of them will refuse to board their 'holiday plane' in the Summer, as their parents drag them screaming and kicking to the plane?

And will their headteachers be so tolerant if their parents take them out of school before school holidays actually start?

See, I really don't understand this attitude. They same people who bemoan the youth of day for being celebrity-obsessed and glued to their phones are the same people sneering at the protests. While these kids were out drawing attention to the global issue of our lifetime, our paid grown-up politicians were arguing about whether Winston Churchill was a goodie or a baddie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Yarmy said:

See, I really don't understand this attitude. They same people who bemoan the youth of day for being celebrity-obsessed and glued to their phones are the same people sneering at the protests. While these kids were out drawing attention to the global issue of our lifetime, our paid grown-up politicians were arguing about whether Winston Churchill was a goodie or a baddie.

I was merely asking if they'll be practicising what they protested against. Somehow i doubt it.

And i suspect most headteachers who sanctioned the time off for the protest wont be so lenient with parents taking kids out of school to go on hols.

As for the Churchill ref i presume you are referring to the one half of the Marx Brothers putting his jackboot in to Churchill last week?

Edited by Bristle boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...