[Al_U_Card]

Belief is not an issue.
Man has altered his environment in many ways, including the UHI that can affect local temperatures. As far as regional and global effects are concerned, once there is a real (and not model-generated) human fingerprint on weather and climate (30 year weather?) then I will take those facts (observed and verified) as factual and actionable.

[Daniel1960]

[quote name='Cthulhu D' timestamp='1397119109' post='788488']
The modelling indicates that the impact will be net negative.

No, the models indicate an increase in rainfall.

http://iopscience.io...9326/8/2/024010

This combined with higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and an increase in the growing season suggest a continued greening in most areas. Satellite data shows significant greening over most of the planet in the past 30 years, led by the Arctic regions, and followed by the Sahel.

http://probing.veget...tion-talk-2.pdf

[mike777]

Interesting articles recently about Thorium reactors and research in India and China.

One main point was the USA dropped research since it was a poor way of making weapons.

In the next few years expect to see results from India and China on this energy source.

[Al_U_Card]

So, do we still panic, or what?

Climate change has been portrayed as a huge catastrophe costing as much as 20% of world GDP, though brave politicians could counter it at a cost of just 1% of GDP. The reality is just the opposite: We now know that the damage cost will be perhaps 2% of world GDP, whereas climate policies can end up costing more than 11% of GDP.
What makes this story all the more amazing is that experts have known almost all of these facts for a long time. The Stern Review was produced by bureaucrats and never subjected to peer review. Economists knew that the damage costs had been extensively massaged, and that the estimates were outliers compared to the academic literature. The unfathomably low projections for policy costs were artifacts of ignoring most liabilities, again contradicting the academic literature.

[Al_U_Card]

Earth Daze


The day the Earth stood...still?




Unlikely the exact same time of year but ...

[Al_U_Card]

Yet another voice of reason or is it a cry for help?

"The process of the government approval sessions was exceptionally frustrating, and the outcome of that process – the final SPM – was in some regards disappointing. Two weeks ago, immediately after returning from Berlin, I sent a letter to the Co-Chairs of Working Group III — Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramon Pichs-Madruga, and Youba Sokona — expressing my disappointment with the government approval process and its outcome in regard to the part of the assessment for which I had primary responsibility, SPM.5.2, International Cooperation. At the time, I did not release my letter publically, because I did not want to get in the way of the important messages that remained in the SPM and were receiving public attention through the Working Group III release.

With two weeks having passed, it is now unlikely that the broader release of my letter will obscure the news surrounding the Working Group III release, and – importantly — it could be constructive to the process going forward, as the IPCC leadership and others think about the path ahead for future climate assessments. Rather than summarizing or annotating my letter, I believe it makes most sense simply to reproduce it, and let it stand – or fall – as originally written. It follows below."

[Al_U_Card]

This just in....King Canute will be pleased, as SLR slows and data "adjustments" are needed to maintain the linear (not accelerating) rate of rise. Clearly, the "missing" heat is not causing the oceans to expand so I wonder where it is hiding now?

Cazenave, A., Dieng, H., Meyssignac, B., von Schuckmann, K., Decharme. B., & Etienne Berthier (2014) The rate of sea-level rise, Nature Climate Change | Letter [Abstract] doi:10.1038/nclimate2159



And for a closer look at that very precedented graph...

[Al_U_Card]

Once was way more than enough...

This post has been edited by Al_U_Card: 2014-May-01, 08:22

[Al_U_Card]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

But interest has waned while countries wrangled over setting new emission goals under the United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), hammering credit prices down to unprofitable levels below $0.30.

The board appointed to oversee the CDM insists work should continue to improve the system to ensure it is ready when demand returns, yet analysts and governments see almost no prospect of a price recovery until 2020, when a new UNFCCC deal is due.

Having staff sit in Bonn and slowly draw down the surplus in salary is not a good use of these human and financial resource
“We hope countries will come forward with ambitious reduction pledges but at the moment it is hard to see where demand for international offsets will come from (post-2020),” said Jacob Werksman, a senior official at the European Commission who negotiates on behalf of EU nations at UN. talks.

