Exxon Climate Change Denial

The guardian is carrying a story about Exxon emails that reportedly reveal that people in the company knew about the effects of anthropomorphic global warming in 1981, and funded groups denying the existence of climate change to the total of 31 million dollars over 30 years.

The evidence is that the large fraction (70%) of CO2 in an Indonesian oilfield was a factor in not developing the field. Development of the oilfield would have made it the largest single contributor to release of CO2 into the atmosphere.

According to Wikipedia Svante Arrhenius proposed the existence of the greenhouse effect to explain the existence of ice ages, and in 1896 he was the first scientist to attempt to calculate how changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect. The magnitude of the effect of CO2 in absorbing radiation was disputed by by Knut Ångström who made experimental measurements of the absorption.

According to Wikipedia past ice ages can be explained by changes in the earths orbit (orbital forcing), with atmospheric CO2 having an amplifying effect. The next ice age is predicted to occur in 50,000 years with out intervention, but it has been reported that this may be delayed for 500,000 years by predicted CO2 emissions.

Some references (it’s a blog)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_forcing

Svante Arrhenius, 1901a, Ueber die Wärmeabsorption durch Kohlensäure, Annalen der Physik, Vol 4, 1901, pages 690–705.
Svante Arrhenius, 1901b, Über Die Wärmeabsorption Durch Kohlensäure Und Ihren Einfluss Auf Die Temperatur Der Erdoberfläche. Abstract of the proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science, 58, 25–58.

Hays, J. D.; Imbrie, John; Shackleton, N. J. (1976). “Variations in the Earth’s Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages”. Science 194 (4270): 1121–1132. doi:10.1126/science.194.4270.1121. PMID 17790893.

Hays, James D. (1996). Schneider, Stephen H., ed. Encyclopedia of Weather and Climate. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 507–508. ISBN 0-19-509485-9.

Modelling Climate Successfully by Time Travel?

I saw on phys.org website new that Monckton et al have published a paper “Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model” about climate modelling, and why previous models ‘run hot’.

Monkton etal Climate Model

Monckton et al Climate Model

As seen in their figure 6, their model matches very well with the observations. One strange thing to me, is that they have observations of the temperature change until the year 2050, although currently the start of 2015. Does this mean that Monckton et al are able to get information from the future, maybe they have a time machine? It seems more likely that they made a serious mistake in the presentation of their results. Since this paper should have been subject to much scrutiny before publishing (given the controversy of the subject) it seems probable to me that the figure purposefully misleads the reader.

As can reported at skeptical science, in 2012, Christopher Monckton has been using this graph for some time. It seems that the error is to compare data from two different periods of time. The graph presented in the recent paper is less carefully presented than the version used in a 2012 presentation. If we look at the old graph we can understand that the data is not from the future, it’s actually the previous trend.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/monckton-misleads-CA-lawmakers-now-its-personal-part2.html

Credibility gap

Monckton’s credibility gap

They also suggest a parallel with another UK time travelling Lord, could it be that Christopher Monckton is  a Time Lord?

MONCKTON TARDIS

MONCKTON TARDIS

Zero Carbon

Hehe, this is a draft post I made six years ago, slightly amended. I note that recently the UK has paid energy companies for providing electricity to the UK market, and we have also agreed the building of a new nuclear power station Hinkley point C, built by French and Chinese governments (I mean EDF, China General Nuclear and China National Nuclear Corporation). I should search for some numbers about CO2 released in different countries of Europe and also how they produce their power.

Just want to make a quick post, pointing out one method to stop CO2 emission. Inspired by those who are calling for a zero carbon. If we all just stop breathing this will eliminate nearly all our emissions. If you don’t believe me it’s possible you can try to just stop breathing for a few minutes first.

The leading country at solving this problem in a practical way may well be Germany, where everyone had a chance to help solve the problem, after the German Government has made sure that everyone has the opportunity to generate electricity which will be distributed on their national grid. I don’t know how much of a practical solution this is, but it makes sense that solar generators and wind power has to be in a distributed network — rather than centralised like a conventional power station. This shifts power away from a dependence on central distribution, and means that appropriate technologies can be quickly developed. This is due to the strength of the green party which has been decisive in forming coalition governments.