I should change the heading to Occasional salon, but hope springs eternal, plus I really don’t have time!
I’ll just try to select a few of the many insights and events which a making our future.
1. A different world order is already here
Geoff Raby in Why a different world order is already here tells us that Jo Biden scuttling back to Washington to deal with the debt ceiling crisis while Chinese President Xi Jinping presided over the third China-Central Asian Summit in the Chinese city of Xian.
Recently Xi tried to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, has made clear that it has interests in many parts of the world. New groupings emerge without the US of A, trade is de-dollarising as countries deal in each other’s curency.
- Effectively, it comprises two bounded orders. One with the US at its head, the other with China. These are not “blocs” in the sense that the Cold War had blocks. They are not ideologically based so much as representing different ordering of values and associated forms of social and political organisation. At times states may move between the two, as the Philippines has recently shown.
Nor do they preclude co-operation between bounded orders on the global commons, such as environment. As the Australian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister have so succinctly summarised, our relations with China, the bounded orders will “co-operate where they can and disagree where they must”. The challenge for Australian foreign policy, then, is to come to grips with the end of US primacy long before the US comes to understand that it has ended.
Chandran Nair, founder and CEO of Global Institute for Tomorrow and a member of the Executive Committee of the Club of Rome says I’m sorry, but the toxic G-7 ‘rich club’ is past its sell-by date:
- It is worth reminding the world that six of these seven are from the West which only represents less than 15% of the global population and their histories are riddled with colonisation, plunder, and the destruction of indigenous communities.
Their current foreign policies seem focused on one goal: maintaining the status quo and the privileges borne out of conquest and domination.
2. The hidden extinction
Graham Lawton in the New Scientist tells of the shocking decline of Earth’s microbiome:
Bacteria, fungi and other microbes, which are vital to life on Earth, were long thought impervious to threats endangering larger lifeforms. Now biologists are warning of a microbial extinction event
- …A gram of soil contains around a billion single-celled organisms, including tens of thousands of different species, and if you could tease out the fungal strands, they would stretch for hundreds of kilometres. These are indispensable to life on Earth, including you and me. If they all died, we would soon follow.
They are dying.
Apart from plants, fish, reptiles, birds and mammals:
- there are perhaps 7.7 million species of animal, around 80 per cent of which are insects and other arthropods, including arachnids and crustaceans. But there are at least 6 million species of terrestrial fungus and up to a trillion species of bacterium and archaeon, collectively known as prokaryotes. On top of that, there are about 200,000 species of complex unicellular microorganisms called protists, such as slime moulds. These latter two groups make up the majority of Earth’s biodiversity.
There are obvious problems in gathering data, but fungus hunters in Europe tell of about a 45% decline of species in a century. Other indicators tend to confirm the pattern.
Ironically in Sweden the decline was worse where foresters had been at work.
Conversely 27 restoration experiments that added wild microbiomes found that plant growth increased by an average of 64 per cent versus plots that weren’t seeded or that used commercial mycorrhizal solutions.
The solutions are simple. Stop global heating, dial the knobs down by removing CO2 back to Holocene levels, reduce the population of humans by at least half, give over half of the land currently used for food reproduction to rewilding.
There are plenty to tell us how. For example Julian Cribb has A plan for human survival.
Or try Mark Diesendorf in Saving humanity: here’s a radical approach to building a sustainable and just society.
3. We ignore James Hansen at our peril
If you are 99.9999% sure James Hansen is wrong, then feel free to ignore him. If there is one in a million chance that he is right, then prudence you should pay attention.
My introduction to Hansen and indeed to the gravity of the global heating issue was via the print edition of the Scientific American, which headline Hansen’s article Can we defuse the global warming time bomb?
He has always asked the big questions and tried to answer them.
In latest monthly mailing of May 2023 Equilibrium Warming = Committed Warming? he links to a revised draft of Global warming in the pipeline.
On that site there is a link on the RHS to the new draft paper where on p41 we have this:
-
Equilibrium global warming for today’s GHG level is 10°C for our central estimate ECS = 1.2°C ± 0.2°C per W/m2, including the amplifications from disappearing ice sheets and non-CO2 GHGs (Sec. 4.4). Aerosols reduce equilibrium warming to about 8°C. Equilibrium sea level change is + 60 m (about 200 feet).
Elsewhere we are told to expect 1.5°C by 2030 and 2°C by 2050. I’ve only skimmed the paper, but I think they expect several metres of SLR in the next 100 years and an AMOC shutdown.
They don’t nominate a point of no return, but say we need to remove 7.6Gt of CO2 pa, plus presumably zero emissions. The cost is trillions of $s pa, which you have to be a bit pessimistic about.
4. Direct removal of carbon vs planting trees
Here beginneth the big debate about whether the direct removal of carbon or planting trees are the way to go, with this mob asserting the latter:
Capturing Carbon With Machines Is a Failure—So Why Are We Subsidizing It?
Pascal Lamy has set up a Climate Overshoot Commission which seriously contemplate geo-engineering, or sunlight reflection methods (SRM), also known as “solar radiation modification”. He’s the man who took over the World Trade organisation in 2003 when it ran into a cliff in 2003. If you check him out I think you’ll find he is a serious player.
“Elsewhere we are told to expect 1.5°C by 2030 and 2°C by 2050.”
IMO, an increasing list of indicators suggest this is increasingly likely.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Jun 4:
Average daily sea surface temperatures (for 60°S-60°N latitude band) have been at record seasonal highs for more than 2 months.
The average daily 2-meter air temperature is near record seasonal highs.
Antarctic sea ice extent is at record seasonal lows.
Arctic sea ice extent for this year (2023) is currently tracking below the record minimum year-2012 seasonal track.
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) published their latest results of the NINO34 climate model (dated May 20), indicating temperature anomalies for:
* Jun 2023: +1.3 ℃
* Jul 2023: +1.7 ℃
* Aug 2023: +2.2 ℃
* Sep 2023: +2.4 ℃
* Oct 2023: +2.5 ℃
* Nov 2023: +2.7 ℃
Latest Atmospheric CO2 at Mauna Loa in Hawaii jumped 3 parts per million on last year to a new record high of 424ppm
What did that funny guy from the UN, António Guterres, say about heading for damnation with our foot on the accelerator? Or words to that effect.
David Spratt has let fly with James Hansen’s new climate bomb: Are today’s greenhouse gas levels enough to raise sea levels by 60+ metres?
As usual he does an excellent job of setting out what Hansen et al are on about. He ends with:
60 metres would bring the sea to my doorstep, here in the foothills of Mt Coot-tha, which would become an island behind our house. Must check out the flood maps, and ask our local MP what she is going to do about it.
Brian: – “Must check out the flood maps, and ask our local MP what she is going to do about it.”
Would she be thinking beyond getting re-elected in the next election?
I’d suggest on our current GHG emissions trajectory, dangerous temperatures will arrive long before SLR becomes disruptive in your location.
Published by Cambridge Independent on 29 May 2023 was an article by Mike Scialom headlined Current climate path will lead to collapse of life on Earth, say climate scientists. It began with:
Prof Rockstrom told delegates: “1.5C is not a target. I call it a physical limit.“
Barring multiple nuclear weapons airbursts, major volcanic eruptions, and/or major meteor surface impact event(s) here on Earth, I would not be at all surprised to see:
An overshoot (temporary) of the +1.3 °C global mean surface temperature threshold for this calendar year (2023);
An overshoot (temporary) of the +1.4 °C global mean surface temperature threshold for the next calendar year (2024).
Will we temporarily overshoot +1.5 °C next year? We’ll know soon enough!
New study:
The Arctic may be sea ice-free in summer by the 2030s, new study warns
Plus:
Scientists need to ask why they keep getting surprised by the speed of climate change. I’m sure James Hansen doesn’t, who, because he focusses on paloeclimate in the first instance rather than models, seems to have a better handle on what’s happening.
Tim Lenton et al have had another look at the ‘human niche’:
Climate Crisis Is on Track to Push One-Third of Humanity Out of Its Most Livable Environment
However:
There’s more, but that’s enough for this morning!
Per NOAA, dated Jun 8, El Niño has officially arrived:
Per the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM), the ENSO outlook switched from “El Niño Watch” to “El Niño Alert” on 24 May 2023.
It looks like the BoM’s next update is scheduled for 20 Jun 2023.
Meanwhile, the smoke/particulates from the Canadian wildfires are producing extremely hazardous air in NE USA & SE Canada.
We are experiencing almost unprecedented rapid CO₂ and temperature changes in the Earth’s 4.5 billion year history.
David Spratt has struck again with Dramatic Arctic sea-ice news should not be a shock: We were warned.
We were warned back in 2007 when there was a big melt of Arctic ice, which shocked climate scientists, leading to estimates that the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free as early as 2030, instead of by the end of the century. Spratt links to and republishes part of his paper The big melt, which is amazing to read now. Spratt reads what scientist are saying and comes to different, and I think more accurate, conclusions than the IPCC.
We were warned, and Spratt suggested back then, in October 2007, that our target should be 320ppm, two months before Hansen said 350pp.
He suggests that if we want to avoid breaching a tipping point with Arctic ice, we should get temperature increase back to 0.5°C .
He’s not wrong!
Hmm: Hydrogen’s dirty secret: Leaks could have 12-times impact on global warming than CO2
Claims that H2 could interfere with breakdown of methane in the atmosphere but the argument is not clear and the level at which H2 could be a problem is not stated.
This morning (Jun 14), the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture published my 2nd Supplementary to Submission (#165.2) on their submissions webpage for their Inquiry into Food Security in Australia. My Supplementary Submission was lodged on the afternoon of Jun 5.
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Agriculture/FoodsecurityinAustrali/Submissions
John, the Europeans are certainly pushing ahead on hydrogen for heavy duty transport. The Spanish have just trial tested a hydrogen train.
Geoff, Windows would not open your submission for me. I’ll try again tomorrow.
Geoff, I opened it this morning. Looks good. Will try to read more tonight.
James Hansen has sent out another mailing.
He suggests 2023 temperature to be in the yellow band on his graph, and 2024 to be above it, which would get us close to 1.5°C.
Brian: I think that it is a good idea that different forms of clean fuels and batteries are being researched and used for both mobiles and static applications
John, Twiggy Forrest’s top technology bloke said today they are technology neutral. They are trying out all kinds of solutions.
Several groups of scientists are now concluding that we need to get temperatures down to an increase of 1.0°C or less.
See:
Proposing a 1.0°C climate target for a safer future
Safe and just Earth system boundaries
With this comes a recognition that direct carbon removal will be necessary, in the case of the former scaling up to 40Gt pa from 2060. And that group is working on models rather than paleoclimate science.
Plus it doesn’t necessarily cope with sea level rise longer term.
It’s encouraging to see that some are focussing on a safe climate and intergenerational justice, both of which have been neglected by the IPCC.
It seems the latest communication (dated Jun 14) by James Hansen, Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy, titled El Nino and Global Warming Acceleration
is not getting any mainstream media acknowledgement. I’d suggest these are the main points (bold text my emphasis):
A YouTube video published by PBS NewsHour today (Jun 16) titled Scientists issue increasingly dire warnings as ocean surface temperatures spike, discusses the ocean rapidly heating up, hitting record-breaking levels, and includes an interview by Amna Nawaz who discussed what’s happening with Kevin Trenberth. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that ocean surface temperatures spiked in April and May to the highest levels recorded since the 1950s. All this could have dangerous consequences for aquatic life, hurricane activity and global weather patterns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9SbFryYDqc
Geoff, your comment sent me off wandering in YouTube land last night. It included this one from Just Have a Think
Why is our upper atmosphere cooling?
and The Electric Viking:
Hydrogen’s Mass Uptake Could Have Devastating Consequences, Scientists Warn
Seems we are making a proper mess of the upper atmosphere. Research now shows that cooling in the upper layers could be jeopardising satellite orbits and opening up a new ozone hole above the arctic.
We need more research on hydrogen, with impact via methane, ozone and water vapour.
The Electric Viking churns out videos like sausages. Among his latest:
Billionaire Forrest calls Musk a ‘muppet’ over hydrogen – then his company said this…
Breakthrough technology produces cheap blue hydrogen, capturing 99% of CO2
The first has an interesting story of the beginning and rise of Twiggy.
Bottom line is that hydrogen, whether green or blue, takes three times the energy to create, and never seems as though it will compete with rapidly improving battery technology for transport, unless you have very heavy stuff to move, or need explosive acceleration, as in supersonic flight. Still, a lot of money is being spent on R&D for it.
Meanwhile Polar scientists call for more research and observation into rapid sea ice reduction. Earlier this year we were told that by spokesperson Clare Nullis from the World Meteorological Organization that:
the amount of ice lost annually from the Antarctic ice sheet “increased at least six-fold between 1979 and 2017”.
Most of this ice loss happens when ice shelves melt from below, as they come into contact with relatively warm ocean water, she explained.
Melting is especially marked in west Antarctica, according to WMO, and to a lesser extent along the peninsula and in east Antarctica.
Turning to glacier melt, Ms. Nullis warned that around “87 per cent of glaciers along the west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula have retreated in the last 50 years, with most of these showing an accelerated retreat in the last 12 years”.
Concern is particularly high over the main glacier tributaries to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, in particular the Pine Island glacier, where two large rifts that were first spotted in early 2019 have each grown to some 20 kilometres long.
Elsewhere diverse cities are sinking into the ground around the world for various reasons, including groundwater extraction and sea level rise.
And Humans Have Pumped Enough Groundwater to Change the Tilt of the Earth.
Between 1993 and 2010 humans pumped out 2 trillion tons of groundwater, enough to raise sea levels a quarter of an inch, and change Earth’s pole axis 31 inches.
The Copernicus Climate Change Service tweeted Jun 15 (including graph):
Is this the first of more (and longer) incursions above the +1.5 °C warming threshold?
Well-spotted Geoff, but looking at the Copernicus site, the answer is “no” but it’s highly unusual and the first time it’s happened in the northern summer.
Not good news.
Brian: – “Not good news.”
Indeed.
Published today (Jun 21) at The Conversation was a piece by Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography Steve Turton, headlined Global average sea and air temperatures are spiking in 2023, before El Niño has fully arrived. We should be very concerned, including:
Meanwhile, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) updated (20 Jun 2023) their latest El Niño forecast (NINO34 model run dated 17 Jun 2023):
+3.0 °C by October 2023; and
+3.2 °C by November 2023.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted earlier today (Jun 21) this:
Thanks, Geoff. Things are becoming ridiculous, like a cricket Ashes test being played in Birmingham in the centre of England, while a few kilometres to the east the sea temperature is going beserk.
Also in India people are dying because it’s too hot outside:
“A scorching heat wave in two of India’s most populous states has overwhelmed hospitals, filled a morgue to capacity and disrupted power, forcing staff to use books to cool patients…. residents said they were scared of going outside after midmorning”
David Spratt has a new post – Three climate interventions: Reduce, remove, repair while Peter Sainsbury writes about Environment: Two years left for a decent chance of keeping warming under 1.5ºC.
Except “decent” is not decent at all.
Because the IPCC was based on emissions from 2010 to 2019, and since January 1 2020 we’ve just kept the Keeling curve trending ever higher, the best that can be offered now using IPCC methodology is an 83% chance of limiting warming to 1.5ºC if we reach net zero in a bit over two years.
If we do that, which we won’t, we’ll achieve a climate that is already unacceptably dangerous, and where the risk of tipping points starts at about 0.8ºC.
Spratt’s article lists groups like the Overshoot Commission, which are seriously looking at geo-engineering.
Realistically, it’s the nest we’ve made for ourselves.
Lab-grown chicken gets US approval, set to make its restaurant debut
Not clear how expensive the process is and the potential for replacing traditional meat agriculture.
John, I tried to research the company, Eat Just Inc, which turns out to be private company. Their website doesn’t tell you anything about them. However, Wikipedia has the story.
They have been around since 2013, in the early days selling plant based egg products. They have a division in Singapore, and have been selling the chicken ‘meat’ product for a couple of years.
Businesswire says:
GOOD Meat won multiple regulatory approvals for its chicken in Singapore in 2020 and 2021, and in January 2023 received a key clearance that paves the way for greater scalability, lower manufacturing costs and a more sustainable product. Since its Singapore launch, the company’s chicken has been featured on menus at fine dining establishments, popular hawker stalls, via the foodpanda delivery platform and most recently by reservation at Huber’s Butchery, one of Singapore’s premier producers and suppliers of high-quality meats.
Seems they have won a few awards. It looks like genuine innovation taking off.
Europe have a whole bunch of startups in the alternative foods space.
A YouTube video was published on Jun 8 titled A True Paradise: WHERE WE ARE HEADING – Kevin Anderson, duration 0:16:25. Climate scientist Kevin Anderson warns that continuing on our current path could result in a 3-4 °C temperature rise by the end of the century, a catastrophic outcome to be avoided at all costs. He cautions against believing the political rhetoric about progress in the fight against climate change and calls on us to push for bold policy changes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_FtS_HNbkc
Wind farm noise no worse for sleep than traffic noise, study by sleep researchers finds.
John, I don’t know why, but your comment lobbed in the ‘moderation’ bucket!
John, I noticed there was a link to an article Bald Hills Wind Farm ordered to stop emitting night-time noise, pay neighbours damages in landmark ruling which doesn’t tell us much, except that local residents took the wind farm to court and won.
RenewEconomy does give useful information in Wind farm ordered to make less noise at night, in unprecedented court ruling, which makes me wonder about the value of a study simulating real world conditions.
The Clean Energy Council urges community engagement. which Bald Hills WF now does explicitly by sprinkling around a bit of cash. They also encourage and facilitate complaint making, wanting to avoid paying expensive damages.
Geoff M, Kevin Anderson has always been a straight shooter. I think he shows the value of bringing an engineer’s perspective. Scientists, economists and politicians have pretty much run the show at the IPCC and the UNFCCC. Their task back around 1990 was to avoid DAI (dangerous anthropogenic interference), in which they demonstrably failed, which should have been clear to everyone when the Arctic ice took a deep dive in 2007.
Kevin Anderson called them out on the Paris agreement in January 2016 in The Hidden Agenda: How Veiled Techno-utopias Shore Up the Paris Agreement and became quite personal in 2020 in an interview with Andrew Simms.
His latest shtick (or Schtik) with Dan Calverley is to take IPCC prescriptions at face value and look in practical terms what needs to be done, starting with fossil fuels. Part One of their post How alive is 1.5? Part one – a small budget, shrinking fast in November 2022 promised a Part Two soon.
It has not arrived. I suspect that what they planned to say back then is now out of date.
Global average sea and air temperatures are spiking in 2023, before El Niño has fully arrived. We should be very concernedContains a telling chart.
href=”https://images.theconversation.com/files/532475/original/file-20230617-15-9e4epx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=752&fit=crop&dpr=1″>telling chart
John, while La Nina prevailed the sun didn’t go on holidays, so 90% plus heat still went into the sea.
I think James Hansen thinks less is going into the deep ocean than the models assume. The article gives some of the other reasons like the depletion of Antarctic sea ice and less aerosols from shipping etc.
Nevertheless, there is a lot of serious talk now about CCS and even geoengineering, as countries are not honouring their pledges, which are anyway inadequate. Prof Kevin Anderson is perfectly right – we are looking at 3-4 degrees. Hansen, who understands the Earth System better than most, is saying it could be more.
How much are we and our politicians willing to sacrifice now to ensure a livable future. Particularly given that other countries need to make a major sacrifice too if the world is to take control of emissions.
Recent successes of the Greens might look like a move in the right direction but Greens housing/tenant rights policies appear to have a strong effect on results.
Greenland ice surface melt extent is perhaps another thing this year to watch emerging:
The Greenland ice sheet cumulative daily mass balance has recently headed strongly towards deficit.
https://twitter.com/climate_ice/status/1674296661080678401
The Greenland ice melt is not anything even remotely comparable to previous melt events in Greenland – not yet.
https://twitter.com/EliotJacobson/status/1674179357424893952
Greenland’s ‘heatwave’ continues across the northeastern ice sheet.
https://twitter.com/climate_ice/status/1673956360193441796
The scariest thing I saw today was a toss-up between European Union to look into blocking sun’s rays to combat climate change: Report (I can’t find the report referred to) and David Spratt’s latest burst – What scientists say… and his Links & Info: Information resources for activists and advocates.
I think I found the EU report, with some difficulty.
EU proposes comprehensive new outlook on threats of climate change and environmental degradation on peace, security and defence
Somewhere on that page there is a link to a 25 page report:
JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL: A new outlook on the climate and security nexus
Addressing the impact of climate change and environmental degradation on peace, security and defence
On pp 21 and 23 there is mention solar radiation modification.
They decided:
Guided by the precautionary principle, the Commission and the High Representative will support international efforts to assess comprehensively the risks and uncertainties of climate interventions, including solar radiation modification and promote discussions on a potential international framework for its governance, including research related aspects.
They recognise that people are thinking and talking seriously about geoengineering. They are suggesting that this needs to be considered within an appropriate international framework with thorough investigation.
The whole report is largely about the need for better information and international cooperation.
It seems from yesterday afternoon, Twitter is now denying access to tweets to those people not logged in to a Twitter account. It seems to me Twitter is sabotaging their primary purpose for being a public message service.
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/how-many-users-does-twitter-have
It’s a shame, Geoff. They won ‘t attract new users by shutting people out!
Meanwhile BHP are going for batteries rather than hydrogen:
BHP says battery electric cheaper than hydrogen as it dumps diesel for haul trucks
I understand they are doing the same at Fortescue, in spite of Twiggy’s investments in hydrogen.
At the same time Australia’s first hydrogen-powered truck launched
A hydrogen highway of charging stations is being set up down the east cost.
Diesel electric mine haul trucks have been around for yonks. Some mines have overhead connections for trucks going uphill and, in theory could recover power when trucks are going down slopes.
Green ammonia is attractive because it has similar characteristics to LPG. Others promote green methanol.
Final decisions may depend on tech advances in each option.
Dr. Peter Carter, Paul Beckwith and Regina Valdez discuss a recent paper called ‘Global Warming in the Pipeline’ by James Hansen et al.
Sir David King talks of Antarctic Warming and the #cop28 Nightmare [13 min summary version] while
Ocean heat is off the charts – here’s what that means for humans and ecosystems around the world and the
EU warns of rising climate-fuelled conflict, risks of geoengineering.
Peter Carter is a prolific Tweeter. His latest points out a shocking increase in atmospheric CO2. Here’s the NOAA site.
This Financial Times article came from a re-tweet by Stefan Rahmstorf, also prolific:
Financial models on climate risk ‘implausible’, say actuaries
British companies are required to report on their climate risk. there has bee an inquiry into the standards used.
From Damien Meadows:
For example, an assessment of GDP loss in a world of 3C higher temperatures by a group of 114 central banks and financial supervisors did not include impacts related to extreme weather, sea-level rise or wider societal impacts from migration or conflict(!)
The “Daily 2-meter Air Temperature” (World, 90°S-90°N, 0-360°E) has broken instrumental records twice:
Mon, Jul 3, 2023: Observed Temp 17.01 °C (anomaly +0.81 °C)
Tue, Jul 4, 2023: Observed Temp 17.18 °C (anomaly +0.98 °C)
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/
The “Daily Sea Surface Temperature” (SST World, 60°S-60°N latitude band) has been at record seasonal high levels for more than 3½ months. (SST North Atlantic, 0-60°N, 0-80°W) has also been at record seasonal high levels for almost 4 months.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) declared the onset of El Niño conditions on 4 Jul 2023.
Here’s the image of that first link:
It’s time politicians and business elites woke up!
Just listening to the audio of the public hearing conducted today by the Standing Committee on Agriculture inquiring into Food Security in Australia with Professor Dr. Johannes le Coutre, FRSN, for the University of NSW.
Professor Coutre mentioned the Global Food Security Index 2022, where of 113 countries assessed, Australia is ranked:
22nd overall (score 75.4);
1st for affordability (score 93.3);
48th for availability (score 61.1);
13th for quality & safety (score 84.0);
33rd for sustainability & adaptation (score 58.8)
Published several hours ago by Nick Breeze ClimateGenn was a summary YouTube video titled Dr Julia Steinberger | The hour before dawn is always the darkest (Summary Version), duration 0:14:15.
Geoff, thanks for the link.
I’m not sure people realise that the Energy Charter Agreement allows fossil companies to sue for profits denied up to 20 years after the country has left the scheme, and can also be triggered through bilateral and multi-lateral trade agreements that contain ISDS (Investor State Dispute Settlement) clauses, as does the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).
The UK is still in it. This Guardian article UK should quit ‘climate-wrecking’ energy treaty, say official advisers actually gives a good rundown on what is happening.
Australia originally ‘joined’ in the 1990s, but never ratified, thought better and now has a policy on not including ISDS clauses and trying to clean them out wherever they exist.
Patrica Ranald via AFTINET has campaigned against this caper for decades.
In this post on the AFTINET site they point out that Australia needs to exchange side letters with the UK excluding ISDS action now that the UK is joining the TPP.
Switzerland is very naughty in exploiting this issue to make a buck while killing the planet.
The Energy Charter thing is also why the UK can’t refuse new coal and gas licences.
Prof. Eliot Jacobson tweeted earlier this evening:
NOAA’s June 2023 Global Climate Report included:
Berkley Earth’s June 2023 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde, dated 11 Jul 2023 stated:
https://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Annual_time_series_combined-2.png
Another communication by James Hansen, Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy was published on 13 Jul 2023 titled The Climate Dice are Loaded. Now, a New Frontier? It includes Fig. 1. The shifting bell curve for Northern Hemisphere land in the summer, for periods 1951-1980, 1990-2000, & 2010-2020.
In conclusion:
Yes, Geoff. June was unusually cool in the USA, which is only 2% of the global land area, if memory serves.
Now in July their luck ran out. US Republicans oppose climate funding as millions suffer in extreme weather and in Europe Europe’s Sizzling Summer: A Heatwave Like Never Before.
All this as El Niño is barely out of the starting blocks. Hansen’s reading of the situation is more than plausible.
Julian Cribb points out that Swedish biologist Carl Linnaeus came up with the descriptor for humans as homo sapiens in 1758. Cribb reckons it was a mistake. We may be clever and innovative, but a species which is acting to render the Earth uninhabitable withing three or four generations cannot be described as “wise”.
Extreme weather persists pretty much around the globe in the Northern Hemisphere:
Climate Change: US, Europe reel under historic heatwave, while Asia battles torrential rain, floods
In Italy European heatwave: red alerts issued for 16 cities in Italy.
Meanwhile Big oil quietly walks back on climate pledges as global heat records tumble.
There’s an episode of the Aaron Sorkin series, The Newsroom, that highlights a jaw-dropping example of the deeply toxic relationship between mainstream media and the existential-level predicaments we face including Climate Chaos and Global Heating. The 4-minute video segment below is from The Newsroom series 3 episode 3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNYp6oc37ds
Lets be clear, according to Wikipedia:
The Newsroom is an American political drama television series created and principally written by Aaron Sorkin that premiered on HBO on June 24, 2012, and concluded on December 14, 2014, consisting of 25 episodes over three seasons.
So all that scary stuff is from Sorkin’s fevered imagination and is actually BS, right?
Wrong. Mother Jones fact-checked the episode:
So, in all, well done Newsroom. Informative, accurate, if a little heavy-handed on the doom and gloom.
Marginally heavy-handed. And using IPCC science of the time.
Professor Jason Box posted on 16 Jul 2023 another informative YouTube video titled insane flooding rain to Greenland – rapids in an atmospheric river, duration 0:11:26. Prof Box talks about high rainfall (i.e. ≥1 foot / 304.8 mm of rainfall within a 24-hour period) events observed in Greenland in recent years.
Extreme rainfall ‘darkens’ the surface snow, inducing more heat adsorption on following sunny days, elevating melting rates for days/weeks.
This is an excellent presentation discussing atmospheric ‘river’ rapids that instrumentation is now observing in greater detail in southern Greenland!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tua4p9ns2JY
My stuff is struggling to get thru Brian.
Sorry to hear, John. I’ll write to Viv again. She hasn’t responded to my last.
I’m just finding it slow, and it won’t let me do anything at all unless I’m logged in.
The back end homepage says it needs urgent attention.
Geoff M, that’s a very significant post from Jason Box. I knew Greenland had experienced rain, but imagined it was light. I have thought for some time that with warming the difference in precipitation was caused by changes in global ocean and atmospheric circulation patterns. Not so much by the explanation usually given, that the carrying capacity increases by 7% for every degree warmer.
Box is critical of the climate models, and says specifically that we are going to have to remove significant amounts of GHG from the atmosphere.
The SST North Atlantic (0-60°N, 0-80°W) on Fri, 21 Jul 2023 reached 24.8 °C, about 0.1 °C below the record established in Sep 2022. With about 1-1½ months of general warming in the North Atlantic still in the pipeline, and the recent temperature trend still rising at about 0.1 °C/day, it seems to me a new record is perhaps due to be set for today or tomorrow. But where will the new peak reach in this year? 25.5 °C? 26.0 °C? higher?
The SST World (60°S-60°N) is currently (21 Jul 2023) about 0.1 °C below the record established in early Apr 2023.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
And 19 days (so far) of record-setting high 2m Temperature World (90°S-90°N, 0-360°E)
https://twitter.com/EliotJacobson/status/1682717148173721602
And 2m Temperature Tropics (23.5°S-23.5°N, 0-360°E) is at record seasonal highs for the last few weeks.
Andrew Dressler wrote in a post headlined Why are climate impacts escalating so quickly? on Jul 18:
Geoff, I listened (and watched) Dessler’s NASA talk. I was a bit amazed at how simplified he kept it, and how much relating just to energy production. The complexities came up in the questions. The money quote was at about 50:00 on the tale:
“We have no idea how bad it’s going to be!”
BTW in response to John’s problem, Viv says she’s out of range until Wednesday, when she will take a look at the works. The dashboard says there are things to be fixed, which should improve the speed and reliability.
Shouldn’t be too hard if you know what you are doing.
So we live in hope.
I’m in heavy duty doing personal stuff at present.
I note that Climate Reanalyzer has increased the y-axis from 25 °C to 26 °C in the graph for North Atlantic SST. With 5-6 weeks of more heat to go this year it seems there’s perhaps still an expectation of breaching the 25 °C threshold this year. The latest data point for Sunday, 23 Jul 2023 is still just a little shy of the Sep 2022 record of 24.89 °C.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
There’s another very informative data dive by Prof Jason Box published on 23 Jul 2023 in a YouTube video titled record setting July 2023 Greenland heatwave alert, duration 0:14:53.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nagmRzCMEVM
Michael Pascoe: Why ‘fantasy’ carbon credits scheme is a Labor and Coalition problem
John, I tidied up the link. I’ve been worried about the whole safeguards mechanism, partly because I don’t see merit in offsetting through planting trees or improving soil carbon. Meritorious in themselves, although there are issues, but not as a 100-year carbon store.
Partly because the share prices on the likes of Santos, Woodside and Tamboran (Beetaloo) did not miss a beat when the legislation was passed.
I need to study the links more, but I suspect the ‘illegal’ complaint refers to credits handed out historically, with ACCUs that still sit in the system.
Geoff M, what is happening now seems to be surprising scientists, although perhaps Jason Box, Hansen and a few other earth system scientists not so much. Latest is Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation:
I have to run, but Stefan Rahmstorf, probably the leading scientist on AMOC, has a talk here.
Looks like being 80 may not be enough to avoid the climate crisis.
James Hansen’s latest communication dated 21 Jul 2023, titled Peer & Public Review of “Global Warming in the Pipeline”, included:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2023, the North Atlantic SST daily mean was at 24.87 °C, only 0.02 °C below the record of 24.89 °C set on 2-4 Sep 2022.
There may perhaps be another full 1 °C of warming ahead before this year’s peak is reached. Where will the peak reach? 25.5 °C? 25.7 °C? Higher?
It seems 26 Jul 2023 is perhaps the day to break another temperature record.
CarbonBrief in State of the climate: 2023 now likely hottest year on record after extreme summer has a wide collection of graphs, showing that there appears to be a decisive break in the smooth trend, which has in fact startled most scientists irrespective of what they say.
However, CarbonBrief does a disservice IMO in attributing what’s happening entirely to the early affects on the emerging La Niña.
In this short video the ABC collects some dramatic footage. Towards the end Warren Howden is quite exolicit ib saying the effects of La Niña are not yet in play.
From Democracy Now U.N. Warns: “The Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived” we get a fuller version of Antonio Gutteras’ warning that we are facing a decisive break. The discussion examines the Biden administration’s reaction and finds it inadequate.
I note that concern for sea level rise is missing.
This piece G20 meeting fails to agree on climate policy, EU says ‘we are simply nowhere’ looks at the reaction of the G20.
Fine words, but in terms of action when we ask whether the glass is half full or half empty, the answer is clear: the glass is empty.
Brian: – “However, CarbonBrief does a disservice IMO in attributing what’s happening entirely to the early affects on the emerging La Niña.”
Should that be the emerging strong El Niño?
Meanwhile, the Earth’s Energy Imbalance (EEI) from NASA satellite data reached 1.97 W/m² (12-month mean)!
That’s:
• 15.9 Hiroshima nuclear bomb-magnitude energy equivalent uptake per second;
• 500 million ‘Hiroshimas’ in the last 12 months;
• More than one billion ‘Hiroshimas’ over the last 36 months.
On Thu, 27 Jul 2023, the Arctic just hit a modern-day record high 2-metre temperature of 5.813°C (42.46°F), which is 3.33σ above the 1991-2020 mean.
Climate scientist Johan Rockström explains the urgency of operating within “planetary boundaries“ – the planetary life-support systems essential for maintaining human life on Earth. See the YouTube video titled A True Paradise: AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT – Johan Rockström, published 2 Jun 2023, duration 0:10:53.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STzhJPapFW4
Yes, El Niño. My brain is turning to sludge!
I hadn’t seen that Rockström video. Very clear, and for a general audience. The pedant in me points out that we crossed 350ppm in September 1988, I think two or three months after Hansen’s Senate testimony. ‘Burnable carbon’ has been a fiction that scientists have bought into.
Rockström’s Planetary boundaries: scientific advances | Frontiers Forum Live 2023 is more detailed in the science. It’s worth listening all the way through, including the Q&A.
Rockström is head (joint head, I think) of the Potsdam Institute, which has over 400 staff. Seems he is using the planetary boundaries frame to align their effort to best help the existential challenge.
I took another look at Kevin Anderson’s A True Paradise: WHERE WE ARE HEADING.
Rockström is on record as saying we have the technology to deal with the climate threat. Not sure he still says that. Anderson is brutally direct – we don’t.
He thinks we are going to fail, but we must try.
As Wikipedia notes:
Australian radio broadcaster Phillip Adams often fondly recalls Casals’ 80th birthday press conference where, after complaining at length about the troubles of the world, he paused to conclude with the observation: “The situation is hopeless. We must take the next step”.
Exploring this concept might be more productive than accepting “eat, drink and be merry, tomorrow we die.)
Perhaps one of the underlying problems is that too much power lies with those who will die before the real shit hits the real fan? OR.….
Stefan Rahmstorf has done a post What is happening in the Atlantic Ocean to the AMOC?
Seems he wrote it before the new Danish study, which just confirmed his view that the IPCC had underestimated the danger:
The AMOC is projected to weaken in the 21st century under all RCPs (very likely), although a collapse is very unlikely (medium confidence). Based on CMIP5 projections, by 2300, an AMOC collapse is about as likely as not for high emissions scenarios and very unlikely for lower ones (medium confidence).
He says:
It has long been my opinion that “very unlikely”, meaning less than 10% in the calibrated IPCC uncertainty jargon, is not at all reassuring for a risk we really should rule out with 99.9 % probability, given the devastating consequences should a collapse occur.
Apparently the climate models don’t even recognise the input of fresh meltwater from Greenland.
Just published by Nick Breeze ClimateGenn a few hours ago was a YouTube video titled Professor Jason Box – Atmospheric River Rapids + why next year will be worse + what can we do?, duration 0:18:45. Glaciologist Professor Jason Box answers:
What are atmospheric river rapids?
What do these teach us about extreme deluge events around the world that we are seeing now?
What is driving it?
Why next year will be worse
What do we have to do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ddb9pRqcDw
Leon Simons posted a long tweet today (Aug 3) on solar irradiance, and the increasing amount of solar radiation that Earth absorbs due to less (sea) ice and snow and decreasing aerosol and clouds.
12-month solar irradiance at the top of the atmosphere is only +0.4 W/m² higher than the lowest value in 2008.
Because of less (sea) ice and snow and decreasing aerosol and clouds, Earth now absorbs about +2 W/m² more sunlight.
So yes, the sun is currently making warming worse than it would be if the 11-year solar cycle was at its low point.
But we/humanity are making the warming much worse with our GHG emissions.
Glaciologist Prof Jason Box tweeted earlier today (Aug 4) an animated graph of accelerating concentrations of greenhouse gasses (CO₂, methane, nitrous oxide).
US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted Aug 2, quoting a comment from an article about extreme weather could cripple the US grid:
Perhaps a good reason to put critical power transmission underground?
Leon Simons suggests in a tweet in Aug 3:
There’s another post by David Spratt at Climate Code Red, published today (Aug 4), headlined The Australian Government refuses to say what it knows about climate-security threats, so we gave policymakers a helping hand. It begins with:
Thanks for all that Geoff. I’ve been rushed off my feet in the last few days.
On blog news, Viv has said she has tidied up the back end of the blog ahead for a foreshadowed major update from Word Press. So I’m hoping it will function a bit better. If anyone has problems, pls let me know.
Geoff, re Art Berman ‘s tweet, it’s worth checking out the article –
Extreme weather could cripple the US electrical grid – Nexans.
The grid is antiquated, split into three, but each has very poor connections between states. Blackouts are increasing:
Investment in renewables generation has not been matched by investment in infrastructure, so the interconnection queue has ballooned:
It’s not clear that the Biden expenditure burst will fix things. Seems things may have to get worse before they get better.
Jason Box has putout a video 5 factors behind the Global Heatwave 2023, and it’s not just El Niño.
Not sure he has rounded up everything, but for a glaciologist he is doing well in understanding the broader earth system. Plus he is a very good communicator.
Zeke Hausfather has done a piece, now that July is in as the hottest month on record, What a record July means for 2023 temperature.
Taking into account the state of ENSO:
This model gives a 98% chance of 2023 being the warmest year on record. The central estimate is 1.42C above 1850-1899 levels, with a range of 1.35C to 1.50C. It suggests there is a ~2.5% chance that 2023 exceeds 1.5C, and turns out to have a slightly better fit to the data (adjusted r2) than the version that doesn’t include the latest month. It also produced a good hindcast. (Emphasis added)
Hausfather on 25 July did a post Are temperatures this summer hotter than scientists expected?
Hausfather works entirely on measured evidence and models. The one factor that is popping out of the top of his error bands is the North Atlantic ocean temperature. Elsewhere what we see is towards the high side, but within bounds.
Three comments. First, Hausfather simply leaves out known unknowns.
Second, I think he under-rates the tipping point factor, where many are clearly inn play and will become increasingly problematic.
Third, even if we can design effective policies, there is little evidence that we are doing so.
Finally, there is no sense that we have gone too far and if we are to get to the place which gives human well-being within planetary boundaries we need to get temperatures down to Holocene levels – at least.
The Guardian published an article on Aug 6 by climate justice reporter Nina Lakhani, headlined Racism at heart of US failure to tackle deadly heatwaves, expert warns, reporting on an interview with Jeff Goodell, an award winning climate journalist, about his latest book titled The Heat Will Kill You First: Life and Death on a Scorched Planet. The article included quotes from Jeff Goodell:
See also the YouTube video published 17 Jul 2023 titled “The Heat Will Kill You First”: Rolling Stone’s Jeff Goodell on Life and Death on a Scorched Planet, duration 0:20:16.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7ZVqXuBXHk
Leon Simons tweeted today (Aug 10):
And there’s still probably a few more weeks of ocean warming to go.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted yesterday (Aug 9):
Northern Hemisphere 2 m mean air temperature appears to have passed peak, but is still higher than previous instrumental years.
Tropics 2 m mean air temperature is still at seasonal record highs.
From Bill McGuire:
Geoff, I hadn’t got to Geoff Goodell’s stuff. He could be right about our accommodation to disaster:
I would have thought the Northern Hemisphere summer of 2022 would have produced panic, but it seems not. However, if the AMOC stops, or the Thwaites Glacier suddenly crumbles we may wake up in fright.
Leon Simons tweet scrolling down reproduces reproduces this image:
The image is not sourced, but is meant to show sulfate aerosol emissions including those from shipping prior to 2020, when they reduced. There is also a link to an article Aerosols must be included in climate risk assessments:
I think the suggestion is that changes in emissions from shipping may be a large part of the story in heating of the North Atlantic.