The latest UN financial statements show the CDM has operating cash of $148-million, on top of a separate reserve of $45-million, meaning the system’s administrators could continue at current levels almost until the end of the decade.

But with such a bleak outlook, some observers are calling on the CDM to drastically scale back its Bonn, Germany-based operations and want much of its near-$200-million of cash pile spent elsewhere.

“Having staff sit in Bonn and slowly draw down the surplus in salary is not a good use of these human and financial resources,” said Anne Arquit Niederberger, a consultant who has worked on CDM projects and was a Swiss negotiator at UN climate talks when the mechanism was drawn up in the 1990s.

We were desperate for funding and we were successful in getting donations but it is not sufficient and we continue to look for ways to get stable sources of funding
The CDM raises funds by charging fees to developers for registering projects and issuing credits, a relatively unique mechanism that helped it grow from a handful of staff in 2003 to more than 160 in 2013 as the number of projects mounted.

Its accounts show almost half of the current annual budget of $32.9-million is to pay staff, which still number around 150 despite a massive drop-off in new projects seeking registration.

UN data shows just three projects a month were registered on average this year, against 268 a month at the peak of activity in 2012. This means a staff of 10-20 people would be sufficient, said Axel Michaelowa, a University of Zurich climate policy academic and founding partner of consultancy Perspectives.

Michaelowa, who was seconded to the CDM during its busier periods, said surplus cash could be used to prop up the market by buying credits or develop new carbon market mechanisms earmarked to feature in a new climate deal

A CDM spokesman said the board had no current plans to cut employees but was conducting regular reviews of its operations.

The board is also trying to drum up demand for the credits by promoting them for uses other than meeting Kyoto targets.

While the CDM has enough money to see it through several years, a separate Kyoto Protocol programme, the Adaptation Fund, is struggling to fulfil its aims of helping the world’s poorest nations cope with the effects of climate change.

Governments agreed to help finance the fund with a 2% levy on CDM credits issued for projects such as building sea defences or developing drought resistant farming techniques.

Institutions created internationally are difficult to reform and even harder to put to sleep, especially if they have a stockpile of revenue that allows them to continue regardless of the demand

Can you say: "BOONDOGGLE"?

[hotShot]

 WellSpyder, on 2014-April-01, 05:05, said:

How confident are you about that?

The thing that has always worried me about prevention is that is impossible. Whatever measures we take, they are never going to prevent CO2 concentrations rising. (As I pointed out a few posts back, even if the UK eliminated ALL net emissions, it would still only delay the inevitable by two years.) So adaption is, and always was, going to be required (as has always been the case in the past, too, as the climate has changed). Obviously that doesn't mean that there is no point in some measures to reduce emissions alongside some adaption, but putting all the focus on the former has diminished the credibility of climate change activists in my opinion.

The adaption process for plant and animal life is not that easy as you might think. e.g. fish need a specific water depth and temperature to spawn, since the coastline does not move they might not find suitable conditions a bit further north/south. The ecological system is quite complex, if not all species adapt at the same speed the whole process can fail.

[Al_U_Card]

 hotShot, on 2014-May-01, 06:40, said:

The adaption process for plant and animal life is not that easy as you might think. e.g. fish need a specific water depth and temperature to spawn, since the coastline does not move they might not find suitable conditions a bit further north/south. The ecological system is quite complex, if not all species adapt at the same speed the whole process can fail.

An interesting point that begs the question: "How have they managed thus far?"

Previous natural fluctuations being in whole degrees rather than fractions, it would seem to be a non-issue for the most part. Local ecosystems being part of the whole, micro-populations can come and go while the regional groupings proliferate and prosper. Movement and migration are part of the evolutionary process. Poisoning the well (like the GoM at the mouth of the Mississippi is a case in point) is another issue and requires concrete action(s). Taking a deep breath (AND exhaling CO2) is part of what needs to be done in cases of co-existance.

[hrothgar]

[quote name='Al_U_Card' timestamp='1398954434' post='791656']
An interesting point that begs the question: "How have they managed thus far?"
[\quote]

An non-interesting point that demonstrates once again that Al is an ignorant *****head, too dimwitted to understand that the rate of speed at which climate change takes place might have some impact on the ability of ecosystems to adapt.

