James Hansen is perhaps the most renowned of all modern climate scientists, and also one of the most controversial. His voluminous publishings have generally contained new and interesting material and have never shied away from making predictions, most of which have been close to the mark. His activity has been tempered in recent years because of a more diversified schedule but he still issues reports and people always pay attention. His somewhat obscure monthly email temperature update typically has a few things to say that are quite special but might only be part of a broader text, with no headline. His July update, published on August 13, makes a startling point that has just been uncovered by science writers. The full text is all good reading, and you may also want to become a regular subscriber to future updates: http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/Temperature/Emails/July2021.pdf.
Here is the paragraph near the end that is just now attracting attention: “For now, we can only infer that Earth’s energy imbalance – which was less than or about half a watt per square meter during 1971-2015 – has approximately doubled to about 1 W/m2 since 2015. This increased energy imbalance is the cause of global warming acceleration. We should expect the global warming rate for the quarter of a century 2015-2040 to be about double the 0.18°C/decade rate during 1970-2015 (see Fig. 2), unless appropriate countermeasures are taken.”
Veteran science writer Bob Berwyn, who writes for Inside Climate News, has picked up on it, done some interviewing, and written a fine article that adds a great deal of supplementary context. One point that cannot be overemphasized begins with the fact that sulphate aerosol emissions have declined since the 1970s. Ever since that time we have seen a steady increase in global air temperatures, a steady increase in ocean heat content, and a pronounced increase (unclear about how steady) in Earth’s energy imbalance. Hansen is clearly convinced that aerosol removal is a major cause of the recent warming trend, both of which are not only certain to continue but to accelerate, with even more long-term impacts to follow over time. He laments about how the exact amounts are difficult to quantify because of a lack of needed data.
But now browse over here now viagra buy cheap those days are vanished. These are exceptional pill and having the same parts to make cheap viagra tablet the similar impact. The Magic power purchase cialis coffee company has pretty much been shut down by the FDA. This drug has recently gained regulatory approval in many countries of Europe as it is a long awaited remedy for a problem known as premature ejaculation or PE that has been the source of pharmacy online viagra stress and anxiety for their sexual performance with female partner.The doubling of warming predicted by Hansen as a consequence of a quickening of aerosol removal, by adding an extra 0.18C per decade, amounts to 0.36C by 2040, and quite probably not less than a full one-half degree by 2050. The current IPCC carbon budget is geared to reaching a goal limited to no more than 1.5C by 2050. This unaccounted for acceleration, if correct, would thus lead to an actual total of 2.0C by 2050 even if the IPCC’s CO2 emission reduction target is successfully accomplished—which at this date is surrounded by uncertainty. A prominent IPCC report author, Joeri Rogelj, who is quoted at the end of Berwyn’s article, appears to agree with Hansen’s analysis and has given us a clear understanding of what must be done about it. The idea makes perfectly good sense, and we might look for it to be added to the official IPCC program of directives in a more outspoken way than it is now—which would not be good news for beef lovers:
“The removal of air pollution, either through air quality measures or because combustion processes are phased out to get rid of CO2, will result in an increase in the resulting rate of warming,” said climate scientist and IPCC report author Joeri Rogelj, director of research at the Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute….There’s a fix for at least some of this short-term increase in the rate of warming, he said….“The only measures that can counteract this increased rate of warming over the next decades are methane reductions…..I just want to highlight that methane reductions have always been part of the portfolio of greenhouse gas emissions reductions that are necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. This new evidence only further emphasizes this need.” (But—isn’t methane reduction already required by the IPCC in order to meet the original 1.5C goal? If we now need to raise the 2050 goal to 2.0C, as Hansen implies, what else must be done to get us there?)
Carl