Leon Simons tweeted on Aug 13 (including a graph of SST for Florida Keys):
What will be the fate of the GBR this summer, and the next summer?
Geoff, I’ve recently seen three articles on the GBR.
First, Imogen Zethoven, who I’m told is a GBR specialist, has a lot of detail on what can be done to preserve the GBR of the Holocene, given what is coming down the track – The terrible reality: Great Barrier Reef on threshold of rapid deterioration.
However, she ignores research that finds the GBR will be stuffed with 1.5°C from Peter Kalmus, Scott Heron and Adele Dixon, while recognising that it is in big trouble at present temperatures.
Also nothing about what happens when miners empty deluge water from open cut mines in the Bowen Basin.
I found this one genuinely impressive – Management approaches to conserve Australia’s marine ecosystem under climate change.
They recognise that while seeking to preserve what flourished in the Holocene we need to plan positively for the best outcomes in the Anthopocene. They recognise the value of using introduced species.
My criticisms would be that they could be more specific about the size of the problem – 3000 reefs in an area the size of Italy, and the need to make hard choices where to concentrate effort.
Also, no-one seems to recognize how sea level rise will make us lose our coastlines within the century and what might be the effects of a couple of metres of SLR, which is pretty much inevitable in what should be our forward planning horizon.
Third, a piece in the possible negatives of introduced species – New research highlights risks of selective adaptation in extreme coral habitats.
If anyone was looking in the last few minutes, I’ve untangled two links which appeared in the wrong places, and added links for Kalmus, Heron and Dixon.
Berkley Earth published on Aug 14 their July 2023 Temperature Update, by Robert Rohde. It included:
2023 is virtually certain to become the warmest year on record (99% chance).
To add to scientists sharing the news, I found a tweet by Andrew Dessler, who links to an article by Veronika Meduna – Meltwater from Antarctic Glaciers Is Slowing Deep-Ocean Currents.
That’s around the Weddell Sea.
Quite startling is this graph of the Antarctic sea ice which dropped like a stone this year:
Dessler has a chat with Matthew England embedded in The oceans are changing because of climate change: Matt England tells me how.
England says the overturning current around Antarctica is slowing by around 40% in the next few decades. Inter alia this means that nutrients are not brought back to the surface. He kind of describes the SH and NH overturning currents like two great fly-wheels that kept the whole Earth System steady during the Holocene. Towards the end he refers to James Hansen’s latest, where warming at 0.18°C per decade is speeding up to 0.27°C to 0.36°C per decade.
Scrolling down Dessler’s tweet there is a link to a Paul Beckwith video – The Mother of All Tipping Points: AMOC Shutdown and Chaotic Connections to Earth Systems and Us
I suspect that does not take into account the additional chaos caused by what’s happening in Antarctica, because England says the main action will be around the Thwaites Glacier area, which is simply the worst.
Having rellies in Toronto I was interested in Beckwith talking about tornadoes whistling past and clipping Ottawa.
Geoff, there are some great graphs on that Berkeley Earth site. Here’s there full-year 2023 prediction:
We have just got back from Cains. Went there for a family reunion expecting sunny days to suit American family. Cool and wettish. would have got better weather if we had stayed in Ballina.
Where is global warming when you want it???
Welcome back, John. I heard on late night talkback last night that it had finally stopped raining around Cairns, just after you’d been there!
I understand you have a sub to the New Scientist. In the August 1 edition there is an article Something strange is happening in the Pacific and we must find out why.
Apparently a tongue of cooler water is developing in the Eastern Pacific, which would mean we spend more time in La Niña rather than El Niño. That would make it cloudy and wet this side of the Pacific.
I’m a bit sceptical about all that, because they say:
That could mean simply that there is less warming on the eastern side. However, the map graphic shows a far wider differential.
In any case on this side the SE trade winds seem to have been enhanced pretty much permanently, which moves moisture just to the east of where I sit, but hits the coast in FNQ.
Meanwhile Hansen has done an update Uh-Oh. Now What? Are We Acquiring the Data to Understand the Situation?
Essentially he is saying, I think, that we are not measuring as much as we should to know what is going on. We need more on aerosols, on clouds, and much more on the oceans.
So he is turning to paleoscience for the bigger picture.
In that he is in furious agreement with what Will Steffen said. That is, we are hitting the Earth System with a shock like no other, apart from the asteroid strike 65 million years ago, but in the opposite direction.
However, the disposition of the continents was very different back then. In the broad the effect is similar, but how it may depend on which tipping points tip first, and how the consequent cascading effect plays out this time.
Professor Jason Box published today his latest YouTube video titled climate wildcard – Greenland melt lakes, duration 0:12:54. Well worth a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4fz7Dc5vRs
Good one, Geoff, and genuinely scary.
Here’s one on the bright side – Judge sides with youth in Montana climate change trial, finds two laws unconstitutional:
Bruce Shapiro talking to Phillip Adams, likened the judgement as a clear home run, but not the end of the game, as the judgement would almost certainly be appealed.
I was interested that 350ppm made an appearance in the evidence.
John D, this one is for you!
Lenai Tiny Home Is a Harmonious Blend of Simplicity, Exquisite Design, and Functionality
Thanks Brian. There is so much on offer that I rarely look at tiny house links these days.
What needs to happen is for them to be used but not just the glorified caravan version.
Another long tweet from Leon Simons posted late Aug 21 on the latest data (up to Jun 2023) from NASA on Absorbed Solar Radiation for the North Atlantic Ocean.
And Leon Simons then posted a tweet earlier today (Aug 22) comparing the SSTAs so far this year with Super El Niño years 1997 and or 2015.
Published in yesterday’s (Aug 23) Newcastle Herald was an op-ed by David Spratt headlined David Spratt | Anthony Albanese government refusing to release declassified climate security report. It included (bold text my emphasis):
Leon Simons has been busy and that’s a stunner from David Spratt, who apparently posted also in the Canberra Times, and now at Climate Code Red. He finishes with:
David Spratt from the Climate Code Red site has linked to a “brutal but necessary video” from Mike Hudema.
Julian Cribb just tweeted a link to Michael Klare’s piece We Are Witnessing the First Stages of Civilization’s Collapse.
It’s actually a reprint of Klare’s original Collapse 2.0. I found that perchance on the weekend at resilience.com then decided to subscribe only to receive their starter offering for me – We need an ecological civilization before it’s too late published in 2018.
We are on the threshold of it becoming too late. The ALP at its national conference last week decided that its policy platform accepts the need for the economy to work within ecological limits, with consideration of climate and biodiversity impacts.
How this is enacted and institutionalised will be critical. There are good people working on making that happen.
Meanwhile Greens push for 2035 net zero target in NSW as Labor sweats over Eraring closure and David Osmond reckons A near 100pct renewable grid for Australia is feasible and affordable, with just a few hours of storage.
Every Sunday I look to see what Peter Sainsbury has to say. He seldom fails to depress, this time with Environment: Fossil fuels still dominate energy systems and economies.
Follow the link to a Statistical Review of World Energy by the World Energy Institute.
Masses of charts, tables and graphs. Much could be said, but I was surprised that we in Oz produce less than 4% of the world’s gas.
It’s apparently been a record melt area in Greenland for the period of 22-24 Aug 2023.
https://twitter.com/climate_ice/status/1695808867395920280
https://nsidc.org/greenland-today/greenland-surface-melt-extent-interactive-chart/
The North Atlantic SST is still at record highs (above 25.30 °C on 27 Aug 2023).
The Australian (BOM) model is back at forecasting a +3 °C El Niño for Dec 2023 – Jan 2024.
Thank, Geoff. To be clear, they are forecasting a 3 °C sea surface anomaly.
I expect the chances of a significant coral bleaching event are high.
ICYMI, David Spratt & Ian Dunlop’s op-ed at the Pearls and Irritations blog was posted on 29 Aug 2023 headlined Fatal mistake: Intergenerational report misleads on climate risks. It included:
Thankyou Geoff, I did see it, now reproduced at Climate Code Red as Thinking in boxes, Australian Government’s Intergenerational Report misleads and fails to connect the climate dots.
Problem is while I’m not we are achieving nothing in emissions reduction, in terms of net emissions it’s close to nothing. See Greg Jericho’s Australia’s greenhouse emissions are a national disgrace that are destroying the planet and costing households.
See the third and fourth graphs, where he looks at emissions with and without LULUCF.
ICYMI/FYI:
Dr Andrew Forrest AO explained the practical steps needed to accelerate collaboration, stop global warming and build a green energy economy in the Asia-Pacific, at the Boao Forum for Asia Perth 2023, on Wednesday, 30 Aug 2023.
Forrest declared in a presentation slide (from time interval 0:03:35):
Forrest concluded with (from time interval 0:23:11):
“Because it’s business – I need you to know – it’s business which is causing global warming. It’s business which will kill your children. It’s business which is responsible for lethal humidity. But it’s policies which guide business. You, must hold us, to account. Don’t let us, with our clever advertising, blame you the consumer, or you the public or individual – that’s rubbish. Business, guided by government, will either destroy, or save this planet.
Hold us to account – the power of you.
Thank you. Make us change. That’s all I’m asking you to do – make us change. Thank you very much.”
See the presentation slides here.
See Dr Forrest’s presentation in the YouTube video titled Dr Andrew Forrest AO speaks at the Boao Forum Asia, duration 0:24:10.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kigyFOj7HUw
Thanks, Geoff. I’d heard a news headline, but hadn’t seen the video. Chances are I would have missed it.
Twiggy Forrest of course has a PhD, which Google describes as:
He clearly understands the ‘human niche’ science.
He hasn’t put his PhD on the shelf and forgotten about it. He seems to take cleaning up the company operations seriously, aiming for real zero in Scope 1 and 2 in his mining operations by 2030. He’s also converting to ammonia for his ships.
I’m interested in his proposal to make ecocide and killing the planet a real crime. There are now at least four moves in that direction. There is one through the Pacific Islands Forum, aiming at this year’s COP. Julian Cribb is lobbying for an Earth System Treaty. There is a more legalistic and punitive one emerging from Europe. I’ve lost the details, would have to look up.
A dimension not highlighted by Twiggy is what happens with overshoot and beyond zero. Pascal Lamy has been working on an Overshoot Commission, due to report at the end of next week.
Have to go now, but will try to give details. I’ve been looking at the dimensions of what needs to be done in terms of drawdown, given that 1.5C is no place to try to park the Earth System. Seem somewhere between at least 100 to 1000Gt, which is a helluva lot as you would always take the top number as minimum to take account of risk.
David Spratt this time in the Bulletin for Atomic Scientists – Betting against worst-case climate scenarios is risky business:
A tweet by Leon Simons on Sep 5 (including a graph):
Also tweeted by Leon Simons (including another graph):
Earth just had its hottest three months on record, according to the European Union-funded Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) implemented by ECMWF.
Per the C3S press release dated 5 Sep 2023 titled Summer 2023: the hottest on record, included August 2023 – Surface air temperature highlights:
Dr Robert Rodhe tweeted on Sep 8 (including a graph of Periods when the Arctic Ocean has been Passable):
North Atlantic sea surface temperatures are spiking again, up 0.06 °C on 7 Sep 2023, reaching a new high for 2023 of 25.37 °C.
The National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) reported on Sep 5:
I wonder when (not if) we see a major ice sheet collapse?
Good question, Geoff.
Basically I think Hansen is right in saying the climate is entering a new frontier. Climate scientists are very anxious about what is happening. I’ve just seen a post on Twitter, following a re-post by Stefan Rahmstorf, posted by Peter Jelenek, translated as:
I think that’s Morocco. If you scroll down he has more.
Of interest to all, I would think, documentary filmmaker Johan Gabrielson has worked with Tim Flannery in a search for the one ingredient currently missing – good climate leadership.
On Sunday 17th September the resulting film “Climate Changers”, after its world premiere at the 2023 Sydney Film Festival, will screen at more than 25 cinemas around the country, followed by a live-streamed Q&A including Prof. Tim Flannery, co-founder of Rewiring Australia Dr Saul Griffith, and international human rights lawyer and activist Kavita Naidu, to be moderated by actor and climate advocate Yael Stone.
The film explores how individuals, cultures and countries have successfully implemented many forms of leadership with the hope that “Climate Changers” will offer inspiration and impetus to a greener tomorrow.
See the trailer and book tickets here.
Tim Flannery, back in 2020 when he penned the introduction of his book The Climate Cure: Solving the climate emergency in the era of COVID-19 said:
We have almost no time to avoid the ultimate failure, and much to change. This declaration is a last call for rational action to protect ourselves and our children from climate catastrophe. Fail now, and we fail forever.
He proposed emissions reductions of 8 per cent per annum, and as much drawdown as we could manage, heading for net zero by 2030.
Ian Duncan has let fly in Breaking the suicidal impasse. He says:
Also:
That’s a sample. It’s strong stuff!
Brian: You and Geoff seem to be running a competition to see who can accumulate the most pessimistic projections. Any serious solutions on offer??
John D; – Any serious solutions on offer??
What’s required to avoid worst-case catastrophic conditions for humanity in the coming decades?
http://www.climatecodered.org/2023/06/three-climate-interventions-reduce.html
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, in the Foreword to What Lies Beneath: The Understatement Of Existential Climate Risk, published Aug 2018, concluded with (on page 3):
Do your federal and state members of parliament encourage and support more fossil fuel projects? If so, have you asked them directly why? Have you indicated to them that more fossil fuel projects is effectively civilisation suicide?
John, I think that this year may well be the year homo sapiens lost the war to the enemy, being the fossil fuel industry, so designated by Peter Carter in his Climate Emergency Update Sept. 2023.
It’s well worth a listen, actually. Made me realise that floods are more photogenic, but drought is hugely on the increase, and is killing the planet.
Currently I’m reading Earth for All – A Survival Guide for Humanity, the book. I see just now that they also have a website.
If I was properly retired and could find the space in my somewhat frustratingly crowded life, I’d post about it, plus all the amazing stuff I’ve been reading and seeing about energy storage, the latest a battery being developed that will drive your EV 3.7 million miles, or so it was said!
Active wind turbine control aims to cut bird deaths by 80%
apart from describing a system that helps reduce turbine deaths a few interesting stats:
Also from the Climate Emergency Forum was a YouTube video titled Risk in the Climate Casino, published 10 Sep 2023 (recorded on Sep 6), duration 0:29:46.
Dr. Peter Carter, Paul Beckwith and Regina Valdez discuss the topic of risk assessment as it pertains to climate change, how it is a crucial aspect of understanding its effects on populations, and the consequent need for immediate action to mitigate the impacts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5_Qw62i1dU
Just now, on batteries:
Fully Charged in Just 6 Minutes – Groundbreaking Technique Could Revolutionize EV Charging
This is the first I’ve seen, I think, from Korea:
Dr Robert Rohde, Lead Scientist at Berkeley Earth, tweeted late yesterday (Sep 13):
Berkeley Earth’s August 2023 Temperature Update was published yesterday (Sep 13).
James Hansen has issued his monthly email – Global Warming is Accelerating. Why? Will We Fly Blind.
He repeats his common complaint that we are not monitoring critical information about aerosols and criticises again the current role of NASA GISS.
I think the story is that when he was running the show under the Bush administration his public advocacy got under their skin to the point where they put a line through the main part of his mission “To Understand and Protect the Home Planet”.
His former deputy and successor, Gavin Schmidt, is a climate modeller, has concentrated on that and is extremely cautious about making public statements that could harm his organisation.
Single-bladed floating wind turbine promises half the cost, more power
Potential is there for a more robust, lower cost offshore wind turbine system.
CNN published on 6 Sep 2023 an article by Angela Fritz headlined ‘Doomsday glacier,’ which could raise sea level by several feet, is holding on ‘by its fingernails,’ scientists say, including:
John, I’ve had a go at cleaning up the link.
Seems one advantage of the new design is that wind turbines can be put further out, and to trade off the best wind and the least nuisance, being out of sight, shipping lanes etc.
Geoff M, I wonder whether we’ll need something like the Thwaites glacier crashing of AMOC stopping before the world wakes up.
Saul Griffith said in Q&A after the film Climate Changers on Sunday that no single country was treating climate as a wartime emergency. Specifically not the USA, which, the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ notwithstanding, was still coming up short.
The film showed the beach erosion at Stockton near Newcastle. The Council has put up a tourist feature where you can take a photo of the beach and then compare it with a photo taken only two years earlier.
I’ve put up a new post Australia drops the ball on fire ant invasion. It’s something I decided to finish for once.
Meanwhile, there is a fascinating long interview Johan Rockström interview | Planetary boundaries, ‘negative emissions’, mitigation models & fairness with Kevin Anderson as interviewer doing most of the talking.
Listening to what they say, I’d wager that most climate scientists would learn something.
The major point, mentioned at the outset, and I wish they had returned to it at the end, is that if we want a stable, safe climate in the Anthropocene, we need Holocene-like conditions. That is GHGs need to be scaled down to appropriate levels to give us pre-industrial temperature plus no more than 0.5°C .
This is now horrendously difficult.
Rockström, the climate scientist, says that we need negative emissions technologies. Without them we’ll need reductions in the order of 10 to 15% pa, which is impossible.
Anderson, the engineer, says that such technologies can’t be scaled up in the time available.
Then we need negative emissions just for the IPCC’s overshoot. In fact we need them beyond that to reach a safe climate which is dangerous now.
Both of them should be looking to people with expertise in social and political change, rather than thinking they have to solve the ‘equity problem’ themselves, although their ideas are indeed interesting.
Here’s one from Kate Raworth in full flight on Doughnut Economics, which of course sits within the Planetary Boundaries concept.
She seems to have turned it into a business planning service product.
Nearly a century ago Ruth Benedict, the famous anthropologist, distinguished between societies with economic systems like siphons (traditional societies) vs funnels (modern capitalism).
Meanwhile the UN Secretary General is not impressed with Australia’s efforts in climate change. We too are left off his list of 41 countries found to be more or less serious about it:
‘First movers’ only: US, China, UK left off UN climate guestlist
Rooftop solar ‘cannibalising’ power prices as Australian generators pay to stay online: The growth of rooftop solar is making it difficult for other power producers including large scale solar who may have to reduce output during solar peaks.
My take is that more storage would helpl and it may make more sense now to have a hard look at solar thermal.
Part of the problem, IMO, is that we are relying on the market, rather than making rational decisions as to which storage form is appropriate and how much should be installed.
Waterless high-density hydro makes more energy from less elevation
Basically it is talking about using a denser liquid to reduce height and/or tank size required to store a given amount of energy.
No details re liquid used. Might also work with slurries like those used in the minerals industry,
Interesting, John. It all helps.
There seems to be a ‘game changing’ announcement about batteries every couple of days. The latest I’ve seen is NASA has cracked the code for replacing lithium batteries: ‘triple the energy’ .
It’s sulphur-silenium solid state.
They are claiming double the density of the best lithium, discharges 10 times faster. Shouldn’t catch fire or explode, could have 2000km range, and suitable for serious aviation.
I don’t think there was anything about price, but could be commercially available this decade.
Leon Simons tweeted yesterday (Sep 25):
It seems the Antarctic sea ice melt season has already begun, with a million km² of sea ice below the previous record low!
The energy transition can’t come fast enough!
Stefan Rahmstorf tweets that he can’t stop looking at these graphs:
Visualizing a summer of extremes in 7 charts
I heard yesterday that 3 of 4 penguin colonies produced no surviving chicks as the lack of ice did not allow them to develop waterproof feathers in time.
At that Lean Simons site, I found this:
Posted at WRAL TechWire on 29 Sep 2023 was a follow-up piece by Marshall Brain headlined Just how bad is climate change? It’s worse than you think, says Doomsday author. It began with:
Food for your thoughts…
Yep, we need to act “but what act?”
If it was a world war we would go onto a war footing where survival of the country depends on a massive effort world wideSome things are being done but efforts so far don’t look anything like a war fitting to me.
We have to reduce the population as well as other environment action.
John, on population, if a superintelligent AI entity was given the problem, as suggested towards the end of the second link I’m sure it would come up with a way of culling the population!
A major part of the problem is that there are hundreds of things that need to be done. I’ve been reading a book Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity which identifies five leverage points in there Giant Leap scenario, as against the Too Little Too Late story, which is the path we are pretty much on.
The most succinct statement comes from a preprint:
On population the approach is mainly to liberate and educate women.
They reckon it could all be done with 2-4% of GDP.
At this stage I’m making no comment.
Brian: The turnarounds above sound like a list of nice to haves with a claim that fixing these will solve the problem. Yep all the good things for women have resulted in lower birthrates but China achieved more in a hurry with its one child policy.
John, if you read the full text it’s not a nice list of things to have, rather wrestling with the issues that might take us forward, clear-eyed about the real-world fix we are in.
The Chinese are good at seeing the opportunity in disaster. We need to do the same, and with the Chinese, for the whole planet, but without the same vertical political structure.
There was a lot of research, thinking, talking and writing, before they wrote the book, and they are still at it.
They are not claiming that what they are suggesting will fix everything, but are trying to give it a coherent and realistic go.
Posted at WBUR on Oct 3 was a piece by Barbara Moran headlined Many scientists don’t want to tell the truth about climate change. Here’s why. It concluded with:
Geoff, there is no doubt many serious scientists are worried about the way the climate is changing now. Zeke Hausfather’s tweet on the first data set to come out on the September global temperature anomaly:
Stefan Rahmstorf comments:
I’m looking forward to what James Hansen says.
The Potsdam Institute have sent me a link to a recent paper of theirs – The South American monsoon approaches a critical transition in response to deforestation.
In short I think they are saying that there is a lot they don’t know for certain, but looking at the data and modelling as best they can, things look bad, are definitely going to get worse. When drying and climate and fire induced warming bring the coverage down to 40% or so, they suggest the area will mostly flip to open savannah. This will have implications for rainfall and food security for the whole continent, including the fertile plains to the south.
Here’s a bit from their email:
And:
Garnered from Facebook, here is another representation of the JRA55 (Japanese) record of the September global temperature anomaly which has gobsmacked scientists:
I understand that no monthly record has been smashed by so much since modern records began.
A study of corals from Belize reef cores going back 9,000 years – Growth of coral reefs likely cannot keep pace with rising sea level.
The bottom line is that coral reefs are fragile and are unlikely to survive the expected pace of sea level rise.
Brian: Hadn’t linked a rapid increase in sea level with coral not getting enough sunlight to survive.
John, nor had I, at least not at levels we are likely to reach in the foreseeable future.
Brian: – “The bottom line is that coral reefs are fragile and are unlikely to survive the expected pace of sea level rise.”
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) published in Feb 2022 a report titled Global and Regional Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States: Updated Mean Projections and Extreme Water Level Probabilities Along U.S. Coastlines. It includes Table 2.3: Global mean sea level and contiguous United States scenarios, in meters, relative to a 2000 baseline.
The outlook for global SLR at year-2050 (relative to year-2000 baseline) ranges from 0.15 m (low) to 0.43 m (high).
The outlook for global SLR at year-2100 (relative to year-2000 baseline) ranges from 0.3 m (low) to 2.0 m (high).
The outlook for global SLR at year-2150 (relative to year-2000 baseline) ranges from 0.4 m (low) to 3.7 m (high).
In the YouTube video titled John Englander, Expert on Sea Level Rise, Talks with US Harbors About Changing Coastal Waters, published 6 Jul 2022, duration 0:41:42, John Englander, explains the causes of sea level rise, the various factors impacting increasing coastal flooding, and talks with Anastasia Fischer, president of US Harbors, about the need to re-engineer our coastlines for the future. John Englander discussed the 2022 NOAA report.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXskGqw4Uxo
My observation is that some coral species can survive variations in depth. It will all depend on clarity of water tolerable difference . (Coral reefs tend to have clear water) I have certainly seen quite deep slopes with what looks like the same species stretching down.)
John D: – “My observation is that some coral species can survive variations in depth.”
But many corals are unlikely to survive the projected global temperature increases over the next few decades.
The longer-term/multi-year +1.5 °C global mean warming threshold will inevitably be breached, and per Hansen et. al., likely occur within this decade.
On our current GHG emissions trajectory, the longer-term/multi-year +2.0 °C global mean warming threshold is likely to be breached by mid-century, unless drastic measures are implemented immediately to reverse global warming.
Per The Conversation article published on 2 Feb 2022 by Adele Dixon, Maria Beger, Peter Kalmus and Scott F. Heron, headlined Safe havens for coral reefs will be almost non-existent at 1.5°C of global warming – new study, included:
Geoff: Sounds like “Eat Drink and be Merry for tomorrow we die.”
There is a level of disaster prediction that provides an incentive to do nothing apart from enjoying life while we can..
John D: – “There is a level of disaster prediction that provides an incentive to do nothing apart from enjoying life while we can..”
I’d suggest those people who take that attitude are selfish – more interested in their own personal comforts and pleasures in the here and now, and don’t give a rats for what’s coming soon for their progeny/families, and us as a species and civilisation.
If civilisation collapses, then I’d suggest the keeping of history and maintenance of advances/achievements/legacies will be lost and people won’t be remembered.
Careful what you wish for, John D.
Published on 11 Oct 2023 by Berkeley Earth was their latest September 2023 Temperature Update, by Robert Rohde. It included:
https://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Annual_time_series_combined-1.png
Geoff:
Or perhaps they are pointing out that endless bad news simply turns people off because they cannot see what will work.
We need action plans to deal with specifics.
John D: – “Or perhaps they are pointing out that endless bad news simply turns people off because they cannot see what will work.”
Would you prefer lies and fairytales instead, John? “Brightsiding”? Deceptive expectation?
Some would say those with hope are less motivated to be activists than people with more realistic expectations. If you have hope, then you believe the problem can be solved, usually by someone else, which enables you to not deal with the problem. Hope facilitates complacency.
John D: – “We need action plans to deal with specifics.”
Reduce;
Remove;
Repair.
https://www.climatecodered.org/2023/06/three-climate-interventions-reduce.html
Nothing less will do. The Laws of Physics are not negotiable.
Geoff: “John D: – “Or perhaps they are pointing out that endless bad news simply turns people off because they cannot see what will work.”
Would you prefer lies and fairytales instead, John? “Brightsiding”? Deceptive expectation?”
Geoff: If you look my website you would find that I have written quite a bit on climate action issues. (The focus is solutions) Have also had a few articles published in Renew Economy.
During my career I used my lateral, intuitive and inventive mind to improve product recovery and production from coal washeries and other mineral processing plants. Not major routes to emissions reduction and not an alternative to things like major reduction in coal mining but it does reduce emissions per tonne lifetime product.
I am also an active member of the Greens.
My work experience includes living in the center of WA for 10 yrs (serious dry heat) and 8 yrs on Groote Eylandt. (Serious humid heat). Makes me a bit optimistic about what can be survived to add to the things we can do to reduce global warming,
John, personally I’m not attempting to persuade the masses in writing on this blog. I’m more concerned with the truth.
I take an interest in a fair bit of sport around the world. I can report that wet bulb temperatures and the human niche is starting to manifest as a real issue.
Recently I’ve been following Johan Rockström. As an engineer I’d appreciate your honest thoughts on Johan Rockström interview | Planetary boundaries, ‘negative emissions’, mitigation models & fairness with Kevin Anderson.
There’s 70 minutes of goodness to ponder.
I think Rockström and his mates have come up with the best conceptual framework yet for how we should live sustainably on this planet. Rather than lecture us about degrowth and the virtues of vegan diets he looks at the boundaries we need to live within. In essence, create a circular economy that is just and fair.
Rockström says in the interview that he likes to not scare people too much, although I find what he is saying scary enough. He says, show them the possibilities of a better life. They feel better and are more productive if they are doing something positive – sure, sure.
However, we need topdown realistic action from governments and corporates. Anderson is right when he says we have chosen to fail. We need to be clear-eyed about what is at stake. It looks worse than the IPCC is now saying, which is astonishingly bad.
Plus, when you look at the Berkley temperature linked above, the whole system does appear to be tipping before our eyes.
So is there hope? Not nearly as much as one would like. When the Rockström the scientist talks of cranking up the drawdown industry, Anderson as an engineer says it may be conceptually feasible, but not doable in the real world at the speed needed to save the planet.
The talk a lot about the role of scientists and how they could communicate in public debate. The aim is to be a force for good on which happy note they conclude.
Honestly, though, John, I’m finding it harder these days to offer hope with integrity.
I’ve been waiting for Hansen’s commentary on the September temperature anomaly. Here it is:
El Nino Fizzles. Planet Earth Sizzles. Why? – 13 October 2023
He explains the yellow projection on Figure 2 thus:
He has long documented the increased tempo in warming in the near term. The forecast for the current El Niño, which he thinks is not very severe as a natural El Niño, looks as though it will burst through the upper line.
Hansen repeatedly tells us that important factors at work are not even being measured. At the end, he says that what is happening around Antarctica including a lack of sea ice could be affecting the whole system.
I suspect that tipping point elements are having an effect, such as ice sheet decay, failure of the boreal forests through heat and dryness, insect attack, burning etc, plus Amazon turning into a source rather than a sink, and we don’t even know what is happening in the Congo.
However, as I have been saying, it looks like a major inflection point in the whole earth system, worthy of commentary on this blog.
Published at John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations on 15 Oct 2023 was a piece by Peter Sainsbury headlined Environment: On track for 2 degrees of warming within 20 years. It included:
Concrete is an important source of emissions. A replacement, “C-Crete” is hailed as a planet-friendly alternative to cement
Doubly attractive in that many of the things that could be done to reduce emissions need a lot of cement to build.
John, I think that link may only work for you. Is this the one you mean?
C-Crete hailed as a planet-friendly alternative to cement
Geoff, yes I saw that Sainsbury article. It was I think about one of four similar prognostications I saw between watching the thoroughly depressing coverage of voting on the Voice and going to bed. Last night there was the International Energy Outlook 2023 produced by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
There are copious graphs in the report, but one can gain a sense of it overall from the Press release:
John, there is a great article in a recent edition of the New Scientist which talks about why scientists understate the situation and how policy makers are using the wrong approach.
How can policy makers make appropriate decisions if they do not have a clear view of the risk of the worst that could happen and make appropriate contingency plans which could keep us and the planet safe.
The EIA are simply extrapolating where existing policies and industry plans are getting us. It’s not pretty.
Brian: The Davidson’s were divided on the voice with me changing my mind a number of times. Another part of me wanted to get something into the constitution with another part put off by the practicalities. (For example, there are about 1400 Groote Eylandt Warndilyagwa speakers. You would need a very large to give small groups like this representation.) Hazel agreed with the Warren Mundine line: You have to help all poor people. Helping one poor community while helping another is just divisive. (Ex: Dragline operators are very very well paid. Hazel encountered a part Aboriginal kid who was getting educational support on the grounds of Aboriginality despite being the son of a dragline operator.
My take was that the 1967 referendum was successful because it was instructing the federal government to treat Aboriginals like the rest of the population as well as giving the federal government the power to make laws that overruled state governments that were discriminating against Aborigines.
Given the problem’s of Howard’s elected voice it was crazy horse to put something in the constitution that would have stopped Howard getting rid of a dud voice.
Posted at Climate Code Red yesterday (Oct 18) was a piece by David Spratt headlined One swallow doesn’t make a Spring, so do a few super-warm months mean global warming has really hit 1.5°C? It included a reference to Hansen’s latest communication:
Geoff, thanks for that. I saw the article but have been up to my navel in alligators on diverse matters.
Nevertheless I seen plenty to worry about the state of the climate catastrophe, including these:
We need to talk about ANTARCTICA…AGAIN!!
Unrelenting Drought Clobbers the Amazon
Dr Euan Nisbet – Methane Climate Termination Event – Wetlands are turning on (summary version)
Commenting on the last, Nisbet seems the world expert on methane emissions. While it is very hard to tell where the increase is coming from in precise terms, he is worried about the tropical wetlands, pointing out that we have a cyclical feedback going on. Last time this happened big time was at the end of the Younger Dryas, when the temperature in Greenland went up by 10°C in a decade.
We could be seeing a tipping point in action, where humans lose any chance of control.
Actually that wasn’t last week. It was nine years ago in 2014
Now in the Guardian – Global warming: it’s a point of no return in West Antarctica. What happens next?
Here’s the scientific paper – Unavoidable future increase in West Antarctic ice-shelf melting over the twenty-first century
What is different this time is that the research has come out of the British Antarctic Survey, but uses the most new sophisticated ice sheet decay models, and scientists on X (Twitter) are agitated about it. The research says, no matter how effectively we mitigate climate change by reducing emissions, the ice sheet is on the way out.
However, they are saying that East Antarctica can be saved.
In terms of the paleo evidence, this is ridiculous. The Wilkes glacier area in the SE is unstable, and there are others. During the Eemian there were contributions from all three major ice sheets.
Will this put the world on a war footing?
Probably not.
BioScience published on 24 Oct 2023 a journal article by William J Ripple et. al. (including Johan Rockström, Timothy M Lenton, Leon Simons & Sir David Anthony King) titled The 2023 state of the climate report: Entering uncharted territory. It begins with:
Will this change attitudes with the elites? Probably not…
The Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Bill 2023 was referred to the NSW Parliament Legislative Council Portfolio Committee No. 7 – Planning and Environment on 12 October 2023 for inquiry and report.
Submissions close today (Oct 25).
So far, 33 submissions are now publicly available to view (including mine).
Public hearings are scheduled on 27 & 30 Oct 2023.
A committee report is required by 17 Nov 2023.
Sorry, I’ve been up to my navel in alligators.
I’ve changed the settings so comments here remain open for another 30 days.
That’s an outstanding report by Ripple et al, Geoff. Towards the end they tell us what we must do.
Following the links, on the planetary boundaries stuff, they have retained 350ppm of CO2, which the Greens had held onto until they lost it in the pre-election flurry of redoing their stated climate policy.
They also nominate < 1°C for a safe climate.
I’d like to comment more, but meanwhile James Hansen tells us in To Understand and Protect the Home Planet that the Pipeline paper is due to be published.
He is very clear about the approach he took, how it differs from the IPCC approach, and how his Ice Melt paper was defanged as a condition of publication.
On 18 Oct 2023 in Edinburgh, Johan Rockström presented the 44th TB Macaulay Lecture. The YouTube video titled 44th TB Macaulay Lecture – In conversation with Professor Johan Rockström, published 20 Oct 2023, duration 1:37:47, includes:
0:00:05 Welcome from Prof Colin Campbell, CEO, The James Hutton Institute
0:04:14 Message from Prof Mathew Williams, Chief Scientific Advisor for Environment, Natural Resources & Environment, Scottish Government
0:10:00 Introduction by Fran van Dijk, Chair, The Macaulay Development Trust
0:13:03 44th TB Macaulay Lecture by Prof Johan Rockström, Director, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
1:09:55 Panel Discussion with Prof Sir Ian Boyd, Laura Young, and Prof Johan Rockström
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2VjdyqG-nY
Geoff, I think that Rockström lecture is his best effort yet.
He says he always tries to be positive, and I think he is careful to take account of where people are. So, for example, he does not attack the stupidity of ever thinking 1.5°C. In fact he supports it but only, I think, because it is there in the public mind, and limiting heating to that level is the best we can hope for.
Before and after he nominates 1.0°C as the limit of a planet where a Holocene-like safe operating space may be found. He seems aware of risk, and of uncertainty, but is still able to tell a story that gives a path we could follow.
Any way I’m a fan of the Planetary Boundaries concept. He seems prepared to do the scientific legwork to make it happen.
Often the second author cited is the one who does a lot of the work. I note that in the original planetary boundaries documentation, the late Will Steffen was second author. In Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries by Katherine Richardson et al published in September this year, there he is again.
In my view, the ‘planetary boundaries’ concept should be adopted as the operating framework for all government departments and entities.
On 2 Nov 2023, Oxford Open Climate Change published a peer-reviewed journal article titled Global warming in the pipeline by James E Hansen et. al. It includes:
The UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) published today (Nov 3) the YouTube video titled An Intimate Conversation with Leading Climate Scientists To Discuss New Research on Global Warming, duration 1:12:23. Ahead of the upcoming COP28, renowned climate scientist, Dr. James Hansen, and his co-authors present their novel findings of their new paper Global Warming in the Pipeline. From time interval 0:17:03, James Hansen said:
“The 1.5 degree limit is deader than a doornail, and the 2 degree limit can be rescued only with the help of purposeful actions to effect Earth’s Energy Balance. We will need to cool off Earth to save our coastlines, coastal cities worldwide, and lowlands, while also addressing the other problems caused by global warming.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXDWpBlPCY8
Thanks, Geoff, I’ve been looking forward to the publication of this one.
However, the link does not lead to the actual paper. Have you found it anywhere yet?
Brian: – “However, the link does not lead to the actual paper.”
Interesting. I copied the doi.org link from this:
https://academic.oup.com/oocc/article/3/1/kgad008/7335889
Senate inquiry recommends $55-million investment into managing long-spined sea urchin
Spiny sea urchins are considered a delicacy in some countries.
Quick answer is “You have got to be joking Peter Dutton!!”
The article provides experience based cost and delay data. What isn’t mentioned is “not in my backyard” holdups to approvals.
Geoff, in your first link to the Hansen paper, the link you gave is actually as follows:
a href=”https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgad008
I can see it because of my editing status on the blog. That one doesn’t get the paper.
Clearly Hansen has upset some like Michael Manne and Zeke Hausfather. I’ve long regarded Manne as unreliable, because he believes that hope can only be maintained by concealing the truth. This has led him into concealing the truth from himself.
I’ve also been cautious about Zeke Hausfather.
Instead of reminding Hansen of his misjudgements in the past they would do well to recall the accuracy of his prognostications. To attack him on his reputation was a low blow, which he wisely ignores, sticking to the physics, where Hansen is well aware of uncertainties.
They should also understand that Hansen is not the sole author. I have a lot of confidence in Karina von Schuckmann, for example.
On calling 1.5°C dead, Will Steffen did it in 2020, but as an aside in an answer to a question in a Zoom session, not as a finding in a scientific paper. As I recall, Kevin Anderson called 1.5°C absurd in 2016.
I found Hansen’s fingering of West Antarctica and Thwaites Glacier as the most serious tipping point quite chilling. Sea level rise is routinely neglected in planning and discussion generally about the environment.
So far only The Guardian has picked up the paper as far as I can see.
Global heating is accelerating, warns scientist who sounded climate alarm in the 80s
Brian: – “Sea level rise is routinely neglected in planning and discussion generally about the environment.”
There have been two public hearings held on Oct 27 and 30 of an inquiry into the NSW Government’s proposed Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Bill 2023. It seems to me there have been some interesting exchanges at these hearings.
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=3016
Per an except from the UNCORRECTED transcript of the public hearing at the Preston Stanley Room, NSW Parliament House, Sydney, on Monday 30 October 2023 (on page 21):
John Ruddick MLC, is a member of the NSW Parliament Legislative Council, declared elected on 20 Apr 2023, and is the first member of the Liberal Democratic Party to be elected to the NSW Parliament. In 2020, Ruddick started JR Mortgages, a mortgage broker house in Sydney.
Professor Sackett is a physicist, astronomer, and was the Chief Scientist of Australia from November 2008 until March 2011. She was a member of the Scientific Advisory Board
of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, serving a three-year term from 2017-2019. From 2015-2021, she was a Councillor of the Australian Capital Territory Climate Change Council, serving as its Deputy Chair and then Chair. Currently, she is a Distinguished Honorary Professor, Institute for Climate, Energy and Disaster Solutions at the ANU.
Also check out the submissions.
Nature Communications published a paper on 7 Nov 2023 by R Millan et. al. titled Rapid disintegration and weakening of ice shelves in North Greenland. The Abstract includes:
Nature Climate Change published a paper on 23 Oct 2023 by Kaitlin A. Naughten et. al. titled Unavoidable future increase in West Antarctic ice-shelf melting over the twenty-first century. The Abstract includes:
Dr Ella Gilbert talks with Dr Kaitlin Naughten in the Nov 9 YouTube video titled We can’t save the West Antarctic. So what now?, duration 0:14:28.
I note one of the comments (by @mralekito) to the Dr Gilbert video says:
Time to be grownups.
Actions of the sea are generally not covered by insurance. That would include sea level rise.
Ms Kylie MACFARLANE, Chief Operating Officer, Insurance Council of Australia appeared as a witness at the NSW Parliament Portfolio Committee No. 7 – Planning and Environment public hearing on 30 Nov 2023, providing testimony relating to the NSW Government’s proposed Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Bill 2023. On page 35 of the CORRECTED transcript (bold text my emphasis):
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/transcripts/3186/Transcript%20-%20Net%20Zero%20Future%20-%2030%20October%202023%20-%20CORRECTED.pdf
October global surface temperatures are starting to come in from the various agencies. Here’s Copernicus:
Also reports from the UNJ and IEA saying absolutely no new coal and gas. Yet this is from a broker report on Woodside:
(Emphasis added)
And:
Also, the AFR is making clear today that Origin Energy’s new owners (it is under takeover offer by foreign private equity owners) are going to aggressively pursue gas developments. They are major players in Qld’s coal seam gas, and have exploration rights which include the Cooper basin and the Chanel Country.