[PassedOut]

Hearkening back to Onoway's original post, National Geographic is running an informative series on the Future of Food. First, some bad news:

Quote

Lobell and his team analyzed field-level yield and weather data in Corn Belt states from 1995 to 2012. They calculated the environmental stress that each field was under in each year. The biggest predictor of stress, they found, is the "vapor pressure deficit," or VPD, which is the difference in humidity between the inside of the plant and the outside air. It determines how fast the plant loses water to the air as it takes in carbon dioxide to fuel its photosynthesis.

Although overall yields have increased since 1995, the researchers found that yield growth has been far lower in fields where VPD was high—an indication that corn yields had become more drought sensitive over time, rather than more drought tolerant. The disparity was greatest in the drier Corn Belt states of Nebraska, South Dakota, and Kansas, the target market for drought-tolerant corn varieties.

The most likely cause of the increased sensitivity, Lobell says, is the very increase in planting densities that has allowed yields to increase. More plants typically translate into higher yields, but also less soil, less sunlight, and less water per plant.

In any case, the increased sensitivity to VPD is not a good sign for the future. VPD goes up with temperature, and climate models project that VPD in the Corn Belt in July, when corn plants are most sensitive to it, could to rise by 20 percent over the next 50 years. Lobell and his colleagues calculate that yields could fall 15 to 30 percent—unless new corn varieties or agronomic techniques can manage to offset the trend.

But there is good news too:

Quote

Faced with global warming and a population that will swell to nine billion by 2050, a growing number of experts say that the way to feed the masses as climate change makes growing our food more difficult is to focus on family farmers, who often can barely feed themselves.

When policymakers in the developed world talk about feeding billions of extra mouths in the decades to come, its multinational agribusinesses-which operate industrial-size farms that can fill entire cargo trains with grain—usually get most of the attention.

But in the long run, it's small-scale farmers in the developing world, using low-tech but sustainable agricultural techniques, who may be best poised to lead the way in adapting to a warmer world and ensuring the security of the global food supply.

There are more than 500 million family farmers who produce at least 56 percent of the world's food. Most are subsistence farmers, scratching out barely enough to feed their own families, with little or nothing left over to take to market.

A report on family farms released in March by the sustainable agriculture group Food Tank credits these small-scale farmers with contributing to global food security-that is, having sufficient quantities of food available on a consistent basis-through the use of more sustainable agricultural practices.

For instance, while agribusinesses use fertilizers and pesticides to yield bumper crops of single grains like corn and wheat, smallholder farmers are growing indigenous plants that help protect increasingly stressed natural resources (like water) and that improve the density of nutrients in crops.

That helps explain why the Food Tank report, which crunched data from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other sources, concluded that smallholder farms "are not only feeding the world, but also nourishing the planet."

In the Lake Superior area where I live, I see a lot more interest recently in growing food locally. Extending the growing season here and starting community seed banks community by community helps to make that happen, and small businesses and non-profits are springing up to support the movement.

Helping the earth and getting better tasting food too! Hard to beat a deal like that.

[Daniel1960]

 PassedOut, on 2014-May-02, 07:42, said:

Hearkening back to Onoway's original post, National Geographic is running an informative series on the Future of Food. First, some bad news:



But there is good news too:


In the Lake Superior area where I live, I see a lot more interest recently in growing food locally. Extending the growing season here and starting community seed banks community by community helps to make that happen, and small businesses and non-profits are springing up to support the movement.

Helping the earth and getting better tasting food too! Hard to beat a deal like that.

Sounds like somewhere in-between the large industrial farms and small sustenance families would be the ideal future farmers.

I am just starting my garden here in lower Michigan. Some lakes still have some ice patches. Has the ice receded up your way yet?

[PassedOut]

 Daniel1960, on 2014-May-02, 10:18, said:

I am just starting my garden here in lower Michigan. Some lakes still have some ice patches. Has the ice receded up your way yet?

Although the ice has been melting, Lake Superior is still nearly half covered. Here is a satellite image from April 20 when the ice cover was over 63%.

