Wednesday, 14 March 2012

The CSIRO and BOM State of Climate Report: Part 11:

By Anthony Cox
Those guys at the CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology [BOM] are fun and wacky guys; they keep saying things which their own data contradicts! Their 2011 climate report showed that.
Now they have done it again in their follow up to their much beloved State of the Climate, part 1, part 11. The highlights of part 11 are here and the whole fun-filled effort is here.
Are they up to their old tricks? They say atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are the highest in 800,000 years. They rely on ice-core records to claim this. The definitive paper on ice-core based records of CO2 over the last 800,000 years is by Luthi et al. Luthi looks at all the ice-core records and generally finds a maximum of 300 parts per million [ppm] for this period. Currently the CSIRO/BOM boys have noted the CO2 concentration is 390ppm.
However, Luthi note there are pockets of CO2 concentration which range from 264 and 477 p.p.m. Luthi calls this a “large scattering” but regard it as an outlier from the normal range caused by a defect in the drilling process.
But how accurate are the methods used to interpret past concentrations of CO2? Noted ice core expert Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski explains the inherent defects of ice core extraction of CO2 samples here. Basically the pressure of the ice weight can cause the CO2 contained in the ice core to be ‘squeezed’ out of the ice. This has 2 effects. Firstly this leaves less CO2 in the older ice samples creating the impression of less concentration in the past.
Secondly, the CO2 squeezed out can pool and give anomalously high readings in other parts of the ice samples; as Luthi found. Another paper which takes this effect into account when looking at the ice record is by Drake. Figure 4 of Drake clearly shows that when adjustment is made for the defects Jaworowski has highlighted prior levels of CO2 were not that different from today.
But let’s assume the CSIRO/BOM comment is right and that current CO2 levels are exceptional over the last 800,000 years. What relevance does that have for temperature? The graph below shows ‘official’ CO2 and temperature over the last 400,000 years. 

The high-points in the temperature graph show the past short interglacial periods similar to the one we are now in.
The temperatures in the previous interglacials are HIGHER than they are today but CO2 levels were LESS than they are today!
So, if we accept what the CSIRO/BOM is saying and the record of past CO2 is correct it means LESS CO2 is associated with HIGHER temperatures!
In other words the claim by the CSIRO/BOM does not support AGW, it disproves it!
Furthermore, even if current CO2 levels are the highest for 800,000 years there is no certainty that human emissions of CO2 [ACO2] are responsible for all the modern increase. The Knorr paper shows that the % of airborne fraction of ACO2 has not changed in 150 years.
A simple calculation shows how ACO2 cannot be responsible for all CO2 increase. If CO2 is 100ppm and ACO2 is 20% or 20ppm then if CO2 doubles to 200ppm ACO2 must be still 20% or 40ppm BUT CO2 from other sources must have increased from 80ppm to 160ppm.
Professor Murry Salby and Dr Tom Quirk also show that ACO2 has little to do with CO2 concentrations:
CO2 variations do not correlate with man-made emissions. Peaks and falls correlate with hot years (e.g. 1998) and cold years (1991-92). No graphs are available from Salby's speech or paper yet. This graph comes from Tom Quirk's related work (see below).

The significance of this is that even if you believe, as the fun guys from CSIRO/BOM do, that CO2 causes global warming, catastrophic climate change and the end of the world, it is likely that the increase in CO2 is not caused by humans!
You couldn’t make this up; oh wait, that’s what they’re doing.

Greenland Summit Surface Snow Temperatures

From CO2 Science:

A peer  reviewed study to determine - for Greenland - how much warming is caused by increasing atmospheric greenhouses gases and how much is due to natural variablilty.

Kobashi, T., Kawamura, K., Severinghaus, J.P., Barnola, J.-M., Nakaegawa, T., Vinther, B.M., Johnsen, S.J. and Box, J.E. 2011. High variability of Greenland surface temperature over the past 4000 years estimated from trapped air in an ice core. Geophysical Research Letters 38: 10.1029/2011GL049444. 

What was done
In the report of the study they designed to obtain this needed knowledge, Kobashi et al. say they reconstructed "Greenland surface snow temperature variability over the past 4000 years at the GISP2 site (near the Summit of the Greenland ice sheet) with a new method that utilizes argon and nitrogen isotopic ratios from occluded air bubbles."

What was learned
The eight researchers report that the average Greenland snow temperature over the past 4000 years was -30.7°C, while the current decadal (2001-2010) surface temperature at the Greenland Summit is -29.9°C, which they say is as warm as it was there in the 1930s-1940s. And they add that "there was another similarly warm period (-29.7°C) in the 1140s (Medieval Warm Period), indicating that the present decade is not outside the envelope of variability of the last 1000 years." And, even more telling, prior to the last millennium they report "there were 72 decades warmer than the present one, in which mean temperatures were 1.0 to 1.5°C warmer." In fact, they found that "during two intervals (~1300 BP and ~3360 BP) centennial average temperatures were nearly 1.0°C warmer (-28.9°C) than the present decade."

What it means
Clearly, there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about Greenland's recent relative warmth, as it is clear that much warmer temperatures have been experienced there over many prior prolonged periods without any help from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Hence, there is no valid reason to believe that mankind's burning of coal, gas and oil has had, or is having, any measureable impact on the climate of that part of the world, or any other part of the planet.

Nothing to see here, move on, IPCC!

Another Beautiful Day In Greenland (From Real Science
Hendriks webcam i Tasiilaq

Green Gillard Government to re-name key bodies

Einstein must be wondering what happened
to Science.
Rumoured in the halls of power are name changes to two peak bodies. The two bodies are the Commonwealth Scientific and Research Organisation (CSIRO) and The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM).

They have jointly issued a report.

Under the heading Key point they have three points (Did they rush it into publication?):

Key point
  • Fossil-fuel CO2 emissions increased by more than three per cent per year from 2000 to 2010.
  • The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere in 2011 was 390 parts per million – higher than at any time for the past 800,000 years.
  • The main cause of the observed increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the combustion of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution.
Their first key point is a fact backed by empirical data from the Mauna Loa records.

Their second key point is not agreed by all scientists. For an example, a paper published in 2007 - 180 YEARS OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 GAS ANALYSIS BY CHEMICAL METHODS" was published in the journal Energy and Environment. (link)  Their conclusions contained:
During the late 20th century, the hypothesis that the ongoing rise of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is a result of fossil fuel burning became the dominant paradigm. To establish this paradigm, and increasingly since then, historical measurements indicating fluctuating CO2 levels between 300 and more than 400 ppmv have been neglected. A re-evaluation has been undertaken of the historical literature on atmospheric CO2 levels since the introduction of reliable chemical measuring techniques in the early to middle 19th century.
Their third key point is straight from the Alarmists' song book. There is not one single peer-reviewed paper that shows "The main cause of the observed increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the combustion of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution."

Because the CSIRO is now not reporting pure science but is singing from the Alarmist Song Book, it is rumoured that the Scientific is to be dropped from the title and Alarmist added. C.A.I.R.O.

Because the BoM has bombed with the report, an additional B (for Biased) is to be added to their acronym - BOMB.

See also: Australian Climate Madness - here