Thursday, September 16, 2010

Wish I understood this better

This paper will make the rounds again on all the blogs trying to diss global climate disruption. The work has been out for a couple of years... so it's not exactly breaking news.

A new version of the paper gets a big boost from a small but influential science journalism publisher today – the AAAS’s ScienceNow. Reporter Phil Berardelli doesn’t write it long, but long enough to get outside astronomers saying that the paper is legit. At issue, as he writes, is whether the extrapolation showing magnetic fields dropping in about 2015 below the minimum needed for sunspots reflects a very likely scenario. His hook is an update of the thesis, for an international virtual symposium, on line at the preprint site arXiv astro-ph.



This is a legitimate news topic. A decent chance that the Sun will moderate its overall output (which overall has positive correlation with sunspot number despite intuition that proliferation of big cool dark spots ought to dim a star), and thus counteract to some small or large extent the current warming driven by fossil carbon burning, merits full public airing. It sure would complicate efforts to get the world’s nations to drastically change their energy policies. A Maunder Minimum II could chill any chance for a carbon tax even if, when the minimum wanes, the climate-forcing rebound would cook us for sure. And anyway, ocean acidification would proceed apace.
...
The new paper, from a quick read, sees the anemic rise in sunspot number during the first phases of the 11-year solar cycle’s current iteration as evidence that whatever the trend’s fate, it’s not showing signs of stopping now. As it says, “It is important to note that it is always risky to extrapolate linear trends; but the importance of the implications from making such an assumption justify its mention.” That’s a heavily nuanced, if perhaps true, sentence. A reporter who sits down with, or just spends some time on the phone with these two to ask how they regard their paper’s role in political and ideological debates over global warming might get a terrific story.

One prediction seems safe: this series of ever-updated papers will get more press.
- Charlie Petit

AAAS ScienceNow: The way things are going, sunspots will disappear in five years and Earth might cool off.
Related post
Need Something Else to Worry About?




I will say this again... the Republicans in congress are a single organism. An X files fungus of immense proportions suffocating the democratic process. If they don't wake up and smell the climate change, they'll smother life on this planet as well.


Reaching at all
No, liberals did not ‘overreach’ on climate -David Roberts





Prop 23 and the Oil Companies (Legal Planet)
.It is frequently said that “the oil companies” are financing Prop 23. This turns out to be a bit of an overgeneralization. According to Greenwire,


While some companies are supporting Proposition 23, Shell Oil Co. opposes it, Chevron Corp. is officially neutral, Exxon Mobil Corp. and BP PLC have decided not to get involved and ConocoPhillips has yet to contribute. Three oil refiners — Valero Energy Corp., Tesoro Corp. and Koch Industries — have contributed most of the $8.2 million raised to support Proposition 23.
Shell Oil, in particular, deserves praise for its position. Shell’s climate change adviser has posted a lengthy critique of Prop 23. (As an aside, it was pretty cool to find out that Shell even has a climate change advisor who maintains a blog). He makes a very cogent point about the impact of Prop 23 on business:
Related posts:
Must defeat CA's Prop 23
Shell Oil (Tuesday)

No comments:

Post a Comment