“No new gas” is an easy slogan, but not easy to deliver for a country which is the third biggest fossil fuel exporter (I think) where major trading partners say they want our stuff so that they can keep the lights on.
Yet we must.
Sorry for my absence. Since last Saturday we have spent seven hours in the RBH emergency system, then a couple of days later over four hours in the Wesley.
There are two health systems in place. At the Royal Brisbane we had egood service, you might say, being attended by an intern doctor on his second day at work.
At the Wesley, a non-profit run by the Uniting Church, we paid a decent sum $270 for walking through the door, plus tests and stuff, but were seen by an experienced physician.
The outcome, ie. the path forward, was substantially different.
BTW we are OK, more or less.
Two months to go, but the call is being made by scientists other than James Hansen:
2023 is “virtually certain” to be the warmest year ever recorded, climate agency says
Michael Manne is still brightsiding, but:
James Hansen’s new comment:
How We Know that Global Warming is Accelerating and that the Goal of the Paris Agreement is Dead (10 November 2023)
Not just 1.5°C:
He does not spell out here what needs to be done, but I think you will find that he believes we need serious consideration of ‘solar radiation management’ plus somehow or other (planting trees won’t do it) drawdown of something like 7 gigatonnes of CO2 per annum.
This communication may have been written by Hansen, but the list of authors includes a number from the Pipeline paper, notably Karina von Schuckmann, who I rate highly.
Interesting read. The human collapse is not just about the climate. To put it simply our current temperature crisis is part of the problem but the advancing human/world crisis is more complex than that .
Radical breakthrough? It looks nothing like a typical “fan on a stick” wind turbine, but this oval track with evenly spaced wing blades could be an enormously disruptive addition to the renewable energy mix, since it slashes the cost of wind power to unprecedented lows.
John, new wind technology sounds good, and adds to the notion that fossil fuels will just run out of steam because they can’t compete with cleaner technology.
The ‘human collapse’ link is also interesting in that Jem Bendell, a well-known doomster, is now telling us how to cope with it.
He’s not the only doomster around, of course. The other day I found 10 Reasons Our Civilization Will Soon Collapse, each reason by itself being enough to provoke collapse.
I also found a couple of Finnish guys, with a bit of help from people who work at very respected outfits, with Proposing a 1.0°C climate target for a safer future who reckoned a safe climate is doable, and should be our aim. They linked to Climate change mitigation easier than suggested by models, which say that the IPCC is always out of date and misleading.
They recognise, however, that if we trigger tipping points, things might get more bumpy.
Another Nick Breeze ClimateGenn YouTube video was published a few hours ago titled Kevin Anderson: Climate Failures and Phantasies | Full episode, duration 0:43:29. In this full ClimateGenn episode host Nick Breeze speaks with Professor Kevin Anderson from the Universities of Manchester and Uppsala about how journalists and experts have failed the public by an over dependence on reductionist thinking, as opposed to systems thinking, much needed to avert disaster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_7Z58eVzk4
Per Prof Eliot Jacobson’s tweet yesterday (Nov 19), on 18 Nov 2023, the Earth System breached the global daily mean 2 m surface air +2.0 °C threshold (relative to the IPCC’s 1850-1900 baseline). This is the first time in the instrumental record.
I’ve been up to my navel in alligators again!
Geoff, one of the scientists not surprised about the elevated temperatures would be James Hansen, of course.
But then I found this one from November 2022 – The world will likely miss 1.5 C. Why isn’t anyone saying so?
Masses of reports hitting the deck in the run up to COP28.
Politico are producing a number of posts.
Climate Home is doing the same.
Leon Simons posted a long tweet yesterday (Nov 23) about smoke from our fires kept Earth cool, potentially for thousands of years.
Highlight tweets by Leon Simons at:
https://twitter.com/LeonSimons8/highlights
I’ve had my leg stuck in a bog for a bit.
Have just opened comments for another 30 days. The blog did not seem to want to follow, must be breaking a universal principle or something.
Here’s Bill McKibben on A Corrupted COP.
Honestly, it looks like game over for a livable planet!
Sorry, John, we tried!
Dr. James Hansen, former Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and Adjunct Professor at Columbia University’s Earth Institute, joined Paul Beckwith in a discussion about his recent work, as shown in the YouTube video titled Dr. James E. Hansen in Conversation with Paul Beckwith, duration 0:43:12. This video was recorded on 13 Nov 2023, and published on 26 Nov 2023.
James Hansen at the beginning of the video says:
“You know, we owe it to young people to explain exactly what the situation is and they need to be involved in the decision-making because it’s – they’re the ones who are inheriting the consequences. They come over decades and even of centuries, but we should be able to understand what they are going to be and make some sensible decisions, because we have to reduce this planetary energy imbalance. It’s never been this large. It’s never been driving the planet at the rate that it is now and it’s going to have consequences on the decadal time scale, which are going to be very large.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTWUJ8Lvl-U
Leon Simons tweeted on Nov 28:
COP28: UAE planned to use climate talks to make oil deals
Probably the best on COP analysis I’ve seen so far. David Spratt and Ian Dunlop in COP-out: Why the petrostate-hosted climate talkfest will fail.
The article has masses of links to research backing up what they say, some to recent reports which have flooded the internet.
The basic thing is that UNFCCC was set up over 30 years ago to avoid dangerous climate change. We have that now. They have failed.
Moreover the approach to risk is negligent beyond comprehension. The default prospect is now for a planet where life as we know it will not be possible in terms of our social, political, economic structures. With tipping points in play, just about anything could happen.
Meanwhile, The Guardian article published less than an hour ago, headlined Net zero by 2050 and interim target of 70% emissions reduction by 2035 passed by NSW parliament, begins with:
On 1 Dec 2023, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists published a piece by David Spratt headlined The stark choice facing climate conference: A livable climate or more oil and gas? It concludes with:
Yara announces world’s first clean ammonia-powered container ship
Good one, John, but apparently limited in range, so not the whole answer.
Geoff, David Spratt certainly gets around. I notice he links to the Club of Rome statement How to make COP fit to deliver real climate action? where inter alia we have this:
The Potsdam Institute have led a new modelling exercise that looks to solve the climate problem quick smart:
Kriegler, E., Strefler, J., Gulde, R. et al. 2023. How to achieve a rapid, fair, and efficient transformation to net zero emissions – Policy findings from the NAVIGATE project.
Their email said:
The Earth System nudged the +2.0 °C global mean daily 2 m surface air temperature again on Dec 3, per a tweet by Prof Eliot Jacobson on Dec 4.
Between 2000 and 2015 it was forecasted the 30-year average ΔT for the +1.5 °C global mean threshold would be reached around 2045. Now the estimate is 2034. And it will come closer fast in the months and years to come. See Leon Simons’ tweet on Dec 5.
Yes, Geoff, there is little doubt something extraordinary is happening. Hansen still seems to have the best handle on what’s going on. The first time we went to + 1.5°C was 17 November. Here’s Hansen et al on 10 November in How We Know that Global Warming is Accelerating and that the Goal of the Paris Agreement is Dead:
(Emphasis added)
From memory, Paul Beckwith is expecting 2023 to come out as +1.54°C.
I don’t like carbon pricing because it is easy to result in unproductive price increases (I prefer offset credit trading.) I might also be convinced that a carbon tax is worth having if the carbon tax income is used to do something worthwhile. For example, use tax income to improve the situation of low income people.
John, James Hansen reckons there should be a carbon tax which is distributed directly to the people.
He also says young people should create their own party, because the two big parties in the US are captured be the fossil fuel industry.
I’m not convinced climate scientists or indeed engineers have the best insights on what to do. Nor do I!
David Spratt has posted his recent salvos at Climate Code Red:
The stark choice facing climate conference: A livable climate or more oil and gas?
COP-out: Why the petrostate-hosted climate talkfest will fail on key emissions-reduction task
Leon Simons tweeted on Dec 12:
David Spratt tweeted this morning (Dec 15):
Brian: Hansen is not necessarily an expert in driving change. Taxes can be a clumsy tool in some cases. The tax may not be enough to drive the desired changes (Pay the tax but no gain) and/or higher than necessary in other cases. (specific cases could be driven with a lower tax. ) Direct action: Ex: Government invests in specific projects or bans new cola fired power.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted Dec 18 (including a graph of global 2m surface temperature anomalies, 1940- 11 Dec 2023):
Also, another tweet from Professor Eliot Jacobson (including graph):
The October data from CERES for EEI is now available, with a new record set for the 36-month running mean, this time at 1.52 W/m², per another tweet by Prof Jacobson.
The Climate Chat Club hosted a live streaming video of an interview with legendary climate scientist James Hansen, with the recording now available in the YouTube video titled Climate Change: What to Know/What to Do with Climate Scientist JAMES HANSEN, published 18 Dec 2023, duration 1:50:45.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ag3UVSrlhE
Sorry I’ve been out of action with diverse emergencies, and now a daughter and family have arrived to brighten up my life!
The Christmas/New Year edition of New Scientist has just arrived.
They saw climate change as the biggest issue of 2023. It does seem that it was something of a tipping point, or marker of what the onset of the Anthropocene is going to mean.
There has been a change in the forecast for El Niño, but I think it has been over-egged a bit in the reportage, such as El Nino appears to be on verge of rapid collapse . The link to the source article they give – ENSO Forecast: December 2023 Quick Look is less dramatic:
For more detail the real source is no doubt NOAA’s ENSO Diagnostic Discussion 14 December 2023 with lots of links to further information.
I’ll be interested in whether James Hansen changes his prognostication for 1.7°C by 2030 and 2°C by about 2039.
Berkeley Earth (BE) published on Dec 19 their November 2023 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It seems BE calculate a 99% chance the full year 2023 will exceed +1.5 °C. There’s also a discussion on the El Niño Outlook.
The latest ERA5 data point for global surface temperatures (Dec 15) was +1.62 °C above the IPCC’s 1850-1900 baseline, per a tweet by Prof Eliot Jacobson.
Planet Earth is now absorbing 2.2 W/m² more heat from the sun than it did in the first decade (i.e. 2000-2009) of this century, per CERES data to Oct 2023. Leon Simons tweeted on Dec 19:
Geoff, Leon Simons could be right. In this graph he’s essentially saying what is central to Hansen’s concern.
Hansen’s latest is now out – Global Warming Acceleration: El Nino Measuring Stick Looks Good
(14 December 2023):
John, Hansen’s value is in telling us how much time we have and how much CO2 we need to take out of the atmosphere etc. He plans to do another paper on this. The IPCC scenarios depend on drawdown being a major factor. I think Hansen is proposing 7 gigatonnes pa, which will only reduced CO2 concentrations be 1 ppm. Planting trees won’t do the job.
The problem here is Hansen is making concessions here to what he sees as feasibility. On that he has no more expertise that the next climate scientist, that is, it’s simply not his field.
He has also been the most consistent in warning about sea level rise, which still does not get enough attention by ‘policy makers’, or environmentalists, greenies and Greens. He plans to have another look at that, but warns that we had several metres within a century during the Eemian, and has consistently said that this century we are going to lose our coastlines.
Copernicus Sentinel-3 proves instrumental in tracking melting land ice, article dated Dec 19.
A heatwave produced extreme low Greenland ice sheet albedo ~14 July, 2023 – see graph:
https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/documents/d/success-stories/heatwave
Brian: – “He has also been the most consistent in warning about sea level rise, which still does not get enough attention by ‘policy makers’, or environmentalists, greenies and Greens.”
I think Prof Jason Box also does an excellent job warning about faster than forecast SLR.
ICYMI/FYI, Prof Jason Box published a YouTube video on 11 Dec 2023 titled Arctic climate insights and low fidelity climate models, duration 0:07:35. On climate models, Prof Box says from time interval 0:03:56:
“We find that increased wildfire area, that is not only a major ecosystem disruptor and source of black carbon soot, but carbon emissions from fire combined with carbon emissions from permafrost degradation together are amplifying global warming. The more global warming, the more Arctic carbon release, and then some more global warming, in a feedback process. Increasing fire and permafrost carbon emissions are not well-captured by climate models that policy relies on as planning tools for the future. The weakness of modelling is not from lack of diligence on the part of science. It’s for reasons like the model resolution tends to be too coarse to resolve the wavy jet stream and stuck jet stream patterns that produce extremes. Furthermore, the global carbon cycle is not well accounted for yet in climate models. And it’s not the model’s fault that not all known amplifying or damping factors are yet accounted. The issue is that in a lot of cases we lack the physics and mathematical expressions to mimic how sensitive nature really is. Consequently, climate and Earth System models offer a mere facsimile of the infinite fidelity of nature. The models lack the sensitivity and detail we see when we venture to the Arctic. With model futured ice loss being reported faster each time the models are upgraded, the implication is that society likely needs to prepare for more sea level rise. Modelling the future is hard, and when we compare how well modelling captures past ice and carbon changes, we get the clear impression that future warming and ice loss can come faster than forecast.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpbpbm_1Qss
Merry Christmas Brian and crew.
Although a don’t comment on here anymore I do drop in from time to time to checkout your offerings, which as always is very comprehensive. Thank you and all the best for 2024.
Ootz
Thankyou, Ootz. Greetings to you also. It appears you have survived Cyclone Jasper.
We’ve had our moments in SEQ, with a tornado ripping through SEQ mainly Gold Coast and hinterland.
Personally I survived three Christmas family events, which, shall we say, required a lot of attention.
Now we have brutal heat, too hot for me to venture outside, so I hope to catch up here a bit.
Will the +2.0 °C daily global 2m surface temperature anomaly be breached again before the end of 2023? Per Prof Eliot Jacobson’s tweet posted today (Dec 31):
And US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted today (Dec 31):
Nate Hagens published a YouTube video on 14 Dec 2023 titled Arthur Berman: “Shale Oil and the Slurping Sound” | The Great Simplification #101, duration 1:30:27. The conversation was recorded on 29 Nov 2023. Art presents recent data on well productivity in US shale plays indicating we are much closer to ‘the slurping sound’.
Show notes, links to the video, transcript, and slides are available at:
https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/101-art-berman
What will 2024 bring us?
Geoff, one big question for me going into 2024, is what Alan Kohler raised in September 2021, when will we hit the panic button on climate change?
At the time I thought it might take the Thwaites Glacier to crash. That is probably still true, but to that we can now add a complete breakdown of AMOC.
Simple bad weather doesn’t seem to count.
However, I took a look at what Art Berman was saying. He reckons we are screwed if we keep burning oil, and are screwed if we can’t keep burning it at the same rate. Renewable, he says, are no substitute.
For now I’ll just say with Pablo Casals:
The situation is hopeless, we must take the next step!
Brian: – “Geoff, one big question for me going into 2024, is what Alan Kohler raised in September 2021, when will we hit the panic button on climate change?”
I’d suggest the usual time to respond to dangerous circumstances is when many people have already died.
Brian: – “Simple bad weather doesn’t seem to count.”
It seems some blame the messenger instead – for example, the BoM for recent predictions of the deadly weather events in Queensland. It seems to me there’s a concerted campaign by the ‘rabid right’ to discredit the BoM as part of their “climate change is a hoax” narrative.
Brian: – “However, I took a look at what Art Berman was saying. He reckons we are screwed if we keep burning oil, and are screwed if we can’t keep burning it at the same rate.”
His career has been in petroleum – that’s what he knows best. I think he makes some compelling evidence-based arguments about the oil supply outlook. I think it’s too late now to avoid some serious societal pain in the not too distant future (i.e. best guess, beginning within this decade).
Art Berman tweeted earlier today (Jan 1):
US ‘conventional’ + offshore oil production are declining. US tight oil (excluding the Permian) has already peaked. The US Permian basin is the only play that’s likely to show any further growth, but the key questions are:
a) For how much longer?
b) How steep will be the decline after the final peak?
Art Berman also tweeted today:
The dutch are finding space for solar panels by using them as a surface for bikeways’
Another option is to put the panels above bikeways to take advantage of unused space and/or provide shelter for cyclists.
Other potential free spaces for solar panels that provide other benefits including reducing the needs for long power lines, protection from weather etc. include:
– Pathway cover
– Walkway cover.
– Carpark coverer
– Continuous car battery charging from side of road.
AND
John, I heard on the radio today that the Dutch are setting up local power systems in crowded cities, because the network is full and can’t take any more!
Geoff, I had the feeling Berman was not tuned in to where renewables are going. Here’s a couple of links in new battery technology:
A Chinese EV company developed a battery with a 1,000km range — and its CEO tested it out on a 14-hour livestream
NASA’s nickel-hydrogen battery technology could displace lithium by 2030
The latter basically does not wear out, and will not burst into flames. Otherwise works well. Seems targetted for large-scale storage. AGL are installing one.
Geoff, I heard today that in the September Libyan flood, 11,300 were dead and 10,100 missing in Derna and an estimated 170 other people killed elsewhere in eastern Libya.
The wet bulb effect is worse than previously thought.
If temperatures work out as Hansen et al think they will in 2024, people will die, Nate Hagen tells us in his particularly frank new year message (from about 2:25).
It is also worth thinking about the use of phase change materials to store energy and/or cold or heat. Ice/liquid water is one example but there are a whole number of phase change materials that make the change at other temperatures.
An article, PHASE CHANGE MATERIALS – BACKGROUND INFORMATION that I wrote some time ago gives some idea of possibilities.
Brian: – “If temperatures work out as Hansen et al think they will in 2024, people will die, Nate Hagen tells us in his particularly frank new year message (from about 2:25).”
Thanks for the ‘heads up’. Nate Hagens mentions an interview with Leon Simons already recorded, that’s due to be published sometime in Jan 2024 – could be worth a look/listen. There’s another ‘Frankly’ scheduled to be published Jan 5 & another on Jan 12 (see comments below the Frankly #51 video).
Meanwhile, revisiting Climate change could take us back 50 million years, dated 12 Dec 2018, included:
In the PNAS paper titled Pliocene and Eocene provide best analogs for near-future climates, published 10 Dec 2018, includes Fig. 1 showing a multi-timescale time series of global mean annual temperatures for the last 65 million years, and recent and projected warming trends out to 2200.
The warnings are there. It seems humanity needs to find out the hard way by direct experience!
John, I had forgotten about phase change materials!
Geoff, interesting article from 2018. Of course James Hansen warned us in 2007 that we had already gone too far when CO2 was 386ppm (from memory). Of course we knew 10 or 15 years earlier than that about the Eemian Interglacial (to be continued!)
ICYMI/FYI, James Hansen and colleagues have recently published 2 more communications:
28 Dec 2023, Good News for Young People About Climate Change and a Thank You
04 Jan 2024, Groundhog Day. Another Gobsmackingly Bananas Month. What’s Up?, beginning with:
It seems there’s another few days wait to get the remaining 3 days of surface temperature data for the full year for 2023. See Prof Eliot Jacobson’s tweet yesterday (Jan 4).
Will the +2.0 °C daily global 2m surface temperature anomaly be breached again before the end of 2023?
Will the +1.5 °C full year average global 2m surface temperature anomaly be breached in 2023?
We’ll see soon…
Thanks, Geoff. There are as lot of graphs on display if you scroll down from the Eliot Jacobson link.
James Hansen’s good news piece is good news. It’s great that the planet is absorbing a slightly higher percentage of human CO2 emissions when we might have expected the reverse.
However, I think this is the graph that Greta Thunberg keeps an eye on. There was not even a pause for COVID.
Bill McKibben, looking for good news to start the year, outlines the enormous growth in battery technology and production in his newsletter Fully Recharged. Eight years ago there was one gigafactory, now there are 240.
Battery production capacity is now ahead of demand.
He rather spoils his positive message by including a later item on the US LNG export boom which is spreading to Mexico, causing environmental concerns.
Energy policy seems to be more about politics than concern for the planet.
Dr Robert Rohde tweeted Jan 6:
James Hansen’s temperature update for 2022 communication was published on 12 Jan 2023, for 2021 on 13 Jan 2022, & for 2020 on 14 Jan 2021. So it would be reasonable to expect his 2023 update to become publicly available late this week.
Meanwhile, global SSTs have exceeded 6σ for the second time in recorded history on 6 Jan 2024, per Prof Eliot Jacobson tweet.
Zeke Hausfather does not give a value for 2023 actual in his predictions graph, where he said their predictions methodology completely broke down for 2023.
However, it looks very close to 1.5°C , and high enough to create terror in the hearts of scientists, but not politicians.
Published earlier today (Jan 9) at The Guardian was a piece by Oliver Milman headlined Global heating will pass 1.5C threshold this year, top ex-Nasa scientist says, included:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted today (Jan 9):
I think James Hansen understands better than most how the moving parts of the Earth System fit together. However, in his recent ‘Pipeline’ paper there were 17 joint authors. They weren’t just along for the ride. Their work actually contributed to the paper.
Moreover, I have seen the 82-page peer review report, where one reviewer was initially completely dismissive. Hansen, who did the writing, was respectful and responsive, achieving a recommendation to publish from all (I think there were three, from memory).
In his January 4 communication with two of his regulars, he says:
We should be able to see where things are heading by about mid-year.
Copernicus seem to be the first out of the gate:
Copernicus: 2023 is the hottest year on record, with global temperatures close to the 1.5°C limit
Among the highlights:
In Australia the climate was remarkably benign, looking at the map.
Art Berman tweeted on Jan 12:
Published on 9 Jan 2024 at The Oil Crash blog was a piece titled Peak Diesel: 2023 Edition. Rafael Fernández Díez’s piece concluded with (translated to English):
I’d suggest fuel efficiency standards are now very likely too little, too late.
Berkeley Earth’s Global Temperature Report for 2023 was published several hours ago. Dr Robert Rodhe tweeted earlier this morning (Jan 13):
And James Hansen has tweeted earlier this morning (Jan 13):
So it appears that
The question is “So what?”
To what extent has this change made tangible changes to:
*The wild environment:
*The agricultural environment?
*The fate of individual species?
*Political stability?
AND???
Are there environments or species that are actually benefitting from the increase in greenhouse gases and/or increases in average world temperatures?
Places where the Davidson’s have lived include:
Melbourne (cold wet to hot dry)
Whyalla (Dry cold to very hot- 47 deg C one day when I was there.)
Newman -middle WA (very dry ranging from cold enough to get frost and temperatures over 40 deg C.
Groote Eylandt (Humid hot most of time. Started sweating in Aug and stop sweating in April.
1.5 deg C is insignificant compared with the range of temperatures the Davidsons have lived in.
I appreciate
Has it co
John, honestly, this is not about your individual experience, although I imagine you may remember how in decades gone by when driving in the country how your windscreen got covered by insect splat, but now is largely clear.
Albert Van Dijk, Professor of Water and Landscape Dynamics in the Fenner School of Environment & Society at Australian National University has noticed changes. See How 2023’s record heat worsened droughts, floods and bushfires around the world .
Then William J Ripple and Christopher Wolf have been doing a ‘state of the climate’ report every year since 2020 to advise humanity on what scientists see happening. The 2023 version has some senior co-authors, including Johan Rockström, joint CEO of the Potsdam Institute, Tim Lenton and Sir David King, along with Leon Simon who also worked with James Hansen in his Pipeline paper. Here’s the link – The 2023 state of the climate report: Entering uncharted territory . Over the four years the perspective has changed from warning of a climate crisis to now seeing an existential crisis upon us. Selected quotes:
And:
As they say, big problems need big solutions. What we don’t need is US oil lobby launches eight-figure ad blitz amid record fossil fuel extraction.
Brian: Some countries, businesses and people will face a massive losses climate action shuts down greenhouse gas emissions. In some cases the smart operators will change to something else that uses their expertise. For example my understanding is that coal design and construction specialists Sedgman have done smart things like divert to other minerals and the sale of expertise that is relevant to businesses that have nothing to do with coal and mineral processing.
The US oil and gas companies running big campaigns against change might be a lot better off seeking alternatives.
Brian: “John, honestly, this is not about your individual experience,” Personal experience is part of of it: How my body coped with high temperatures and/or humidity.
However, it is also about other things that could be done. For example, at Newman people had gardens, fruit trees etc despite temperatures reaching 47 at time. The crucial thing was water supply.
Newman had a dam to recharge the aquifer. Recharge reduces evaporation losses by taking the water out of the dam and putting it in the bellow ground aquafer that we pumped the water needed by the down, mine etc.
Brian: I worked for the Ore Processing Dept at Newman. A lot of the people (including me) working for the dept did at least part of their job working outside during the hottest part of the day. You get used to it.
Nearby Marble Bar has just ended 26 consecutive days over 43 degrees Celsius.
John D: – “A lot of the people (including me) working for the dept did at least part of their job working outside during the hottest part of the day. You get used to it.”
Empirical data indicates you don’t “get used to” 35 °C wet bulb temperatures when exposed for between 15 minutes to 6 hours – you simply die.
Recent empirical data indicates a lower moist heat threshold for where heat stress compensability ceases to exist, taken from laboratory-based measurements in young, healthy adults doing work associated with the minimal activities of daily living.
As heatwaves become more frequent, intense, and longer-lasting due to climate change, the question of breaching thermal limits, not just for us humans, but also for plants and animals we depend upon for food, becomes more pressing.
See the PNAS paper published 9 Oct 2023, by Daniel J. Vecellio et al. titled Greatly enhanced risk to humans as a consequence of empirically determined lower moist heat stress tolerance.
Geoff: I am conscious that a wet bulb temp of 35 deg can be fatal. However, most of the time Newman had very low wet bulb temperatures. The water in shaded gorge pools is uncomfortably cold throughout the year. Groote Eylandt was much cooler than Newman but I believe the wet bulb temperature would have been much higher, (I have no figure.)
In both places the dangers and avoidance of heat exhaustion were part of inductions and safety training.
John D: – “I am conscious that a wet bulb temp of 35 deg can be fatal. However, most of the time Newman had very low wet bulb temperatures.”
Can be fatal? Nope, it’s fatal well within 6 hours of exposure time. Per the Supporting Information for the PNAS paper An adaptability limit to climate change due to heat stress, published 3 May 2010, included these statements:
I’d suggest biologically compromised people are likely to die at lower wet bulb temperature thresholds.
When were you in Newman, John D? Decades (plural) ago? That was then, I’d suggest it’s worse now and will get even hotter. I’d suggest in your current biological condition you would likely be less able to tolerate being in Newman in high summer now.
Fossil lobby claims voters want nuclear. Grid simulation shows it’s the last thing Australia needs
Fossil fuel supporters love using nuclear as a distraction. Can’t think of any examples of coalition candidates lobbying for a nuclear power station in their electorate.
GM: I was in Groote Eylandt from 1972 to 1980 and Newman from 1982 to 1992. After moving to Brisbane I spent time working in the central Qld coalfields with part time work in Whyalla. The site I was working at got up to 47 deg C while I was there.
We have retired to Ballina on the NSW Nth coast. No dramtic heat waves so far.
My experience in Newman was that, at about 43 deg C, it becomes more comfortable to be out of the breeze.
We had elderly friends in Sweden at the time when old people were dying from the heat. We suggested to our friends that they wet their clothes to protect them from the heat. The reply was that they couldn’t do that because their parents had taught them to avoid damp clothes in draughts.
John, in your comment I could not see what your experience of the climate had to do with the news that the 2023 average global surface temperature was around 1.5°C, knowing that you knew about ‘wet bulb’ temperature, because we’ve discussed it before, no doubt more than once.
To put livability in a climate frame, I happened upon and old 2010 post Dangerous global warming is here which summarised a piece by Elizabeth Kolbert, who, inter alia, referred to this study – Global warming: Future temperatures could exceed livable limits, researchers find – which found for the first time that:
95°F equates to 35°C .
Like many forecasts we don’t have to wait for the next century.
Chi Xu et al found Future of the human climate niche (2020) that in the next 50 years:
MAT is ‘mean average temperature’.
This doesn’t mean that they will all die, of course.
Now, in addition to the study quoted by Geoff, we have from Jennifer Vanos et al – A physiological approach for assessing human survivability and liveability to heat in a changing climate:
I think this was the study Sabine Hossenfelder explained very clearly in Climate change to force people indoors earlier than expected.
On a number of occasions weather authorities in the US issued warnings about going outside. US citizens like to make up their own minds. Here are two cases that ended badly.
Man dies in Death Valley as California national park swelters in extreme heat (July 2023)
California family found dead on hike killed by extreme heat, sheriff says (2021)
They were OK until they weren’t.
Tim Lenton et al had another go last year in Quantifying the human cost of global warming:
When I worked in the public service I found staff complained when the temperature went to 28°C or higher, and to 18°C or lower. Lenton and co say:
However, from physiological studies people clearly differ quite a lot.
Where I was in the public service, the temperature of the air conditioning suited engineers walking around in suits rather than office workers at desks.
John, that link on nukes is broken, but I think the LNP favour nukes as a distraction. It’s their latest way of pretending they will do something, when actually they won’t.
Google said the following re Newman temperature ranges: “Newman has a hot desert climate (Köppen climate classification BWh), with very hot summers and mild winters. The temperature reaches or exceeds 38 °C (100 °F) for many days in the summer. On 15 January 1998, the temperature reached an all-time recorded high of 47 °C (117 °F).” Can’t remember work being stopped for temperature reasons but people would slow their pace and drink more water to compensate for heat. For plastic pipe laid on the ground the spec was “able to handle 80deg C.”
All I can say is that human bodies adjust, strategies adjust, population density adjusts and clothing adjusts in response to changing conditions.
John D: – “All I can say is that human bodies adjust, strategies adjust, population density adjusts and clothing adjusts in response to changing conditions.”
Human bodies do not adjust to environmental conditions beyond their biological limits. Population densities then adjust to zero. Clothing won’t be required.
That’s the trajectory the Earth System is heading towards…
Professor Johan Rockström, Director, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said from time interval 0:21:28 (bold text my emphasis):
“So, dear friends, what, what tends to be forgotten is that we’re in the middle of a climate crisis and that the only way to have a safe landing, to hold the 1.5 °Celsius, is a global sustainability transformation. Phasing out coal, oil and gas is actually – and I know this comes across often as a provocative statement – but that’s the easy part of the challenge. That’s the easy part of the challenge. We need to transform the food system, keep nature intact, and scale negative emission technologies in an unprecedented way. All of this has to occur, simultaneously, to have a safe landing. That’s where we are at, and this requires – which I will be kind of arguing in the continued part of this talk – a planetary boundary approach, because we have to have the checks and balances across all the systems of the planet, even if we only care about holding 1.5 °Celsius – one of the nine planetary boundaries. So, that’s where we are. And unfortunately, if you take the latest IPCC and UNFCCC assessment of the journey we’re following, even after the last stock-take on the Nationally Determined Contributions that were performed just before the New York climate week in September this year, we’re following a pathway that takes us to 2.7 °Celsius by the end of this century. And let me just be very clear from the outset, that is, without any hesitation in science, a path to disaster, That’s a path to disaster. We have no evidence, whatsoever, that we can support in a dignified and responsible way, eight, soon to be 9 billion people in the world as we know it, at anything above 2 °Celsius. Actually, we’ve not been at that point for the past 4 million years, at the 2.7 °Celsius level. So this is why we are talking about urgency – that we really need to move this around very fast. Now, is this only me standing here saying this? Well, actually no. The scientific communities now today, are very well, has a very strong consensus here.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2VjdyqG-nY
I mentioned here that Nate Hagens had recorded an interview with Leon Simons. It’s now available at Nate Hagens YouTube channel, published yesterday (Jan 18), duration 1:24:53. Highly recommended, includes links to some informative slides in the notes.
There needs to be more emphasis on the need to reverse population growth.
I’ve been engaged in a couple of missions. Done, for now.
John, you say everything adjusts, but surely it is basic engineering that everything has limits.
You may be interested in this new study by Meg Cox, Loughborough University Global food production at risk as rising temperatures threaten farmers’ physical ability to work.
James Hansen’s Pipeline paper is published on the NASA site where you can link to individual slides, such as Figure 23 which indicates that the GHG forcing of 2022 will take us back 40 million years, when the global temperature was 10°C higher than now, if we keep it up.
That would give us land temperatures where a lot of mammals would struggle.
Geoff, thanks for the Leon Simons link. Have not watched it yet but definitely will.
China’s population shrinks again and could more than halve — here’s what that means
Comments include”
We have based our assumptions on observations of actual total fertility rates in China’s region and their downward trend. In 2022 these rates hit 1.26 in Japan, 1.04 in Singapore, 0.87 in
And
The population shrink will have economic effects that will be damaging if not managed properly. What do you do change the economy to improve lives while driving down emissions and reductions of things like accommodation building, food production and………….?
John, don’t quote me because I don’t have the source. Probably one of the ABC RN programs I listen to when I’m working.
I recently heard that in general terms Chinese men do not treat their women well and domestic violence is a real issue.
Chinese women are increasingly giving that marriage/child-bearing scene a miss, finding more interesting ways of living their lives.
That in undoubtedly a huge oversimplification, but Chinese population trends are going to be a significant factor in the decades ahead.
Extreme weather events are the top risk facing supply chains in 2024, according to an annual outlook report from Everstream Analytics.
Yale Climate Connections highlights a 2023 report by insurance giant Lloyd’s explores the odds of a disruption of the global agricultural and food supply chain, leading to panic buying and price shocks. The report looked at “major,” “severe,” and “extreme” scenarios.
The “major” case would cost the world $3 trillion over a five-year period, with their estimated 2.3% chance of happening per year. Over a 30-year period, those odds grow to about a 50% probability of occurrence, provided the risks aren’t increasing, which they are with increasing Earth System warming.
Meanwhile, Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted Jan 26:
I’d suggest further population growth will be increasingly constrained by emerging and intensifying disruptions to global food & clean water supplies.
Prof Eliot Jacobsen is is a mathematician who comes up with surprising graphs, which appear to reveal the deeper meaning of the trends within the data. His polynomial curve of a 365-day running mean based on monthly temperatures provides strong support for the warming acceleration Hansen et al are pointing to.
I’ve been looking at some YouTubes, frankly tired from the enervating heat we are having. There seem to be a lot on the population issue. I happened on this one by Two Bit da Vinci.
The World Population Crisis NO ONE Sees Coming
I think he is an engineer – talks like a thrashing machine, with irritating interloping ads, and completely ignorant on some dimensions relating to the issue. That is not to say that the information he provides is wrong.
His whole shtick is that fertility is below replacement rates in the majority of countries which is going to create severe problems. Imagine China, for example, with 500 million people, sustaining an aging population and all the infrastructure they have built.
However, he doesn’t appear to be aware of their problem of defending 27,000 km of coastline from sea level rise and the implication of the melting of the Himalayan ice cap.
Brian: – “Prof Eliot Jacobsen is is a mathematician who comes up with surprising graphs, which appear to reveal the deeper meaning of the trends within the data.”
On 29 Jan 2024, Prof Jacobson posted on his blog a piece headlined How Hot is Hell? I Mean Earth? He states:
His analysis indicates in 2024, with the average of the previous 10 years as actually measured, together with the forecast for the next 10 years based on models, the Earth System is at +1.38 °C (relative to the 1850-1900 baseline). This is a much higher estimate than what climate scientists are stating.
His analysis indicates the current decadal average gain is 0.30 °C, rising to 0.35 °C per decade by 2034. The +1.5 °C multi-year threshold is projected to be breached by the end of 2028.
That looks consistent with Table 1 in the 1 Mar 2021 paper by Claudia Tebaldi et al. titled Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6. They use an 11-year running mean.
Geoff, it seems the mainstream IPCC scientists want to be sure before they declare 1.5 °C reached. Their very methodology means that we will be well past 1.5 °C before they can be scientifically sure. However, blind Freddy can see that there is a trend, and increasingly they are waking up to the notion that it is accelerating.
Some should also be paying more attention the the airborne fraction of CO2 emissions, where the upward trend is accelerating and never missed a beat during COVID.
Brian: – “Some should also be paying more attention the the airborne fraction of CO2 emissions…”
Some climate science deniers may ask how can such a small amount of atmospheric CO₂ have such a big influence on planetary heat flows? Leon Simons tweeted on Jan 31:
It was also mentioned in Simons’ discussion with Nate Hagens, around the 29 minute mark.
We can see clouds (that are water droplets or ice crystals at very tiny atmospheric concentrations), and understand intuitively the effects they have on energy flows. We are unable to see in the infrared part of the electromagnetic spectrum, but our instruments show CO₂ has a similar impact on heat flows. A case of trusting our eyes but not the instruments.
My wife and I have been banged up with Covid. Mainly just tired, very tired. We now have antivirals and hope it will settle down soon.
Sabine Hossenfelder has caused a bit of a stir with I wasn’t worried about climate change. Now I am.
ClimateAdam responds in Climate Scientist responds to Sabine Hossenfelder on Climate Sensitivity.
He’s really following the standard IPCC line, which is better explained by Zeke Hausfather and Andrew Dessler in Revisiting the hot model problem. It identifies the dilemma they had and explains that they included models which provided grid patterns to show regional effects:
To me that’s not a scientific reason.
The comments thread is worth reading.
Hausfather and Dressler treat the Hansen Pipeline paper as just another paper on climate sensitivity, although it does appear to give explanations for why 2023 was so startling.
They also think 2023 was well within the range of what models predicted. I think of Gavin Schmidt as knowing as much about models as anyone. So we have How 2023 Broke Our Climate Models with Neil deGrasse Tyson & Gavin Schmidt.
The video is a bit of a riot, but a couple of interesting points came through. From this month NASA is going to launch a satellite to measure aerosols, which Hansen had long called for.
I don’t think that will solve the issue of changes in clouds, however.
Schmidt also agreed that if you take CO2 out of the atmosphere, then a certain amount will out-gas from the ocean, a factor that I don’t think some scientists understand.
All that being said, I don’t think Schmidt spends much time on thinking about mitigation.
Meanwhile, more records are broken…
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted Feb 8:
And also tweeted this:
ICYMI/FYI, Andrew Glikson’s piece headlined Too late? Climate change denial and the rise of fascism, was published Feb 7 at John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations. It concludes with:
Love them both, Geoff, Eliot Jacobsen is eloquent through his graphs, Andrew Glikson does apocalyptic prose on the future of the homo sapiens and the planet like no other.
However, he is not quite up with Hansen’s Pipeline paper which has used the Westerhold (2020) calibration of the Cenozoic temperature graph.
Hansen et al see our 2022 forcing, if continued, as landing us back around 40 million years into the Eocene. That was a time way before before our species started its run.
Brian: – “Hansen et al see our 2022 forcing, if continued, as landing us back around 40 million years into the Eocene. That was a time way before before our species started its run.”
Indeed. The ape-human split was circa 7 million years ago from genetic data, per Skeptical Science. After Mid-Miocene and before Pliocene era.
Thanks Geoff. Meanwhile the Climate Council have a simple explanation for why the weather has gone crazy this summer:
Climate Whiplash: Wild Swings Between Weather Extremes
It has become super-energetic and chaotic, with the drivers getting into a tangle, which makes the past no guide to predicting the future.
We’ve got a series of days coming up when the BOM say we could get 1-4mm. In practice that could mean we get nothing, or we could get 40mm, or whatever.
Anything can happen!
Copernicus is out of the blocks with the January temperature:
….
Brian: – “Anything can happen!”
Indeed. The temperature in the Tasman Sea off Coffs Harbour, on the state’s Mid North Coast, and north is currently 26.5 degrees – two to three degrees above the average for late summer, reports Weatherzone. That’s hot enough to sustain a tropical cyclone.
John D, Population can’t be ignored. It has to be part of the policy solution to our world’s problems .
So says Jenny Stewart, Professor of Public Policy, UNSW Sydney .
Let the women decide, is the message.
We know!
NASA is launching a handy new satellite:
NASA’s new climate satellite will offer ‘an unprecedented view’ of our heating planet
It’s called PACE, which stands for Plankton, Aerosol, Climate, ocean Ecosystem:
Later this year NASA will launch one in collaboration with India called Nisar, which will use radar to measure the effect of rising temperatures on glaciers and other melting icy surfaces.
Bill McKibben at The Crucial Years has a piece Bank of America to World: Just Drown Already: Finance capitalism as a suicide machine.
It seems that the big banks and asset managers like Blackrock are more afraid of Republican politicians than they are of killing the planet, so they are opening their books again to Fossil Fuel companies prepared to do whatever they like.
The piece has about half a dozen more climate stories, ending with the news that Canadian oil sands operators are under-reporting their emissions bu 6,000 per cent!
