Ö÷²¥´óÐã

I thought it would be a good idea as we enter a new decade to collect together as many global temperature predictions as possible, some from big famous institutions, others from much less well known scientists, with a pledge to re-visit these predictions in time, to establish some kind of accountability - something I feel that has been lacking.

I think you will notice a definite divergence in the forecasts below, between the majority (those institutions and scientists who believe greenhouse gases are primarily driving global temperatures), and sceptical scientists, in a minority (who think natural mechanisms affect temperatures the most).

This calendar decade has been the warmest on instrumental record (although technically the 10 years to 2007 were the warmest 'decade'). However, although temperatures have remained elevated, the rate of global warming has clearly slowed. Put another way, temperatures have plateaued, at elevated levels, throughout the decade, and have not continued to rise, according to the HADCRUT data set.

So let's start by having a look at how the Met Office has done over the last few years. It's a mixed picture.

Back in January 2007 the Met Office, with the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, made a prediction about 2007 being the hottest on record, which proved incorrect.

2008 was then the coolest year of the new millennium, which was correctly forecast by the Met Office.

There were no such predictions that I could find for 2009, but they are certainly very clear about what the next few years will bring: Record breaking global temperatures. And it's easy to see why they think this may be the case. The developing El Nino in the Pacific will undoubtedly give global temperatures a push. This coincides with the start of the new solar cycle, and however weak that may be, should in theory add extra energy to the planet, and you would expect this to be reflected in predictions since the variations in the 11 year solar cycle is to a certain extent included in the model (although scientists at the Hadley centre believe these variations to be small)

Lets now have a look in more detail at the forecasts on offer as 2009 draws to a close, , with a global anomaly of +0.515C.

There are bound to be other forecasts, please feel free to post if you are aware of any.

The Majority - More warming:

1) Met Office Hadley Centre. will be hotter than the previous hottest year on record (set in 1998).

issued during the Copenhagen climate conference said next year is 'very likely' to be the hottest year on record.

This is part of a new forecast for 2009-2019 which shows a range of possible outcomes for each year but the "central estimate" for 2010 shows a figure of about 0.55C above the average - clearly in excess of 1998. The temperatures then steadily climb to a high of about 0.7C above the average by 2015.

2) NASA: (early 2009) have been used in the absence of anything new. But effectively it's the same as the Met office, in that a new global record is expected next year.

3) Global surface temperatures to increase by 0.15C +- 0.03C from 2009 to 2013 inc.

The Middle ground - More warming due to greenhouse gases, but a possibility that natural cycles could mask this in the next decade leading to flat lining temperatures:

1) There are bound to be others but this is the only example that comes to mind.

The Minority - No more rises, or cooling:

This is very interesting in that most of them seem to be a variation around a central theme. Weakening solar cycles leading to cooling, possibly linked to the pacific decadel oscillation. Most have already been mentioned in my previous blogs, on the whole their conclusions are no more warming (relative to record set in 1998), with cooling possible at least until 2030.

So here are a couple of new ones for you to digest over Christmas.

1) : World temperature to oscillate around maximum that has been achieved until beginning of 2013 and then decline as the sun heads towards a Maunder minima as part of the 200 year bicentennial cycle.

2) : Solar Gleissberg minimum around 2030 decline in temperatures towards this point, with only El Nino events causing warming spikes.

It is clearly going to be a fascinating few years, and not everyone can be right.

Happy Christmas and a prosperous new year to all readers of my new blog and thank you for all your wonderful, interesting and thought provoking contributions. Most importantly, its nice to see such a good debate going on!

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

***UPDATE 1400 Mon 21st December***

Topcliffe, North Yorkshire recorded a minimum temperature on both Friday night and Saturday night of minus 14C - this is the coldest December minimum temperature recorded in North Yorkshire since December 1981, when Leeming fell to minus 15C.

***ENDS***

Heavy snow has fallen across parts of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. And it's not just us feeling the cold. Our friends in America have had a very cold and snowy time of it recently, with a number of records broken for both amounts of snow and cold temperatures. Its been bitter even by Canadian standards too, with new records set in Edmonton; and many European countries are colder than normal at the moment.

