From a post by John Bruno on Skeptical Science:
Former TV weather guy Art Horn has a post up at Pajamas Media about the current La Niña. He mixes some reasonable and accurate observations with several important misconceptions and misstatements about weather, oceanography and climate change.
Mr. Horn correctly points out that we are in the midst of a strong La Niña phase of the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle. We entered the current La Niña when the last El Niño ended in April/May (or a month or so later based on NOAA's Multivariate ENSO Index). As a result, equatorial Pacific Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) are currently about 1.4 C cooler than average.
As Art says, the switch from El Niño to La Niña was abrupt, as can be seen in the rapid change from negative to a positive Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) . . .
The Southern Oscillation Index (as plotted by the Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology above) is based on the measured air pressure difference between Tahiti and Darwin. Sustained positive values are associated with stronger Pacific trade winds and are indicative of La Niña.
Record high temperatures during La Niña
Art then goes on to make a number of errors in his analysis of the relevance of this La Niña, and ENSO in general, for anthropogenic climate change. Although his wording is a bit vague, he seems to suggest that a La Niña can somehow erase anthropogenic heat accumulation:
"strong La Nina events drop the Earth’s average temperature around one degree Fahrenheit" "The most recent La Nina developed in the spring of 2007, and persisted until the early summer of 2008. The global average temperature fell one degree Fahrenheit in that period of time, equal to all of the warming of the last 100 years!"
Monday, November 8, 2010
Monday, October 25, 2010
Massive stretches of weathered oil spotted in Gulf of Mexico
From an article by Bob Marshall in The Times-Picayune:
Just three days after the U.S. Coast Guard admiral in charge of the BP oil spill cleanup declared little recoverable surface oil remained in the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana fishers Friday found miles-long strings of weathered oil floating toward fragile marshes on the Mississippi River delta.
Oil was spotted in West Bay just west of the Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River, seen at top left, by the Gulf of Mexico Friday October 22, 2010.
The discovery, which comes as millions of birds begin moving toward the region in the fall migration, gave ammunition to groups that have insisted the government has overstated clean-up progress, and could force reclosure of key fishing areas only recently reopened.
The oil was sighted in West Bay, which covers approximately 35 square miles of open water between Southwest Pass, the main shipping channel of the river, and Tiger Pass near Venice. Boat captains working the BP clean-up effort said they have been reporting large areas of surface oil off the delta for more than a week but have seen little response from BP or the Coast Guard, which is in charge of the clean-up. The captains said most of their sightings have occurred during stretches of calm weather, similar to what the area has experienced most of this week.
On Friday reports included accounts of strips of the heavily weathered orange oil that became a signature image of the spill during the summer. One captain said some strips were as much as 400 feet wide and a mile long.
The captains did not want to be named for fear of losing their clean-up jobs with BP.
Just three days after the U.S. Coast Guard admiral in charge of the BP oil spill cleanup declared little recoverable surface oil remained in the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana fishers Friday found miles-long strings of weathered oil floating toward fragile marshes on the Mississippi River delta.
Oil was spotted in West Bay just west of the Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River, seen at top left, by the Gulf of Mexico Friday October 22, 2010.
The discovery, which comes as millions of birds begin moving toward the region in the fall migration, gave ammunition to groups that have insisted the government has overstated clean-up progress, and could force reclosure of key fishing areas only recently reopened.
The oil was sighted in West Bay, which covers approximately 35 square miles of open water between Southwest Pass, the main shipping channel of the river, and Tiger Pass near Venice. Boat captains working the BP clean-up effort said they have been reporting large areas of surface oil off the delta for more than a week but have seen little response from BP or the Coast Guard, which is in charge of the clean-up. The captains said most of their sightings have occurred during stretches of calm weather, similar to what the area has experienced most of this week.
On Friday reports included accounts of strips of the heavily weathered orange oil that became a signature image of the spill during the summer. One captain said some strips were as much as 400 feet wide and a mile long.
The captains did not want to be named for fear of losing their clean-up jobs with BP.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Canada must free scientists to talk to journalists
From a commentary on Nature News by Kathryn O'Hara, professor of science broadcast journalism at Carleton University and president of the Canadian Science Writers' Association:
This week is Right to Know Week in Canada, intended to acknowledge and celebrate our freedom-of-information laws. Some 40 other countries have a Right to Know Day, but we Canadians get a whole week. And you know what? We need it.