A bunch of scientists have used climate models and Atlantic Ocean circulation nearing ‘devastating’ tipping point, study finds.
Scientists who prioritise models over paleoscience commonly thought of AMOC tipping as a theoretical possibility, unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future. Now they see us as heading in that direction, and getting close, very close:
On a more positive note, WEF 6 technologies to help the world adapt to climate change.
With great certainty, Big Tech will make heaps of money out of AI and climate change, and the help may come in handy.
More tangibly, Quiggin reckons Labor’s fuel-efficiency standards may settle the ute dispute – but there are still hazards on the road .
The LNP will run a scare campaign based on lies, and I’m sure the crossbench will want to leave an imprint, but it looks like overdue progress.
Here’s an article from The Conversation by René van Westen et al, the authors of the scientific study, about the AMOC likely shutting down:
Atlantic Ocean is headed for a tipping point − once melting glaciers shut down the Gulf Stream, we would see extreme climate change within decades, study shows
It’s a simpler and well-illustrated tale than the previous link.
Stefan Rahmstorf at RealClimate – Stefan Rahmstorf – New study suggests the Atlantic overturning circulation AMOC “is on tipping course”. He rates the authors and the approach they took:
He’s worried, very worried. Among the impacts:
I see you have commented there on the post, GM.
Brian: – “I see you have commented there on the post, GM.”
So far technically responding to someone else’s comments at that blog post:
10 FEB 2024 AT 6:08 PM to Victor;
11 FEB 2024 AT 2:39 AM to Max Hartmann;
11 FEB 2024 AT 6:23 PM to Victor.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Feb 12:
Leon Simons tweeted Feb 11:
I note that Climate Reanalyzer have increased the Y-axis on their SST graph.
Chris Martenson at Peak Prosperity published on 7 Feb 2024 a podcast of a discussion with Adam Rozencwajg, CFA, Managing Partner at Goehring & Rozencwajg (G&R).
G&R projects that the one final and last mega oil basin in the US – the Permian – is set to hit peak output in 2025. And if it does, it could set off alarm bells within the US and across the world, resulting in vastly higher oil prices.
And yet Adam Rozencwajg says from time interval 0:19:52:
“Now, of course, if we compare the world today, compared to the world of Malthus, things are infinitely better than they were. The same is true of the Club of Rome in the 1970s, that had a very strong Malthusian streak to them. And so, I think you do have to be really careful, because I, I think our brightest days lie ahead. I think that, um, we have an unbelievable amount of prosperity in growth. I think probably it’s mostly going to come from nuclear power…”
I don’t think Adam Rozencwajg understands the key premise in the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, and the very limited time constraints imposed by the escalating climate crisis.
On the solution front, Redflow gets green light to supply 15MWh battery for California microgrid. Flow batteries have the attraction of being able to store a lot of power from low output sources using relatively low cost materials compared with lithium.
28-ton, 1.2-megawatt tidal kite is now exporting power to the grid
Minesto’s fully operational Dragon 12 looks like some sort of futuristic military drone – but it behaves remarkably like a kite underwater. It uses lift generated by tidal flows to fly patterns faster than the currents, harvesting renewable energy.
Senator Larissa Waters tweeted on Feb 12 (including a video segment of proceedings at Senate Estimates):
David Spratt tweeted on Feb 12:
John, yes, I understand flow batteries have advantages for grid-scale operations.
Geoff, Spratt and Dunlop have started the year well, and have just published three searing posts.
Humanity’s new era of “global boiling”: Climate’s 2023 annus horribilis
Towards an unliveable planet: Climate’s 2023 annus horribilis
Shock as warming accelerates, 1.5°C is breached faster than forecast
Let’s say that their view of the Government’s appreciation of the state we are in is less than flattering.
The public servants under questioning in the Senate seemed careful to follow the official script – net zero by 2050 and 1.5°C will be sweet.
John D, Martyn Goddard has a long and informative post on Defusing the population bomb.
Phosphorus and Africa are big problems. He ends with:
Doesn’t get us all that far.
I may have missed it, but Johan Rockström in talking about planetary boundaries has been saying that we may need to set aside 50% or more of land, including arable land, for ‘nature’ to survive, including in continuous north-south strips to provide the capacity for species to migrate. Goddard is more focussed on food.
Brian: – “The public servants under questioning in the Senate seemed careful to follow the official script – net zero by 2050 and 1.5°C will be sweet.”
It seems to me they are willfully blind to reality.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Feb 18:
As Hansen stated in a communication on 4 Jan 2024:
Advanced geothermal drilling is 70% faster and 50% cheaper than 2022!
In a publication announced at the Stanford Geothermal Workshop this week, Fervo said it has been able to drill a horizontal well in just 21 days. That’s a 70% reduction in drilling time over its first horizontal well, which was drilled in Nevada in 2022 as part of a Google-backed effort known as Project Red. The company says this reduction in time has led to an additional reduction of costs, with the latest well coming in at US$4.8 million, down from $9.4 million.
John, interesting to see they are doing hot rocks in the USA. And I’m sure Santos and others are relishing improved drilling technology.
Geoff, I saw the Jacobsen Tweet and now followed his graph back to the source at Tamino’s Adjusted Global Temperature Data.
The methodology he used was developed with Stefan Rahmstorf in a peer-reviewed paper back in 2011. It takes out the non-human influences such as aerosols from volcanoes, ENSO and solar radiation variation.
The best graph is the last one, which you can see in detail in this link.
For Tamino this exercise confirms that global warming is accelerating. To me it also shows that there was warming in the 1950-1970 decades, which are usually shown flat.
Kiwi blogger, presumably mathematically competent, takes this further to reveal the underlying trend in a post The underlying global warming signal. His conclusion:
That’s all fine and good, but Hansen et al are dealing with the world as it is, not with bits taken out. It will probably take something like Thwaites Glacier crashing before, as Alan Kohler says, everyone starts to panic.
Brian: – “For Tamino this exercise confirms that global warming is accelerating. To me it also shows that there was warming in the 1950-1970 decades, which are usually shown flat.”
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Feb 21:
I’d suggest this is another graph that shows global warming is accelerating.
A burst of optimism?: Staggering’ rise of rooftop solar to put all other power generation in the shade, report finds
On a related topic:
Massive geothermal potential found offshore, where the Earth splits
Worth a read. Could be a source of cheap, abundant energy.
John, if we are going nuts over rooftop solar we are going to need batteries.
Seems Qld is the latest candidate to become a clean energy superpower:
$570m battery deal pushes Queensland closer to goal as renewables superpower
The Nationals have turned against wind and solar in the bush, suggesting that the latter should be restricted to roof tops in the city.
I must confess that I have been uncomfortable about seeing large installations of solar panels spreading over flat farmland.
Then I heard the story of a NSW grazier near Wellington talking with Andy Park on ABC RN:
Do sheep and solar mix?
The answer is, yes, very well, to the advantage of all. The solar operators have reduced mowing to twice pa instead of the planned six times.
Water penetration is better when it rains, the grass grows more consistently, the sheep have plenty of access to shade. The farmer is setting up an experiment, measuring the effect of the productivity of paddocks next to each other, with and without solar panels. He had many years of experience in the industry and reckons the solar panel wool clip is 20 to 30% “better” with gains in weight of wool harvested, and also in quality.
Maybe the likes of Littleproud and Joyce should get around a bit and talk to people.
Coal mine climate change case challenges the government’s use of ‘drug dealer’s defence’ on emissions
Arguments used in the past re coal mine approvals are passing their use by date.
A nanoporous material that holds hydrogen at twice the density of cryogenic liquid H2 could address the challenges of large-scale liquid and gas storage that have held this clean fuel back.
Blast from my past.
South Australian government signs hydrogen deal with Whyalla steelworks
Sounds like serious negotiations are starting.
(I have spent time working on direct reduction of iron ore and also spent quite some time working at Whyalla.)
Brian: – “Maybe the likes of Littleproud and Joyce should get around a bit and talk to people.”
I don’t think they care about their constituents’ longer-term wellbeing. I’d suggest it’s all about delaying the transition to renewables to protect their fossil fuel donors.
ICYMI/FYI, Dr Andrew Forrest said at yesterday’s (Feb 26) Australian Press Club Address (from time interval 0:31:00):
“On misinformation, let me directly address nuclear energy. I’m agnostic, but I’ve done the numbers, unlike many of the fear-spreading politicians. Who’s going to pay the nuclear electricity bill, when it’s four to five times more expensive than the renewables next door? Even ignoring the decade or two plus it takes to develop nuclear. And how hopeless is it that politicians say that they want to wait for new technology in twenty years time, that may never happen? It’s just an excuse for doing nothing. This is a straight admission that fossil fuels have to go, but their solutions risk leaving us destitute. With wind and solar, you are up-and-running, lowering energy costs, and eliminating pollution within one to three years. We’re doing it today; we’re proof. Small and declining amounts of natural gas, sourced from existing, not new, developments can act as firming power as Australia massively ramps-up green hydrogen. But as soon as there’s replacement we must go for it, because it’s not gas in the long term.“
Why is Dr Andrew Forrest doing the job Australian journalists should be doing about calling out the Coalition selling false hope with nuclear power ‘bulldust’?
Meanwhile, Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Feb 27:
Geoff: Never heard a pollie suggesting nuclear in their electorate. I wouldn’t rule nuclear out but we should not be slowing climate action while we wait for progress to be made on nuclear options.
Just Have a Think has just had a look at small nukes:
Small Modular Nuclear Reactors. The Verdict
Just not going to happen. You’d need economies of scale that no company or country will be able to achieve. And there are problems to solve.
Meanwhile we have stuff that works, and by the time anyone got their act together on nukes, they would still be expensive and actually not needed.
For the LNP it’s a very obvious way of putting the mockers on renewable energy development and perpetuating fossil fuels.
Brian: – “For the LNP it’s a very obvious way of putting the mockers on renewable energy development and perpetuating fossil fuels.”
And Labor continues to encourage and approve more fossil fuel projects, and it seems they are looking after their political donors, instead of looking after the long-term interests of Australians.
Adam Bandt MP was addressing this issue recently in the YouTube video titled Labor is addicted to more coal and gas, published 23 Feb 2024, duration 0:08:20. He began with:
“Coal and gas is leading the cause of the climate crisis. And Labor is addicted to more coal and gas. Last year, Labor approved five new coal and gas projects. There’s 92 coal and gas projects in the pipeline, and today, the start of 2024, Labor in Queensland just approved the country’s biggest new ‘greenfield’ coal mine. After the cyclones, and the fires, and the floods in Queensland, they’re approving new, huge coal mines that will last for ages. Labor’s kidding themselves. We can’t have a safe future if we keep opening new coal and gas mines. Labor’s far more concerned with what the coal and gas corporations want than what will keep people safe. The corporations are making billions of dollars in revenue, and many of them aren’t even paying a single cent in tax. So you have to wonder how they’re getting away with it. Well, last week we discovered how – $863,000! That’s how much money Labor took from the coal and gas corporations, and their lobby groups, in their first full year of office alone. Santos, Woodside, and the Minerals Council of Australia all coughed up big. So, what did it get them in return?”
Meanwhile, today (Feb 28) the Climate Council has published their interactive Heat Map of Australia that shows how cutting climate pollution will limit extreme heat in our neighbourhoods.
Geoff, since becoming active within the ALP when Morrison was elected I’ve only met one member who advocated supporting coal and gas. His only reason was that in Qld people in the regions won’t vote for you unless you support fossil fuels.
The vast majority would like to see the end of coal and gas ASAP.
Hard to negotiate with people who yell at you. I’ll say more tomorrow, but Madeleine King as Resources Minister is often fingered by the press, and has been known to say the she supports all mining, including coal and gas.
At this point I’ll just say that her ministerial statements are mostly about other things, but she did do a trip to Japan and Korea to assure them that we are not going to cut them off:
And so on. We can’t realistically tell the Japanese and the Koreans that they can’t keep their lights on while we continue to burn gas and coal to keep ours on.
Moreover, you will find, I think, that Korean and Japanese companies are involved in doing the mining here in Oz. When you give an exploration licence you can’t then tell them they can’t make a Final Investment Decision after they have spent significant money getting the project that far.
However, the time has come when there must be a reconsideration. I just wish the Greens would go the whole way and face up to what is required for a safe climate. Larissa Waters implied, indeed said, that if we adopt the Greens climate trigger bill then we’ll all be climate safe.
I’ll try to give the link tomorrow.
Plus Chris Bowen reckons that 80% of our trading partners have a net zero by 2050 target. Of course that is hopelessly inadequate, which I suspect he personally knows.
Brian: – “We can’t realistically tell the Japanese and the Koreans that they can’t keep their lights on while we continue to burn gas and coal to keep ours on.”
Australia will be burning less and less coal/gas.
In the latest RenewEconomy Energy Insiders Podcast, energy analyst David Leitch said from time interval 0:39:29
“As soon as we start getting some more solar and wind supply, and I want to, you know, there are 7 gigawatts of utility wind and solar under construction right now, and that will take us over 50 per cent renewables. It’s absolutely certain within two years, ah, of today, and probably sooner, ah, depending on how quickly its commissioned. And there’s 5 gigawatts of batteries, ah, being built right now, 5 gigawatts; I don’t have the duration number in front of me, and that’s all going to compete, ah, in the price, ah, for those evening price peaks, so I think there’s a lot of signs that both volume and price are going to be coming down within a couple of years, and we saw that the futures market is showing some of indications of that already.”
Brian: – “When you give an exploration licence you can’t then tell them they can’t make a Final Investment Decision after they have spent significant money getting the project that far.”
Tough! More fossil fuel projects are civilisation suicide! What’s more important: protecting the fossil fuel industry; or protecting our civilisation and maintaining a habitable planet?
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted Mar 1:
And also this:
Has global ‘peak oil’ passed?
World crude and condensate production remains 2.7 Mb/d less than in November 2018.
It’s looking a bit like it.
WRT the other matter (ending coal and gas) I’ll have to leave it tonight, but the situation is worse, way worse than I thought!
My problem with dealing with the future of coal and gas here on this blog is that I don’t have time to write a full post on it, not sure one would be enough.
I was interested in where the Johan Rockström quote came from. It’s clearly a comment he repeats in his many lectures, interviews and presentations.
Had a bit of a look, and came up with the most coherent expression of his views I have yet seen:
Prof. Dr. Johan Rockström: A safe and just Future for Humanity on Earth
It’s a comprehensive account which takes into account the paleo history of the earth system, highlights our particular dilemma at present and then details what we need to do, including adopting a stewardship approach to our planetary home so that we can have “prosperity and equity within a stable and resilient planet”.
The comment re 2.7°C relates to COP 28 which was supposed to include a stocktake of where the climate mitigation of intentions of countries were added up to show we we are heading if we do what we say, which we are not.
With respect to a possible climate trigger I’m keen that Australia should adopt the planetary boundaries concept. It seems obvious and logical that we conduct our human activities in such a way to not just fit in with our planetary home, but act as stewards. As he says, the Anthropocene needs to be Holocene-like.
Last year the ALP national conference set up the policy platform for the next electoral cycle. This was inserted into the economics chapter:
It fits with Rockström’s notion of “prosperity and equity within a stable and resilient planet”.
We need to establish a planetary limits policy commitment which runs across all areas of government, all ministries, all departments, and permeating all the institutional entities we use to regulate activity (ASIC, ACCC etc).
The revision of the environment act is currently being considered. I’m not fully informed of what is happening, but everyone needs to read two articles in the Saturday Paper, one this weekend and one a week ago.
The most recent is Mike Seccombe – Who sets Australia’s fossil fuels policy?
A week ago we had Royce Kurmelovs – Madeleine King set to take offshore gas approval power from Tanya Plibersek
Probably paywalled. I have to go but here’s and extended quote from the beginning of the Seccombe paper:
I knew what the Japanese attitude was, but am surprised at how explicit and ‘in your face’ they are talking. What Inpex says is being supported by their government diplomatically.
In the Kurmelovs paper Santos is making direct demands that they effectively should not have to run the gamut of environmental and First Nations views which seem to be regarded as vexatious and trivial. Nor do they want the inconvenience of court cases – just a sign-off by the resources minister, who, we are told, is not a climate denier, but very supportive of the coal and gas industries.
I’d like everyone to take a good look at Rockström’s planetary boundaries framework, have a think about their grandkids then sit down and talk like adults instead of yelling at people with simplistic notions.
Just finally Tony Wood, who I rate, on The great gas conundrum.
Gas needs to be phased out, but it won’t be easy.
I also tend to listen to AEMO who have the responsibility of telling everyone what we need to do to keep the lights on. Other expert commenters tend to have some ideology in their perceptions.
Eliot Jacobsen has global surface temperature for February.
He is asked, “When you see this graph, what are you dreading?”
Answer, “The collapse of global industrial civilization and the 6th great extinction.”
He also gives a linear trendline of temperature:
Researchers found 37 mine sites in Australia that could be converted into renewable energy storage. So what are we waiting for?
Some are places I have known and worked at.
Pumped hydro makes sense in some locations, preferably close to existing power distribution systems or close to places with high power needs.
Two killed in NSW house blaze believed to be state’s first recorded lithium-ion battery-related deaths, Fire and Rescue NSW says
What can be done to protect from this hazard?
On batteries, important information, but what about this:
I don’t have any technical quals, but would ask, are there standards that could be applied by law?
I have two Stihl batteries that I use on gardening equipment. The handbook said a bit of water splashing around is not a problem, which is just as well, because in our climate, and given the quality of hose fittings, water is hard to avoid.
I’m hoping that Stihl’s battery management technology and battery construction is good enough to keep me out of trouble.
On pumped hydro, I wonder whether Snowy 2.0 has inhibited private investment in smaller schemes.
The Daily SST World (60°S-60°N) set another record on Mar 5, at 21.19 °C. It looks like Climate Reanalyzer will need a bigger Y-axis very soon for its SST graph.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Mar 7:
Copernicus: February 2024 was globally the warmest on record – Global Sea Surface Temperatures at record high, dated 5 Mar 2024. Summary includes:
Not good news, Geoff. In Australia the temperature has been relatively benign overall. The map shows NE America and Europe are cooking. Obviously not good for skiing.
This report is two weeks old, but James Cook University advises First reports of severe coral bleaching this summer as the Great Barrier Reef warms up. They found this in normal reef monitoring, so there are parts of the reef they have not looked at for a while.
Global sea surface temperature is literally off the chart.
Prof Jacobsen is asked, “So my question is are we past the point of no return where even if we all just stopped it would still be too hot?”
His answer, “Yes.”
Graham Readfearn – Fifth mass coral bleaching event in eight years hits Great Barrier Reef, marine park authority confirms
Looks as though the whole reef is affected this time.
We’ve had reports on the radio all day, like this one:
Mass coral bleaching event hits Great Barrier Reef
Richard Leck, WWF’s Head of Oceans and Sustainable Development reckons we need 90% emissions reductions by 2035.
Actually we need 100% reductions tomorrow, and more, if we actually want to save the reef. These experts always avoid the stark reality that overwhelmingly the odds are that the Reef will be cooked over the next few decades.
David Spratt took a look two years ago, and found the GBR, and coral reefs generally, to be in a death spiral.
He says that Charlie Veron told the Royal Society in London in 2009 that “The safe level of atmospheric CO2 for coral reefs is ~320 ppm.”
Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg’s interview with Robyn Williams last July is worth a listen:
The global fight to protect our reefs
He’s working with seven individual reefs, each in a different country (none in Oz) with the best resilience he can find on the planet to maximize their chances.
He says that 10 years between bleaching events is not enough – you need 50 years to regain full complexity of species.
At the end of the interview he says that the technology now exists to save the reefs, but the interview was winding up, so we are left wondering.
Brian: – “Looks as though the whole reef is affected this time.”
Is it any wonder? The global daily mean SST was at 21.21 °C on Mar 7 – another record.
Closer to home, the water temperature off the coast of Sydney reached a new all-time high of 26.75 degrees Celsius — 3C above average, on Friday (Mar 8).
Sea surface temperatures exceeding 26.5 °C to a depth of about 60 m are sufficient to sustain tropical cyclones.
I don’t know who Uncle Stabby is, but he raised the issue of ocean acidification:
He links to this graph.
Seems he’s roughly right, except the forecast is for the second half of this century. Dr Katharina Fabricius warned about this in 2008. It’s a log scale:
Calcifying organisms make up more than a third of all sea life. Corals go at 7.9. At 7.8 it’s goodnight nurse. Can humans live if plankton goes?
Fabricius et al have another go in 2020 with Progressive seawater acidification on the Great Barrier Reef continental shelf. I made more sense of the Conclusions than the Abstract. We approach the tipping point, but the point is the acidification is happening now, with negative effects now.
The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority has a great information site which addresses the many threats to the Reef and corals generally.
Matthew England et al – Abyssal ocean overturning slowdown and warming driven by Antarctic meltwater
This is what he says on Twitter (X):
On daily sea surface temperatures in the Antarctic, he said this:
Mass extinction: our fossil study reveals which types of species are most at risk from climate change
It was concluded that :
John, interesting study, but in some ways a bit strange.
I find this hard to believe:
Then:
Who would have thought!!
However, it doesn’t really explain why we had such a real-time mass extinction event with only 1°C change.
Maybe rate of change has something to do with it!
World’s largest tidal barrage energy project proposed in the UK
Test Post.
Did this work Brian?
Yes John, it did!
Here’s a concise and comprehensive essay on the messaging from mainstream climate science, titled Mainstream Climate Science: The New Denialism? by Jonathon Porritt posted 7 Mar 2024.
It seems the Jonathon Porritt post has become unavailable since late yesterday morning: “509 Bandwidth Limit Exceeded”. Climate Code Red has extensively quoted Porritt’s musings in the 9 Mar 2024 piece by David Spratt in Is scientific reticence the new climate denialism?
The latest research shows that Greenland’s glaciers are shrinking at seven times the rate of just a few years ago, an average of 30 million tonnes an hour. In the YouTube video titled Greenland: Ice Loss Accelerating, published 8 Mar 2024, duration 0:25:33, Peter Wadhams, Emeritus Professor of Ocean Physics at Cambridge University and Climate Scientist, Paul Beckwith describe what is happening on this sensitive continent.
Thanks for that, Geoff. I thought the ‘Bandwidth’ notice referred to my computer.
I did see David Spratt’s piece. He’s really blown a fuse.
I also saw the Beckwith/Wadhams piece.
Both the above are quite shocking. NW Greenland in a muddy mess. I think Jason Box works on SW Greenland where he’s wading around in pools of trapped methane. Beckwith, whose understanding of the science I respect, says he thinks sea level rise this century may exceed 5m.
Leon Simons’ Tweet on solar radiation absorption is one of the more important graphs we’ve seen lately.
The secret to saving our reefs may lie in the sea cucumber.
I wonder to what extent sea cucumbers might help coral survive in warmer waters.
Brian: – “Beckwith, whose understanding of the science I respect, says he thinks sea level rise this century may exceed 5m.”
In the YouTube video titled Greenland: Ice Loss Accelerating, published 8 Mar 2024, duration 0:25:33, Peter Wadhams, Emeritus Professor of Ocean Physics at Cambridge University and Climate Scientist, Paul Beckwith describe what is happening on this sensitive continent. The latest research shows that Greenland’s glaciers are shrinking at seven times the rate of just a few years ago, an average of 30 million tonnes an hour. Paul Beckwith says from time interval 0:03:58:
“We have very good data on measuring the mass of both Greenland and Antarctica; [from] the gravity anomaly satellites ah, flying in tandem, and we’ve seen melt rates at least doubling every, what, seven to ten years typically, both for Greenland and also for Antarctica. And, ah, we’re still focussed mostly on the Northern Hemisphere, but with all that missing Antarctic sea ice and warming water, people are very concerned also with the Antarctic ah, glacier melt, and they’re tied together because if melt rates greatly increase at one pole, you know, the rising sea level can lift up floating ice shelves and, and cause accelerated melting at the other pole. So, there’s a connection, of course, between them. People are going to be very surprised, I think, at the, at the accelerated growth of sea level rise, in the next ah, you know, decade, decade or two, let alone…”
With Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet melt rates apparently doubling “seven to ten years … typically”, then that suggests the current sea level rise (SLR) rate of 4.5 mm per year observed over the period 2013–2021 is likely to accelerate. I did a calculation for the rate of SLR for 7- & 10-year doubling rates with a starting point of 4.5 mm/y in 2024:
Year _ _ _ _ 7-year _ _ 10-year
2024 _ _ _ 4.5 mm/y _ 4.5 mm/y
2025 _ _ _ _ 5.0 _ _ _ _ _ 4.8
2030 _ _ _ _ 8.2 _ _ _ _ _ 6.8
2035 _ _ _ 13.4 _ _ _ _ _ 9.6
2040 _ _ _ 21.9 _ _ _ _ 13.6
2045 _ _ _ 36.0 _ _ _ _ 19.3
2050 _ _ _ 59.1 _ _ _ _ 27.3
That suggests the global mean SL, relative to today’s (year-2024) levels, could perhaps be of the order of:
• 39.2 to 43.2 mm higher by 2030;
• 141 to 189.5 mm higher by 2040; and
• 344.7 to 583.3 mm higher by 2050.
The 7-year doubling rate model suggests by the late-2060s we may perhaps be seeing SRL rates of the order of a metre/decade. So more than 5 m SLR by 2050 is possible.
NOAA’s Feb 2022 report on SLR projects between 0.15 to 0.43 m by 2050, relative to a year-2000 baseline (see Table 2.3).
Are governments planning for this magnitude of SLR rate?
CORRECTION:
“So more than 5 m SLR by 2050 is possible.”
should be:
So more than 5 m SLR by 2100 is possible.
Jonathon Porritt’s post Mainstream Climate Science: the New Denialism is now available. It’s definitely worth a read all the way through.
I have a few queries/gripes.
First he mentions climate action “in timeframes still available to us”. I’d query whether we have any in terms of avoiding a climate catastrophe.
Second, he rightly identifies the trend with tipping points becoming a concern at increasingly lower temperatures, “now a concern at 1.5°C. There is too much focus on the midpoints of tipping points. In terms of risk we should avoid them altogether, which means gunning for a safe climate below 0.5°C of warming.
Third he identifies deglaciation in therms of ice shelves rather than glaciers. Recently there has been concern for the Wilkes Basin in East Antarctica.
Finally, no mention of ocean acidification. This one has actually shocked me in looking into the latest coral bleaching event.
It is said the acid levels have dropped from about 8.1 to about 8.0, I think about 26% as it’s on a log scale.
Reef development is said to cease at 7.8, which could happen this century.
The question is How much oxygen comes from the ocean? and can humans survive if phytoplankton don’t?
I’m not a scientist. I’d like to know!
John, I think coral reefs are going to need all the help they can get. Our default expectation should be that we won’t have any large-scale reefs in a few decades time. UNESCO are going to show up again this year to see whether the GBR is endangered. Can we seriously argue that it is not?
Geoff, thanks for the maths.
Not that I’ve heard, apart from a few like The Netherlands and Singapore. SLR keeps chewing away at the USA. Here’s a few links:
32 U.S. cities, including New York and San Francisco, are sinking into the ocean and face major flood risks by 2050, new study reveals
Leonard O. Ohenhen et al – Disappearing cities on US coasts
Swept away: $500,000 sand dune built to protect US homes disappears in days
Petermann Glacier melting has tripled due to warm ocean water
Fires Imperil the Future of the Amazon Rainforest
The article says more about this growing crisis.
Looks crook!
And:
Whoever thought 1.5°C was any kind of a guardrail, or indeed a point where the climate could be stabilised.
This article From Talk to Action: Rethinking the Language of Climate Change is about a new megastudy looking at what motivates climate action in 63 countries.
The bottom line according to one author, Kimberly C. Doell:
It depends on all manner of things, which I’m sure marketers could tell us much about.
It seems people in Chile and China believe the science, others not so much.
I learnt this, which did not surprise:
And:
I’ve often thought there is no such thing as fresh air any more. Perhaps the survivors of global heating will have to wear the kind of gear worn by divers.
There I am, becoming dystopic again, rather than telling stories full of hope!
Red alert’ after key global warming records were smashed in 2023
Go to the link for more bad news.
Thanks, John, that was the New Scientist report, usually pay-walled. One of my obsessions is SLR:
And:
What chance the Great Barrier Reef?
The report, not linked by NS is the WMO State of the Global Climate in 2023
Their press release Climate change indicators reached record levels in 2023: WMO is quite long, and acts as an executive summary.
Figure 3 of the report shows that the climate in Australia was relatively benign. A lot of cold water seems to be shedding from Antarctica. Figure 15 actually shows Antarctica’s mass balance increasing, due to increased snow falls in the last 18 months.
All in all the place is falling apart. The usual summation is given: the cost of action is high, but less than the cost of inaction. And we need to transform the finance system to spread it around. They link to the November 2023 report Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2023 where we are told that climate finance was only USD 1.3 trillion in 2021/2022, about 1% of world GDP. We need to crank that up to over $10 trillion each year from 2031.
If we don’t we’ll all be rooned!
Brian: – “One of my obsessions is SLR:”
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3761–3812, 2016, James Hansen et al., Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2°C global warming could be dangerous, included (on page 3766):
The current rate of CO₂ and temperature change is almost unprecedented in the entire 4.5-billion-year geological past, per the late Will Steffen.
And the Earth Energy Imbalance has more than doubled since year 2000.
I’d suggest SLR will be relentless for centuries, regardless of how quickly we/humanity reduce our GHG emissions.
I think 5 m SLR by 2100 is quite possible – somewhere around the 10-year doubling rate curve seems to me to be the most likely scenario.
The 10-year doubling curve exceeds 1 m SLR around 2064 and 2 m around 2074.
Are any jurisdictions planning for this order of magnitude of SLR?
Winged cargo ship saves three tonnes of fuel per day on first voyage
Combine that with clean ammonia drive for even greater savings
ICYMI/FYI, Berkeley Earth published on 20 Mar 2024 its February 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde.
Estimated Probability of 2024 Annual Average final rankings:
• 1st – 62%
• 2nd – 37%
• 3rd or lower – 1%
BE currently considers there to be a 75% chance that 2024 will have an annual-average temperature anomaly more than 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) above our 1850-1900 average.
Geoff, the Atlantic surface temperature for February and the global ocean surface temperate between 60º South and 60º North seem to show a clean break from the past.
I haven’t checked but I think forecast from Berkeley Earth for 2024 has increased from their first effort after 2023 temperatures became known. To me Zeke Hausfather seems to play too much finality to what the models tell him, and wants to choose which models matter.
I don’t trust the way he went from being totally “gobsmacked” last September to his current position of “there is nothing to see” and James Hansen might be right, but it’s just another paper and he’s probably wrong – any way it doesn’t matter.
If people want to start down that track, I’d suggest the following:
Sabine Hossenfelder – I wasn’t worried about climate change. Now I am.
Climate Scientist responds to Sabine Hossenfelder on Climate Sensitivity
Hausfather and Dessler – Revisiting the hot model problem
How 2023 Broke Our Climate Models with Neil deGrasse Tyson & Gavin Schmidt
I’m with Hossenfelder!
Gavin Schmidt, who seems to me a candidate for being the planet’s top modeller, said in the fourth link that the models were a “total failure” in forecasting 2023. He identifies clouds and aerosols as areas we don’t know enough about. Hansen, using the work of Leon Simons and others, has given it his best shot. Hansen also has Karina Von Schuckmann
One thing that commends Hansen’s work to me is that he sees climate in the context of the Cainozoic, the last 65 million years. Will Steffen always said that what we are doing now is equivalent to the asteroid strike in terms of force, but in the other direction, that is about 8°C. And you can bet that people like the guy in the second link have not read the Pipeline paper with care. One of the factors Hansen gives is that other research has now shown that warming from the last glacial maximum to the Holocene was actually 7°C, not 6°C.
I don’t go with Gaven Schmidt when he says if we stop emitting then the planet will stop warming. He can’t be sure of that!
I’ve just posted a notice that the blog will be upgraded by our American host next Thursday 28 at 3pm our (Eastern Standard Time) or an hour later if you are south of the Queensland border and suffering daylight saving.
I’ve extended comments on this thread so we should have a year to May 30. Much of the discussion on this thread has been pertinent to this thread, which included an item on Hansen’s new Pipeline paper, which was then under review.
Here’s more on accelerated warming and the utility of models:
FT Editorial – The world is warming faster than scientists expected
A quality piece, with lots of links. Following some of them I found:
Audrey Minière with Karina von Schuckmann et al – Robust acceleration of Earth system heating observed over the past six decades
Finally:
Gavin Schmidt – Climate models can’t explain 2023’s huge heat anomaly — we could be in uncharted territory
Schmidt says:
(Emphasis added)
Schmidt, I think, deliberately avoids talking about his former boss, James Hansen; probably does not want to get involved in the sh*tfights that follow Hansen around. However, Schmidt worked on modelling at NASA GISS with Hansen, I think from 1996, and commented very positively on Hansen’s 1988 forecasts in his Senate testimony. See Hansen got it right.
Schmidt now want a few more months data before he is certain we are in new climate territory. Compare Hansen last July in The Climate Dice are Loaded. Now, a New Frontier?
Hansen too is looking to the next few months to see whether he got it right. He thinks he can see the shape of the new regime, with 95% + certainty, and he is similarly certain the IPCC crowd have got it wrong. Schmidt would seem to agree with the latter of those two.
Leon Simons tweeted on Mar 20:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Mar 25:
Also Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Mar 25:
Good to see Leon Simons speaking up.
Eliot Jacobsen’s quadratic trendline seems a good idea. I’ve just found again an article I had lost by Betts et al – Approaching 1.5 °C: how will we know we’ve reached this crucial warming mark?
Seems the Paris Agreement did not define how to measure 1.5°C . IPCC AR6 deemed it a 20-year average from a base of 1850 to 1900, so we may recognise 1.5°C about 10 years after we get there. Their solution is to combine an average of the last 10 years with an average of the next 10 years based on the climate model projections.
This would bring an earlier change of rhetoric. I’d like to hear more about aiming for 0.5°C for a safe climate. For me, Johan Rockström (as with Will Steffen) emphasises the Holocene as the touchstone, but then he buys into 1.5°C quite strongly as important to avoid tipping points. Yet when talking about tipping points he recognises how many are already in play, plus the fact that scientists have a trend of lowering the lower bars.
Brian: – “Eliot Jacobsen’s quadratic trendline seems a good idea.”
The Climate Emergency Forum posted a YouTube video on 24 Mar 2024 titled Chaos in the Climate Casino, duration 0:53:08. This video was recorded on 4 Mar 2024. The Climate Emergency Forum welcomes Dr Eliot Jacobson, a retired professor turned climate researcher. The discussion delves into the complexities of the 1.5 °C IPCC global average temperature goal.
Dr Jacobson discusses his own analysis based on Copernicus data, revealing a higher rate of warming at 0.3 °C per decade compared to previous estimates. This leads him to assert that the current temperature anomaly is around 1.38 °C above the pre-industrial baseline, indicating a faster pace of warming than commonly acknowledged. He predicts that at this rate, the world is likely to surpass the 1.5 °C goal by 2028, highlighting the urgency of addressing climate change.
Regular Panelists:
Dr. Peter Carter – MD, Expert IPCC Reviewer and the director of the Climate Emergency Institute
Paul Beckwith – Climate Systems Scientist. Professor at the University of Ottawa’s Paleoclimatology Laboratory as well as at Carleton University
Happy Birthday Brian and all the best on your next loop around the sun. Thank you for all those years of sharing and facilitating relevant and important information exchange.
In the last three months we have received more than two times the median annual rainfall here in Mareeba, FNQ. It is an extraordinary wet season not just for our region, enormous rainfalls are wide spread, here in the Wet Tropics, Cape and Gulf country, West Qld and more to come and that in an El Niño year. Infrastructure and house hold losses are enormous, not looking forward to insurance renewal.
Thankyou Ootz. I normally don’t take much notice of my birthdays, and this one is not a significant one, apart from marking another year above ground. There was a time for a few years after I left school when no-one, including family, remembered. I may have psychologically separated from the notion of celebrating birthdays then.
So birthdays tend to be BAU, but people have remembered and I do appreciate that.
On rain, I don’t think the past is any guide to the future anymore. The models are broken. Here in our suburb we’ve just had double the monthly average, but almost everywhere around has had more. Grateful there are no floods.
Thanks again Ootz. Much appreciated!
Geoff, I’ll check that one out. Those three are some of my favourite commentators.
Geoff, that Chaos in the Climate Casino is definitely worthwhile. Insurance industry becoming kaput, people actually moving out of Florida.
Enough to scare the bejesus out of everyone paying attention.
They say scientists should be advocating louder. Sabine Hossenfelder in Should we be terrified of climate change? says scientists should be telling the truth, not scaring people.
Fair enough, but the truth is scary, and they can chose how many times and to some extent the forums in which they speak. I actually disagree with Peter Carter. Warren Howden, for example tells a scary tale, as do some others.
I listened again to Dr. James E. Hansen in Conversation with Paul Beckwith from last November just after the Pipeline paper was released, which is excellent. I note that Hansen said the Earth’s albedo had changed, and links this with the effects of less aerosols in creating droplets, and the big gap opening up in sea ice cover in the Antarctic. He did not mention the extra green cover we are getting, especially at high latitudes. The 25% or so of emissions absorbed on land must be going somewhere.
I thought he under-rated methane somewhat when Beckwith raised it.
Loved the fact that he had to run off at the end because he was due to talk to the Chinese!
Brian: – “Insurance industry becoming kaput, people actually moving out of Florida.”
In Australia, for property, ‘Actions of the Sea’ are normally not covered by insurance.
The Insurance Council of Australia’s October 2021 report
Climate Change Impact Series: Actions of the Sea and Future Risks confirms significant additional investment will be required to mitigate the risks of coastal inundation and sea level rise. On page 17 of the Insurance Council of Australia report, section 3.5.2 Considerations for the Insurance Industry includes:
The latest 14-page communication (dated 29 Mar 2024) by James Hansen, Makiko Sato and Pushker Kharecha titled Global Warming Acceleration: Hope vs Hopium, includes:
Thanks, Geoff. I was actually up last night when the Hansen missive came through, but I was very tired and had trouble concentrating on the text. This morning (Saturday) I happened on Paul Beckwith’s Crucial Update on Global Warming Acceleration by James Hansen and his pals. Basically I’m a lay person with a brain as far as science is concerned. As such I found Beckwith’s exposition helpful. He’s a bit more pessimistic the Hansen.
There is much that is notable in Hansen’s piece. Essentially it’s about the use made by the IPCC of climate models and the significance of aerosols and cloudiness. Warming in the last decade has increased from 0.18°C per decade to 0.3°C , an increase of 67%.
Hansen’s notion of aerosol forcing is 10 times that of the IPCC.
From the references, the suspicion that the aerosol effect could be very big goes back a long way. Hansen cites Knutti (2008) Why are climate models reproducing the observed global surface warming so well?
The title is a bit ironic. They are doing well because they tack on sundry amounts of aerosol effect with no scientific justification.
Hansen himself published a piece in 2007, with over 40 joint authors: Climate simulations for 1880–2003 with GISS modelE
Back in 2005 we had an article Strong present-day aerosol cooling implies a hot future:
Beckwith thinks the IPCC crowd are indulging in groupthink and won’t admit they are wrong. I’d probably call it confirmation bias, but with some there seems to be a resentment of Hansen which has a personal edge to it. However, he is not alone. There’s a whole bunch of models that are in better sync with his thinking.
Gotta leave it there.
Meanwhile Prof Eliot Jacobsen says on 3 April:
Here is his raw monthly data for the global surface temperature anomaly over the pre-industrial baseline, from January, 1940 through March, 2024, with quadratic trendline. Warming is accelerating.
From Leon Simons, joint author on Hansen’s Pipeline paper:
Trend in Earth’s Energy Imbalance
The paper is open access in Nature:
Recent reductions in aerosol emissions have increased Earth’s energy imbalance
The Electric Viking puts out a new view every few hours, and the images are not always related specifically to the text. Also he frequently identifies ‘game changing’ developments. I think this one might be:
TESLA battery maker CATL reveal 1 million miles + zero degradation battery
I understand CATL have a research facility with 18,000 employees. This battery should get rid of range anxiety, and push hydrogen out of the large vehicle market. Seems especially suited to road transport, buses and mining machinery.
I haven’t read this one in detail, but it’s important in that the Greens and indeed LEAN within the ALP tend to take the Climate Council as their bible on ‘what the science says’. There’s 84 pages, largely of goodness; I have a few points of difference. See the Climate Council’s:
Seize the Decade: How we empower Australian communities and cut climate pollution 75% by 2030
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted Apr 5:
Thanks, Geoff.
I’ve spent endless hours dealing with the sudden disappearance of my entire email account. It’s a long story, but no, I wasn’t hacked.
