Wator vapour caused one-third of global warming in 1990s, study shows
Water vapour caused one-third of global warming in 1990s, study reveals
Experts say their research does not undermine the scientific consensus on man-made climate change, but call for ‘closer examination’ of the way computer models consider water vapoor
- The Guardian, Friday 29 January 2010
- Article history
A 10% drop in water vapour, 10 miles up has had an effect on global warming over the last 10 years, scientists say. Photograph: Getty
Scientists have underestimated the role that water vapour plays in determining global temperature changes, according to a new study that could fuel further attacks on the science of climate change.
The research, led by one of the world’s top climate scientists, suggests that almost one-third of the global warming recorded during the 1990s was due to an increase in water vapour in the high atmosphere, not human emissions of greenhouse gases. A subsequent decline in water vapour after 2000 could explain a recent slowdown in global temperature rise, the scientists add.
The game has changed and so should the PM
The game has changed and so should the PM
- From: The Australian
- January 29, 2010
KEVIN Rudd’s emissions trading scheme is dead but he can’t let it go. Politically he should shift ground to alternative action on climate change, blame Tony Abbott for the failure of a scheme previously favoured by Liberal leaders, and use the global failure to agree on a concerted plan as a reprieve before the election.
The Prime Minister can still campaign on taking steps against climate change and adopt the high moral ground on the environment, but he doesn’t have to cling to an ETS that no longer fulfils his stated aims of leading the world on climate change, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and providing “business certainty” – and which is vulnerable to the Coalition’s “great big tax” claims.
Challenging times for climate science
Challenging times for climate science
- The Guardian, Wednesday 27 January 2010
- Article history
You report (Cold snap does not undermine climate case – scientist, 12 January) that Professor Mojib Latif of Kiel University, a leading member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has attacked as “misleading” my article in the Mail on Sunday (10 January), stating that I wrongly claimed that his work “undermines the scientific case for manmade global warming”.
At no point in my piece did I say that it does. I merely quoted him, accurately, saying that his team’s work suggests that up to half the global warming observed in recent decades was due not to greenhouse gases but long-term ocean temperature cycles. These, he went on, have now entered a “cold” mode, and that as a result, we can expect more cold winters and a slight, though temporary, cooling. Prof Latif told me: “Global warming has paused,” adding that the extreme glacial retreats and icecap melting seen recently would for the time being cease.
United nations caught out again on climate change
United Nations caught out again on climate claims
- From: The Australian
- January 25, 2010
THE UN climate science panel faces new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to a rise in natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change based the claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny – and ignored warnings from scientific advisers. The report’s author later withdrew the claim because the evidence was too weak.
The link was central to demands at last month’s Copenhagen climate summit by African nations for compensation of $US100 billion from the rich nations.
However, the IPCC knew in 2008 that the link could not be proved but did not alert world leaders, who have used weather extremes to bolster the case for action on climate change.
THE NEW ECONOMICS OF CARBON OFFSETS
carbon trading
21 Jan 2010
The New Economics Of Carbon Offsets
How do offset schemes really work? Mark Schapiro visited a carbon sink in Brazil to find out what it will cost to keep the world’s lungs alive — and who is going to pay
I am standing in the shadow of General Motors’ $1 tree. It’s a native guaricica, with pale white bark and a spreading crown that looms about 40 feet above my head. Hanging from its trunk is a small plaque that identifies it as tree No. 129. I’ve come here, to the verdant chaos of Brazil’s Atlantic forest, to understand the far-reaching and politically explosive controversies taking shape in diplomatic corridors thousands of miles away over the fate of trees like this one.
No. 129 stands in the heart of the Cachoeira reserve in the state of Paraná — one of the last slivers of a forest that once blanketed much of the country’s south eastern coast. Just 7 per cent of the Atlantic forest remains, but it is still one of the Earth’s richest centres of biodiversity, home to a wealth of plants and creatures comparable to the Amazon’s.
iCING OVER THE FACTS
Icing over the facts
BEN CUBBY
January 23, 2010
The war on science took an absurd turn this week, writes Ben Cubby.
To stand near the snout of a glacier is to take a glimpse of geological time grinding forward on its non-human scale. The vast mass of compressed ice crushes everything in its path to gravel, but it does so with invisible slowness, mostly creeping back and forth at the rate of a few metres a year.
The consensus position among glaciologists is that most of the world’s glaciers are retreating at a startling rate that in many cases can only be explained by the rising temperatures brought about by climate change. It is also true that some glaciers remain static or are growing as a result of regional weather patterns, some of which are also influenced by global warming.
This week saw unprecedented fascination with glacier research, and people who had never before shown the slightest interest in the subject before bombarded universities and research centres with questions.
The flurry of attention was sparked by a front-page story in The Sunday Times in London, reprinted the next day in some Australian newspapers, which pointed out that a mistake about the timing of glacier retreats had crept into one of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s ”working group” reports. The report said that Himalayan glaciers could be gone or greatly reduced by 2035 – a rate of decline far outstripping other glacier fields around the world.