We live on the Keweenaw peninsula, which is the long finger of land in the center of the image. The smaller lake in front of our home is still frozen and snow-covered. It shows up toward the middle of the peninsula as a wider area in the waterway that connects with Lake Superior on both sides of the peninsula. A couple of days ago some buildings were damaged on the shores of Big Traverse Bay near the tip of the peninsula when strong winds blew sheets of ice onto the beach. That ice piled up to 12 feet high, knocking down structures in its path and stopping within a few feet of some homes.

We expect warmer weather by July 4, though.

[Al_U_Card]

Our lake is still mostly ice covered, but we expect the total thaw to take place within about 7-10 days Having only had a chance to get to the driving range 3 times to date, warmer days would be welcomed. (Only one 20C day so far this year... )

[Al_U_Card]

 PassedOut, on 2014-May-02, 07:42, said:

Hearkening back to Onoway's original post, National Geographic is running an informative series on the Future of Food. First, some bad news:



But there is good news too:


In the Lake Superior area where I live, I see a lot more interest recently in growing food locally. Extending the growing season here and starting community seed banks community by community helps to make that happen, and small businesses and non-profits are springing up to support the movement.

Helping the earth and getting better tasting food too! Hard to beat a deal like that.

Let's take advantage of the CO2 fertilization effect because things used to be a lot worse because of drought, the dustbowl was not that dry, compared with the recent past as the study notes:

"Abstract
We present a 576-year tree-ring-based reconstruction of streamflow for northern Utah's Weber River that exhibits considerable interannual and decadal-scale variability. While the 20th Century instrumental period includes several extreme individual dry years, it was the century with the fewest such years of the entire reconstruction. Extended droughts were more severe in duration, magnitude, and intensity prior to the instrumental record, including the most protracted drought of the record, which spanned 16 years from 1703 to 1718. Extreme wet years and periods are also a regular feature of the reconstruction. A strong early 17th Century pluvial exceeds the early 20th Century pluvial in magnitude, duration, and intensity, and dwarfs the 1980s wet period that caused significant flooding along the Wasatch Front. The long-term hydroclimatology of northern Utah is marked by considerable uncertainty; hence, our reconstruction provides water managers with a more complete record of water resource variability for assessment of the risk of droughts and floods for one of the largest and most rapidly growing population centers in the Intermountain West."

[Al_U_Card]

A comment from Judith Curry about her experience as a contributor to the IPCC

"My experience as Lead Author in the IPCC TAR, Chapter 2 “Observed Climate Variability and Change”, allowed me to observe how a key section of this chapter, which produced the famous Hockey Stick icon, was developed. My own topic was upper air temperature changes that eventually drew little attention, even though the data clearly indicated potentially serious inconsistencies for those who would advocate considerable confidence in climate model projections."

[hrothgar]

 Al_U_Card, on 2014-May-02, 15:20, said:

A comment from Judith Curry about her experience as a contributor to the IPCC

"My experience as Lead Author in the IPCC TAR, Chapter 2 “Observed Climate Variability and Change”, allowed me to observe how a key section of this chapter, which produced the famous Hockey Stick icon, was developed. My own topic was upper air temperature changes that eventually drew little attention, even though the data clearly indicated potentially serious inconsistencies for those who would advocate considerable confidence in climate model projections."

Poor little Al. Too stupid to be able to read a simple sentence and understand what's being said.

Judith Curry was never a contributor to the IPCC and most certainly not a lead author.
(For the record, she is quoting John R. Christy)

[Daniel1960]

 hrothgar, on 2014-May-02, 15:29, said:

Poor little Al. Too stupid to be able to read a simple sentence and understand what's being said.

Judith Curry was never a contributor to the IPCC and most certainly not a lead author.
(For the record, she is quoting John R. Christy)

Correct, that was a quote from John Christy.
It should be interesting to read the new APS climate change statement due out later this year. Both Curry and Christy, along with Richard Lindzen made up half the APS sub committe workshop, along with Bill Collins, Ben Santer, and Isaac Held. They discussed several questions related to the recent IPCC AR5 report. A transcript of the workshop can be found here:

http://www.aps.org/p...-transcript.pdf