I now have the latest version of Outlook, the one I use. I know the Gmail is effective, but personally I can’t seem to get into how it works.
Problem is, I now have Outlook, which I can use, except that the entire contacts list is gone. OK I’ve got some, but none that were added in the last eight years.
Meanwhile, I must confess to being shocked and disappointed by Gavin Schmidt and Zeke Hausfather, who are saying that accelerated warming that became very obvious from about mid-2023, was very much within what their models predicted, and really there was nothing much to see in Hansen’s paper.
I’d like to do more on this, but for now two links:
Schmidt – Much ado about acceleration
Hausfather – Factcheck: Why the recent ‘acceleration’ in global warming is what scientists expect
This is actually a huge turnaround from the language they were using a few months ago.
My main suspicion is that these senior scientists are working on their budget submissions for the next financial year, and can hardly argue the value of the work they have been doing for years by reporting that their models are broken and not fit for purpose.
It’s relevant here to think about what Sabine Hossenfelder has been saying. She takes no prisoners:
Sabine Hossenfelder – I Was Worried about Climate Change. Now I worry about Climate Scientists.
Hossenfelder – My dream died, and now I’m here
Copernicus Climate Change Service published their Mar 2024 Climate Bulletin headlined Copernicus: March 2024 is the tenth month in a row to be the hottest on record.
Eliot Jacobsen has been plotting the 365-day Global Surface Temperature average from 1941:
Leon Simons tweeted on Apr 12:
Countercurrents published a piece by Robert Hunziker on Apr 13, headlined Global Warming: Uncharted Territory Dead Ahead. It began with:
According to Schmidt, the answer to whether the Earth System has fundamentally changed and the ‘new normal’ has already arrived will be obvious by August 2024. That’s only 4 months away.
Schmidt almost never refers to James Hansen, but you have to assume he knows what Hansen is saying.
Hansen in Global Warming Acceleration: El Nino Measuring Stick Looks Good of 14 December 2023 is saying that when the current El Niño subsides, usually in the Northern summer, we’ll have confirmation that warming has kicked up a gear. However, he’s saying we’ll have a fair idea by May.
Maenwhile the oceanographers of the world have been meeting for three days in Spain:
Scientists at Spain meeting sound alarm over ocean warming
They are worried:
Meanwhile The Electric Viking, who puts up a new video every couple of hours is waxing lyrical (again!) about the new super battery being launched by CATL:
CATL’s new LFP battery lasts 3 million miles with 0% degradation for 5 years
It’s super dense, charges rapidly and doesn’t wear out in vehicles.
As a grid storage proposition, it’s cheap, makes fossil fuels redundant, and will last for 15 years.
The Earth System global mean SAT is almost at +1.60 °C for 365-day running mean as at Apr 15. The next day or two may push it over the threshold. Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Apr 18:
And it seems on Apr 17 the global 365-day running mean SAT reached the +1.60 °C anomaly relative to the 1850-1900 baseline, per Professor Eliot Jacobson.
And the global daily mean SST continues to remain hovering around 21.1 °C, per Prof Jacobson.
As someone said on the thread, this is the end of the beginning.
Roger Hallam in his usual forthright style says:
And so on…
The video of Dr Selina Ward posted by Terry Hughes is very sad.
Climate change played a role in killing tens of thousands of people in 2023
Dr Robert Rohde tweeted on Apr 19:
On 19 Apr 2024, Berkeley Earth published their report titled March 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It included:
Geoff, Berkeley Earth’s forecast on temperature looks about right.
The article Robert Rohde is talking about is available at Nature – The economic commitment of climate change:
The graph copied by Rohde reflects all climate effects, not just temperature, which raises estimates by approximately 50% and leads to stronger regional heterogeneity.
The authors are from the Potsdam Institute and the Berlin Mercator Institute, plus peer reviewed.
Just have a think has done a segment Europe is cooking at double speed! Are Europeans ready? based on a whopping report Europe is not prepared for rapidly growing climate risks: Press release Published 11 Mar 2024. Looks as though they will fry, unless AMOC stalls, in which case they will freeze. With either scenario it would be impossible to produce much food.
Fortescue is one company that seems serious about taking the carbon out of their operations:
Liebherr electric excavator reaches million ton milestone, scores more orders
The diesel excavator, converted to electric by Liebherr, began operation in January, and has scooped scooped its one millionth tonne of dirt. Fortescue is planning to order two more.
The Grattan Institute has just released a report Keeping the lights on: How Australia should navigate the era of coal closures and prepare for what comes next which says we are in trouble, trying to construct a fit for purpose modern electricity grid in a piece-meal fashion, subject to the vagaries of politics, whereas there should have been a complete new design of the NEM.
The link above has links to articles by the authors published elsewhere, a media release and the report itself.
ABC RN has an interesting interview with Tony Wood – Does the National Energy Market need to be redesigned?
Their Media release is Prepare now to avoid blackouts in the post-coal era .
People don’t generally realise that half or more of the price of electricity is in the poles and wires. Also as renewables approaches 100% it becomes increasingly difficult to ensure continuity of supply.
I think this report is timely and an important piece of work.
Brian: – “I think this report is timely and an important piece of work.”
I’d suggest government planning at all levels and grid connection approvals also need to be happening at a much faster pace to accelerate the decarbonisation process.
Wang 9 & Great Western BESSs already have NSW planning approvals, yet so far appear not to be progressing further.
One needs to ask why some of these energy projects are taking so long to get through the NSW planning approval process and continue to be delayed in becoming operational, while some others (e.g. Waratah Super) apparently progress rapidly. Are governments fair dinkum about a rapid energy transition and reducing GHG emissions?
Meanwhile, I’d suggest EnergyAustralia’s Mt Piper Power Station (MPPS) may have difficulties sourcing adequate quantities of local coal supplies beyond year-2026. This may prompt a closure date significantly earlier than the currently expected year-2040.
Below is a list of coal mines I’m aware of within the Lithgow City Council LGA with current development consents:
Angus Place: Underground Longwall, Operator: Centennial, production consent expires on 18 Aug 2024, Maximum allowable production is 4.0 Mt/y ROM, Status: Care & Maintenance since 2015
Invincible: Open cut, Operator: Western Mining Solutions, production consent expires on 31 Dec 2025, Maximum allowable production is 1.2 Mt/y ROM, Status: Producing in 2023 & 2024
Cullen Valley: Open cut, Operator: Western Mining Solutions, production consent expires on 31 Dec 2025, Maximum allowable production is 1.0 Mt/y ROM, Limited production in 2022-23
Clarence: Underground Longwall, Operator: Centennial, production consent expires on 31 Dec 2026, Maximum allowable production is 3.0 Mt/y ROM, Producing
Springvale: Underground Longwall, Operator: Centennial, production consent expires on 31 Dec 2028, Maximum allowable production is 5.5 Mt/y ROM, Producing
Airly: Underground Bord & Pillar, Operator: Centennial, production consent expires on 31 Jan 2037, Maximum allowable production is 1.8 Mt/y ROM, Producing
Centennial has lodged a development application to extend the life of Angus Place Colliery, with a proposal per Centennial’s Scoping Report called Angus Place West (APW) to extract up to 2.0 Mt/y ROM until 31 Dec 2042. To date, no EIS has yet been made available on public exhibition at the NSW Government’s Major Projects portal.
Meanwhile, the NSW Parliament passed legislation late-2023 to enshrine whole-of-government climate action to deliver net zero by 2050. The Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 legislates emissions reduction targets for NSW:
• 50% reduction on 2005 levels by 2030
• 70% reduction on 2005 levels by 2035
• Net zero by 2050.
It will be interesting to see how much of an effect the NSW Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 has on further coal mine approvals in NSW.
Springvale is still having significant production problems. The maximum allowable production is 5.5 Mt/y ROM, yet saleable coal appears to be less than half that in recent years. I’d suggest saleable coal production is clearly inadequate to sustain MPPS operations from Springvale alone, and anecdotally I see likely supplementations coming from both Airly and Clarence in recent years.
US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted on Apr 30:
Art Berman also tweeted on Apr 30:
I’d suggest the day of reckoning is coming when less oil reserves are found each year to replace what’s being produced. An average R/P of 12 years is not a long time before running out.
Good to see coal mines closing. Today in the AFR Chris Bowen said we are going to need more gas, which is more flexible than coal or nukes, as he says, in order to keep the lights on while we meet our targets. This is probably realistic, if undesirable.
Today’s ABIX Roy Morgan Daily News Summary has this item:
Brian: – “Today in the AFR Chris Bowen said we are going to need more gas, which is more flexible than coal or nukes, as he says, in order to keep the lights on while we meet our targets. This is probably realistic, if undesirable.”
I’d suggest Chris Bowen needs to read AEMO’s March 2024 Gas Statement of Opportunities. In particular, Figure 26: Reserves and resources reported in the 2023 GSOO and 2024 GSOO shows:
2023 actual production: _ _ _ 1,885 PJ
2P reserves (developed): _ _ 17,640 PJ _ R/P = 9.4 years
2P reserves (undeveloped): 16,279 PJ _ R/P = 8.6 years
2C resources: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 39,296 PJ
The 2P reserves estimate reflects statistically that there should be at least a 50% probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the sum of estimated proved plus probable reserves.
Gas resources are defined as less certain, & potentially less commercially viable, sources of gas. When estimating these uncertain resources, the best estimate of contingent resources (2C) is used.
And on page 49:
Amandine Denis-Ryan & Kevin Morrison stated in their RenewEconomy piece published 3 Apr 2023 headlined Australia can and should eradicate its gas supply gap – but not with more gas, beginning with:
Meanwhile, methane emissions are being vastly underreported and are damaging the nation’s credibility on climate change, economist Professor Rod Sims has warned.
When are politicians going to heed the evidence/data?
Thanks for the link from Rod Sims. I heard what he said on the radio, so good to have the link.
I suspect that there is a problem in how gas is counted in the offsets granted under the Safeguard Mechanism. Probably they see methane as equivalent to 26 or 28 times CO2, which is vastly underestimating the effect in the next two or three decades.
I’ve got stuff to do tonight and will comment further on gas when I can. Meanwhile I came upon these two articles on electricity pricing:
Why are power bills more expensive, when new data shows wholesale energy prices have fallen?
The energy regulator drafts new benchmark power prices — but what does it mean for your bill?
Good as far as they go, but there could have been more on the role of retailers, the spot market and how the price of gas has undue influence, the difference between businesses and consumers etc.
I tried to understand the whole thing back around 2017, and was told by an expert who made a living from knowing about gas prices that the network charges on the bill you get do not cover the full cost of transmission. He reckoned 60% was nearer the mark.
My main point is that the cost of generation is a minor part of the bill. So I’m not sure our abundant sun and wind will be as big a natural advantage as commonly reckoned.
Today, the Australian Security Leaders Climate Group (ASLCG) released a new report titled TOO HOT TO HANDLE: The scorching reality of Australia’s climate–security failure.
Ret. Adm. Chris Barrie, former head of the ADF said:
“It appears that the government either doesn’t understand what our scientists are telling them, or they are deliberately hiding the facts from the Australian community. Facing down the climate threat will require unprecedented global cooperation, not a new arms race.”
There’s an ABC report by Jake Evans published today (May 2) headlined Climate risks ignored in National Defence Strategy, former defence chief says.
Roy Morgan summary of an article in The Age about the report:
Our politicians are not grasping the gravity of the situation.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted today (May 3):
Meanwhile, global mean daily SSTs remain stubbornly at record high levels.
Yes, it’s looking crook! James Hansen said he would do communication in May, but it would not surprise if he missed. I imagine the publishers may be getting stroppy over his non-completion of Sophie’s Planet. He’s not a spring chicken.
Meanwhile the legal team representing the Australian Government in the Torres Strait climate case have been particularly rude, ignorant and egregious in the Federal Court. See or hear:
Landmark case tests whether Commonwealth has ‘duty of care’ to prevent climate harm
Chris Bowen has been up there. He’s not an ignoramus, so what is going on?
Zeke Hausfather has a comment that is I think supposed to reassure us about rising temperature, but does it? See Hausfather – Warmest April on record – but a possible return to predictability?
Global temperatures were being set by historic margins in the second half of 2023. While September’s “absolutely gobsmackingly bananas” record margin of 0.5C stands out, every month between July and December beat the prior record by at least 0.3C.
(Emphasis added)
Hansen said back in January in Groundhog Day. Another Gobsmackingly Bananas Month. What’s Up?
I suspect Hausfather is trying to show that what Hansen is saying is nothing special. See Hausfather – Factcheck: Why the recent ‘acceleration’ in global warming is what scientists expect.
We see in the fourth graph, which is a collection of four, in the bottom left Hansen is shown as spot on the predictions of the CMIP6 models. Elsewhere (I’ll have to look for the link) he explains (admits) that in that graph he has included the “hot” models, which had been excluded from the IPCC. Arbitrarily excluded, I think.
I’d like to look at this again, but as of now I don’t trust Hausfather and Dessler.
The link I was referring to in the last comment was Dan Miller, interview with Zeke Hausfather from 29:00 in Climate Chat – “Accelerating” Debate on Global Warming: Interview with Dr. Zeke Hausfather.
I find Hausfather congenitally happy and optimistic, which produces some cognitive dissonance when discussing frying the planet. Dan Miller as interviewer plays a straight bat and keeps him more or less honest.
Towards the end Hausfather says he does not have much expertise in climate sensitivity, which really excludes him from the topic of Earth System Science.His characterisation of Hansen’s Pipeline paper as a “useful thought experiment” is shall we say, a bit rich.
Some of his statements are astonishing, eg. that CO2 emissions peaked in 2019, that 90% of the climate forcing effects come from CO2, methane is minor and he disregards NO2 and the rest of the ‘Kyoto six’ GHGs.
Leon Simons came on near the end and warned about the regional variation in the effects of aerosols, with particular concern about how hot India is going to be if they stop polluting.
This could be a game changer. Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production Common salt is sodium chloride
John, the Electric Viking says it is. See CATL’s sodium hybrid battery will be 30% cheaper & revolutionise the world. But then he sees a game changer at least once a week.
I gather it still has some lithium in it, but mainly sodium.
Brian: Sea-bed ‘air batteries’ offer cheaper long-term energy storage
The claim is that storing energy as compressed air in tanks deep in the sea will require far less expensive tanks. The air would be stored at about the same pressure as the water outside the tank.
The challenge is to find locations where there is deep water close to the coast.
I’ve just started to hear some of the comments by Dr. Gavin Schmidt in the YouTube video published by Climate Chat on 6 May 2024 titled Much Ado About Accelerating Warming with Climate Scientist Gavin Schmidt, duration 1:56:03. I thank Gavin for his comments/perspectives and his engagement with host Dan Miller, and in a Q&A including with Leon Simons.
For example, Gavin Schmidt says from time interval 1:13:21:
“So, so, if your question is: ‘Ah, what’s the likelihood of staying underneath two degrees in the absence of any ah, climate, ah, carbon dioxide removal?’ And the answer is going to be, ah, you know, very small chance, under, under reasonable assumptions about other things.”
Meanwhile, published at RenewEconomy yesterday (May 6) was an AAP piece headlined Reef in crisis: Scientists despair – and are reduced to tears – as corals perish.
And governments find excuses to continue to encourage and approve more fossil fuel projects. See Juice Media’s latest poke at gross hypocrisy titled Honest Government Ad | How to State Capture (EPBC Act).
John, on reading your link on sodium-ion batteries, it’s a US battery targeting industrial uses, with possible design for EVs later. The CATL battery I linked to is similar but different, and designed for EVs in the first instance.
Both appear to be welcome developments.
Now Electric Viking (Sam Evans) tells us China says its water battery has double the energy density of lithium.
Evans points out that it is technology under development, not yet a battery. Also it is only as dense as the best new lithium, but one to watch.
John, the sea-bed air batteries look to have possibilities, but I’m not sure what “long duration” means. Will it eliminate the need for gas standby? We have rain depressions that last a week.
Just have a think in Heating cities with sand and water tells of hot sand in Sweden and hot water in Finland for heating. Both look rather expensive.
Geoff, on the Great Barrier Reef, that’s AAP, bless them. However, everyone everywhere that is interested knows what is going on. Here’s CNN in ‘Like wildfires underwater’: Worst summer on record for Great Barrier Reef as coral die-off sweeps planet .
Today on ABC Radio National we had Government accused of down-playing coral death, which is cannily similar to the AAP piece.
I’m not sure the Government is playing down-playing coral death, they just don’t want to talk about it in public.
I don’t think I’ve posted these two from the Climate Council:
Yolanda Waters – The story you’re not being told about the latest bleaching event and Dr Ove Hoegh-Guldberg – Why is no-one talking about the black summer of our oceans?
So everyone is talking about the Government and Reef authorities not talking. Senator Nita Green is special envoy for the GBR. She need to talk to us after she comes back from UNESCO.
Geoff I was through the Gavin Schmidt interview and Leon Simons was about to come on when I had to go out today. I’ll watch the rest and come back. Schmidt is several levels above Zeke Hausfather in my esteem in Earth Systems Science understanding.
Please delete previous system-scrambled comment. Second attempt:
Meanwhile, US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted on May 7:
And Art Berman tweeted on May 8:
And Art Berman also tweeted on May 8:
It seems expected that petroleum fuel prices are likely to stay high for the remainder of this year. Will people just except rising fuel prices, or look for cheaper alternatives?
Geoff, I can’t see anything you would like me to delete. Can you clarify, pls?
I really don’t know how the future is going to work out. Sabine Hossenfelder says I thought Electric Cars Were the Future. I Changed My Mind She looked at what had to be done in real world terms, and came to the conclusion that the most practical solution would be to hedge her bets and buy hybrid.
Brian: – “Geoff, I can’t see anything you would like me to delete. Can you clarify, pls?”
The first attempt had 4 URLs, so the system said the comment was awaiting moderation. But the comment displayed wasn’t as I intended – somewhat scrambled. It seems my first attempt has been lost down the system rabbit hole.
Brian: – “She … came to the conclusion that the most practical solution would be to hedge her bets and buy hybrid.”
I think Sabine Hossenfelder, like many people, are assuming petroleum fuels will remain ABUNDANT and AFFORDABLE for years/decades to come. Data I see suggests that’s an ill-informed assumption.
Art Berman posted on his blog on 2 May 2024 a piece titled The Oil and Energy Macro. He concluded with:
I’d suggest hybrids have a very limited range on electric-only mode (around 50 km). As petroleum fuels become increasingly more expensive, and perhaps even become rationed, ICEVs, including hybrids, will likely become less desirable.
I think if you have an ICEV already, keep it well maintained until you can afford to make a switch to a suitable EV (or buy a good second-hand ICEV). I’d suggest buying a new vehicle with an ICE (including any hybrid) no longer makes economic sense.
Geoff, I looked in the blog’s works and the comment, being non-conforming with the settings, was caught in ‘Pending’ where the spam gets trapped. So I’ve moved it to ‘Trash’ where it stays unless I subsequently approve it or empty the trash.
I take your point on oil. Actually when I give up working on acreages near here, which is likely before Christmas next year, my 2006 model Falcon will probably go to junk. My wife’s car is not much younger, so I had been foreshadowing becoming a one-car family with an EV. The way the Chinese are going at it, there could be handy ones available reasonably cheap. I’d like one with a spare tyre, or a tyre that can get you to a service station.
I took a look at the Juice Media video.
Realistically we have some problems. One was that Terri Butler who put together Labor’s environment agenda, lost her seat to Max Chandler-Mather, the bright, shiny Greens excitement machine. So Tanya Plibersek, whose heart I think was in Education, had to come from a standing start.
Second problem is that Madeleine King, whatever her merits and limitations, is a dead set supporter of WA mining of whatever hue.
Third is a leader who thinks the climate change is a subset of economic change.
Apart from that the Greens have now dug in and won’t let anything through, unless Labor agrees to no new coal and gas.
Problem is that Beetaloo is progressing nicely from Tamboran Resources POV, and NT reckons they need the gas or the lights won’t stay on. Fracking Beetaloo would be a crime against the planet.
Santos needs Barossa as a continuation to supply the Japanese, who I think are in joint venture through Inpex in the Bayu-Undan field. Barossa is meant to be a continuation. The Japanese have been vocal in saying they are beginning to question whether Australia can be relied upon as an investment destination and as an energy supplier.
I understand Barossa will be about the dirtiest gas field on the planet.
Problem is that all these developments were planned, worked upon and funds spent on development when our official position was that gas was good, and was elevated by the ‘Gas-led Recovery’ policy.
Albanese came to power on a promise that we would pump gas as mine coal as long as anyone wanted to buy it.
I have not been working on the detail, but I understand that the existing environment legislation is a thousand pages, which is genuinely hard to move forward in one piece.
I have no position on that, because I don’t know enough. However, time is not on our side. The planet passed 350ppm in September 1988, two months after James Hansen addressed the US Senate. There never has been burnable carbon after that time. We have the IPCC and the UNFCCC and many complicit scientists to thank for our current dilemma.
So Juice Media is fine as satire. Giordano Nanni has better intellectual creds than most in that industry, and a genuine seriousness of purpose.
Labor is implementing policies formulated back in 2021. The current ALP platform includes this in the Economics chapter:
I’m inclined to agree with Wesley Morgan – ‘It’s not game over – it’s game on’: why 2024 is an inflection point for the climate crisis and 26 years ago, Howard chose fossil fuels over the Pacific. What will Albanese choose?
The Government has tasked the Climate Change Authority to give it advice. There is still time to make a submission to their2024 Issues paper: Targets, Pathways and Progress.
Unfortunately I have not had time to do more than a skim. On that basis I’m impressed, except we should be talking about a safe and just climate, which 1.5°C is not and never will be.
I think Chris Bowen is probably the smartest pollie in the house on climate, but I’m not sure he can win the day. So I don’t think we can talk in terms of state capture yet, although there have been some revolving doors, which in the end will cost Labor seats, if the charge sticks, to indies or Greens.
No guesses as to which I would prefer.
Very briefly, I’d like to return to the interview with Gavin Schmidt.
I’m quite impressed. He is very knowledgeable, analytical and logical, has a calmness of mind, and understands the boundaries within which he works.
I think Dan Miller and Leon Simons both lost it a bit.
However, he is a mathematician, and a PhD studying ocean currents in the Cretaceous does not make him a paleo-climate scientist.
Like anyone choosing a medical specialist, I think I can make some assessment of how he works. I think of him as a top draw modeller who sees climate science within the framework of models.
Unfortunately he knows that models cannot grasp everything that is necessary to make perfect understanding.
Hansen has always rated paleoscience information above models in his knowledge edifice. I think he has no peer in understanding how it all works over the millennia.
I was shocked to hear that current models are based on information up to 2014. Hansen is working largely on what was different that happened after 2014.
I also don’t see that information taken in a slither of time has to project backwards. It’s like working out what happened last year on the basis of what happened in the first few days of January this year.
Other than that his comments as a person on how politics and how people act and relate were interesting!
There’s more but that will have to do!
BTW, the cutoff for IPCC was December 31, 2020. Hansen used science published well after that date.
I watched this webinar Too Hot to Handle last night.
With a bit of luck they will send me a link.
Very confronting, but, they say, if you want to lead the conversation you have top tell the truth.
The Guardian published on 8 May 2024 a piece by Damian Carrington headlined World’s top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target. The article began with:
The survey sample size response was 380 (out of of 843 contacted).
For the question: How high will global heating go?
Below +1.5 °C: _ _ _ _6
At least +1.5 °C: _ _16
At least +2.0 °C: _ _68
At least +2.5 °C: _132
At least +3.0 °C: _100
At least +3.5 °C: _ _33
At least +4.0 °C: _ _14
At least +4.5 °C: _ _ _7
+5.0 °C or more: _ _ _4
Leon Simons tweeted on May 8:
Eliot Jacobsen says:
He’s saying we are at the beginning of the end of everything.
In 2023 there was a Record-breaking increase in CO2 levels in world’s atmosphere.
Check out CO2 and other GHGs at NOAA.
Not encouraging. I suspect the land is not taking up as much CO2 on a net basis as it has in the last 100 years.
Peter Carter posts:
On 15 May 2024, Berkeley Earth published their April 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It began with:
It also included:
Leon Simons tweeted on May 16:
Thanks, Geoff. Also late last night James Hansen came good with Comments on Global Warming Acceleration, Sulfur Emissions, Observations:
I’d just remind folks that the IPCC had a cutoff of 31 December 2020 for their latest report on climate science, and that according to Gavin Schmidt, who would know, the climate models they are using are based on climate data inputs with a cutoff of 2014.
Hansen is giving it his best shot at explaining what the measured increase of heating found by CERES in recent years is doing to the increased temperatures we have experienced, and broader implications for the future. He is completely aware that we need to see what happens post El Niño , and we need to measure changes in aerosols and clouds.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on May 18:
Paul Beckwith posted a video on May 17 where he has a look at the latest communication from Hansen.
Art Berman tweeted on May 20:
Art Berman also tweeted on May 20:
Oh dear!
Meanwhile The world faces a shortage of minerals needed for the energy transition and Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought – report.
The good news is that batteries are going gangbusters especially in China:
China develops revolutionary electric car battery that can charge in 10 minutes
Also Battery storage is about to overtake global capacity of pumped hydro.
Finally China is moving on climate. I’m hoping this link works. It’s to Adam Toozes substack Chartbook 284 The beginning of a new era: How the “global” energy transition is happening in China. He’s summarising stuff from a 191 page report by EMBER Global Electricity Review.
Paul Beckwith introduces a new paper by Eric Rignot et al. titled Widespread seawater intrusions beneath the grounded ice of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica, published on May 20 at PNAS, in his latest YouTube video titled Daily Tidal Flexing of Antarctica’s Thwaites Glacier Bodes ill for Global Sea Level Rise, duration 0:41:42.
It looks like May 2024 will end up over the +1.5 °C GMST anomaly threshold, per Eliot Jacobson’s tweet on May 29. That would then be the 11th consecutive month over 1.5 °C and the 12th straight month setting a record monthly high.
I had the ‘comments’ setting to close after 367 days, so it closed early! I’ve set it now for 400, hope to do a new post or three soonish.
This Hartman Report made me sad tonight:
Is the Loss of Insects a Desperate Cry for Help From a Planet Under Assault?
Zeke Hausfather Tweets on June 2:
I just had one of those ‘Server error’ events, and lost a comment. I’ll just give the link. It’s Sabine Hossenfelder on climate sensitivity:
I wasn’t worried about climate change. Now I am.
She really lets fly from about 12:50.
Leon Simons tweeted on Jun 2:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on May 2:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Jun 4:
The graph shows the Climate Casino Over/Under Lines for GMST Anomaly for years 2025-2050 (relative to 1850-1900 baseline):
2025: +1.44 °C
2026: +1.47 °C
2027: +1.51 °C
2028: +1.54 °C
2029: +1.57 °C
2030: +1.60 °C
2031: +1.64 °C
2032: +1.67 °C
2033: +1.71 °C
2034: +1.74 °C
2035: +1.78 °C
2036: +1.82 °C
2037: +1.85 °C
2038: +1.89 °C
2039: +1.93 °C
2040: +1.97 °C
2041: +2.01 °C
2042: +2.05 °C
2043: +2.09 °C
2044: +2.13 °C
2045: +2.17 °C
2046: +2.21 °C
2047: +2.25 °C
2048: +2.29 °C
2049: +2.34 °C
2050: +2.38 °C
Thanks, Geoff.
Prof Jacobsen says he used the methodology as per his January post How Hot is Hell? I Mean Earth? which has the rate of temperature increase constantly accelerating. So:
From 2025 to 2030 the temperature increases at 0.32°C per decade.
From 2030 to 2040 the increase is 037°C per decade.
From 2040 to 2050 the increase is 0.41°C.
So he has 2°C in 2041, which from memory is what James Hansen reckons.
Prof Eliot Jacobson posted on Jun 4 a blog piece headlined Betting on the End of the World. It’s an explanation for his Over/Under graph. It concludes with:
James Hansen has published his latest communication on 30 May 2024, titled Sophie’s Planet and Terminations.
Paul Beckwith posted a YouTube video earlier today (Jun 5) titled Update on James Hansen’s Work and Sophie’s Planet Book, duration 0:29:09.
Rio Tinto says BioIron iron ore processing could slash greenhouse gas emissions. Is it possible?
Label me sceptical. Would need a lot of space to provide the necessary biomass.
John, Prof Zhang did not seem impressed. I can’t see that it’s scalable.
I was talking to another engineer recently who mentioned the ‘Boston’ method. Said it was basically like the method used in aluminium.
I think he meant the Boston Metal green steel solution.
I also found this article – Boston Metal & ArcelorMittal Take Different Routes To Green Steel:
And:
I notice that article is two years old.
Geoff, thanks for the links. I had seen Hansen’s letter and knew Beckwith would be onto it. Will try to watch tomorrow.
Meanwhile two article to make us worry.
Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought – report
They reckon it’s the equivalent of being constantly at war, which IMO is no surprise.
Then Joëlle Gergis is at her eloquent best in An intergenerational crime against humanity’: what will it take for political leaders to start taking climate change seriously?
I have two queries. Firstly, she needs to get up to speed on sea level rise. Two metres by 2100 might be the about what we we’ll get, but in risk planning we should be thinking six at least. We got 6-10 metres in the Eemian, about 120kya. Hansen says there was an episode back then when we got three metres in a century. That was with 300ppm of CO2.
Secondly, she should be stating the real task of achieving a safe climate. Both Will Steffen and Johan Rockström have said the Anthropocene must be Holocene-like, which to me means that temperatures need to be brought down to no more than 0.5°C above pre-industrial.
The latest edition (Jun 2024) of Quarterly Essay has a piece by Joëlle Gergis titled Highway to Hell: Climate Change and Australia’s Future.
Per the Hansen et al. (2023) paper Global warming in the pipeline (bold text my emphasis):
With a SLR rate of 5 mm/year at the beginning of year-2024:
* The 10-year doubling scenario curve exceeds 1 m SLR around 2063 and 2 m around 2072;
* The 13-year doubling scenario curve exceeds 1 m SLR around 2070.
The 10- & 13-year doubling curves sit within the upper end of the global mean SLR projection range 0.15 to 0.43 m by 2050 in Table 3.2 in NOAA’s Feb 2022 report on SLR.
Real-world ice melt will not follow a smooth curve.
The acceleration of the rate of SLR will continue while ever the energy inputs into the Earth System, and more particularly into the cryosphere and oceans, increase.
Spot on Geoff.
One of my favourites is Stefan Rahmstorf’s assessment of the IPCC treatment in Sea level in the IPCC 6th assessment report (AR6):
(Emphasis added)
Was interested in alternative processes for making steel when I worked at BHP Central Research labs 50 yrs ago. One of the problems is that blast furnace based processes are seriously cheap and in those times CO2 was not being raised as an issue.
Al production produces about 4.8 tonnes CO2 per tonne Al.
(Google: ” much co2how is generated during aluminium smelting process?)
NOAA posted on Jun 6 a piece headlined During a year of extremes, carbon dioxide levels surge faster than ever. It included:
Roger Hallam tweeted on Jun 3:
The Guardian published on 27 May 2024 an op-ed by Sir David King, founder and chair of the global Climate Crisis Advisory Group, headlined Humanity’s survival is still within our grasp – just. But only if we take these radical steps. His message included:
Yes, Sir David simplifies things without being simplistic.
Can’t say the same for this YouTube:
Is Australia on a Highway to Climate Hell? | Joelle Gergis & Polly Hemming
I’ve started to read Gergis’s Quarterly Essay Highway to Hell: Climate Change and Australia’s Future. She writes beautifully, does very well on the explaining what kind of a fix we are in and the urgency of action that makes a difference.
I’ll see what she writes about solutions, but in her written piece on the science she points out that achieving net zero is not nearly enough.
Meanwhile Sabine Hossenfelder takes a look at what Bill Gates said about planting trees..
I’ve been reading the actual Future Gas Strategy.
I’m thinking that most people who have commented on it have not read it. I haven’t seen any decent analytical commentary yet.
Meanwhile the floods and high temperatures in Pakistan typify where we are at.
Q&A: As Temperatures in Pakistan Top 120 Degrees, There’s Nowhere to Run
The climate is dangerous, and some highly populated regions are becoming unlivable. The rich who caused the situation we face don’t care enough to help the poor.
The ABC published on 11 Jun 2024 (updated 12 Jun 2024) an explainer by energy reporter Daniel Mercer and climate lead Tim Leslie headlined Does nuclear power have a future in Australia? These numbers will help cut through the debate. Some nitpicks include:
Nitpick #1
Evidence/data I see indicates initial planning began in early 2006 with an Energy Study, leading to the establishment of the UAE’s Nuclear Policy announced in 2008. I’d suggest the UAE would not have just announced their Nuclear Policy in 2008 without doing their due diligence beforehand from their earlier Energy Study.
See slide 6 at: https://www.isoe-network.net/publications/pub-proceedings/symposia-thematic/policy-standards-and-regulation/national-regulations/3092-bilal2015-ppt-1/file.html
Also, published on 7 Oct 2023 in the SMH was an explainer by Mike Foley headlined Is nuclear energy feasible in Australia (and how much would it cost)? It included:
The UAE’s Barakah 4-reactor project has taken more than 15 years (NOT “13 years to deliver the first of four reactors” as the explainer suggests) to get the first nuclear reactor unit operational from a standing start, and more than 18 years for the fourth (so far incomplete) reactor unit.
Per the IAEA’s Power Reactor Information System (PRIS) data (accessed today):
Reactor Unit _ Construct Start Date _ Commence Full Ops _ Construct to Operate
BARAKAH-1: _ _ 19 Jul 2012 _ _ _ _ _ 01 Apr 2021 _ _ _ _8 y, 08 months, 14 days
BARAKAH-2: _ _ 15 Apr 2013 _ _ _ _ _24 Mar 2022 _ _ _ _8 y, 11 months, 10 days
BARAKAH-3: _ _ 24 Sep 2014 _ _ _ _ _24 Feb 2023 _ _ _ 8 y, 05 months, 01 day
BARAKAH-4: _ _ 30 Jul 2015 _ _ _ _ _ _ Pending _ _ _ _ _ 8 y, 10 months, 16 days+
The first criticality and grid connection dates (respectively) for:
BARAKAH-1: _ 31 Jul 2020 _ _ 19 Aug 2020
BARAKAH-2: _ 27 Aug 2021 _ _14 Sep 2021
BARAKAH-3: _ 22 Sep 2022 _ _ 08 Oct 2022
BARAKAH-4: _ 01 Mar 2024 _ _ 23 Mar 2024
BARAKAH-2 took around 6¼ months from first grid connection to full commercial operations. BARAKAH-3 took around 4½ months. I’d suggest BARAKAH-4 should therefore be commencing full operations around late Jul to early Aug 2024.
Nitpick #2
The small reactors in China (i.e. the twin reactors designated SHIDAOBAY-1 (SHIDAOWAN-1) coupled to a single steam turbine) and Russia (a pair of independent reactors on a single floating barge designated AKADEMIK LOMONOSOV-1 & -2) don’t fit the ‘modular’ definition referring to serial factory production of reactor components, which could potentially (in theory) drive down costs.
By that definition, no small modular reactors (SMRs) have ever been built and none are being built now. In all likelihood none will ever be built because of the prohibitive cost of setting up factories for mass production of reactor components.
Bill Gates breaks ground on first Gen-IV nuclear plant in the US
Sounds promising. And not just a Duttonish plot to slow the take-up of clean energy.
The AP article published on 11 Jun 2024 by Jennifer McDermott headlined In Wyoming, Bill Gates moves ahead with nuclear project aimed at revolutionizing power generation, included:
It’s site preparatory work only. The TerraPower reactor hasn’t yet gained the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s approval, and faces daunting obstacles that could delay completing the reactor on time, promised in 2030 at the earliest.
First of a kind (FOAK) reactor projects are notorious for delays and cost overruns.
New nukes are interesting in that they intend to use sodium for cooling. I have a question as to how easily they can be ramped up. The newer kind are better than the old, but it seems the old are not meant to be ramped at all. The new are not that much better.
When I searched, most of the articles were a few years old. Of interest this one:
How the next generation of nuclear reactors could be smaller, greener and safer
It was from 2020. Clearly the technology is experimental. A point is made that there may be unanticipated problems that arise when they get the thing actually working. So we won’t really know how good the new technology is until well into the 2030s.
Far too late.
Also what are we going to do with the waste? I recall Prof Barry Brooks was keen on SA being a waste dump for the world, but after an inquiry no satisfactory solution could be found. Siting waste is a bigger NIMBY problem than operating nuclear power stations.
Remember also, Qld heavily dominates the ranks of federal LNP. Qld politics of that hue is heavily infested with climate deniers.
It’s a distraction to pretend you want to do something about climate, when you don’t.
Brian: Agree that small nuclear is, at least in the short term, a distraction being supported by those that want to continue making money from fossil fuel.
Would also agree that the world needs the ending of fossil fuel ASAP if we are to avoid a major disaster.
I am happy to see Gates putting a bit effort in small nuclear as long as the use of fossil carbon is being forced down quickly.
My general approach during my career was to support parallel strategies.
Two more articles worth a look.
David Leitch at RenewEconomy – Why the AFR economics editor is wrong on GenCost, nuclear and “always on” power.
Readers of the AFR were misinformed by John Kehoe, who is a political journalist. Leitch is illuminating about LCOE modelling. His bottom line is that nukes are designed to run flat out at around 97% capacity. At 50% they are horrendously expensive.
So nuclear is “incredibly expensive, the potential construction delay risk is totally unacceptable and the technology is fundamentally unsuited to Australia’s generation mix.”
Karen Barlow at Saturday Paper (pay-walled) looks at the politics in ‘What the hell is this?’: Inside the Coalition’s climate division . Bridget Archer and some others say there was no discussion involving LNP members.
Dutton says he was merely saying Labor’s targets were unachievable and:
Moreover, he says people are worrying about cost of living rather than climate, including in the Teal seats. He says the independents occupying safe Liberal seats are actually Green, which of course in his language is a negative appellation.
Brian: – “Moreover, he says people are worrying about cost of living rather than climate, including in the Teal seats.”
One of the most ominous risks for Europe is that of a major change in Atlantic ocean currents. If the AMOC shuts down then Europe becomes around 20 °C cooler. That makes growing food much more difficult. And the Southern Hemisphere gets warmer.
See Prof. Rahmstorf presenting his keynote address in Vilnius in May 2024, in the YouTube video titled Tipping risk of the Atlantic Ocean’s overturning circulation, AMOC. Keynote by Prof. Rahmstorf, duration 0:34:54.
The journal Oceanography published an open access paper by Stefan Rahmstorf on 10 Apr 2024 titled Is the Atlantic Overturning Circulation Approaching a Tipping Point? Figure 2 shows what the world would look like if the AMOC shut down. Scary stuff indeed!
Sorry, I’ve been distracted by family matters, plus, frankly, the gas strategy plan from the Federal government has not been greeted with equanimity internally in the ALP, plus Dutton’s cynical push for nukes.
I hope I can find time to address both.
Meanwhile, Geoff, Rahmstorf’s paper on AMOC should be given more attention. Importantly (p10) he criticises directly how the IPCC treatment is misleading. The deliberate “tuning towards stability” of the models is, I think, criminal. Certainly unscientific.
Paul Beckwith has done a video How the Rapidly Approaching AMOC Shutdown will Completely Change our Lives.
Beckworth’s explanations are valuable. He knows his science. However, he appears to ad lib, with little planning of what he’s going to say. In this one he ends up skating over the IPCC role and problems with the models.
Elsewhere Hansen has a new communication – The World Will Cool Off – A Bit – and Other Good News! .
He has put in a new trend line in his graph, reflecting acceleration of warming, which he now puts at 78%.
I’ve been thinking that Hansen actually neglects AMOC and does not pay enough attention to methane (no-one’s perfect!).
If so, he either over-eggs aerosols a bit, or the situation is worse than he portrays.
I came upon this new study via a link by Peter Carter on X (Twitter) – Caitlyn R. Witkowski et al – Continuous sterane and phytane δ13C record reveals a substantial pCO2 decline since the mid-Miocene:
Hansen et al in their Pipeline paper found Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity to be 4.8 °C and Earth System Sensitivity, which includes slow feedback over a millennium plus, to be 10°C.
The authors were Dutch, plus Bristol.
The new Daily suggests thatUnless Biden quits, Australia and the world should be preparing for a second Trump presidency, which means preparing for global warming of a lot more than the Paris target of 1.5 degrees Celsius – at least 2 degrees, probably more. Would going nuclear be an offset for this?
Evidence/data I see indicates Australians won’t see electrons flowing from any prospective operational nuclear powered generator units for at least 20 years.