Ironically, this celebration of open information comes on the back of new evidence of unacceptable political interference in the public statements of federal government researchers. In short, the information policies of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper are muzzling scientists in their dealings with the media.
What happened to the transparency and accountability promised when the government formed the first of two minority administrations in 2006? Its stated communication policy, posted on a federal website, directed civil servants to "Provide the public with timely, accurate, clear, objective and complete information about its policies, programs, services and initiatives." Yet today, that openness is being held ransom to media messages that serve the government's political agenda.
The signs were there in spring last year, when press reports revealed that climate scientists in the government department Environment Canada were being stymied by Harper's compulsive message control. Our researchers were prevented from sharing their work at conferences, giving interviews to journalists, and even talking about research that had already been published. Carefully researched reports intended for the public — Climate Change and Health, from Health Canada, and Climate Change Impacts, from Natural Resources Canada — were released without publicity, late on Friday afternoons, and appeared on government websites only after long delays. This is not a government that is comfortable with climate change or the implications for action, as its largely obstructionist stance at climate talks has shown.
This week is Right to Know Week in Canada, intended to acknowledge and celebrate our freedom-of-information laws. Some 40 other countries have a Right to Know Day, but we Canadians get a whole week. And you know what? We need it.
Ironically, this celebration of open information comes on the back of new evidence of unacceptable political interference in the public statements of federal government researchers. In short, the information policies of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper are muzzling scientists in their dealings with the media.
What happened to the transparency and accountability promised when the government formed the first of two minority administrations in 2006? Its stated communication policy, posted on a federal website, directed civil servants to "Provide the public with timely, accurate, clear, objective and complete information about its policies, programs, services and initiatives." Yet today, that openness is being held ransom to media messages that serve the government's political agenda.
The signs were there in spring last year, when press reports revealed that climate scientists in the government department Environment Canada were being stymied by Harper's compulsive message control. Our researchers were prevented from sharing their work at conferences, giving interviews to journalists, and even talking about research that had already been published. Carefully researched reports intended for the public — Climate Change and Health, from Health Canada, and Climate Change Impacts, from Natural Resources Canada — were released without publicity, late on Friday afternoons, and appeared on government websites only after long delays. This is not a government that is comfortable with climate change or the implications for action, as its largely obstructionist stance at climate talks has shown.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Mote plans conference on Gulf oil spill
From Mote Marine Laboratory:
We are also planning for a regional scientific conference related to the oil spill. Working with our partners at the University of South Florida, the Florida Institute of Oceanography and the State of Florida Oil Spill Academic Task Force, we have scheduled an oil-spill related scientific conference for Feb. 9-11, 2011. “Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, a Conference on Lessons Learned: Charting the Future” will consider everything from the impacts of the dispersants used on the oil to human health issues and economic impacts.
We are also planning for a regional scientific conference related to the oil spill. Working with our partners at the University of South Florida, the Florida Institute of Oceanography and the State of Florida Oil Spill Academic Task Force, we have scheduled an oil-spill related scientific conference for Feb. 9-11, 2011. “Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, a Conference on Lessons Learned: Charting the Future” will consider everything from the impacts of the dispersants used on the oil to human health issues and economic impacts.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Saving species with science
From an interview with Gabriela Chavarria by Amanda Mascarelli posted on Nature News:
Coping with climate change is a key priority for conservation in the United States, says new science adviser.
In July, Gabriela Chavarria was named the top science adviser for the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), based in Washington DC. Born in Mexico, she has a PhD in biology from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and 14 years of experience with non-governmental conservation organizations, most recently the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Her first big task will be presiding over the 27 September release of the service's national climate plan, titled "Rising to the Urgent Challenge". Nature spoke with her about the agency's scientific direction. . . .
What will the scientific priorities be on your watch?
Climate change. This is not a future event — climate change is happening here and now. With it comes so many different things, such as habitat fragmentation and loss, water scarcity and the spread of invasive species.
What role will the USFWS have in addressing climate change?
Our national climate plan focuses on three areas: adaptation, mitigation and engagement. We've built a five-year plan of action, and will be working with federal agencies, non-profit companies, private landowners and stakeholders so that we can protect and connect large intact habitats that will support many species.
One of the biggest pieces of our plan is engagement. We're reaching out to the public and our partners so that we can share information, work together and find joint solutions. Because climate change is a challenge posed to everybody, we really need to engage the public.
