"Weather is your mood, climate is your personality." (Marshall Shepherd)
We just learned that the year 2017 is the 3rd warmest year since modern recordkeeping of global temperatures. It is not a “winner” year, so not really considered newsworthy after 2016’s record breaking. However, 2017’s bronze medal finish masks the important observation that the four warmest years so far have all occurred in the decade that started in 2010 (see figure). The decade before, 2000-2009 is the current record holder, which will undoubtedly be eclipsed by 2010-2019. Such decadal trends are much better indicators of climate change than yearly or seasonal records and, especially, weather.
Annual temperature anomalies through 2017
relative to 20th Century temperatures.
Credit: NOAA, https://goo.gl/vfMe8o
Credit: NOAA, https://goo.gl/vfMe8o
Cataloguing 2017 as the 3rd warmest year for the US seems to contrast with personal weather experiences. Since December the US northeast has been battling bitter winter conditions, with very low temperatures and considerable snowfall. Where is the warming, as President Trump tweeted at the end of the year? Weather is the expression of short term, local condition of the atmosphere, or the “here-and-now”. While weather is ultimately linked to climate, it only does so over long time period, not the current conditions, or the “now”. Also, weather patterns are local, so one person’s cold snap experience is matched by another’s unusual heat, the “here” of weather.
Confusing weather and climate also arose during 2017’s late
summer hurricanes that battered the southern US and the Caribbean (notably
Harvey, Irma and Maria). Researchers, media
and tastemakers alike were eager to blame global warming for the unusual and
costly occurrence of several major storms in 2017. But the evidence is again more complicated,
as we also have had low storm cycles in recent, otherwise warm years. Maybe next year we have another lull in storm
activity, which no more characterizes climate warming, as high storm activity
in 2017. We know that, as the atmosphere
and the ocean warm, more energy is available for the build-up of major storms. But warming is a gradual and slow process. Only as the 21st Century
progresses do we expect to see more and/or stronger storms, but sequential
years have little change on average. A
year without major storms, just like a cold period, is no more evidence for
climate stabilization or cooling, than a year with great storm activity is evidence
for climate warming. This eagerness to
conflate weather with climate in support of one’s favored argument feeds today’s
contentious discussion, while clouding the urgency to address the impacts of a changing
climate on regional and global scales.
Whether 2017 is a cooler year than 2016 and 2015, whether it
is characterized by a cold spell, or by major storm activity must not affect the
need to address the slow atmospheric, ocean and land warming that is taking
place around the world. The impacts of
warming will be significant, if not calamitous for the unprepared, especially
the less-developed equatorial nations and the poor of the world. Reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
as proposed by the 2016 Paris Accord, provide an admirable step in the right
direction, but is not enough to stop or even slow gradual warming. To achieve that, more aggressive emission
reductions are needed, as a recent UN report showed (the 2017 Emissions Gap
Report, https://goo.gl/JXHMv3), or through climate intervention. The latter, more ominously called geo-engineering,
aims to address the symptoms and roots of warming through solar radiation
management of GHG removal, respectively.
Given that human society has been engineering climate through GHG
addition since the mid-19th Century industrial revolution, perhaps climate
retro-engineering is a more appropriate descriptor. While weather is good watercooler conversation,
it is not a good proxy for the climate change debate. Whether or not the bronze medal for 2017 warming
will become a gold medal for 2018, warming is underway, and we should aggressively
deal with it, better sooner than later.
[Follow Ben van der Pluijm on Twitter:@vdpluijm]
[Follow Ben van der Pluijm on Twitter:
1 comment:
Hi Ben,
1. Paul is turning 80 on the 27th. We are the only two of his PhD students getting away without handing in a geological map.
2. "Contrarians" (I try to be nice) do not only not distinguish weather and climate, but also regional and global, 2D and 3D (sea ice), and science and politics.
http://friendsofginandtonic.org/page4/page9/page9.html
http://friendsofginandtonic.org/page4/page18/page18.html
Science is more complicated than "the models are wrong" or "climate has always changed". Many of their logical connections are "non sequitur".
3. "Contrarians" use time scales favourable for deception: either the geological time scale ("...climate was different in the Ordovician...") or one since 1998...always creating something out of context.
4. The latest trick is compressing the Y-axis of the t-T diagram (see above). Bob's homework will be adding the average Ts for ice ages and warm ages to his diagram.
5. An example of 2.: climate is defined by 30-year intervals. Therefore, even if it is warming for 5 years, this may (but in this case isn't) part of a cooling phase. Anybody screaming warming has stopped in 1998 (which it hasn't), therefore global warming is over, is simply wrong.
Jürgen
Post a Comment