Totals in the last 24 hours have been impressive. Decembers in recent years have not been well known for heavy snow in the UK, mainly as a result of the trend towards milder winters that we have grown used to in the last 20 years or so. But Pateley Bridge in the Yorkshire Dales measured 18 cms (7 inches) at 9am this morning. This was the heaviest December snowfall recorded since the very snowy and cold December in 1981 (one of the worst of the last century). The maximum temperature at the same site has only been minus 1.5C this afternoon making it the coldest day since 2nd January 2002.

20 cms of snow was recorded on the North York Moors - with much deeper drifts due to the gale force wind last night.

Further south, parts of Lincolnshire was badly affected. Southeast Lincolnshire, had totals around 5 inches (12cms) again with big drifts - wind speeds reached 57 mph last night along the coast.

So to the question that everyone keeps asking: Is it going to be a white Christmas? Frankly, I have no idea, and neither, it seems do the computer models. The latest American operational model still has the UK in deep cold air come Christmas day; the UK Met Office drives less cold air north by Wednesday; the European operational model has the transition sometime through Christmas Eve.

Interestingly looking further ahead, the latest European monthly model guidance has a cold anomaly three weeks ahead. And the American model that has been so good through December has consistently signalled a cold anomaly for February throughout Europe. So even if milder air wins over the Christmas period, it's a fair bet that it wont be the last we will see of the cold and snow before winter is through.

Enjoy the snow!

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

There's something very unusual going on in the sky at the moment, which is causing great excitement amongst astronomers and solar scientists alike. The sun, which contributes 98% of all the planet's warmth, is very inactive; in fact such a solar cycle has not been observed for over 200 years. Where does this fit in the ongoing debate about global warming? On the face of it, it sounds significant, but is it?

The sun's influence on global temperatures has long been contested by scientists on both sides of the global warming debate. Climate computer models do incorporate variations in the sun's 11 year solar cycle. But, according to satellite data first gathered at the end of the 1970s, the sun's overall contribution on this measure has been mostly static, and because of this most climate scientists have argued that the warming that has occurred since then could not have been down to changes in the sun's output. In fact , the role of the sun in explaining variation in global temperatures in recent decades has been insignificant.

But many scientists, on both sides of the argument, agree that going back further in time, the sun has played a bigger role in determining global temperatures.

One particular theory which seems to show this is the , first postulated by two Danish scientists, Friis-Christensen and Lassen. Their work has proved controversial. But although on their findings regarding the sun's role in warming observed in the last few decades, their theory does seem to be valid during earlier periods.

According to their theory, temperatures respond to the LENGTH of the particular solar cycle, with changes in temperatures only becoming apparent during the following
cycle, because of lag effects, such as, for example, the time it takes for oceans to absorb the suns energy. On average the length of the solar cycle is 11 years. If the solar cycle is shorter, then temperatures on average tended to be higher during the following cycle; and if the cycle was longer, temperatures in the following cycle tend to be lower.

Australian scientist David Archibald, who believes that the solar cycle can be used to predict global temperatures, has looked at Central England temperatures and the solar cycle length. Although the mechanism for a link between the two is poorly understood, .

Archibald then looked at the current unusual weakness in solar activity. Although it is difficult to be precise, it seems that Solar Cycle 23 (1996-2009) ended a few months ago and was two years longer than normal. It also looks like Solar Cycle 24, expected to run between 2009 and 2021 has started, but very weakly. Archibald says solar cycles 22(1986 to 1996) and 23 (1996-2009) were very similar to cycles of 3 (1775 to 1784) and 4 (1784 to 1798), which preceded the so called 'Dalton Minimum', a period of very quiet solar conditions between from 1798-1823, and named after meteorologist John Dalton.

So if history is about to repeat itself, and we are headed into this so called lull in solar activity, similar to a Dalton Minimum, Archibald tried to work out what the implications would be for global temperatures. He looked back at what happened to temperatures during the Dalton minimum in the early 1800's across several mid latitude sites such as Armagh in Northern Ireland, De Bilt in the Netherlands, and also used the Central England temperature series. Archibald concluded that if solar patterns continue, global temperatures through the next decade are likely to fall. He says 'The difference will be seen most clearly with winters starting earlier, and lasting longer. And in that regard, the northern states of the US/Canada will be the bellwether, along with areas such as the UK and central Europe'.