The IAEA produced a document as part of their Nuclear Energy Series, Technical Report No. NP-T-2.7, titled : , published Feb 2012. It includes FIG 8, which highlights the typical prerequisite time required of the order of 5 years, for planning, licensing, design, equipment procurements and site preparations that must happen before the first concrete pour milestone can even happen.
The construction times for reactors are usually quoted—they’re easy enough to find; just look at the IAEA’s Power Reactor Information System (PRIS) data—but it seems to me the prerequisite pre-project implementation time is conveniently ignored by the Coalition, nuclear boosters, and the incurious media/commentators.
Per the -2023, ten countries completed 66 reactors over the decade 2013–2022—of which 39 in China alone—with an average construction time of 9.4 years, slightly higher than the 9.2 years of mean construction time in the decade 2012–2021.
Add 5 years of pre-project implementation time to the 9.4 years global average construction time, and on average, experienced civil nuclear power countries are demonstrating they are requiring much more than a decade to deploy new civilian nuclear-powered electricity generator units.
For inexperienced Australia:
: 20+ years for the first prospective operational nuclear generator unit;
: In the hundreds of billions to perhaps over a trillion dollars. Is it any wonder why the Coalition won’t reveal the costs for their nuclear fantasy?
Tony Barry, a former deputy state director and strategist for the Victorian Liberal Party, describes the Coalition’s decision to make nuclear power the centrepiece of its energy and climate policy as “the longest suicide note in Australian political history”.
Some examples I see that provide a closer approximation to how long it actually takes to deploy existing nuclear technologies include:
• United Arab Emirates has demonstrated it took more than 15-years to get its first nuclear reactor unit operational from scratch, from an Energy Planning Study in 2006 through to announcement of their Nuclear Policy in 2008, to construction commencing for BARAKAH-1 on 19 Jul 2012 to full operations on 1 Apr 2021, and more than 18-years for its BARAKAH-4 (yet to be fully operational) unit;
• Finland has demonstrated it took more than 22-years to get its OLKILUOTO-3 unit operational, from a first licence application in Dec 2000, to construction commencing on 12 Aug 2005 to full operations on 1 May 2023;
• USA has demonstrated it took almost 17-years to get its VOGTLE-3 unit operational, from Southern Nuclear’s formal application for an Early Site Permit in Aug 2006, to construction commencing on 2 Mar 2013 to full operations on 31 Jul 2023;
• France has demonstrated it will take more than 18-years to get its FLAMANVILLE-3 unit operational, from preparatory site works beginning in the summer of 2006, to construction commencing on 3 Dec 2007 and fuel loading now forecast for summer 2024;
• China has demonstrated it took more than 18-years to get its twin demonstration reactors designated SHIDAOBAY-1 (SHIDAOWAN-1) operational, from initial approval in Nov 2005, to construction commencing on 9 Dec 2012 to full operations on 6 Dec 2023;
• Russia has demonstrated it took around 20-years to get its floating twin small reactors designated AKADEMIK LOMONOSOV-1 & -2 operational, from when the Ministry for Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation (Rosatom) chose Severodvinsk in Arkhangelsk Oblast as the construction site in 2000, to construction commencing on 15 Apr 2007 to full operations on 22 May 2020;
• Canada looks like it will take more than 22-years to get the first of its four new SMRs at Darlington operational, from Ontario Power Generation (OPG) submitting an application for a site preparation licence to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) in 2006, to an anticipated first SMR unit operational “late 2028, early 2029” according to Ontario Minister of Energy, Todd Smith MPP;
• UK looks like it will take at least 19-years to get the first of its twin reactors designated HINKLEY POINT C-1 &-2, from when the site was one of eight announced by the British government in 2010, to construction commencing of HINKLEY POINT C-1 on 11 Dec 2018 to the latest expected start date at least by 2029.
Overwhelming evidence/data I see indicates nuclear technologies cannot save us!
See some factchecking by Swollen Pickles in the YouTube titled Dutton’s Nuclear Announcement: An exercise in Fact Checking Part 1, published Jun 30, duration 10 minutes.
Stanwell to test and make Redflow long duration flow batteries as it prepares for life after coal. This type of flow battery .
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Jun 2:
John D, I’d missed that Alan Kohler piece because the title did not alert me to the focus on climate change.
The path ahead is daunting indeed, and as he says, looks impossible.
It’s not rue, however, that nothing is being done. The states have active programs, as does the Federal Government. Definitely not enough urgency around, but the Climate Change Authority is said to be working on sector-specific plans beyond electricity. AEMO is not the central planning authority. Their role is to manage the NEM basically and to tell us what is needed to keep the lights on.
Geoff M, in that Jacobson graph the light blue lines I think are from 2000 plus. The distance between shows the acceleration of global heating.
I’ve been swatting up on Dutton’s nukes. I’ll try to get back later today, but I think he wants to stop renewables dead in their tracks, limit them to 40% or preferably lower, then top up with nukes.
The claim is that renewables have lost their social license in the bush.
However, nukes don’t have a social license either.
Private enterprise won’t touch nukes here because the insurance would be too high.
If we do decide to go down that the nuclear track ( I can’t think of a possible senate configuration that would let us) Alan Finkel says the UAE case is the best model for us, except that the planning phase here would take 5 years of more. Apparently the contract was signed in 2009 with Korean Kepco, who had an outfit fit for purpose and ready to go. I think it’s a cluster of 5 or 6 plants of one gigawatt each. The idea is that the planning is not much greater for a cluster than what it is for one.
However, Finkel says that as a society we decided we would not do nukes. To turn that around would itself take time.
So even if you are tolerant on nukes, we don’t have time. What we do in the next two decades is crucial to prevent the planet being cooked. So dealing with the tools we’ve got Finkel reckons 90% will have to be chaotic sun and wind, which need to be turned into AC power. Balancing will need to come from batteries, pumped hydro and some gas. His vision has 25 to 30 gigawatts of standby gas, which may only be used relatively few days in the year.
Expensive and needs offsets, but does anyone have a better idea?
BTW Finkel reckons our electricity prices are roughly mid-range, surprisingly close to France’s. Hard to see prices going down much, however.
Perhaps the most useful things that countries and the world go on a climate saving war footing.
Think about the second world war. The world went on to war footing where people accepted that it was do and die. The sort of do and die where countries were inspired into fighting a war that had to be fought.
What about climate? At a personal level it may be putting on warm clothes instead of turning on the heater AND trying to reduce travel that creates green house gases and????
Perhaps climate + might focus more on answers instead of self righteous doom and gloom?
Perhaps JD should go back and look at what I wrote in
Oh dear. Comments closed again. I’ve put another 100 days on the limit. Surely I’ll get time to do a new post in that time.
John, I’ve been looking at what I wrote in the years gone by. I know that around 2008 I was writing about Gwynne Dyer, a correspondence with a defence background who was then a columnist syndicated in 175 papers around the world. He had just spent a few months interviewing top scientists and top defence people around the world. It resulted in several columns and a book, including this column Last exit for the Holocene.
What we do now on a personal level has little effect directly on the planet, but could contribute to a social tipping point, where society as a whole sees the need for a quantum change in our priorities and approach.
There’s a group of scientists who say that if we get to net zero all will be well, perhaps chief among them Michael Mann. I’ve just found his detailed explanation:
Warming ends when carbon pollution stops
Mann thinks it is important to preserve hope at all costs, and I think it has affected his science. There is an over reliance on models, which are anyway biassed towards stability, plus a neglect of some of the main tipping points that are clearly active, and a focus on the short term (100 years). Paul Beckwith is quite scathing about him.
Must go now.
BTW, biggest effect for the planet, apart from US presidency, will be China’s next 10-year plan, which they are currently working on.
Brian: – “Alan Finkel says the UAE case is the best model for us, except that the planning phase here would take 5 years of more. Apparently the contract was signed in 2009 with Korean Kepco, who had an outfit fit for purpose and ready to go. I think it’s a cluster of 5 or 6 plants of one gigawatt each. The idea is that the planning is not much greater for a cluster than what it is for one.”
The UAE conducted an Energy Study in 2006, which I’d suggest was part of their due diligence that led to their announcement of their Nuclear Policy in 2008. See Slide 6 in this UAE Nuclear Program Update PowerPoint presentation on 14 Jan 2015. Note that the construction of each reactor was expected to take 5 years – they actually took 8+ years each.
The IAEA’s Power Reactor Information System (PRIS) provides data on some milestones for the UAE’s Barakah project implementation progress (i.e. construction starts, dates of first criticality, grid connection dates, dates of commencement of full ops) of reactors, but does not include data on the pre-implementation phase.
The UAE now have four reactors at Barakah – see PRIS data. Note that BARAKAH-4 was grid connected on 23 Mar 2024 but commissioning is still ongoing.
So BARAKAH-1 took more than 15-years to get-up-and-running from scratch and BARAKAH-4 will take more than 18-years to become fully operational. And the four reactor project cost an estimated US$34 billion (AU$51 billion).
And that’s without the impediment of a parliament, let alone a pesky Senate. No need for an EIS, or hampered by court challenges. No delays due to strikes; illegal in the UAE.
Interesting to note that the Barakah site is at risk of inundation from SLR. A look at Climate Central’s Coastal Risk Screening Tool for the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant site suggests it’s at risk of inundation beginning from around 1.0 m of SLR. And most of the site is inundated at 3.0 m of SLR.
Brian: – “BTW Finkel reckons our electricity prices are roughly mid-range, surprisingly close to France’s.”
Yep. See GlobalPetrolPrices, Electricity prices for households, December 2023, US$/kWh.
Some nuclear boosters claim France has the cheapest electricity prices in Europe. The data indicates otherwise.
Geoff, you may have seen it, but Swollen Pickles has now produced Nuclear Dutton: A fact checkers worst nightmare? Part 2 to go with Part 1.
All up, it’s an excellent rebuttal. I note the explanation of what Bill Gates actually said. His suggestion was that Australia should wait 15 years or so to see how the technology develops. Given our situation nukes were not worth bothering with.
Swollen Pickles made reference to Melbourne Energy Institute’s Net Zero Australia project, see also the Media release for a summary. Their conclusions were that net zero was achievable with renewables, plus transmission, storage and some gas. They specifically rejected nukes unless they became 30% cheaper and renewables were constrained. Dutton would like stop renewables dead in their tracks.
Also AEMO’s just-released 2024 Integrated System Plan.
It must be understood that AEMO is politically independent, and funded by the stakeholders, which includes governments and industry players. As such AEMO’s target is net zero by 2050 because that is what is legislated. Nukes are not considered because they are currently not legal.
Nevertheless, they started which 1,000 models, winnowed those down to 25 candidate development paths, out of which they formed three scenarios, from which they derived an Optimal Development Path (ODP), very much on the same page as the Net Zero Australia findings.
Chapter 6 is devoted to Storage and Gas. Yes, we need quite a bit of gas capacity, more than now, but will only use perhaps 5% of capacity each year. It will have a stabilisation and standby role. For standard electricity supply, CCS would be necessary, which is too expensive.
On gas, they say we have 11.5GW of gas now, of which 9.3GW will retire. That needs to be replaced, plus 3.5GW more.
That makes 15GW of gas to support electricity, plus they say some will be still needed still heating, and presumably more as feedstock.
It’s time to stop shouting at each other, end the hand waving and start thinking what to do to give us the best chance of a livable planet.
Thanks Brian. I did see the Swollen Pickles videos. You may find some of my comments below them. Whoever is moderating the YouTube comments seems to me to allow all manner of lies and misinformation through, yet blocks some attempts to provide factual information.
I’m astounded by the number of comments below these videos by people who just parrot misinformation and outright lies propagated by some sections of the media. I think most Australians have no idea about the factual pros & cons about the Coalition’s nuclear fantasy. An effective democracy requires an informed populace.
Geoff, I totally agree. I don’t have enough time to read long comments threads, but I do sample from time to time.
In the last little while I have done myself some damage by watching the Wimbledon tennis late at night.
For the last week I’ve been meaning to post a link to James Hansen’s latest communication Reflections on Time Scales and Butterflies (12 July 2024).
On the GISS record we have now had 13 consecutive record months in global average surface temperature, and look likely to get two more before we drop back to around about a 1.4°C anomaly. The accelerated upward trend remains in place.
I notice that at age 83 he’s moving back into the city so that he can do more work. He mourns the decline of the monarch butterfly, and the decline of insects and birds generally.
We have a lovely grevillea down the back of our place which has been in flower for about a month and is normally visited by enthusiastic flocks of rosellas. This year I have not seen a single one. My wife said she saw a bunch one morning, but they have not been back.
Sad.
Berkeley Earth published its June 2024 Temperature Update on 17Jul 2024.
Thanks, Geoff:
People are starting to take the possibility of sodium batteries
Sodium is a lot,lot cheaper and much much as abundant compared with Lithium batteries, It won’t hold as much power per kg as lithium but does not require mining and places no pollution risks.
John, there is a problem with that link. Suggest you Google the title of the article to get a clean link.
We seem to be getting news of ‘game changing’ battery developments at least once a week! Here’s one from May:
Sodium-ion batteries in the USA. Beating China at their own game!
Here’s one from last week:
CATL reveals game changing new EV battery that lasts 1.24 million miles
Good news: UN Predicts peak human population, as fertility rates plummet.
I note the article spins off to talk of AI, humanoids and other intelligent robotics projects and having sex with robots!
Further on batteries, Iron-air batteries: long-duration grid storage targets 1/10th the cost of lithium-ion looks really good:
Seems that’s what we need beyond sun and wind. If so, I can’t see a startup raising more than $800 million in venture capital over six years will make much of a dent!
Sam Evans aka The Electric Viking got really excited about this one:
U.S company reveals tiny spheres 60x more efficient than solar panels
He said it could be the most important invention of the human race. It’s just that it sounded too good to be true, and he did not know whether it was. The concept was beyond his comprehension.
Sabine Hossenfelder asks the question:
Groundbreaking New Solar Energy System – Too Good to be True?
She makes very clear that she did not say in so many words that the new technology is a scam, but leaves us in little doubt.
An interesting Youtube from Deutsche Welle
How we can make solar power at night
Solar thermal may revive again. It became too expensive as solar PV became cheaper. Now there is only 7GW of solar thermal on the planet.
One more is being built in Australia, but the future now depends on what the Chinese do, where they are building 30.
The new idea is to use sodium rather than salt for storage as it’s easier to get running again if it solidifies. Seem to be looking at 8 hours storage capacity to genuinely last the night.
Also smaller modular designs which can sit beside each other and take advantage of standardisation.
Other than that it is interesting that Chinese leadership is now the norm. I recall early this century the Germans talking about “first mover advantage” with solar.
One of the things I like about solar thermal is that you can include an auxiliary heater that keeps the salt at target minimum temperature on days of high demand and/or when bad weather reduces the heat being absorbed by the system.
Cylinder sails promise up to 90% fuel consumption cut for cargo ships
Using rotating columns instead of sales has provided a simpler to operate alternative to sails.
An alternative column “sail” is now being proposed with claims of up to 90% fuel consumption cut for cargo ships.
John, I fixed your link.
I’ve been meaning to post this one from Spratt and Dunlop, who don’t hold back:
The Albanese government has created a climate vacuum, and we will pay the price
It does raise the issue of how we talk about the climate emergency, or whether we talk at all. Ever since COVID climate has taken a back seat. Increasingly alarming weather events and science of tipping points don’t make much difference.
WWF’s Global Climate and Energy Lead Scientist Dr. Stephanie Roe takes a sensible approach in A climate scientist explains recent heat records.
Do what you can as an individual, and bring it into conversations with everyone you interact with (gently, perhaps, without scaring the bejesus out of them).
Spratt and Dunlop finger the ALP government, which is a fair cop. PM Albanese’s story is that transitioning the economy to green is an economic opportunity. None of our pollies do a good job, not even the teals, and we are using climate politically.
The biggest issue, though, is the failure to release the security report, it would seem in order to keep China as the main issue in the public mind.
Zeke Hausfather is quick out of the blocks on the July temperature records:
Second warmest July ends a 13-month record streak
Second warmest July ends a 13-month record streak, but he’s not willing to accept that we’ve entered “uncharted territory”.
Antarctica being 28C warmer than usual is interesting. Essentially it’s why we are freezing here. I did here a scientist explaining a few days ago that the southern jet stream had slipped north.
ICYMI/FYI, Nate Hagens has published a YouTube video on 31 Jul 2024, titled Exceeding Earth’s Safe Limits with Johan Rockström | TGS 134, duration 1:31:44. It begins with (per the transcript):
[00:00:00] Johan Rockström: We’re deep in the climate crisis. We’re deep in the red on the climate boundary, but what the Planetary Boundary Science shows clearly is that even if we were successful in phasing out fossil fuels, we would still breach the 1. 5 degree Celsius boundary if we do not come back into the safe space on the biosphere boundaries.
[00:00:17] It’s so few people who really recognize that 30, 3 0, 30 percent of the carbon dioxide that we emit from fossil fuel burning is actually absorbed by intact nature on land. It’s thanks to the biodiversity and the intact forest systems in particular that are buffering this. And if you don’t have a healthy planet, that capacity of buffering that stress is reduced.
[00:00:44] So my fear is that we’re shooting ourselves in the foot by emitting greenhouse gases and causing the climate crisis, and at the same time making the planet in her weakest state to deal with that crisis.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Aug 2:
Prof Eliot Jacobson also tweeted on Aug 2:
The op-ed by Gwynne Dyer in The Hamilton Spectator headlined Climate ‘anomaly’ puts us in uncharted territory, included:
Geoff, I saw the Nate Hagens interview with Johan Rockström. Thanks for extracting some of the text. My favourite bit, pretty much, began at 1:9:51:
As luck would have it, or computer algorithms being helpful for once, this episode from Just Have a Think appeared:
The money men know the truth about planetary boundaries!
We are looking at the eye of the tiger. Is their any place to run?!
Gwynne Dyer said:
Now that the federal pollies are back in town, one issue that could liven up is whether environment minister Tanya Plibersek will knock on the head Woodside’s proposed Browse gas development, an investment worth $30 billion. It involves approving a very large project which could run for 40 years, located about 3km away from an outstanding cluster of coral reefs. The ABC report has a map:
WA Premier says he’s hopeful Woodside’s Browse gas project is still viable, despite regulator’s environmental concerns
AEMO says WA is going to be short of gas for the domestic market, in the short term, as well as from next decade as existing fields run down.
To law professors like Samantha Hepburn the solution is easy. See Huge gas fields – under a coral reef. Will a rejection on environmental grounds stop Woodside’s Browse project?
Perhaps she does not understand that diverting contracted export gas is not all that easy, especially when Woodside, although they are the project operator, is in fact a minority partner, around 30%. The other partners are mostly companies from countries that Woodside exports gas to.
What we know now is that the WA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has sent Woodside a letter saying they found the project “unacceptable.”
The federal environment department is said to have similar concerns. It should be noted that these concerns are strong irrespective of the GHG emissions factor. Drilling over 50 wells next door to a reef cluster teeming with life could be characterised as crazy brave, or foolhardy. Woodside have of course promised to be careful.
Last December resources minister Madeleine King expressed her support for the project, so we’ll see how all that works out.
The US has become a world-leading petro state under Jo Biden:
‘This used to be a beautiful place’: how the US became the world’s biggest fossil fuel state
The US has become a petrostate and is still, even under President Biden, permitting new drilling
John Sterman of MIT
Also:
Some countries are achieving notable gains compared to us.
John, the Nordic countries lead in so many areas. Norway is still a paradox, because they make a mozza out of fossil fuels.
I’ve just found this story on Sweden:
How Sweden balances emission cuts with economic growth
Key to their success is bipartison support, with all levels of government, business and industry on board.
Is the hydrogen vehicle dream over? Australian car buyers are making their choice clear
For cars, the answer is, yes, over before it began. Only five were sold last quarter.
On the other hand:
Here’s Alan Finkel, who bought one:
For Finkel the only charging point in Melbourne was the Toyota factory, an hour’s drive.
How?
US petroleum geologist Art Berman wrote in his blog piece on 23 Jan 2024 headlined Draining America First—The Beginning of the End for Shale Gas, including:
It now appears that there are similar danger signs for US tight oil production.
Art Berman was in conversation with Johan Landgren in the YouTube video titled Arthur Berman: The Perfect Energy Storm – Peak Cheap Oil and Natural Gas is here, published 16 Feb 2024, duration 0:55:07. On when the US shale gas decline is likely, Art Berman said:
“…I’m quite confident that before this decade is over we’re going to see some serious supply concerns by markets for both oil and natural gas, and it would not surprise me if that happened in a year or two, ah, as opposed to, you know, the five or six years that we have remaining in this decade.“
Published by Yale Climate Connections on 19 Aug 2024 was a piece by Jeff Masters headlined When will climate change turn life in the U.S. upside down? It included:
To be honest, the climate is getting very noisy, as complex systems are said to do before they break out and flip.
Unless you can say you are 99.9999% sure that everything is going to be OK, then it’s dangerous.
We had 300ppm in September 1988, two months after Hansen’s Senate witness put climate change on the map politically. That’s what we had in the Eemian, when sea levels were 6-10 metres higher, and increased by three metres in one century along the way.
A lot of scientists who are not really Earth Systems scientists are trying to convince themselves and everyone that we are still in a ‘safe’ zone, or could be if we get a hurry on. Hansen calls them “lukewarmists”.
See An URGENT Chat with the Godfather of Climate Science at about 10:21.
I did hear Gavin Schmidt once say to his peers in a NASA GISS seminar that ice sheet decay was too complex to be captured by models, and always will be.
Hansen knows he can’t be sure, but his best estimate on all the data available is remarkably similar to Will Steffen’s who said what we are doing is like the asteroid strike of 65mya in geological terms, just plus rather than minus.
On 21 Aug 2024, Berkeley Earth published their report titled July 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It began with:
Thanks, Geoff. Some interesting graphs and figures.
I love the way he smooths and soothes in summary. Mostly La Niña -> El Niño, with some internal variance, and maybe a bit from changes in shipping.
At the bottom they do link to Hausfather’s NYT Opinion: I study climate change. The data is telling us something new:
Etc.
He does acknowledge acceleration at the end and:
Not sure he’s identified the signals, which are meant to tell us what it means and where we are heading.
Hansen has told us that if we hold atmospheric GHGs at current levels for millennia we’ll get 10°C and 60m of sea level rise. Beyond that we’ll get ocean acidity and may run low on oxygen to breathe!
The Guardian did a decent survey of what climate scientists thought, as reported in May – ‘We should have better answers by now’: climate scientists baffled by unexpected pace of heating.
I’ll have to finish this comment later!
In May scientists generally were happy to admit they were baffled. Mostly they work on grants and admitting they don’t know what is going on is not good. Subsequent articles in The Guardian produced a variety of responses. Mostly scientists were shocked in some way, some saying they expected the heating, but not the damage it did. Many were walking back on their ignorance.
I think there is a lot of emotion involved, and sometimes that effects their science, so I think we are entitled to make judgements about who has the most credible views. It’s a bit of a jungle, but I think David Spratt and Ian Duncan do well in sorting through it all.
I was interested in Gavin Schmidt’s reflections when interviewed by The Guardian in ‘We should have better answers by now’: climate scientists baffled by unexpected pace of heating. Back in March he wrote:
Now:
To wit:
He’s obviously aware that modelling has limitations, and it is not good enough that their existence at all depends on voluntary work.
Policy makers are not doing well either, as a new study from the Potsdam Institute shows:
Climate policies that achieved major emission reductions: Global evidence from two decades
From their email:
I’d kinda rather they left the last sentence off. Reading the Discussion section, the key to successful policies is that they usually have more than one characteristic.
Meanwhile, Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on 23 Aug 2024:
Check out the figure titled Days per year that max temperature exceeds 35° C at various GMST anomalies (1995-2014 average, +1.5 °C warming, +2 °C warming, +3 °C warming) in the article headlined The Future of Extreme Heat in Cities: What We Know — and What We Don’t.
Best make sure the air con is working this summer, and every summer from now on!
Very alarming, Geoff!
To change the subject slightly, we do need good leadership from our politicians.
Peter Stahel is managing director and co-owner of Essential, a progressive research and communications company, a non-executive director of drug law reform organisation Unharm and a former Greens adviser. He outlined his solution in the context of current complaints about pollie behaviour in Unpopular opinion: We need to pay politicians a lot more if we want better behaviour.
He reckons there are four types of people who go into politics:
I don’t think it helps to use the label ‘sociopaths’. Just psychopaths. Our pollies are not the worst people on the planet.
He has a solution which I don’t think most voters would hack – give them more support and pay them better.
Journalist reporting on all this should remember they are held in about the same esteem as politicians, just above used car salesman.
I’m told it’s mainly Coalition men who harass women in other parties. Labor men I’m told do it mostly to Greens.
This is a summary of an article from the ABIX – Roy Morgan Daily News Summary:
As global heating continues, insurance is going to become more expensive and in many cases unaffordable.
I think as the Earth System continues to warm, more risky places will become unaffordable to insure, or ultimately uninsurable.
It seems to me the most likely major economic disruption from climate change over the next few years in Australia might well be a collapse of the housing market in flood-prone, high humid heat-prone and wildfire-prone regions.
If one can’t insure property, then one likely won’t get or maintain a mortgage.
As awareness of risk grows, the financial value of risky places will inevitably fall. Where meeting that risk is more expensive than decision-makers think a place is worth, it simply won’t be defended. It will be unofficially abandoned.
Parts of Aus were over 41 deg c today About 106 deg F?
Arctic sea ice is looking the third worst ever and close to the 2012 record. It’s been bad in the last 3-4 years.
Antarctic sea ice is close to the 2023 record.
Paul Beckwith and Peter Carter are in no doubt. Tipping points are tipping. See The Looming Threat of Climate Tipping Points.
Paul Beckwith asks Has the AMOC gone Amuck? Investigate Yourself!!
Answer for me, Yes it looks like that way. Question is, Will it stop? Answer, More likely than not. We should act as though it will.
Why half a million Australian properties could be all-but uninsurable:
Nuclear reactors a mile underground promise safe, cheap power!!
Deep Fission has come up with a new solution to the economic and safety problems of nuclear power that is, to say the least, novel. The idea is to build a reactor that’s under 30 inches (76 cm) wide and stick it down a mile-deep (1.6-km) drill shaft. Read more
The SMH article headlined Why half a million Australian properties could be all-but uninsurable included:
Evidence/data I see indicates sea level rise (SLR) is likely to be 40 cm by 2050, and well over 100 cm (and possibly 200+ cm) by 2100.
In the YouTube video titled sea level rise – is Greenland beyond its tipping point?, published 29 Jul 2024, duration 04:19, glaciologist Professor Dr Jason Box, from the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, said from time interval 0:01:50:
“Now if climate continues warming, which is more than likely, then the loss commitment grows. My best guess, if I had to put out numbers; so by 2050, 40 centimetres above 2000 levels; and then by the year 2100, 150 centimetres, or 1.5 metres above the 2000 level, which is something like four feet. Those numbers follow the dashed-red curve on the IPCC’s 6th Assessment, which represents the upper 5-percentile of the model calculations, because the model calculations don’t deliver ice as quickly as is observed. If you take the last two decades of observations, the models don’t even reproduce that until 40 years from now.”
John, interesting, but they say the concept still has a long way to go, so we’ll need to plan to get to net zero with other technology.
Geoff, the SMH paper keeps sticking to the IPCC script, which suggests that the authors don’t really understand SLR.
I read recently that Greenland, which could well tip before W Antarctica, was probably limited to two metres during the Eemian.
Which would mean that W Antarctica went pretty much all the way, along with thermal expansion, land-based glaciers and a bit from E Antarctica.
That’s from memory.
Hansen keeps saying there was three metres within a century during the Eemian. I think he got that from Karina von Schuckmann.
I think 2+ is likely and we should be planning for 6, that is, the high end of Englander’s table of options.
Brian: – “Geoff, the SMH paper keeps sticking to the IPCC script, which suggests that the authors don’t really understand SLR.”
Indeed. I sent emails to:
* Caitlin Fitzsimmons, environment and climate reporter for SMH re her article published on Aug 20 in the SMH paper edition headlined Success hot, failure hotter for NSW, which included:
* Bianca Hall, environment and climate reporter for The Age, re her article published in the SMH paper edition on Aug 27 headlined Changes to climate lead to fears over insurance, including:
I stated to them both evidence/data I see indicates sea level rise (SLR) is likely to be 40 cm by 2050, and well over 100 cm (and possibly 200+ cm) by 2100. I highlighted several compelling data sources.
Only Caitlin Fitzsimmons responded.
Brian: – “I think 2+ is likely and we should be planning for 6, that is, the high end of Englander’s table of options.”
I think that would be a prudent approach.
I think the powers that be are still in denial about how fast SLR will likely be in the coming decades.
Good one Geoff.
Two new entries at Climate Code Red.
Mark Carter – Q: Are new liquid airline fuels good climate policy? A: Pigs might fly
Carter reckons we are spending $1.7billion on a dud ‘Sustainable’ Aviation Fuels (SAF) scheme which will actually increase emissions.
The second – State of the global energy system – is a bunch of links to a World Energy Data site. There among other things I found the Sea Level page. Unlike a lot of scientists these days it does not tiptoe around a bloke called J Hansen, in fact runs a video of him talking about the Ice Melt paper back in 2016. It makes your blood run cold!
E3G is an interesting organisation with many significant backers looking for paths forward. A recent post:
Living on the edge: climate tipping points reshaping geopolitics
Their goal is “to translate climate politics, economics and policies into action.”
Yahoo News UK published on 30 Aug 2024 an article by Rob Waugh headlined Startling facts from bombshell sea level rise report. It begins with:
Surging seas in a warming world is a UN technical brief that provides a summary of the latest science on sea-level rise and its present-day and projected impacts — including coastal flooding — at a global and regional level, with a focus on major coastal cities in the Group of Twenty (G20) countries and the Pacific Small Island Developing States.
Thanks, Geoff.
From somewhere I picked up a BBC article – Surging seas are coming for us all, warns UN chief which had links to WMO – State of the Climate in South-West Pacific 2023 and the UN report Surging seas in a warming world.
I can’t see why the Pacific folk don’t give us a harder time. And surely they know that 1.5°C is a disaster for them!
Also this is a big red light for them:
It is said that when SLR reaches 5-7mm pa you likely lose your beach lines.
No-one seems to be talking about acidity.
A GMST anomaly of +1.5 °C (30-year mean) relative to the 1850-1900 baseline is likely to be breached by around 2030, and the +2.0 °C (30-year mean) threshold sometime in the 2040s.
At +1.5 °C (30-year mean) warming level 70-90% of coral reefs would likely be destroyed, and only 1% remains at +2.0 °C (30-year mean) warming level.
The loss of the GBR would be a disaster for Australia.
Have you looked at the UN’s technical brief titled Surging Seas in a Warming World: The latest science on present-day impacts and future projections of sea-level rise? Table 1 includes projected rates of SLR for the periods 2040-2060 & 2080-2100, for a range of end-of-century warming scenarios from 1.4 °C to 4.4 °C. I’d suggest the projections are likely far too reticent.
The Earth System GMST anomaly is already at +1.3 °C (30-year mean) relative to the 1850-1900 baseline, and the rate of SLR is already at around 5.0 mm/year now. Since satellite altimetry data began in 1992-3, the rate of SLR has been accelerating with a doubling time of about 18-years.
I think to suggest in the report table that the rate of SLR in 2040-2060 would be less than what it currently is, at around 5.0 mm/year, is just ludicrous.
I would not be at all surprised if the rate of SLR progressively accelerated to around 10 mm/year by sometime in the 2030s, and then accelerated further to around 20 mm/year by sometime in the 2040s.
Geoff, in short I agree with your assessment as being more likely than the Technical Report, which I did look at.
Figure 1 indicates cities under threat, which should scare everyone. However, when I see them following the IPCC playbook I tend to lose interest. I did notice that in Table 2 New Orleans seemed one of the most threatened, which is not a surprise.
According to the Copernicus record August 2024 was the joint-warmest August globally (together with August 2023), being 1.51°C above the pre-industrial level. It was the 13th month in a 14-month period for which the global-average surface air temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
They expect 2024 to be the hottest year on record.
Dr Kristina Dahl or the Union of Concerned Scientists, commenting on the Copernicus finding says 2024 “could also be one of the coolest years we’ll see in the decades ahead.”
The Guardian published on Sep 10 an article by Adam Morton headlined ‘Two incredible extreme events’: Antarctic sea ice on cusp of record winter low for second year running. It included:
NOAA climate scientist Zack Labe tweeted on Sep 10:
On the Zack Labe tweet, just last night I checked the NSIDC Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph and came to conclusions about the decadal shift which Labe has captured in his graph.
Re Adam Morton’s piece on the Antarctic, I think it is instructive to read the link to the December 2023 article Red alert in Antarctica: the year rapid, dramatic change hit climate scientists like a ‘punch in the guts’.
Scientists really don’t know what is going on. To me 2023 looked like a multifaceted tipping point.
Matthew England said:
Except politicians and many capitalists can’t see that we need to pan how to survive and thrive in a world that could leave 2°C behind us by 2040 or soon thereafter.
Recently I came upon this report from E3G:
Living on the edge: climate tipping points reshaping geopolitics
They say:
That’s on page 34. They then go on to talk of the need for “anticipatory governance and strategic foresight”. That was in September 2022.
Here in Oz there is talk of not committing to new targets until after the next election!
Nate Hagens published a YouTube video on 18 Sep 2024 titled Rapid-Fire Answers to the Biggest Climate Questions with Stefan Rahmstorf | TGS 141, duration 1:40:44, where ocean and climate physicist Stefan Rahmstorf joins Nate for an overview on the most common questions and misconceptions concerning the state of the climate, including the nuances of what our future planetary home might look like. The conversation was recorded on 30 Jul 2024.
Meanwhile, Bob Henson & Jeff Masters investigate Epic floods are wreaking havoc from Africa to Asia to Europe, published at Yale Connections on 18 Sep 2024. It begins with:
eVinci nuclear microreactor moves towards commercialization
Could be practical small scale reactor
Thanks John, this is interesting:
I’ve seen some European plans working on modular reactors where they can be manufactured and shipped to wherever they are used on the back of a truck. Hard to wrap my head around the cooling system, but I expect it works!
Geoff, I had seen the Rockström interview, but not the Henson & Jeff Masters piece. They are always good value.
I liked this from Rockström:
I think Rockström is very deliberate in how he communicates, always offering hope. He realises that he is not an engineer, a politician, policy maker, sociologist etc.
He tells an interesting story I think most completely in his Frontiers Planet Prize lecture Johan Rockström on navigating planetary boundaries for a sustainable future.
Similar, but different in his recent TED TalkThe Tipping Points of Climate Change — and Where We Stand | Johan Rockström | TED
Better look at the slides in that one!
He’s a bit on the bright side, I think, but deliberate in his strategy, using, for example IPCC data, when he knows it’s out of date. Doesn’t want to get himself shut out, like James Hansen is for many.
His big project is now in the real form he has been working towards in launching Planetary Health Check as a practical resource to provide parametres for policy makers.
I’d like the Greens to be promoting this kind of thing, calmly and rationally, rather that the shouty politicking we are getting!
I’d like to see our national government adopt it as a working parameter. For starters:
Time for me to get some sleep while I’m dreaming!
When would the proposed Westinghouse eVinci™ Microreactor be operational? That timeframe will be subject to licensing and regulatory requirements.
The proposed Westinghouse eVinci™ Microreactor uses TRISO fuel – 19.75% enriched fuel.
Per the World Nuclear Association:
These are critical details that mean commercially available SMRs at large-scale quantity deployments are likely decades away. We/humanity cannot afford to wait decades.
Meanwhile, per Prof Eliot Jacobson, the global mean SST anomaly is back to record levels.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on 28 Sep 2024:
Geoff, I accidentally threw your last comment out last night when I was cleaning out the spam. Now restored.
I tried to add the image at the end, but it would not work. I’ll try here:
Plus global temp update from Hausfather via Climate Watcher:
Still gobsmacking!
NOAA has published their CO₂₋ₑ for year-2023 – their value is 534 ppm, with an AGGI of 1.515 (relative to AGGI = 1 in 1990).
Meanwhile, there are at least 64 dead and millions of Americans without power after Hurricane Helene’s deadly march across the Southeast. Moody’s suggests the devastation could cost up to $34 billion.
The Earth System has left the Holocene, transiting towards the Mid-Pliocene by mid-century, on the way towards the Mid-Miocene by the end of this century.
ICYMI/FYI, there’s a YouTube video published 15 Aug 2024 titled The Tipping Points of Climate Change — and Where We Stand | Johan Rockström | TED, duration 0:18:35. On consequences (from time interval 02:32):
“We’re seeing bigger and bigger invoices being sent by the Earth system onto societies across the entire world, in droughts, floods, heat waves, disease patterns, human-reinforced storms, scientifically attributed to human-caused climate change.
Forty degrees Celsius of life-threatening heat across all continents, occurring in 2023.
Fifty-two degrees Celsius hitting the over 1,000 who lost their lives at the Hajj pilgrimage in June in Mecca.
Three times higher climate change risks now attributed to our cause of climate change.
2023, up to 12,000 deaths, 200 billion US dollars of cost, just in the US, up to 100 billion US dollars. This is seriously causing economic costs.
We have scientifically, in the past, shown that this could cost a few percent of global GDP of the climate impacts caused by us.
I can tell you that the latest scientific assessment is what you see on the screen here. An 18-percent loss of GDP by 2050 if we now follow the current path. This is equivalent to 38 trillion US dollars of loss per year in 2050.
It’s starting to hurt. Both in human social costs and an economic cost. And this is happening at 1.2 degrees Celsius of global mean surface temperature rise. And we’re following a pathway that takes us to 2.7 degrees Celsius in only 70 years.
And we’ve had a 10,000-year period where our civilizations have developed, where we’ve had an enormous privilege of a planet at 14 degrees Celsius, plus or minus 0.5 degrees Celsius. That’s the Holocene since we left the last ice age.
And if you look three million years back, we never exceeded two degrees Celsius. That’s the warmest temperature on Earth during the entire Quaternary. The coldest point, minus five degrees Celsius, Ice Age. I call this the “corridor of life.”“
Geoff, yes I had watched the Rockström TED talk, which is admirably blunt and has the virtue of brevity in that it only lasts 18:35 mins but tells a big story with excellent slides.
Yet he is still on the bright side, I think because he doesn’t want to get into arguments over detail. For example, he cites the current temperature as 1.2°C. In another talk he points out that 1.2°C is from the latest IPCC report, which on the science was 2022, I think. He knows we have blown through that, but if you specify anything different you have to explain it, and it becomes a distraction from your main argument.
Another is 5°C above the last glacial period.
James Hansen is now saying 7°C, which recognises that there was masses of clearing, rice growing etc which affected the climate before fossil fuels and the industrial age.
Again, that is probably right, but not mainstream.
The segment you cite is devastating and departs from the story our dear leader is telling about economic opportunities and a bright future for all.
Perhaps that TED talk is the single most important one that all pollies should watch as part of their induction.
Geoff, I hadn’t seen the NOAA ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS INDEX (AGGI) and I have a question.
At 534ppm I think James Hansen would reckon that if we keep that up we are looking at complete deglaciation at least at ‘more likely than not” probably ‘very likely’.
The problem is in how methane is calculated in this context.
I think the standard GWP (Global Warming Potential) is 26 times CO2 as per IPCC. Yet if we are aiming for net zero at that point it is not net zero if the GWP for one year is 100 or more.
Many tipping point factors are already in play. Rockström recognises that scientists have serially underestimated how dangerous the climate is. We should be using formulas that recognise risk, whereas the MO of science is not to scare people unless they are completely sure.
I’d be interested in your view.
Brian: – “For example, he cites the current temperature as 1.2°C.”
It depends on what GMST anomaly dataset one cites.
Per the Carbon Brief post by Zeke Hausfather on 13 Jun 2024 headlined Analysis: What record global heat means for breaching the 1.5C warming limit, the GMST anomaly (long-term) as of 2023:
COMPOSITE: _ _ _ _ +1.30 °C
Berkeley Earth: _ _ _ +1.41 °C
HadCRUT5: _ _ _ _ _ _+1.30 °C
NASA GISTEMP: _ _ +1.24 °C
NOAA GlobalTemp: +1.22 °C
Copernicus ERA5 is not included but it sits very close to HadCRUT5.
Prof Eliot Jacobson has made an attempt to determine how NOAA derives the CO₂₋ₑ figure and has provided an update in his blog post CO2-equivalent Update, dated 1 Oct 2024.
I think the derived CO₂₋ₑ concentration figure is a better indicator for where the Earth System warming trajectory is heading, compared with just the CO₂ concentration.