We are already playing a big part in the science of climate change. A couple of years ago, the USFWS developed the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. These are partnerships focused on informing on-the-ground strategic conservation efforts in defined geographical areas.
We are bringing the science to the ground. This is not a Washington thing. We are providing the science at the regional level, so that each region addresses its key challenges.
Coping with climate change is a key priority for conservation in the United States, says new science adviser.
In July, Gabriela Chavarria was named the top science adviser for the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), based in Washington DC. Born in Mexico, she has a PhD in biology from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and 14 years of experience with non-governmental conservation organizations, most recently the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Her first big task will be presiding over the 27 September release of the service's national climate plan, titled "Rising to the Urgent Challenge". Nature spoke with her about the agency's scientific direction. . . .
What will the scientific priorities be on your watch?
Climate change. This is not a future event — climate change is happening here and now. With it comes so many different things, such as habitat fragmentation and loss, water scarcity and the spread of invasive species.
What role will the USFWS have in addressing climate change?
Our national climate plan focuses on three areas: adaptation, mitigation and engagement. We've built a five-year plan of action, and will be working with federal agencies, non-profit companies, private landowners and stakeholders so that we can protect and connect large intact habitats that will support many species.
One of the biggest pieces of our plan is engagement. We're reaching out to the public and our partners so that we can share information, work together and find joint solutions. Because climate change is a challenge posed to everybody, we really need to engage the public.
We are already playing a big part in the science of climate change. A couple of years ago, the USFWS developed the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. These are partnerships focused on informing on-the-ground strategic conservation efforts in defined geographical areas.
We are bringing the science to the ground. This is not a Washington thing. We are providing the science at the regional level, so that each region addresses its key challenges.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Oil & gas industries spent record $175 mil. lobbying against climate action
A subscriber to Coral Reef Free-for-all suggested this article -- Oil
& Gas Industries Spent Record $175 Million Lobbying Against Climate
Action -- http://tinyurl.com/37ww89b:
The oil and gas industries unleashed a massive $175 million lobbying
spree last year to derail U.S. efforts to address climate change,
according to a new series of reports by the Center for Responsive
Politics (CRP).
OpenSecrets.org blogger Evan Mackinder reveals just how badly oil and
gas interests pummeled the environmental community, which spent its
own record $22.4 million trying to convince Washington to get its act
together to fight global warming.
As CRP notes, "Goliath whipped David."
CRP's new series, titled "Fueling Washington: How Oil Money Drives
Politics," details the oil and gas industries' outsized influence in
Washington.
In the recent battle over climate legislation, ExxonMobil alone spent
more than all the environmental groups combined, stuffing $27.4
million into K Street coffers to ensure the status quo addiction to
fossil fuels can continue unfettered by concerns for the climate.
Combined with the contributions from Chevron, ConocoPhillips and the
now infamous Koch Industries, Big Oil as a whole "hammered away in the
background" while Washington debated healthcare reform, working to
derail support for a carbon tax or cap-and-trade or anything else
having to do with protecting future generations from dangerous climate
disruption.
Over an eighteen month period, Big Oil spent nearly $250 million to
block climate action in the U.S. House and Senate, CRP reports.
& Gas Industries Spent Record $175 Million Lobbying Against Climate
Action -- http://tinyurl.com/37ww89b:
The oil and gas industries unleashed a massive $175 million lobbying
spree last year to derail U.S. efforts to address climate change,
according to a new series of reports by the Center for Responsive
Politics (CRP).
OpenSecrets.org blogger Evan Mackinder reveals just how badly oil and
gas interests pummeled the environmental community, which spent its
own record $22.4 million trying to convince Washington to get its act
together to fight global warming.
As CRP notes, "Goliath whipped David."
CRP's new series, titled "Fueling Washington: How Oil Money Drives
Politics," details the oil and gas industries' outsized influence in
Washington.
In the recent battle over climate legislation, ExxonMobil alone spent
more than all the environmental groups combined, stuffing $27.4
million into K Street coffers to ensure the status quo addiction to
fossil fuels can continue unfettered by concerns for the climate.
Combined with the contributions from Chevron, ConocoPhillips and the
now infamous Koch Industries, Big Oil as a whole "hammered away in the
background" while Washington debated healthcare reform, working to
derail support for a carbon tax or cap-and-trade or anything else
having to do with protecting future generations from dangerous climate
disruption.
Over an eighteen month period, Big Oil spent nearly $250 million to
block climate action in the U.S. House and Senate, CRP reports.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