The weather during the Dalton minimum coincided historically with the writings of Charles Dickens, with winters in England filled with extreme cold and snow. Six of Dickens's first nine Christmases were white. One of these fell in the winter of 1813-14, when Britain's last Frost Fair was held on a frozen River Thames. The ice around Blackfriars Bridge was
thick enough to bear the weight of an elephant.

Seem a bit far fetched to you? Well even NASA seems to think a Dalton minimum is possible. Back in July NASA's David Hathaway said 'Something like the Dalton Minimum -two solar cycles in the early 1800s that peaked at about an average of 50 sunspots - lies in the realm of the possible." And we are now 5 months on from when he made that statement, and the sun is still asleep on the job.

Whether global temperatures will respond as Archibald thinks in the coming years, as they did during the early 1800's, only time will tell. Professor Stephen Mobbs, Director, National Centre for Atmospheric Science at the University of Leeds, thinks it's unlikely, and points out that the analysis could be too simplistic.

'The planet is a very different place now compared with the early 1800s, with much higher concentrations of greenhouse gases' he said. 'So even though a degree of cooling, or more likely reduced warming, is possible should we enter something similar to a Dalton minimum in the coming decade', he added, 'then this is likely to be modified in large part by further man-made global warming, and any such cooling is likely to be difficult to detect against the background warming trend'.

(Note - click on text highlighted in blue for further reading)

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

This week we have discussed the future of power generation in Yorkshire and across the UK, featuring renewables and coal. The other major sector that will see expansion as the government drives forward its low carbon energy policy is nuclear. Up until yesterday, Yorkshire didn't feature, but an announcement by Lord Mandelson has now put this region at the centre of Britain's drive for nuclear power.

As part of the package The Advanced Manufacturing Park in Rotherham has been chosen as the base for the UK's new £25m Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (NAMRC).The NAMRC will provide a focal point for the bulk of the UK civil nuclear manufacturing industry supply chain, ensuring that manufacturers in the UK have the capability and capacity required to compete for nuclear new build in the UK and globally, from skills training to research and development.

It was also announced that Rolls-Royce's planned civil nuclear facility will also be developed in South Yorkshire. The facility will manufacture, assemble and test high quality components that are essential to meet the requirements of the planned new civil nuclear power plants across the UK, worth in excess of £1bn a year.

Nuclear power is a popular concept when it comes to finding solutions to tackle global warming because there are no carbon emissions in the electricity generating process. The January 2008 white paper on nuclear power sets out the government's view that nuclear power is low carbon, affordable, dependable and safe. And supporters look at France, a world leader in nuclear power, where nearly ¾ of all electricity comes from their nuclear facilities, and where there have been no major safety incidents.

But critics say although there are no carbon emissions from the electricity generation itself, there is a carbon footprint in the mining and transportation of uranium. It is also more expensive electricity than that produced by gas or coal.

And Greenpeace points out that the reality is that a new generation of nuclear reactors simply won't deliver the urgent emissions cuts needed to tackle climate change.

According to them even the most optimistic estimates suggest that a new generation of nuclear power stations will only reduce our emissions by four per cent by 2024: far too little, far too late, they say to stop global warming or address the predicted energy gap.
Instead, they continue, a new generation of reactors will create tens of thousands of tonnes of the most hazardous radioactive waste, which remains dangerous for up to a million years and establish new targets for terrorists.

But despite these reservations an increased role for nuclear power now seems a done deal. The way we generate electricity is likely to change considerably in the years to come; it will be much more expensive too. And that means our electricity bills are likely to rise sharply as a consequence.

But for those scientists who believe that man is largely to blame for rises in global temperatures, it's a price worth paying in order to avert damaging climate change.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

For immediate release (UPDATE at 7am DEC 4th at the bottom)

December 3 2009

Sir Muir Russell to head the Independent Review into the allegations against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

Today the University of East Anglia (UEA) announced that Sir Muir Russell KCB FRSE will head the Independent Review into allegations made against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU).