Berkeley Earth published on 2 Oct 2024 its August 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It began with:
Published yesterday (2 Oct 2024) on YouTube was a video titled How bad is it going to get? | Humanity Is Calling – Leadership Summit, Portugal | Rupert Read, duration 0:20:50.
I had not caught up with Rupert Read, thanks Geoff.
He’s pretty spot on. I’d only have minor queries, like, it’s not five minutes past midnight, we passed midnight a long time ago.
Consider this: in 2007 James Hansen told us we had gone too far, we should head back to 350ppm. In fact we blew through 350ppm in September 1988, two months after Hansen’s US Senate testimony.
Incidentally, when I studied German language and literature last century I was impressed by a poem by Friedrich Hölderlin who was cited by Read:
Lots of other good quotes.
I see that Read is a member of The Greens as in Rupert Read | Climate Truthfulness & Its Positive Relation to Climate Adaptation | Green Party Conf. and was a founder of Extinction Rebellion.
Again he is realistic. He urges the UK Greens to come up with plans for adaptation. Would that the Australian Greens did likewise!
He says not to believe anyone who tells us that they have a solution, which, if implemented, everything will be alright.
Actually Johan Rockström is doing just that. Which may be why, in large part, he gets the big gigs and Read talks to the Climate Majority Project.
“He urges the UK Greens to come up with plans for adaptation. Would that the Australian Greens did likewise!”
The Greens are having a run of success that sees them winning inner city seats on their advocacy of issues affecting low income tenants. Bob Brown said on the box the other day something like “the new generation has to decide where they want to go” The Greens in my patch seem to be doing better and better. Part of it may be more people concerned about climate change and the other part about things like accommodation issues.
Hurricane Milton, one of the top ten strongest hurricanes ever recorded, is projected to cross the coast of Florida around the Tampa Bay area in the early hours of Thursday morning (Florida time). See CNN’s coverage in the YouTube video titled Hurricane Milton’s magnitude brings veteran meteorologist to tears, duration 0:10:28.
Per the US National Hurricane Center & Central Pacific Hurricane Centre, re Hurricane Milton Advisory Number 15, as at 04 PM CDT Tuesday October 08, 2024, the Peak Storm Surge Forecast shows a range of expected storm surges along most of the Florida and South Carolina coastlines and all of the Georgia coastline. The advisory includes:
Published earlier today (Oct 9) in The Guardian was an article by Damian Carrington headlined Earth’s ‘vital signs’ show humanity’s future in balance, say climate experts. It begins with:
The assessment was published in the journal Bioscience on 8 Oct 2024, titled The 2024 state of the climate report: Perilous times on planet Earth, by William J Ripple, Christopher Wolf, Jillian W Gregg, Johan Rockström, Michael E Mann, Naomi Oreskes, Timothy M Lenton, Stefan Rahmstorf, Thomas M Newsome, Chi Xu, Jens-Christian Svenning, Cássio Cardoso Pereira, Beverly E Law, & Thomas W Crowther.
Geoff, I heard on the radio that Hurricane Milton intensified in 11 hours, from memory. It was like jumping out of the Bay of Mexico and flattening all before it. At the northern edge it overlapped with Helene.
I’m betting, however, that many will just build back where they were. This NASA thread is diabolical, as scientists struggle for certainty.
Meanwhile the William J Ripple et al report sounds a dire warning. I’m with Trevor Hughes at USA Today:
Hurricanes on repeat: Natural disasters ‘don’t feel natural anymore’.
I’ve just given myself another 100 days to write a new post!
Meanwhile, American zoos seem to go to a lot of trouble to protect their animals in hurricanes according to this BBC post.
However, not much there about storm surges. I did hear an interview with a zoo officer where they had 2,500 animals, protection against high winds, but not against high water.
I’m wondering how they got on.
John, concerning your comment about the Greens doing better and better, many in Labor here can see the rising mould also.
I do wish the Greens would shed their junk economics.
I took a look at their policy site, and was not altogether surprised to find that there was nothing on climate or the environment.
I did, however, find Bandt’s Robin Hood Tax Plan, which Bandt really got from Max Chandler-Mather, who dreamt it up with Johnathon Sri. A kind of conceded pass grade high school Marxism.
The 10 companies listed there are large, but not unduly profitable. I could nominate companies that are two or three times more profitable, and some quite large, but I’m not going to.
To take Woolworths, which has been in the news a bit, the Bandt scheme shows that they made $2398 million after interest and before tax, which on Greens figures is levied at just over 30%, which would make the tax the highest in the OECD. After the taxation office makes off like a bandit with another $425 million, the tax rate is then 48.4%. At that rate no sane capitalist would invest in Australia.
That’s not the finish. Woolies paid out another $103 million on ‘abnormals’. Don’t know what it is, but common enough.
Then they paid the shareholders 78.6% of the remainder, reinvesting 21.4% back into improving the business.
The company is not hoarding profits, it’s a scheme of arrangement whereby shareholders own a share. A goodly portion of the shares are owned by super companies, so as a shareholder (which in this case I am not) I’d reckon the Australian people are already getting a good deal of the lolly.
I’m hoping that the major parties will think carefully about Max and preference voting in Griffith. In the AFR power list. Max Chandler-Mather is number nine in ‘Overt power’. He only has Albo, Penny Wong, Dutton, Jim Chalmers and Richard Marles, in that order, in front of him. Adam Bandt is nowhere to be seen.
Albo said in question time on Thursday that the only reason we have Greens in the Qld parliament is because the LNP put them there. That too might change. Amy McMahon said she was expecting to get in without preferences.
That too is possible.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Oct 12:
On 10 Oct 2024, PhysOrg published an article headlined Catastrophically warm predictions are more plausible than previously thought, say climate scientists. It included:
Geoff, here’s the graph from Prof Jacobsen:
In case you can’t read the print the last year is 2038.
The PhysOrg article seems to suggest that there is more work to be done on climate sensitivity. I don’t have enough maths to make a worthwhile comment. If I’m right I think there ECS (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity) is still south of James Hansen’s.
David Spratt has had another go in Climate’s economic impacts will have unexpected social and security consequences.
Along the way he quotes Prof. Johan Rockström as saying:
The quote is from a Mongabay interview Planetary boundary pioneer Johan Rockström awarded 2024 Tyler Prize
That was Feb 2024. I missed it! It’s actually a good history of ‘planetary boundaries’ concept, and not a bad exposition. Seems Will Steffen together with Paul J. Crutzen and John R. McNeill was central to the development of the Earth Systems Science concept and the notion of the Great Acceleration from around 1950.
US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted on Oct 16:
Is the end of economic growth already here?
On 14 Oct 2024, The Guardian published an article by Patrick Greenfield headlined Trees and land absorbed almost no CO2 last year. Is nature’s carbon sink failing? It included:
Probably close.
The Guardian article I think stems from Ripple et al – The 2024 state of the climate report: Perilous times on planet Earth.
The authors include Lenton, Rockström, and Michael E Mann, saying for once what he really thinks under cover of the multi-authored paper.
Paul Beckwith’s Mishmash of Climate Mayhem: Failing Ocean Currents, Failing Natural Carbon Sinks, Accelerating GHG… includes that paper and a host of similar material.
I have a high regard for Beckwith. Here clearly thinks the Earth System is broken, the consequences are starting to play out quite seriously. He’s been saying for years that we’ll need drawdown and solar radiation management.
I’ve just had an email from the Australian Security Leaders Climate Group:
Summit Communiqué: Addressing the threat of climate change to Australia’s security landscape
Australia’s Climate Security Challenge
Protect, Prevent & Prepare: A Climate & Security Action Plan for Australia
No joy there, I’m afraid. We have been warned!
Google goes nuclear in world-first small reactor agreement: Very interesting sums that make it a potential winner.
John, I think one of the other big techs is doing the same.
Meanwhile from Roy Morgan:
I think in India it’s getting too hot to live, so they are burning coal flat out to increase aircon!
Here we go – Big Tech’s energy needs mean nuclear power is getting a fresh look from electricity providers
John D: – “Very interesting sums that make it a potential winner.”
How so? Apart from the NuScale SMR Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) project, which was abandoned last year due to being too expensive, there are no other SMR designs that have yet gained US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval. See NRC Licensing Activities for Small Modular Reactors.
In Dec 2023, the US NRC approved Kairos Power’s plans for ONLY the construction of Hermes, a 35-MWₜₕ non-power demonstration version of the company’s fluoride salt-cooled high temperature reactor, in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, making it the first non–light water reactor approved for construction in the United States in more than 50 years.
In mid-2024, Kairos Power started excavation and groundwork at the Hermes site through a contract with Barnard Construction Company. The US Department of Energy will invest up to $303 million to support the design, construction, and commissioning of Hermes through its Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program.
Kairos has also filed a construction permit application for a two-unit version of Hermes, dubbed Hermes 2, also non-power demonstration units.
Hermes is anticipated to be operational in 2027. We’ll see, as FOAK nuclear projects have an extensive history of being notoriously late.
The Hermes reactor is being used to inform the development of the company’s commercial reactor that could be deployed next decade.
Kairos Power expects Hermes to lead to the development of a commercial-scale 140-MWₑ KP-FHR reactor, which the company is calling KP-X.
Despite the regulatory nod for Hermes, Kairos Power still faces significant challenges. The US NRC has not yet approved the design and construction of the commercial KP-X SMR unit. No commercial SMRs have begun construction, let alone been commissioned yet, which means the economics and deployment times remain unproven/unsubstantiated.
The Kairos Power KP-X uses TRISO fuel, which requires more energy dense high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU), enriched to 19.75%, unlike many existing PWRs that use enriched fuels of less than 5%.
Dominion Energy has partnered with X-energy, which is developing a 80 MWₑ reactor that can be scaled into a ‘four-pack’ 320 MWₑ power plant. It also uses TRISO fuel.
Per the World Nuclear Association:
It seems to me commercial HALEU fuel manufacturing at large-scale appears to be a critical bottleneck.
Meanwhile, China’s SHIDAO BAY-1 & Russia’s AKADEMIK LOMONOSOV-1 & -2 are real world small reactor examples that I’d suggest thoroughly undermine claims that SMRs could be cheaper and faster to deploy.
John D posted on the fire ant thread ‘ZeroCAL’ cement production process takes CO2 out of the equation:
The Open Letter by Climate Scientists to the Nordic Council of Ministers, dated Oct 2024, is undersigned by 44 experts from 15 countries issuing a stark warning about the dangers of crossing an ocean circulation tipping point. It began with:
Thankyou Geoff, some big names there.
See also Paul Beckwith – AMOC Collapse Probability by 2050 Pegged Between 42% and 76% in new Preprint.
A 90% chance of happening between 2037 and 2059, which pivots around 2050.
I would think close to zero chance of AMOC NOT collapsing this century.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted late Oct 25:
And Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Oct 26:
The post included a graph of Importance of Issues to Vote Among U.S. Registered Voters
Published yesterday (Oct 25) was a YouTube video titled Climate Extremes (Full Documentary), duration 0:52:20. Featuring insights from scientists including Johan Rockström, Daniel Swain, Stefan Rahmstorf, and Samantha Burgess from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), and University of California/US National Center for Atmospheric Research, Climate Extremes lays out the complex dynamics of planetary boundaries and tipping points, providing viewers with a deeper understanding of the powerful forces presently shaping Earth.
We had an election the other day. Crisafulli said the issues were crime, cost of living, housing and health.
There was a big “it’s time” factor. I said at the outset that if Labor wanted to win Steve Miles would have to solve the housing crisis, at a minimum. No-one could do that.
Labor were expecting to lose everything north of Brisbane’s northern suburbs, so it was realistically about saving the furniture.
Most thought Labor won the campaign, and maybe a miracle was just possible. The early vote count was positive, but as the tsunami of prepolls came in the prospects melted away.
Antony Green was not at his best. I think Qld elections are more complex than most. Too often he gave seats away, then had to take them back. Quite late in the evening he did say that neither side looked like getting the magic 47 seats.
Unfortunately Steve Miles hit ‘print’ on his speech at that point, so he did not concede. However, by the time he walked to the broadcast point Green had given it away (probably, not certain) to the LNP.
So the wise men from south of the border, who had flown in to become experts on Qld politics on the ABC, called it graceless.
Miles is a conviction politician, and was telling the voters that he would maintain his convictions and would hold the new mob to account.
There is a half decent account of the election at SBS. The ABC picks up on the regional divide.
Labor only had four ministers from the regions, the LNP will reverse the situation with 4/17 from Brisbane.
I think the city vs the bush divide is becoming larger, if anything. However, as we have said here before, regions are different from each other in Qld. The place is vast. Townsville is about as far from Brisbane by air as Melbourne. Adelaide is closer to Brisbane than Cairns. Then north of Cairns, Thursday Island is another 800km. In between Cape Yorke is about the size of Victoria.
If you happen to be in Birdsville, Adelaide is closer than Brisbane.
The basic problem is that nothing is ever enough. For example, the Bruce Highway is said to be a goat track north of Gympie. No matter how much you fix it, it will never be good enough.
Meanwhile, in Brisbane and SEQ we are flat out driving anywhere for much of the day.
Other than that, the Greens had a big fade out. I can assure Adan Bandt that he has been misinformed by his Qld colleagues. He thinks Labor was fighting the Greens instead of the LNP, so handed the keys to the kingdom to the LNP.
I can assure him that it was actually the LNP who decided they wanted to clean out the Greens. There was a bare-knuckled letter box war going on from way before the campaign officially started. Then in voting it does appear that the LNP preferenced the Greens last, in our electorate below One Nation and the Animal Justice Party.
Which does not explain why Michael Berkman lost 7.3% of his primary vote. Some have said that holding up the housing legislation in the Senate, and mobilizing the Muslim vote, had something to do with it.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted earlier today (Oct 31):
The 2-year running mean is currently at +1.49 °C, approaching the +1.5 °C GMST anomaly warming threshold (relative to the 1850-1900 baseline, per Copernicus ERA5 dataset).
Thanks for that latest from Eliot Jacobson, Geoff.
I’d appreciate hearing what you make of Gavin Schmidt’s post and the discussion thread.
Seems the CERES Earth Energy Balance took a dip last year. I came at this through the New Scientist article Earth is now gaining less heat than it has for several years
And:
So they are saying the models are OK, nothing to see here.
A couple of comments down we find that Schmidt has posted a loess curve, rather than a moving average. For a 36-day moving average, compare Jacobson’s graph.
I’m only a lay person without scientific quals, but Schmidt looks like myopic cherry picking, which is frankly disappointing.
The article ends with this:
I find that sad too. First, Sanderson ignores the possibility of feedbacks and tipping points.
Secondly, Leon Simons stressed that we need to keep a careful eye on the numbers. We can’t if we don’t gather the data.
Brian: – “I’d appreciate hearing what you make of Gavin Schmidt’s post and the discussion thread.”
I think a look at a number of key indicators, not just one, about the Earth System is worth a look. I find Prof Eliot Jacobson’s tweet on Oct 29 an interesting one:
The table includes:
• Global surface temperature: _ _ _ _ _ _25 Oct 2024 _ 15.00 °C _ _ _ New high seasonal record
• Global sea surface temperature: _ _ _ 27 Oct 2024 _ 20.79 °C _ _ _ just below record seasonal high
• Global sea ice extent: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 27 Oct 2024 _ 23.24 Mkm² _ New seasonal low record
• Earth energy imbalance (36-month): _ _ Jul 2024 _ _ _1.42 W/m² _ below 2023 record high
• Albedo (36-month): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Jul 2024 _ _ 28.78% _ _ _ _record low
• Total Column Precipitable Water: _ _ _ _ Sep 2024 _ _26.51 kg/m² _ below record high
• CO₂ (Mauna Loa): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sep 2024 _ 422.03 ppm _ record seasonal high
• CH₄ (Global): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Jun 2024 _1921.79 ppb _ record seasonal high
• CO₂-equivalent (yearly): _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2023 _ _ _ 534 ppm _ _ _ record high
• Global Radiative Forcing (yearly): _ _ _ _ _ 2023 _ _ _ _ _3.49 W/m² _ record high
With CO₂-equivalent (for year-2023) at 534 ppm, and James Hansen suggesting an ECS of 4.8 °C (per Global warming in the pipeline), with a baseline CO₂-equivalent (yearly) of 276 ppm in 1750, then it suggests the Earth System is on a trajectory to a global temperature rise of +4.6 °C (in the multi-decadal-century timescale).
But I’m not a climate scientist.
Thanks Geoff. One of Jacobson’s Halloween tweets uses calendar yearly averages, and year-to-date for 2024, which is 1.61°C. We appear to be blasting through 1.5°C.
Schmidt has used LOESS graphs before. Apparently they are handy when trying to find the underlying trend in scatterplot data by giving less weight to the outliers.
I can’t see this being justified for earth energy balance or temperature.
Not many scientists have an Earth Systems approach even though they have that in their job title. Hansen, who was an atmospheric physicist, is one that sees current phenomena in geological rather than human time-scales.
Will Steffen was one of the best.
Leon Simons tweeted on Oct 31:
And Leon Simons also tweeted on Oct 31:
The full article Leon Simons refers to is An intensification of surface Earth’s energy imbalance since the late 20th century.
BMA = Bayesian Model Averaging which they integrate “with recent developments in surface solar radiation observational data, to refine the ensemble of CMIP6 model outputs.”
The paper stresses the uncertainties in their findings. Nevertheless there is a trend and the trend is up. In fact they say:
I think when they say the past half-century they may mean the first half of the 20th century.
Seems like feedbacks as well as increased fossil GHGs, plus I suspect methane is being somewhat neglected.
I hadn’t noticed Gavin Schmidt using1880-1900 as a baseline. I wonder what his rationale is.
Hansen says he uses 1880-1920 because there are actual records, which are lacking for the IPCC’s favoured 1850-1900.
Brian: – “Hansen says he uses 1880-1920 because there are actual records, which are lacking for the IPCC’s favoured 1850-1900.”
I’d suggest it’s a question of having adequate numbers of continuous, widespread and accurate data points.
Before thermometer readings were standardized using a Stevenson screen, a slatted box invented in the 1860s to shelter thermometers from direct sunlight on all sides while allowing them to measure the air temperature, various thermometer screening methods were used.
In Australia, before the Stevenson screen was adopted, a different kind of shelter was used: a Glaisher stand, which was covered from above but not on the sides or below and therefore left the thermometer exposed to more light.
In a 60-year comparison of the two sheltering devices in Adelaide, the Glaisher stand was found to give higher average maximum temperatures than the Stevenson screen – about 1 °C higher, according to the BOM.
Per Prof Eliot Jacobson, Oct 2024 came in at +1.65 °C over the 1850-1900 pre-industrial baseline using Copernicus ERA5 data. The year to date is currently at +1.59 °C over the pre-industrial baseline. Will the month of Nov 2024 be at a record high temperature?
Also from Prof Eliot Jacobson, global sea-ice extent continues at an all-time low for the day of year, and may smash the previous record seasonal low maximum, set in 2016. The extent on Nov 2 was more than 3 million km² below the 1991-2020 mean.
There are fears of UK food shortages in supermarkets after the devastating floods in Spain that have killed more than 200 people and destroyed farms.
Thanks for the heads up on October temperature. I recall Hansen thinking it might come down to 1.4°C on its way to 1.7°C by 2030. Jacobson says the 12-month average has been 1.5°C or more since January 19th.
Last night I watched Peter Carter and Paul Beckwith being interviewed by Herb Simmens in What’s Up with COP29.
We were told that Jim Skea who is current head of the IPCC said the world has lost the opportunity to limit warming to 1.5°C and that it would require a heroic effort to stay within 2°C, especially since we are clearly in the zone of multiple tipping points.
Yet COP 29 appeared focussed on 1.5°C.
Professor Jason Box’s latest presentation is available in the YouTube video titled short and long term variations in the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, published 28 Oct 2024, duration 0:18:39.
Peter Carter published on 5 Nov 2024, a YouTube video titled Methane Worst-Case Climate Emergency, duration 0:15:14.
Thanks, Geoff.
Peter Carter is brilliant. However, I have a couple of queries. From 7:40 he quotes the WMO as saying methane is responsible for 20% of warming, then from the IPCC it’s 60% of CO2.
I would suggest that both can’t be right, or CO2 loses its majority status. I think the IPCC is right and methane’s share is closer to 40%. I recall discussion about this at RealClimate after IPCC AR6 came out.
Other than that Adam Tooze reckons the cattle herd is 10 per cent smaller than it was in 2008. Carter first fingers livestock, but the more recent story seems to be about wetlands, which look truly out of control. Not sure anyone has a clue as to what to do about that!
Per Prof Eliot Jacobson, on Nov 4 the 2-year running GMST anomaly reached +1.5 °C.
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Nov 7:
It would be interesting to know how far behind the 5-year running GMST anomaly is.
Per the website Paris Agreement Temperature Index, as at 1 Oct 2024, relative to the 1850-1900 baseline, using the Copernicus ERA5 temperature dataset, the number of individual days over:
• +0.50 °C GMST anomaly is: _ 14,909 (first month milestone breached Apr 1940)
• +0.75 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _9,431 (Feb 1941)
• +1.00 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _4,933 (Jan 1958)
• +1.25 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _1,876 (Feb 1995)
• +1.50 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _ _612 (Dec 2015)
• +1.75 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _ _100 (Feb 2016)
• +2.00 °C GMST anomaly is: _ _ _ _ 6 (Nov 2023)
Key data points indicate accelerated warming…
Meanwhile, Leon Simons tweeted on Nov 7:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Nov 12:
Prof Eliot Jacobson tweeted on Nov 13:
It seems John Quiggin (amongst others) is scheduled to appear at a public hearing tomorrow morning (Nov 15) before the Australian Parliament House of Reps Select Committee on Nuclear Energy concerning their Inquiry into nuclear power generation in Australia.
So far 90 submissions have been published on the inquiry website, including mine (#066).
Submissions close by the end of tomorrow (Nov 15).
I’ve been majorly distracted in recent weeks. Ended up in hospital on the weekend. A long story. I think there is not too much wrong with me, but have to undergo a series of tests next week.
I was aware of the nukes inquiry, but the timeline crept up on me.
I’ve skimmed your submission, Geoff. Most impressive! Quiggin always seems to get a gig at these things. He’s a polymath and knows a lot of stuff. Not always right, however.
Ted O’Brien is a zealot. Dutton just wants to stop renewables in their tracks, prolong coal, build more gas, and pretend to do something about climate by retaining net zero policy, when he’s actually doing nothing. IMO.
Brian: – “I’ve skimmed your submission, Geoff. Most impressive!”
Brian: – “Dutton just wants to stop renewables in their tracks, prolong coal, build more gas, and pretend to do something about climate by retaining net zero policy, when he’s actually doing nothing. IMO.”
I’d ask: affordable, abundant gas from where? See my Submission (#066) Attachment A, specifically Slides 7, 8 & 9.
I’d ask: Where are the local coal supplies coming from to keep ageing and increasingly more costly to run coal-fired plants going while we would wait 20+ years for the first nuclear plants to become operational? See my Submission (#066) Attachment A, specifically Slides 4, 5, 6 & 10.
Nuclear technologies are demonstrably too slow to get up-and-running from scratch to save us! See my Submission (#066) Attachment A, specifically Slides 17-32.
M. V. Ramana says in his latest book titled Nuclear is not the solution: The folly of atomic power in the age of climate change, published 30 Jul 2024:
I’d suggest a vote for the Coalition is a vote for blackouts, rising energy prices, and ultimately for civilisation collapse.
Geoff, I agree with you:
I’ve read your submission, plus a number of others. Can’t promise I’ll remember everything!
I also liked Ian Lowe’s comment:
I believe he wants to stop renewables in their tracks. Nuclear engineers that O’Brien listens to see renewables like toys in a kindy sandpit. O’Brien is a nuclear zealot, Dutton a political animal.
The IPA have been telling people in regions that renewables will eventually occupy an area bigger than South Australia. Their calculations are 991 times larger than those of Andrew Blakers. I need to explain this more.
Clare Savage, who is CEO of the Australian Energy Regulator, says in Nuclear awakening ‘a decade or two late’, says AER:
I think changing the legislation has about zero chance, given the composition of the Senate.
Setting up the operating framework is a very big deal, and would include entirely reconceptualising and reconfiguring how the NEM works. Nuclear would need to be given priority, enabling it to run at maximum all the time, with other energy providers curtailed to make room.
AER has just released a whopping State of the Energy Market 2024, which has a section explaining how prices are set. I’m not sure many people understand that aspect.
In the AER report I was surprised to see how often gas is moved from south to north. They do also say that gas export is curtailed to give priority to domestic needs, which I didn’t know. I’m sure it does not happen much.
As to future gas supplies, Beetaloo seems to be the answer to everything. NT Govt will approve. Federal approval will depend on the ‘water trigger’, where one would hope it would fail, as fracking would industrialise a fragile landscape.
If we need extra gas in the future, we should import it. All new gas in Australia will be expensive, apart from environmental considerations.
Finally, there is a gut-wrenching problem with what is happening in installing wind in FNQ forest country. I picked it up in submission 4, (my brother chaired Property Rights Australia for seven years – they represent largely free range beef graziers) but it comes to life in dramatic fashion in 123, and especially in 122. Intelligent greenies preferring nukes!
Brian: – “I think changing the legislation has about zero chance, given the composition of the Senate.”
Unless there is a double dissolution, during Australian federal general elections only half the Senate members face contesting their seats at a time. I’d suggest that means the Coalition are unlikely to gain control of the Senate after the next election (2025), and therefore the ban on nuclear power in Australia is unlikely to be repealed for at least another 4 years. So that means a compliant Senate may be from around 2028 at the earliest. Add 2 years for sorting out “the legislative issues restricting nuclear power at the federal and state level” and that takes Australia to 2030 before nuclear power plants become legal. I think it would be supremely optimistic to see a nuclear reactor become operational in Australia before 2045, and probably more likely in the late-2040s to early-2050s.
There are now multiple examples of how long it actually takes for Gen III & III+ reactors around the world for experienced (and not so experienced) countries to get up-and-running from scratch – 15-20+ years. See my Submission Attachment Slides 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 (ABWR), 25, 28, 29 & 31.
To change the topic slightly, Paul Beckwith has discovered why COP meetings never make any significant progress. Everyone is drowning in CO2!
He found around the pavilions CO2 was consistently 2000 to 2500ppm. He said there are cognitive deficits with 800ppm.
This agrees with information I found in 2017 – CO2 is scrambling our brains, but will it kill us all?
A quick search found this from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services:
QED!
Berkeley Earth has published its October 2024 Temperature Update, by Robert Rohde on 21 Nov 2024. It begins with:
Trying to get a handle on what happened at COP.
Next to nothing, according to PIK – “At best the avoidance of a diplomatic disaster”: PIK assessment on COP29 closing
Johan Rockström says too little, too late. I think the $300 billion eventuates in full in 2035. Losses overall last year were in the region of $1.8 trillion, and Rockström has been quoting a study saying the damage caused by what we have emitted already will cost world GDP $38 trillion pa by 2050.
Jacqueline Peel at The Conversation has a neat short piece From a US$300 billion climate finance deal to global carbon trading, here’s what was – and wasn’t – achieved at the COP29 climate talks .
For a comprehensive account Carbon Brief had six journalists at COP – COP29: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Baku.
Plenty to chew on there. The fundamental problem with COP is that UN bodies of this type work on consensus voting, which means that one country can hold the whole thing to ransom, which Saudi Arabia, and Australia in the past, are happy to do.
The next COP will be in Belém in Brazil, the gateway to the Amazon.
For COP 31 in 2026, Australia is competing with Türkiye. Other countries know Australia’s form under conservative governments. so this will not be decided before the next Australian Federal election.
ICYMI/FYI, 4. Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration published on 2 Dec 2024 their latest report by David Spratt titled Collision Course: 3-degrees of warming & humanity’s future, which included this quote:
– Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director Emeritus Potsdam Institute
Thanks, Geoff. Yes I saw that. I’ve been waiting for David Spratt to explode, and he has in fine fashion.
I have not read every word, but my main worry is that I have not found where he addresses what happens if we manage to reach net zero.
Michael Mann is saying that with net zero everything will settle down and it will all be good. Main problem is I don’t think he believes that himself, but is saying it because he is worried that people will just give up.
Spratt elsewhere is very clear that we have to look the tiger in the eye and earn hope through what we do.
Today (Dec 11) I appeared before the Australian Parliament House Select Committee on Nuclear Energy at the public hearing on Wednesday 11 December 2024, at 9:45am – 10:30am AEDT, at the Millennium Room, Lithgow and District Workmen’s Club (Lithgow Workies), 3-7 Tank Street, Lithgow, NSW. The audio only coverage of the public hearing at Lithgow today is available on YouTube.
The second session (where I appeared) begins from just before the 1 hour 4 minute mark.
My Opening Statement begins from time interval 1:08:57.
The schedule for public hearings for this inquiry can be found at:
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Select_Committee_on_Nuclear_Energy/Nuclearpower/Public_Hearings
Matt Burnell MP made an interesting comment about my Submission from time interval 1:43:28.
Good for you, Geoff. I’ll check it out ASAP.
My big project tonight was to install a new printer.
I was doing really well, I thought, but somehow could not put the paper in the tray!
I’m convinced the designers of these things overthink, and don’t get enough feedback from ordinary people!
Just had a listen. It was good that so many people were heard.
On the the Matt Burnell comment, you did well on the fly. I would add that if parliaments changed their existing ban it would still take years to set up the regulative and supportive institutional framework.
Another point seldom made is that the nominated power stations on the nominated sites would only supply around 4% of power. Clearly they would not stop there.
In the end they would still have the daily peaking and the loner dunkelflaute problem. Probably they intend to use gas, which is ultimately unacceptable for the climate and no prospect that it will get cheaper.
The audio only recording of the Australian Parliament House of Reps Select Committee on Nuclear Energy public hearing in Sydney yesterday (Dec 12) is available at the YouTube audio recording titled Inquiry Into Nuclear Power Generation In Australia | Sydney, NSW | 12/12/2024.
I draw your attention to Simon Holmes à Court’s Submission (#478) Attachment 1 gantt chart and yesterday’s testimony about likely project durations, from time interval 2:12:41.
In the same session, Mr Gerard Holland, Executive Director of the Page Research Centre, also gave testimony. IMO, his characterization of the construct-to-grid connect durations of the UAE’s Barakah 4-reactor units is inconsistent with the IAEA’s PRIS database. See my Submission (#066) Attachment 1 Slides 19-20.
Today (Dec 17) the Australian Parliament House Select Committee on Nuclear Energy published my Supplementary Submission #066.1. This document was made available to the Committee just prior to my appearance as a witness at the public hearing last Wednesday, 11 Dec 2024.
So far, the Submissions count is now at 723. That’s an unusually large response for a parliamentary inquiry but not a record.
Thanks, Geoff. I’ve had a look at your 20 new slides.
What Quiggin said about 20th century reactors settling on one gigawatt is supported by this Just Have a Think video Small Modular Nuclear Reactors. The Verdict.
His points out that small reactors need to be manufactured in large numbers if they are to achieve economies of scale. He can’t see anywhere where the demand would exist in sufficient numbers to create the necessary market.
Hi conclusion about what should be done instead is remarkably similar to the course Australian governments are pursuing.
You ask, where is O’Brien getting expert advice?
I found this quite interesting:
Ted and friends’ excellent adventure in nuclear North America
Then there is the Australian Nuclear Association which recently had a conference in October.
I haven’t had time to look at it yet, but there seems plenty on offer. In the past I’ve also seen a number of Youtubes from CIS (Centre for Independent Studies) Tom Switzer seems to have become an enthusiast. Chris Uhlmann seems to hang out there, and now they have employed a resident nuke specialist I believe.
The there’s Ziggy Switkowski and a number of others, but the more realistic of these understand that it is simply too late to be relevant to net zero, too many impediments, plus we don’t need it.
Berkeley Earth published on 18 Dec 2024 its November 2024 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde. It began with:
Thanks Geoff. With the 12-month moving-average at 1.62 ± 0.07 °C above the 1850-1900 average, we are clearly in trouble. This image tells a powerful story:
Looking at the trend from around 1970, why can’t the IPCC see that to wait for 20-year averages is ridiculous?!
OK. We are very close to the magic 1.5 deg C. Questions:
1. What places have become better to live? (how much better?)
2. What places have become worse to live? (How much worse?)
3. What happens if temp stalls at the current level?
John Davidson: – “OK. We are very close to the magic 1.5 deg C.”
Relative to what baseline temperature? 1750? 1850-1900? 1880-1920? or some other baseline?
What GMST dataset? Berkeley Earth, Copernicus ERA5, HadCRUT, NOAA, GISSTemp, or something else?
What timeframe? Daily, weekly, monthly, 365-day running mean, 2-yearly, 5-yearly, 10-yearly, 20-yearly, or 30-year running mean, or some other timeframe?
I’d suggest you need to be more specific about what temperature threshold you mean? See the Paris Agreement Temperature Index website.
John Davidson: – “3. What happens if temp stalls at the current level?”
It won’t stall. While ever the Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI) is indicating more net energy coming in than going out, the GMST will continue to rise. See the Hansen et al. (2023) paper titled Global warming in the pipeline, see pages 8 & 21-22.
Geoff: Your answer is a good example of talking about. But it doesn’t tell me what I need to to know to determine what action I should be taking in terms of the life of an 81 yr old man living not all that far above sea level. It also doesn’t tell me what needs to be done for my children and grandchildren to avoid a massive crisis.
Perhaps you should try answering the questions I asked in my previous comment?
John D: – “But it doesn’t tell me what I need to to know to determine what action I should be taking in terms of the life of an 81 yr old man living not all that far above sea level.”
How long do you think you will remain ‘vertical,’ John D? I’d suggest SLR ain’t going to be your problem in your remaining lifetime. The rate of SLR is currently around 5 mm/year. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it double to 10 mm/year sometime in the 2030s, and double again to 20 mm/year perhaps before 2050.
John D: – “It also doesn’t tell me what needs to be done for my children and grandchildren to avoid a massive crisis.”
If we want to keep a planet that looks more or less like the one that has existed the last ten thousand years, we actually have to cool off the planet back to a Holocene-level temperature.
It requires the four ‘R’s:
Reduce emissions;
Remove GHGs;
Repair ecosystems;
Build resilience.
Thanks for your answer Geoff. It provides the important impact data that many of us need to make sensible decisions.
Where we live in Ballina is definitely vulnerable in the future. My understanding is that Ballina council decided not to waste time doing things for Ballina Island.
Plan B is to buy something much higher above sea level but I wonder about how much old people movement capacity will be available.
Buying something further above sea level might help but there becomes an issue of holding the higher property.
Brian’s home is in a much better place,
It seems David Spratt has been busy:
31 Dec 2024: Climate Code Red Podcast: Facing the world at 3-degrees of warming
31 Dec 2024: John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations A year of scientific shock and awe
Indeed he has, Geoff. The podcast is based on a substantial document Collision.
Eliot Jacobsen has removed himself from X (Twitter) to Bluesky as have a number of climate scientists. This graph is a preliminary of 2024, bar one day, since he plots every day from Copernicus:
He says:
A(nother) year of scientific shock and awe.
And the above is only the start of things to have been worse than affected.
John, I’ve been thinking a lot over the festive season about what every person can do to provide a livable future for their children. There is a lot being written about it.
There is no shortage no doomism, for example Julian Cribb in 2024 – a dire year for Human Survival
The real challenge he puts is based on the fact that he is, I think, quite rational.
Perhaps it is best to follow the advice from Slate The Best Climate Resolution This Year? Do Nothing.
By that they mean we should reduce unnecessary activity which harms the planet.
The BBC provides Seven proven ways to help the planet in 2025.
Eliot Jacobsen’s blog, Watching the World Go Bye: Eliot Jacobson’s Collapse of Everything Blog has been a recent find for me.
He says Saving Everything Else:
Rather than write something himself about the prospects of staying alive in 2025, he asked AI to do it.
With some slight modification the result was Alive in 2035*
He felt he had to change the date by 10 years. I find it interesting that AI would come up with something so bleak.
There is no doubt that there are fault lines in the foundations of the society we grew up in. Apparently there is a tendency throughout history for people to turn to the ‘strong man’ when disaster looms. Luke Kemp has studied throughout history what happens at these times. Towards the end of this long interview (Nate Hagens seems to serially exhaust his guests) Kent says that the strategy has been 100% unsuccessful. Yet it seems that voters around the world have been following this pattern, which may well include us here in Oz.
Happy days! The people don’t always know best!
Australia needs better ways of storing renewable electricity for later. That’s where ‘flow batteries’ can help There are already flow batteries in some parts of OZ.
Read the article for details.
Thanks John. From memory N Qld has 29% of the world’s vanadium supply.
There is a multitude of battery initiatives in Oz. $500 million for a national battery strategy sounds a bit pathetic.
This is not yet a marketable product, but shows some possibility:
Scientists turn industrial waste into batteries that could be used to store renewable energy
We should be aiming for a circular economy, so in principle this should be worth pursuing.
According to Eliot Jacobsen, Copernicus numbers for global surface temperature come out as 1.598°C:
We’ll see what gives officially tomorrow!
Berkeley Earth published on 10 Jan 2024 their Global Temperature Report for 2024. It included:
The latest data released by the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service yesterday (Jan 10) shows that 2024 was the hottest year on record, with a global mean surface temperature (GMST, over land & sea) at +1.60 °C above the 1850-1900 temperature baseline. The 2-year average GMST has also exceeded the +1.5 °C threshold. 2024 was the warmest year for all continental regions, except Antarctica and Australasia.
Thanks, Geoff. I didn’t have Berkeley yet.
On the Copernicus record, 2024 was 0.12°C up on 2023, which is a lot when you consider that the decadal increase was traditionally 0.18°C. Most, including James Hansen, thought the temperature would taper significantly towards the end of the year. The expectation now is that 2025 fall away a bit and will come in third, but the early days are above 2024 at around 1.7°C.
Some of the Earth System focussed scientists are suggesting tipping points may be at work.
Sabine Hossenfelder might be right in Climate Scientists are Very Confused.
I understand Hansen is to publish a new paper this month. Also I reckon he owes us a comment on the 2024 outcome.
Brian: – “… the decadal increase was traditionally 0.18°C.”
That was typical for the period 1970-2010. Since 2010, the rate of warming has accelerated. Tamino stated in 2024:
That aligns with Hansen’s projections in the paper Global warming in the pipeline, Figure 24.
Geoff, one of the problems is understanding the underlying trends and using them to forecast the future. I notice that Robert Rohde in the Berkeley paper is wary:
Hansen understands the limitations of climate models (but remember he was instrumental in creating them) and uses paleoclimate information like no other. One of their problems is that they leave important stuff out, plus they are based on measurements up to 2014 only.
Leaving Hansen aside for a moment, Eliot Jacobsen gave an interesting talk in December 2024 – MEERTALK December 2024 – How Hot is it? How Hot will it get?
He considers that using a quadratic trend is the best way of presenting and understanding the trend since 1940. He says the acceleration is real, is slightly above the quadratic trend, plus the rate acceleration is accelerating slightly.
As to the future, he says that with tipping points and whatnot his confidence up to 2050 is low, and from there on he would not be putting numbers on it at all.
There is another interesting talk you may not have seen in Climate Chat – Global Warming➔Fewer Clouds➔More Warming! with George Tselioudis.
The important chart comes at about 12:50.
Tselioudis, who was a joint author on the Hansen Pipeline paper, says about 80% of the effect of clouds is in the fact that they have moved towards the poles, which in reality should be shown on a globe rather that a rectangle. So the change in albedo is big.
Rohde seems to neglect albedo, and does not mention the Tselioudis research.
Comments are open again.
When I was young we had a saying “I’ve been up to my navel in alligators!”. That’s what 2024 was like.
In 2025 one of the more impressive bits that I’ve seen is a report done by Institute and Faculty of Actuaries, University of Exeter:
Planetary Solvency – finding our balance with nature: Global risk management for human prosperity
There is an explanation in The Guardian Global economy could face 50% loss in GDP between 2070 and 2090 from climate shocks, say actuaries
Not good.
Hope to get a new post up soon!
Retired professor of mathematics and computer science, casino consultant, author of 4 books, Eliot Jacobson, posted at BlueSky on Jan 21:
The GMST anomalies relative to 1850-1900 baseline using Copernicus ERA5 dataset, as at 18 Jan 2025:
Most recent day: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ +1.83x °C
30-day running mean: _ _ _ _+1.73x °C
90-day running mean: _ _ _ _+1.68x °C
180-day running mean: _ _ _ +1.61x °C
365-day running mean: _ _ _ +1.60x °C
2-year running mean: _ _ _ _ +1.55x °C
Year-to-date running mean: +1.73x °C
And earlier today (Jan 23), Eliot Jacobson posted at BlueSky:
Zeke Hausfather tweeted yesterday (Jan 22):
The UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) published on 3 Nov 2023 the YouTube video titled An Intimate Conversation with Leading Climate Scientists To Discuss New Research on Global Warming, duration 1:12:23. From time interval 0:17:03, James Hansen said:
“The 1.5-degree limit is deader than a doornail, and the 2-degree limit can be rescued only with the help of purposeful actions to effect Earth’s Energy Balance. We will need to cool off Earth to save our coastlines, coastal cities worldwide, and lowlands, while also addressing the other problems caused by global warming.”