The Independent Review will investigate the key allegations that arose from a series of leaked e-mails from CRU. The review will:

Examine the leaked e-mail exchanges, other relevant e-mail exchanges and any other information held at CRU to determine whether there is any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice and may therefore call into question any of the research outcomes.
Review CRU's policies and practices for acquiring, assembling, subjecting to peer review and disseminating data and research findings, and their compliance or otherwise with best scientific practice.
Review CRU's compliance or otherwise with the University's policies and practices regarding requests under the Freedom of Information Act ('the FOIA') and the Environmental Information Regulations ('the EIR') for the release of data.
Review and make recommendations as to the appropriate management, governance and security structures for CRU and the security, integrity and release of the data it holds.

Sir Muir will have the discretion to amend or add to the terms of reference if he feels necessary, devise his own methods of working, and call on appropriate expertise in order to investigate the allegations fully.

The University has asked for the Review to be completed by Spring 2010 and this will be made public along with UEA's response.

Announcing the Independent Review, Professor Edward Acton, Vice-Chancellor said: "The reputation and integrity of UEA is of the upmost importance to us all. We want these allegations about CRU to be examined fully and independently. That is why I am delighted that Sir Muir has agreed to lead the Independent Review and he will have my and the rest of University's full support."

Sir Muir Russell, Head of the Independent Review, said: "I agreed very willingly to Professor Acton's request to undertake this Independent Review. Given the nature of the allegations it is right that someone who has no links to either the University or the Climate Science community looks at the evidence and makes recommendations based on what they find. My first task is to scope the project, gather the information I need and source the additional expertise that will be required in order to investigate fully the allegations that have been made. Once this has happened I will be in a position to confirm timescales for publishing the review."

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading body for assessing climate change science.

The organisation's chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri told Ö÷²¥´óÐã Radio 4's The Report programme the claims were serious and he wants them investigated.

(click on any text in blue which will send you to relevent link)

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I've been filming a piece for Look North looking at wind power which you can see tonight. I was surprised to find out when I was doing my research that despite the fact that the Pennines are one of the windiest places in England, there has been a distinct lack of wind farm developments. In fact, in West Yorkshire, the last wind farm was built 16 years ago in 1993.

Yorkshire has a poor record when it comes to meeting its renewable obligations as set out in government targets. In fact it is the second worst region in the country having reached only 39% of its 2010 target, with only Cornwall doing worse.

But this is surely going to change. The government have set legally binding targets for Carbon dioxide emission cuts by 2020. And to do this, it wants 30% of all our electricity to come from renewables by 2020, compared with only 6% now.

I spoke to the department of Energy and climate change about how this is expected to be achieved a few weeks ago.

It turns out that the government's chosen main renewable source will be from wind as it is, according to them, proven. It means that by 2020 roughly 8000 new turbines will have to erected, evenly split onshore and offshore. There will also be a new guide published next year which will highlight where the best places in England are for placing such wind farms.

As I understand it, Pennine areas, amongst other parts of the country, are likely to be highlighted as good for wind power. But because the Yorkshire Dales and the Peak District are protected as national parks, it may be that Pennine areas of West Yorkshire have to shoulder the burden.

There can be no doubt that the government are frustrated by the number of planning applications that are turned down. That could be about to change, as the government has powers to overrule local planners. A test case is likely to be heard in Darrington, West Yorkshire, in Spring next year. This proposed wind farm was turned down by Wakefield planners; but it has now been 'called in' by central government, and the final decision will rest with the secretary of state for the environment. One thing's for sure: If the government are to reach their legal target, local councils will have to stop rejecting so many wind farm developments.

Critics of wind power say it's just too unreliable. Peak electricity demand is often in mid winter with very low temperatures when we all have our heating on full; or during summer heatwaves when air conditioning units are switched on. Both of these types of weather occur during periods of high pressure, when winds are light, and when turbines barely produce any electricity at all.

when on the 9th November during a 5 hour period a record breaking 53% of all the countries electricity came from their wind farms, in a country that is far less windy than ours. That's the same as the output from 11 nuclear power stations. Spain's record on renewables are impressive. By the end of the year 20% of all its power will come from renewables, compared with only 6% in our country: Ironic when you consider the UK is one of the windiest in Europe.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• |
• Reddit
• - What's this?