Kinda good news:
How much food did the world produce in 2024?
By the numbers we are doing OK. So far. However, this says nothing about the future, or about food distribution and security now.
In A food apocalypse is coming: There is no plan to feed Britain in a crisis we are told that Britain at any given time has less than a week’s supply, and there is no plan to secure supplies in an emergency.
Geoff, Zeke Hausfather clearly considers himself as the smartest guy in the room on climate matters, so I’m always on guard when he writes anything. The bit you quoted implies things might be OK when we reach net zero.
However, I found it interesting when he wrestles with the problems of net zero and overshoot, inherent in virtually all IPCC scenarios for 1.5°C:
The growing carbon debt
and
Forest carbon’s back-end durability problem
He definitely does not believe, as Michael Mann professes, that once we reach net zero everything will settle down and the ice sheets will regrow.
Dan Miller in his Climate Chat on the University of Exeter Climate Risk Report wanders into that territory in response to a question at 23:12 on the counter. It’s quite complex and he gets into a bit of a tangle, then summarises at about 35:00.
Bottom line is that with heat in the ocean sea level rise is going to go on for a considerable length of time, plus it depends on how hot it is when we reach net zero and how many tipping points we have triggered.
Hausfather says:
In the Guardian article on the Exeter Report lead author Sandy Trust apparently said there was no realistic plan in place to avoid a scenario of 3°C warming and 4 billion deaths.
Dan Miller did say that he had been in contact with James Hansen, who is about to liven things up with a new paper any time now.
A new study on sea level rise has been created by Singapore and Dutch scientists, see Major coastal cities around the world could disappear under rising seas by 2100.
They use a fusion of ice sheet models and and “expert
elicitations” as per IPCC reports.
Problem is that with low probability tails on high impact effects we should actually do extra to neutralise the risk.
Moreover, models and IPCC reports are far from the best sources to build on. Better to look at paleoclimate records (we had 5-10 metres of SLR in the Eemian with only 300ppm of CO2), then read James Hansen or listen to someone like Jason Box, who researches what is happening in ice sheets.
Breaking news is that global surface temperature for January is shaping as the hottest ever on modern records. ENSO is virtually neutral so again this is higher than most expected. Zeke Hausfather has commentary based on the Berkeley Earth numbers.
Prof Eliot Jacobsen produces interesting graphs at Bluesky based on Copernicus data. Here is his graph of the January months which was 1.745°C above the 1850-1900 baseline. Last year this time we had a relatively mild La Niña, so temperatures were expected to fall away a bit.
Prof Eliot Jacobson posted at BlueSky late yesterday (Feb 4):
Climate Code Red blog published on Feb 3 a post headlined The world is heading towards 3 degrees Celsius of warming. Will humanity have a future? Join David Spratt on Tuesday, Feb 11, at 7:30pm AEDT for an online discussion to explore these questions:
• What does life look like under 3 degrees of warming?
• How close are we to these scenarios, and what are the tipping points to avoid?
• Most critically, what actions can still be taken to alter this trajectory?
ICYMI/FYI, the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Select Committee on Nuclear Energy published yesterday (Feb 4) my 2nd Supplementary Submission (#066.2). My latest supplementary submission focusses on the PROOF transcript of my testimony to the Committee on 11 Dec 2024 and additional comments I wish to add following from it.
The Guardian published earlier today (Feb 5) an article by Damian Carrington headlined Climate change target of 2C is ‘dead’, says renowned climate scientist.
Environment published a paper on 3 Feb 2025 by James E Hansen et al. titled Global Warming Has Accelerated: Are the United Nations and the Public Well-Informed?
Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) streamed a YouTube video less than 24 hours ago titled Global Warming Has Accelerated: An Intimate Conversation with Leading Climate Scientists. The discussion included:
* Dr. James Hansen, Lead Author and Director, Climate Science, Awareness, and Solutions, Columbia University Earth Institute
* Dr. Pushker Kharecha, Deputy Director, Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions, Columbia University Earth Institute
* Dr. Susanne Bauer, Climate Researcher, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies
* Mr. Anton Keskinen, Executive Director, Operaatio Arktis
Geoff, I saw you received well-deserved praise for such detailed and thorough work.
I think Ted O’Brien is a zealot. Information will never change his views, except that whatever he hears strengthens his position as he sees it.
Dutton is a cynical opportunist. He knows very well that he will never get the required legislative changes through the Senate. I had a look at the numbers and found that Dutton will need votes from the likes of David Pocock, Lidia Thorpe, Fatima Payman, Tammy Tyrell and Jacqui Lambie. We’ll see how it lands, but right now he would need I think four out of five, together with PHON and UAP , plus Van and Rennick.
Dutton just wants to stop Solar and wind in their tracks.
Need to head to bed, but Hansen has just delivered:
Climate change target of 2C is ‘dead’, says renowned climate scientist
Global Warming Has Accelerated: Are the United Nations and the Public Well-Informed?
I think he set out to answer the question, How long have we got?
Answer: we are on the brink!
Ah, I see you have seen.
I noted Leon Simons missing. I would also note Karina von Schuckmann and Eric Rignot – very respected scientists.
Zeke Hausfather was at least polite!
Brian: – “I had a look at the numbers and found that Dutton will need votes from the likes of David Pocock, Lidia Thorpe, Fatima Payman, Tammy Tyrell and Jacqui Lambie. We’ll see how it lands, but right now he would need I think four out of five, together with PHON and UAP , plus Van and Rennick.”
The vote in the Senate on 13 Sep 2023 provides an indicator for how senators are likely to vote re nuclear energy.
David Pocock needs to recontest his seat – senators who represent either the ACT or NT only have 3-year terms, unlike state senators, who have 6-year terms, unless there’s a double dissolution.
Lidia Thorpe is very unlikely to vote for nuclear energy.
Fatima Payman voted against nuclear while she was still with Labor.
Tammy Tyrell seems to be a fence sitter on this issue – she didn’t vote on 13 Sep 2023, and her intentions appear indeterminant.
Jacqui Lambie needs to recontest her seat. She didn’t vote on 13 Sep 2023, and her intentions appear indeterminant.
Van and Rennick gained their seats as party hacks but are now independents and need to both recontest their seats. I don’t think they have enough support to hold onto their seats.
Geoff, I think it highly likely the representation in the territories will stay the same.
In the states, the pattern is three LP, two Labor and one Green. Opinion polls only address lower house voting, but it seems likely the the LP vote is strong enough to reclaim the seats of Rennick and Van.
In Qld the Labor primary vote is so low that in 2019 Labor only got one. So Qld is hard to predict. Malcolm Roberts for PHON could go, but if he does we’ll likely get four LP, one Green and one Labor. For nukes that probably means status quo.
In Tasmania, I would be surprised if Jacqui Lambie loses.
In SA Rex Patrick is running again, this time for the Jacqui Lambie Party. I’m told he got in originally on the coat tails of Nick Xenephon and does not have the local profile to win this time.
Fatima Payman is claiming to represent all Western Australians and has just founded a party Australia’s Voice. Labor never counts her vote. I gather they won’t negotiate with her because they don’t want her to be seen as achieving anything for her electorate. She often votes against Labor because she wants more staff and wants Labor to deal with her.
How she would go on nukes is anyone’s guess.
So I don’t see the overall pattern changing much, but I can’t see Dutton getting four out of five I mentioned above. However, with Lambie and Payman indeterminate it’s closer than I would have thought.
Today (Feb 12) the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Select Committee on Nuclear Energy re their Inquiry into nuclear power generation in Australia published my third Supplementary Submission (#066.3).
It highlights recently published information:
An increasing risk towards Planetary Insolvency:
University of Exeter’s Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) report published on 16 Jan 2025 titled Planetary Solvency–finding our balance with nature: Global risk management for human prosperity.
Global warming has accelerated
The scientific journal Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development published on 3 Feb 2025 a research paper by James E Hansen et al. titled Global Warming Has Accelerated: Are the United Nations and the Public Well-Informed?
Just in:
James Hansen and Pushker Kharecha – Global Warming Has Accelerated. Why? What Are the Consequences?
They are clearly bruised by the personal nature of criticisms made of their work.
One factor not emphasised is that the modern CIMP6 models used by ‘mainstream science’ are based on real world data up to 2014 and no later. Hansen et al are writing about changes in the Earth Energy Balance and consequent climate forcing that occurred after 2014.
ABC Radio National broadcast earlier this evening (Feb 14) on the Radio National Hour a segment titled Climate scientist Dr Jim Hansen on the miracle that’s needed to avoid two degrees of warming, audio duration 24:38.
Dr Monique Ryan MP is hosting a Town Hall meeting on Wednesday, 19 Feb 2025, from 7:00pm to 8:30pm livestreamed on her YouTube channel. Speakers include Admiral Chris Barrie, AC (Retd), former Chief of the Defence Force of Australia along with prominent climate policy analyst and advocate David Spratt, discussing the critical security challenges posed by climate change and exploring potential strategic responses to these emerging threats.
Geoff, I heard the Fran Kelly interview with James Hansen on ABC RN. It was excellent.
The Monique Ryan Town Hall meeting should also be excellent. Unfortunately I have a web meeting exactly at that time
Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration published on 12 Feb 2025 a YouTube video titled Collision Course: 3-degrees of warming & humanity’s future, duration 1:07:25. David Spratt explores the following:
* What does life look like under 3 degrees of warming?
* How close are we to these scenarios, and what are the tipping points to avoid?
* Most critically, what actions can still be taken to alter this trajectory?
This webinar unpacks the stark realities of a world shaped by 3 degrees of global warming, offering a clear-eyed examination of the profound risks to humanity, ecosystems, and the foundations of global stability.
Geoff, I actually attended David Spratt’s webinar last Tuesday. They sent me a link which was supposed to contain all his slides, but the link failed.
So I’m very glad it has been made openly available on YouTube.
However, 4,642 views is not nearly enough. It should be compulsory viewing for all politicians, for all their staff, and for all journalists for starters!
Brian: – “However, 4,642 views is not nearly enough. It should be compulsory viewing for all politicians, for all their staff, and for all journalists for starters!”
I agree. As at 10:23 the viewer count is up to 6,354.
Meanwhile, Berkeley Earth published on 11 Feb 2025 a report by Robert Rohde, Zeke Hausfather, and Devin Rand titled January 2025 Temperature Update. It began with:
Kevin Andrews has responded to Hansen et al., which included:
Global sea surface temperatures have once again broken the 21 °C barrier.
I like Kevin Andrews for his willingness to speak truth to power. From the get go he denounced the Paris Agreement as a shambles. When he interviewed Johan Rockström it was excruciating because Andrews did most of the talking. However, I thought he won the argument in saying that CCS may be doable, but was not scalable in time to save a climate catastrophe.
Hansen and Pushker Kharecha now have a short statement in ordinary language outlining the main import of the paper:
The Acid Test: Global Temperature in 2025 (20 February 2025)
The rate of warming has doubled since 2010, and the point of no return is distressingly likely with the AMOC shutdown very much on the menu.
Eliot Jacobsen has done a global temperature chart on 24 Feb showing a 2-year running mean. The acceleration in recent years is unmistakable.
Trump-lite: Coalition promises purge of experts who call out nuclear bunkum
Threatening public servants that don’t support a parties ideas is a threat do informed democracy, .
The Australian Parliament House of Representative Select Committee on Nuclear Energy published on 25 Feb 2025 its Interim report for the inquiry into nuclear power generation in Australia. The main points are these Committee statements:
Economist John Quiggin wrote in The Conversation:
John, of relevance, Fran Kelly conducted an interesting interview with Bill Adair, Professor of Journalism and Public Policy at Duke University and author of Beyond the Big Lie:
Does the truth still matter?
Of course it does. Adair went on to detail that in his first term Trump lied on average six times a day in the first year. Each year this increased to reach 39 times per day in the fourth year. Since then one might say that lies are his standard currency.
Politicians are held to have committed a grave misdemeanour if they mislead parliament. Surely misleading voters is just as bad. Monique Ryan indicated the other day that Truth in Political Advertising along with climate change might be high on her agenda if the Teals hold the balance of power.
Meanwhile the press should be asking Dutton if he’s fit to be prime minister if he flat out dismisses science and threatens duly appointed government officers.
The Teals should note this behaviour and call it out.
The Climate Change Authority under Labor had a head count of 66 on 30 June 2024, probably about 10 times more than was the case when they took over. They have a specific legal Enterprise Agreement protecting their employment.
I’m sure Matt Kean will know his legal rights.
We could be in interesting times!
ICYMI/FYI, Dick Smith has recently been placing half page advertisements in newspapers. For example, published in last Friday’s (21 Feb 2025) paper edition of The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), positioned on the lower half of page 7, was an advertisement “Placed by Dick Smith in the public interest”. The advertisement included the quote:
It seems Dick Smith is apparently unaware it’s already far too late for stopping “global warming below 1.5 degrees“.
Per Prof Eliot Jacobson, the 2-year running mean for the global surface temperature anomaly is currently at +1.57 °C above the 1850-1900 IPCC pre-industrial baseline.
On 20 Feb 2025, James Hansen and Pushker Kharecha published a communication titled The Acid Test: Global Temperature in 2025. It began with this text (bold text my emphasis):
Nuclear technologies are DEMONSRABLY TOO SLOW to deploy to save humanity from Planetary Insolvency!
Open lecture with Kevin Anderson, professor Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester and visiting researcher Uppsala University, recorded in Uppsala February 12, 2025, published in the YouTube video titled Kevin Anderson: The New Denialism: Climate Change – from the Paris Agreement to Sweden.
It’s a bit sad about Dick Smith.
Eliot Jacobson is the best at communicating data visually!
James Hansen is of course an advocate for nukes also. He’s an amazing earth system scientist, and I agree with what Jeffrey Sachs says about him. He likes to think about solutions too which is understandable, but he’d be better leaving that to others more appropriately qualified.
For example, climate scientists with an engineering background like Kevin Anderson. 10 out of 10 for that lecture!
Thing is, as Anderson says, we need leadership.
Floating Nuclear Power Plant could be a winner
This may change the alternatives for clean power where the reactor can be floated.
UK-based Core Power has announced that it plans to mass produce a fleet of floating nuclear power plants (FNPPs) using advanced reactor design and modular shipbuilding to be anchored off the US coast in about 10 years.
John Davidson: – “UK-based Core Power has announced that it plans to mass produce a fleet of floating nuclear power plants (FNPPs) using advanced reactor design and modular shipbuilding to be anchored off the US coast in about 10 years.”
Promises, promises…
Russia’s AKADEMIK LOMONOSOV-1 & -2 floating twin small reactor project, where planning went back as least as far as the year 2000 and probably earlier, began construction in 2007, with completion expected in 2010, but it was not completed until Dec 2019. A three-year construction project became a 12-year one. Thus, planning to commercial operation spanned at least 20 years. Russia’s plan to have seven floating nuclear power plants by 2015 has not been realised. The initial estimate of around 6 billion roubles (US$₂₀₀₇232 million) grew to at least 37 billion roubles as of 2015 (US$₂₀₁₅740 million). The Nuclear Energy Agency estimates energy costs an estimated US$200/MWh.
The gap between the hype about SMRs and industrial reality continues to grow. The nuclear industry and multiple governments are doubling down on their financial and political investments into SMRs. So far, the harsh reality does not reflect those efforts: with no regulatory design certifications for civil POWER reactors, and no constructions in the west, SMR POWER projects continue to be delayed or canceled.
I’ve been a bit preoccupied by preparations for Cyclone Alfred. The latest I’ve heard is that it is picking up strength as it moves into shallower, warmer sea close to land.
Actually this ABC tracker map is very useful. It tells me that flooding of any of the four types is “unlikely” (actually impossible) at our place, but just down the hill a few hundred metres, where there is a creek containing runoff from the Mt Coot-tha reserve, it’s a dead set certainty.
We’ve had a little rain and a few gusts tonight turning to intermittent rain. Today I went out scouting for batteries and other stuff. I’d have to say that the amount of goods moving through the checkouts of Coles and Woolies at Toowong was like a flood in itself. The power of their massive supply chains is a real asset we should think about.
I think the electricity power system is going to be a mess when the blow really starts, although Brisbane is a bit protected by the Moreton Bay islands. Today driving along Swan Road to St Lucia I was impressed with the line of trees just to the east of the power lines.
Trees on houses is also going to be a thing.
I’m worried that the storm surge has been underestimated by some. There’s also no doubt that the cyclone is going to chew up some low lying land near beaches.
Exactly no-one has said anything about climate change in my hearing.
Dannielle Maguire, digital producer for the National News Desk at ABC Brisbane, wrote a piece published yesterday (Mar 5), including:
The latest storm surge expected for coastal properties in the path of Cyclone Alfred is reportedly around 100 cm over and above the high tide level. That’s a temporary phenomenon. Relentless and accelerating sea level rise (SLR) will be a much more permanent phenomenon. The Alfred-induced temporary sea level rise is a portent of what’s to come with lasting SLR within the next few decades.
The rate of global mean SLR is about 5 mm/year now.
The doubling rate of SLR since satellite altimetry began measurements in 1993 has been around 18 years.
The rate of global mean surface temperature (GMST) warming has increased from 0.18 °C/decade (linear best fit in the period 1970-2010) to 0.36 °C/decade (linear best fit post-2010).
In the YouTube video titled sea level rise – is Greenland beyond its tipping point?, published 29 Jul 2024, duration 04:19, glaciologist Professor Dr Jason Box, from the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, said from time interval 0:01:50:
“Now if climate continues warming, which is more than likely, then the loss commitment grows. My best guess, if I had to put out numbers; so by 2050, 40 centimetres above 2000 levels; and then by the year 2100, 150 centimetres, or 1.5 metres above the 2000 level, which is something like four feet. Those numbers follow the dashed-red curve on the IPCC’s 6th Assessment, which represents the upper 5-percentile of the model calculations, because the model calculations don’t deliver ice as quickly as is observed. If you take the last two decades of observations, the models don’t even reproduce that until 40 years from now.”
So, the global mean rate of SLR is circa 5 mm/year now.
I would not be at all surprised to see the global mean rate of SLR accelerate to 10 mm/year sometime in the late 2030s, and accelerate further to 20 mm/year possibly before 2050.
So, 40 to possibly 50 cm of global mean SLR by 2050, relative to year-2000 baseline, is entirely likely, and multi-metre SLR is entirely plausible well before 2100.
And yet the deniers continue to deny reality.
The media continue to downplay the existential risks.
Meanwhile, the insurance companies keep raising insurance premiums towards unaffordable rates, or refuse to insure.
I appreciate that NSW Northern Rivers and Qld Gold Coast have had loads of wind, rain and coast erosion. Being on the SW corner of Alfred is serious and dangerous.
Even to the north the coastline is being reshaped. The tip of Bribie Island has apparently broken off, exposing Golden Beach, the southern edge of Caloundra.
We’ve been sitting here in Ashgrove, about 7km from the GPO as the crow flies, hearing about it and seeing it, especially on the ABC News 24 channel. Excellent, massive coverage.
Meanwhile here on Wednesday we had mostly sunshine and a total of 5.5mm rain. Yesterday it was cloudy most of the day and ended up with 7mm rain. Today no rain so far that you would hear on the roof, light cloud coverage, sun broke through at 10am for a few minutes.
All the while mostly calm, sporadic gusts up to 20-25kph.
The photo at the top of this link shows the cyclone’s size as a very large system, although it’s not as tight and consistent as depicted there. The eye is said to be 80km wide.
It’s slow moving, so if you do get the full cyclonic treatment they say that could last for 10-12 hours. And then rain over three days as it turns into a rain depression and moves inland and then back out to sea.
People’s experience on this one is going to differ vastly. It’s hard to know what’s going to happen over the next few days.
Seems Alfred has a ‘banded’ eye, which means that the strongest winds are not near the eye, they are further out to the south and west. The weather seems to shoot off the SW zone in bands.
Hence what Lismore cops proceeds to Warwick, Toowoomba, Oakey, even Goondiwindi, while we sit here with the sun shining right now at 3:30pm our time!
Geoff, further to you comment of 8:54 AM, Jason Box is one of the more reliable scientists on sea level rise (SLR) and was being interviewed by John Englander, who is one of the most knowledgeable.
I believe that the annual rate of SLR has doubled in the past 30 years and is likely to accelerate faster in decades to come, even if it does not get a sudden boost by a failing AMOC as James Hansen worries about.
There was a study in 2023 published in Nature that found that coastal landscapes like mangroves and wetlands can start to retreat when SLR is 5 to 7mm.
Cyclone Alfred is here, and has engaged in earnest. I just lost a long comment I typed, so I’m going to bed, perchance to sleep!
The Australian Parliament’s Inquiry into nuclear power generation in Australia has now produced an Interim Report.
I thought the Additional Comments by Dr Monique Ryan MP summarized succinctly what needed to be said.
Brian: – “I believe that the annual rate of SLR has doubled in the past 30 years and is likely to accelerate faster in decades to come…”
Per the World Meteorological Organization report titled State of the Global Climate 2023, Figure 6:
Jan 1993-Dec 2002: 2.13 mm/year decadal average
Jan 2003-Dec 2012: 3.33 mm/year decadal average
Jan 2014-Dec 2023: 4.77 mm/year decadal average
The doubling time for the rate of global mean SLR since satellite altimetry began in 1993 has been around 18 years.
The rate of global mean surface temperature (GMST) warming has increased from 0.18 °C/decade (linear best fit in the period 1970-2010) to 0.36 °C/decade (linear best fit post-2010).
Global sea surface temperatures have also accelerated. The gap between each consecutive decadal mean has been steadily increasing over time.
I’d suggest it would not be unreasonable to expect the doubling time for the rate of global mean SLR to reduce from 18 years (observed over the last three decades) to a significantly shorter time interval – likely somewhere around 10 years; perhaps even shorter.
Physicist Professor Albert Allen Bartlett’s quote was:
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.“
The Australian Parliament House of Reps Select Committee on Nuclear Energy’s Interim Report included the Coalition Members’ Dissenting Report. On page 119 there’s the sub-heading Australia’s nuclear ban is out of step with the rest of the world. Compelling evidence/data suggests the reality is something very different from the Coalition’s ideological narrative.
Worldwide nuclear power capacity was 371 gigawatts (GW) at the end of year-2024. That figure is near-identical to a capacity of 368 GW two decades earlier in 2005.
As of 1 Jan 2025, the mean age of the world’s nuclear power reactor fleet was 32.1 years. In 1990, the mean age was just 11.3 years. Due to the ageing of the reactor fleet, the International Atomic Energy Agency projects the closure of 325 GW of nuclear capacity from 2018 to 2050 – that’s 88% of current worldwide capacity. Thus the industry faces a daunting challenge just to maintain its pattern of stagnation, let alone achieve any growth.
As of 1 Jan 2025, reactors were under construction in just 13 countries, two less than a year earlier. Seven percent of the world’s countries are currently building reactors; 93% are not.
Of the 13 countries building reactors, only three are potential nuclear newcomer countries building their first plant: Egypt, Bangladesh and Türkiye. In those three countries, the nuclear projects are led by Russian nuclear agencies with significant up-front funding from the Russian state.
There is no hard evidence of a forthcoming wave of nuclear newcomer countries in the coming years and decades. At most there will be a trickle as has been the historical pattern with just seven newcomer countries over the past 40 years.
I’ve just extended the comments time limit from 650 days to 700 days, which is ridiculous, but I just don’t have time to do a new post to the standard I set myself. I think I’ll just do one based on graphs that startle. Prof Jacobson has some beauties!
Geoff, the comment I lost the other night was about the release of the report on nukes. Tonight by accident I saw a YouTube of Q&A – Cyclones, housing & the climate cost which had some lively exchanges about nukes and other matters.
The nukes interchanges have been collected in a separate Youtube – Climate Authority head Matt Kean says Liberals ‘socialist’ for ‘nonsense’ nuclear policy | Q+A.
Definitely worth a watch!
Brian: – “The nukes interchanges have been collected in a separate Youtube – Climate Authority head Matt Kean says Liberals ‘socialist’ for ‘nonsense’ nuclear policy | Q+A.”
I responded to some of the comments below the YouTube video on Tuesday. Some were still there yesterday. It seems my comments have all been deleted when I looked again today. It seems to me whomever is censoring the comments section is biased for pro-nuclear.
I became aware of this website yesterday (Mar 12), which models scenarios for radioactive fallout under four wind directions from each of the sites of the Coalition’s proposed reactor locations should a Fukushima magnitude event occur.
Geoff, comments that are not offensive and represent genuinely held views or information should not be deleted, especially on a YouTube that states:
I think you would be justified in registering a complaint.
On another matter, The Arctic is in trouble. The consequences will be felt around the world.
February was the third month in a row of record low sea ice cover in the Arctic.
This may be the best comment on the relevance of nuclear energy to Australian needs:
Solar battery deal for giant smelter is a stunning game-changer for Australian energy
The Saturday Paper published on 15 Mar 2025 an article (paywalled) by chief political correspondent Karen Barlow headlined Exclusive: Secret briefings on climate national security risk. The article begins with:
ABC dot net dot au published on 17 Mar 2025 an analysis by Alan Kohler headlined Trump’s America is abandoning climate action and the fight just got harder. It included:
More commentary seems to be emerging in the media about our climate predicament.
Last Thursday, 13 Mar 2025, I managed to interact on-air with Radio 2GB host Michael McLaren. It began with:
1:01:07: Michael McLaren: “Ah, Geoff, good afternoon.”
1:01:10: Geoff: “Yes, good afternoon, Michael.”
1:01:12: Michael McLaren: “Hi, Geoff.”
1:01:12: Geoff: “Thanks for taking my call.”
1:01:14: Michael McLaren: “Pleasure.”
1:01:15: Geoff: “Um, the evidence I see is that humanity is on the road to ‘climate ruin’. At the moment, for all intents and purposes, the global mean surface temperature anomaly has now breached the 1.5 degree C threshold, relative to the 1850 to 1900 baseline.”
1:01:37: Michael McLaren: “Mmm.”
1:01:38: Geoff: “On current warming trajectory, the 2 degree C threshold is likely to be breached within the next 15 to 20 years. We’ve got currently, the Daily Atmospheric CO₂ measurement at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Observatory, on 7 March 2025, was 430.6 parts-per-million. This is the first daily mean reading above 430 ppm ever directly recorded.”
1:02:12: Michael McLaren: “Okay, So, so, Geoff, so, Geoff, what, what, what do you propose we, what do you propose we do, about that?”
1:02:18: Geoff: “We need to stop burning fossil fuels as fast as possible. Nuclear is far too slow to deploy. For Australia, it will be at least 20 years away.”
1:02:31: Michael McLaren: “I agree; that’s right; with the timeframe. Okay. So… I’m just going to ask, Geoff, I, I don’t disagree with the nuclear timeframe. So, if we have to, if we have to burn less, if not zero fossil fuels, ah, but we can’t use nuclear, are you confident that we can have renewable, ah, totally, basically, renewable grid, ah, and guarantee the lights stay on.”
1:02:57: Geoff: “Well, if we don’t, civilisation collapses.”
Listen to the podcast to hear the remainder of the exchange.
We’ve been having the odd crisis here again. Growing old is not for sissies! ‘Luckily’ it’s other members of the family this time!
Geoff, I’d seen the Karen Barlow and Kohler articles, so thanks for linking to them here.
I’ve been watching a few YouTubes, and there is hardly a scientist alive who does not think we are in the soup bigtime!
Meanwhile David Spratt has done a tidy summary about where we are at with the Government’s selective briefing on climate security in Government refuses to articulate ‘frankly terrifying’ security risks .
He’s probably right in saying they are playing policy by excluding the Greens. Strictly we cannot infer that how things are from how they look.
There is no doubt that around this time next week the election will be officially on. Our local Labor candidate Rebecca Hack is launching her campaign on 2 April, with Chris Bowen as the main supporting act. I think the three Green seats, Ryan, Griffith and Brisbane are all winnable by the LNP, Labor or the Greens.
Geoff, you are brave taking on local radio. The host I think was never up for a serious discussion., but it is good that people are talking plenty about climate these days.
Brian: – “Geoff, you are brave taking on local radio. The host I think was never up for a serious discussion.”
I’m highlighting the overwhelming evidence/data that most of the media seem to be unable/unwilling to do. I was a little surprised Michael McLaren allowed me on-air to say what was said, but it may be attitudes are perhaps beginning to change at Radio 2GB. It’s interesting that Michael McLaren agrees with me that nuclear in Australia would be at least 20 years away, contradicting the 10–12-year timeframe the Coalition is promising in their so-called ‘nuclear policy’. I sent an email to Michael McLaren to suggest he have an on-air discussion with people like Professor Andrew Blakers at the ANU, and Dr Saul Griffith, on how a 100% renewable grid with adequate energy storage can be reliable.
Meanwhile, Prof Eliot Jacobson posted earlier today (Mar 24) at BlueSky:
Berkeley Earth published their February 2025 Temperature Update on 12 Mar 2025. It began with:
Happy Birthday Brian and all the best on your next loop around the sun.
It is really amazing to see how you are still running your blog. Well done, don’t stop!
Thankyou Ootz. Still here but only just! Feel as though I’m running up and down on the spot there is so much being written and said about climate and other important stuff.
Good to see that you are still gracing the planet with your presence!
John D, I’ve just cleaned out the trash from the ‘comments awaiting approval’ for the first time since before Christmas and found this one from 2 January, which was mainly a link to David Spratt’s summary of 2024 A(nother) year of scientific shock and awe .
It ends with:
Spratt says that five years ago insurance analyst Spencer Glendon said that at a conference. From memory after Tropical Cyclone Alfred and insurance expert said uninsured homes would likely reach 15% this year, but I can’t remember exactly which geographical area she was referring to.
Geoff, re your comment, good that 2GB jocks are talking about climate, and good to here he was taking it seriously. The concern is wide enough that you may have luck in suggesting Blakers and Saul Griffith. Both of them perform well and have practical knowledge which would be of interest.
Prof Jacobson should be used by serious scientists with his temperature graphs, because he has found a trendline that best fits the data.
Brian: – “Geoff, re your comment, good that 2GB jocks are talking about climate, and good to here he was taking it seriously.”
Chris O’Keefe was Radio 2GB’s Drive host for 2 years, but quit on-air in Dec 2024. His on-air persona at Radio 2GB was IMO one of challenging the climate science, pro-fossil fuels, pro-nuclear & anti-renewables. This year, Chris O’Keefe was appointed spokesperson for the Clean Energy Council. It seems Chris had an epiphany. Perhaps he was thinking of his young son Henry’s future prospects?
Radio 2GB’s Afternoon’s host Michael McLaren also has IMO an on-air persona of anti-renewables, pro-fossil fuels & pro-nuclear, although I’d suggest it seems to be that this hard stance is beginning to soften of late. Perhaps an epiphany is on the horizon for Michael McLaren also? Michael has a young daughter, Natalie.
Not so for most of the other 2GB hosts that I can see.
Geoff, I listened to this link from Chris O’Keefe. His treatment of information is problematic. First he slides from ‘extreme weather events’ to cyclones, a narrower category. Then when he quotes p1586 of the IPCC Report he cherry-picks that cyclones are now occurring less frequently, but somehow misses that they are likely to be more severe.
Perhaps he should have read this one from 2020 – New Study Shows Global Warming Increasing Frequency of the Most-Destructive Tropical Storms where:
Now we are told that as global heating proceeds that we may expect Tropical Cyclone(Hurricanes) Strength & Energy to Undergo Jaw-Dropping Increases over Next Few Years.
Clearly we need to take care about what we say, and keep an open mind!
NASA EarthData published a piece by Jane J. Lee at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory on 13 Mar 2025 headlined NASA Analysis Shows Unexpected Amount of Sea Level Rise in 2024. It began with:
I would not be at all surprised to see the global mean rate of sea level rise (SLR) increase to 10 mm/year sometime in the 2030s, and double again to 20 mm/year probably before 2050.
That suggests 40 to 50 cm global mean SLR, relative to the year-2000 baseline, likely by 2050, and at least 2m to possibly several metres of SLR by 2100.
Geoff, two metres sounds to me about right unless we get a stoppage of the AMOC which as James Hansen is apt to remind us happened during the Eemian with three metres within a century.
Soil drying has also been an issue, see Earth is losing soil moisture fast — and it’s changing sea levels and the planet’s rotation .
In short:
Moreover:
James Hansen, Joe Kelly, and Pushker Kharecha have released a new Communication (02 April 2025) Global Warming Acceleration: Impact on Sea Ice.
They worry that sea ice melting has not been adequately considered in models used by the IPCC. The implication is that the IPCC has underestimated climate sensitivity as well as the risk of a shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional
Overturning Circulation (AMOC) a “point of no return” event for centuries.
They are clearly concerned that the necessary monitoring through the CERES satellites which are nearing their end-of-life will not be renewed by NASA. They say:
The ARGO floats should also be continued and extended.
Admiral Chris Barrie (retired), former chief of the Australian Defence Force, wrote an op-ed published by The Canberra Times on 31 Mar 2025, and republished at Pearls and Irritations on 4 Apr 2025, headlined In every China-US war game scenario I’ve seen, America has lost. The piece included:
I don’t know whether David Spratt employs slaves to work for him, but I think the version published at Climate Code Red devalues the original. See Is AUKUS a priority when climate change – which should be the focus – is about to upend our region?
The title has been changed, and the editorial summary incorporated into the text.
Also the photo has been changed and the links dropped out, so we don’t get to link to Will Steffen’s We are failing our children and grandchildren when it comes to climate change
Steffen was writing immediately after the 2019 election, which he clearly saw as the wrong outcome for a livable planet. He still had hope back then.
What would he say to us now?
Hansen has had a look at how 2025 temperatures are going in 2025 Global Temperature 15 April 2025.
It looks as though 2025 may be a record. If so 1.5C has definitely been passed.
Bottom line is that decadal increase has increased from 0.18C to 0.37C which means we should expect 2C before 2040, which is what Eliot Jacobson’s graph projection tells us.
There have been at least six consecutive days with atmospheric CO₂ concentrations above 430 ppm at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Observatory:
April 09: 429.12 ppm
April 10: Unavailable
April 11: 430.24 ppm
April 12: 430.36 ppm
April 13: 430.19 ppm
April 14: 430.23 ppm
April 15: 430.27 ppm
April 16: 430.07 ppm
April 17: Unavailable
The first daily mean reading above 430 ppm ever directly recorded was on 7 Mar 2025.
Atmospheric CO₂ levels have not been this high since the Pliocene Epoch, 5.33 to 2.58 million years ago. Global sea level was about 25 m higher then, compared with current sea level.
For all intents & purposes, the GMST anomaly has now breached the +1.5 °C threshold, relative to the 1850-1900 baseline. On current warming trajectory (i.e. 0.36 °C/decade, or ~0.1 °C/3 years), the +2.0 °C threshold is likely to be breached within the next 15-20 years. And the +3.0 °C threshold could be potentially breached as soon as the 2060s.
Indeed, Geoff. Eliot Jacobson (see MEERTALK December 2024) has plotted the trendline of monthly temperatures from 1980. He addresses the issue in his talk, but his answer to a question at 39:41 to 44:50 is of particular interest.
I have a copy of the graph on file, which I can show here:
Unfortunately I don’t have the link, but I think is was on X or Bluesky last year. He says the trend is greater than quadratic, and that the acceleration is accelerating. While he can’t know what will happen in the future the graph is an “educated guess”.
The print is tiny, but his trendline hits 1.5°C between 2026 and 2027. It hits 2°C in 2036.
It’s time we took this developing catastrophe seriously!
We need the Mauna Loa Observatory, but unfortunately the barbarians are breaking through the gate. The Union of Concerned Scientists sond the alarm in Dear Climate Movement: They’ve Come for Our Climate Science. We Have to Stop Them.
We need to avoid electing a climate vandal here!
Brian: – “Unfortunately I don’t have the link, but I think is was on X or Bluesky last year.”
Prof Eliot Jacobson post on BlueSky on 24 Mar 2025:
Brian: – “We need to avoid electing a climate vandal here!”
Where will Australia’s affordable, reliable, sufficient-for-our-needs energy come from in the coming years/decades?
Not from coal – 60% of the currently operating coal-fired generator units in the NEM are 40 years or older, and they won’t be operating by 2035;
Not from gas – the Australian east coast gas 2P reserves-to-production is less than 17 years. Gas will only get scarcer and more expensive;
Not from nuclear – nuclear is 20+ years away in Australia!
Burning more carbon-based substances is ‘civilisation suicide’!
A vote for the Coalition is a vote for blackouts, rising energy prices, and ultimately for civilisation collapse!
Good questions, Geoff.
No-one in the media seems to realise that the leading feature Coalition’s energy policy is gas, not nukes. Chris Bowen, when he launched our local Labor candidate’s campaign recently said the LNP’s policy was to cap renewables at 54%, so if nukes are only going to be 4% that means 40% gas. ABC journalists were only concerned about price, not quantity.
Ted O’Brien in his debate with Bowen confirmed the above, though he would not call it a cap, he just wanted to close off the expansion of renewables.
Brian: – “No-one in the media seems to realise that the leading feature Coalition’s energy policy is gas, not nukes.”
Indeed. Few are asking the question: Where are the affordable, abundant global gas supplies coming from in the coming years/decades?
Per Statistical Review of World Energy 2024, USA is the world’s largest gas producer, representing 25.5% of global share in 2023, and recently, the US became the largest exporter of LNG.
US shale gas plays have reached an apparent peak and may be starting to decline. Any decrease in the growth of shale gas could become an acute problem because it accounts for 82% of US dry gas production.
Goehring & Rozencwajg posted a blog piece on 19 Dec 2024 headlined The Depletion Paradox, which began with (bold text my emphasis):
Technology can mitigate the depletion problem for a while, but geology will inevitably win sooner or later.
Thanks Geoff.
David Spratt has just let us know about his article on climate research and scientific reticence in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists which is available for free until the close of business on April 23.
It’s quite long, but shorter than his 2018 report What Lies Beneath which covered the topic at length.
BTW that report had a preface by Hans Joachim Schellnhuber which he cites several times, but gives the wrong link.
Of course the new article has copious references of more recent articles, which for me was about the best thing about it.
On Trump, Jeffrey Sachs has given him a huge serve in ‘Trump Will Invade Europe’: Jeffrey Sachs’ JAW-DROPPING Disclosure On U.S. Invasion
Sachs is talking about Trump taking over Greenland.
Trump could well do that and leave the Europeans to deal with Russia.
Sachs puts an argument that the USA started with a thin slither of states on the Eastern seaboard and has been involved in imperial expansion and diverse “wars of choice” ever since.
The US site Carbon Credits’ top story this week tells:
U.S. Slaps 3,521% Tariffs on Solar Imports
The U.S. government imposed steep tariffs on solar panels from Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand after an investigation found unfair pricing due to subsidies. While U.S. manufacturers benefit from less competition, Southeast Asian producers face market disruptions. SolarBank and other U.S. companies may find new opportunities amid the changes.
These new duties come from a yearlong investigation by the U.S. Department of Commerce which found that solar manufacturers in the above countries unfairly benefited from government subsidies. With the subsidies they sold their products for less than it cost to make them.
Many of the solar manufacturers were owned or backed by Chinese firms.
The share prices of American solar companies have risen significantly.
So what happens next?
There may be winners as well as losers in US companies. Down the track much will depend on who has the better technology.
However, we must also consider that business will not go on as usual. In the broad, the hegemony of American leadership is coming to an end.
What is certain is that the world will not be universally working to a ‘rules-based order’ made in the USA.
I’ve freed this up again. In recent times I’ve had more challenges.
Had a major email meltdown last week, together with my batteries on the gardening equipment flashing red! Plus more, but explanations are not excuses.
I am going to try to do something on the staggering election we have just experienced. Meanwhile Laura Tingle and Nicki Savva have been the best – 41 minutes of goodness.
Laura Tingle and Niki Savva dissect the election results
Berkeley Earth published on 13 May 2025 their April 2025 Temperature Update by Robert Rohde, Zeke Hausfather, Devin Rand. It began with:
Prof Eliot Jacobson posted on BlueSky yesterday (May 15):
James Hansen and Pushker Kharecha published on 13 May 2025 a communication titled Large Cloud Feedback Confirms High Climate Sensitivity. It began with: