Submarines and the Arctic Sea ice Record

A group of scientists and students, including Ron Kwok of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory visited the Northwest Passage over this summer to run a check up on the health of the sea ice.

In particular, the scientists were looking at the thickness of the ice and trying to determine the longer term changes that have been going on.

Satellites have only monitored sea ice extent since 1973. NASA's Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) has been on the task since 2003, allowing researchers to estimate ice thickness as well, according to the NASA article.

In order to extend that record, the research team recently combined the high spatial coverage from satellites with a longer record from Cold War submarines to piece together a history of ice thickness that spans close to 50 years.

In total, declassified submarine data span nearly five decades--from 1958 to 200--and cover a study area of more than 1 million square miles, or close to 40 percent of the Arctic Ocean.

Their analysis shows that the Arctic Sea Ice thickness has declined 53% since a peak in 1980. Also, the current thinning of Arctic sea ice has actually been going on for quite some time.

A comparison of winter ice thickness in the Arctic. The top image is from 1988, while the bottom image is an average from 2003-2008 with the help of ICESat. Image courtesy of NASA.

"We need to understand the long-term trends, rather than the short-term trends that could be easily biased by short-term changes," Kwok said. "Long-term trends are more reliable indicators of how sea ice is changing with the global and regional climate."

That's why a long-term series of data was necessary. "Even decadal changes can be cyclical, but this decline for more than three decades does not appear to be cyclical," according to Drew Rothrock of the University of Washington.

"A fantastic change is happening on Earth -- it's truly one of the biggest changes in environmental conditions on Earth since the end of the ice age," said Tom Wagner, cryosphere program manager at NASA Headquarters.

Treelines are Not Quite Responding to Climate Warming

A general premise is that treelines are thought to be more temperature sensitive, and so the rise in summer temperatures due to a warming climate should result in an advance of the treeline position.

A new study from the Bio-Protection Research Centre in New Zealand put that premise to test.

A treeline in Alaska

The researchers looked at 166 treeline sites with temperature data taken from the closest climate station to each site during the 20th century.

Results..........

---52% of the treeline sites advanced while the overall temperature increased during the long-term period.
--47% of the treeline sites remained stable.
--1% receded.

"Surprisingly these results reveal that treelines are not universally responding to climate warming by advancing, as expected," said Melanie Harsch, "However they demonstrate the importance of temperature on treeline advance over other factors such as disturbance, latitude, scale, elevation and distance to the ocean; none of which demonstrated strong relationships with the probability of treeline advance."

These results provide no evidence of the prevailing view that high altitude and latitude treelines are controlled only by summer temperatures. Instead they show that treelines are more likely to advance at sites that had warmed during the winter months, according to the ScienceDaily article.

Summer temperature is widely considered to be the primary control of treeline formation and maintenance, whereas winter temperatures have previously been considered less critical because of the insulative effects of snow.

"These results show that treelines are responding to warming, but are not consistent in that only half of the sites showed signs of advance despite most sites experiencing warming," said Harsch.

Causes, Effects and Dangers of Global Warming

report by allie mendoza

What can we possibly do to help stop global warming? How do we solve a problem that seems too large to tackle and too complex to understand?

by azrainman

We’ve all heard about global warming blaring from our TV sets and radios… we’ve seen countless web pages and news prints. Can we really continue to turn our heads away and pretend we don’t have enough evidence to take action?

By the time we get evidence that’s convincing enough for the global warming skeptics, will it be too late for the world as we know it?

By not taking action now, are we putting at risk the only planet we call home… for the off chance that global warming is NOT really going to cause massive destruction?

Are we willing to risk the environment that our children and future generations are going to inherit?

What Is Global Warming?

Global warming refers to the increase in the temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere. This results in the increase of our global average temperature.

It’s hard to understand why some people are still wondering if global warming is really occurring — the evidence provided is overwhelming.

It’s NOT reasonable to suggest that global warming is not occurring… just because we’ve had a couple of pretty cold winters lately. It’s NOT reasonable to compare “a couple of cold winters” to decades or centuries of OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE showing global warming.

For most people — especially most scientists — the only questions remaining are how much and how fast global warming will continue.

What Are the Main Causes of Global Warming?

The atmosphere has a natural supply of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases. These gases capture heat and create a warming effect on the surface of the Earth. This warming effect is similar to warming inside a greenhouse; so, it became known as the “greenhouse effect.”

Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would not be warm enough for us to live on. It would just be a frozen wasteland.

Before the Industrial Revolution, the amount of natural emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases matched what could be removed. When the greenhouse gas emissions and removal were balanced, the greenhouse effect was good — it kept the Earth just warm enough to be habitable.

After the Industrial Revolution, increasingly larger amounts of greenhouse gas emissions were caused by humans. More and more fossil fuels — such as, oil, coal and natural gas — were burned to run factories, power plants, planes, cars and trucks. These human-caused emissions added significantly to the natural sources of greenhouse gases.

As a result, the greenhouse gases are building up beyond the Earth’s natural capacity to remove them. Since these atmospheric gases capture heat, this increase in gas emissions is causing an increase in global warming.

Global warming has increased the temperature of the Earth by about one degree Fahrenheit over the past century… with the last two decades heating up more intensely.

Why should an increase of one degree Fahrenheit matter to us?

If you consider that the difference in average global temperatures between modern times and the last ice age was only about 9 degrees Fahrenheit, it becomes clear that one degree is very significant.

This increase in global warming can cause a dramatic shift in our climate that can have devastating consequences… NOT just for the environment, but for our way of life.

What Are the Effects of Global Warming?

By burning more and more fossil fuels, human activities are adding CO2 much faster than the Earth’s natural capacity can remove.

CO2 is the main pollutant of global warming. Studies have shown that even small changes in CO2 levels lead to significant changes in average global temperature.

Due to human activities, CO2 emissions in the atmosphere have increased by 31% above pre-industrial levels — there is more CO2 in the atmosphere now than at any other time in the last 650,000 years.

Increasing the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases increases the greenhouse effect. This intensifies global warming.

If we don’t effectively reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gas pollution, it is predicted that global warming will increase the Earth’s average temperature by another 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit to 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

Even at the lower end of the predicted temperature, global warming and the resulting climate warming can lead to more intense storms, rising sea levels and more pronounced droughts.

At the high end of the predicted increase in temperature, global warming could lead to irreversible, catastrophic environmental consequences.

Read on to find out what can happen to your city, country or industry due to global warming…

What Are the Dangers of Global Warming?

The Earth has been showing signs and symptoms of global warming for quite some time. For many decades, scientists have been warning all of us about the dangers of global warming… but, few people paid much attention.The Earth is “talking” to us again… it’s message is loud and clear. If we continue to ignore it’s warning, we will suffer catastrophic environmental consequences on a scale previously unknown to our civilization.

Dangers Of Sea Level Rising

Currently, sea level is rising at 1/10 inch each year. Water expands when it is heated. So, with the global warming effect of CO2 already in our atmosphere, sea level can continue to rise for many centuries. To make matters worse, water melted from glaciers can also add to the sea level rising.

The impacts of rising sea level can include, flooding of cities, displacement of the people and loss of coastal ecosystems.

* If sea level rises 12 inches, 17%-43% of coastal wetlands in the United States could be eliminated… with more than half the loss in Louisiana. If sea level rises 24 inches, the United States could lose 10,000 square miles of dry land.

* Many of our cities face a severe risk of flooding. Thirteen out of fifteen of the largest cities in the world are on coastal plains. In California, parts of San Jose and Long Beach are three feet below sea level today. New Orleans is about eight feet below sea level.

* Bangladesh is projected to lose 17.5% of it’s land if sea level rises about 40 inches. With coastal flooding, tens of thousands of people are likely to be displaced. Plants and animals will also be lost.

* Many islands throughout the South Pacific and Indian Oceans as well as Maldives and French Polynesia will simply disappear under the rising seas. If the sea level rises 20 inches, 80% of the Majuro Atoll in the Pacific Marshall Islands will be under water.

Dangers of Infectious Diseases Spreading

Cold weather reduces the spread of infectious diseases by killing infectious organisms and their carriers, such as, mosquitoes. Global warming could increase the spread of malaria, dengue fever and yellow fever.

According to the World Health Organization, malaria has already spread to higher altitudes in places like the Columbian Andes, which is 7000 feet above sea level.

Dangers of Global Warming On Ecosystems

Millions of species worldwide could be driven to extinction due to global warming.

There are only about 3000-4500 Bengal tigers remaining in the wild. More tigers will be lost in Bangladesh as a result of global-warming related rise in sea levels.

With a 7-9 degree F change in mid-winter temperatures associated with the melting of sea ice pack on the western Antarctic Peninsula, shifting in penguin populations has been observed. Adelie penguins inhabit winter ice pack while Chinstrap penguins inhabit the open water. Chinstrap penguin populations increased by 400% in the last 25 years while Adelie penguins decreased by 22%.

Dangers of Disappearing Glaciers and Ice Packs

Almost all of the mountain glaciers on Earth have been shrinking and disappearing over the last century. With melting ocean ice cover, wildlife and humans will be seriously affected.

Walruses and polar bears have been observed to be thin and in poor condition due in part to the melting sea ice.

Deadly Heat Waves Are More Likely and More Frequent

In July 1995, 739 people in Chicago died when the temperature hit a record 106 degrees F. According to the Centers for Disease Control, access to air conditioning could have saved hundreds of lives… but, 49,000 homes lost power and air conditioning.

By the second day of the five-day heat wave, medical emergency rooms exceeded capacity. About 23 hospitals were closed to new patients. So, ambulances had to drive around town with nowhere to unload their patients. The morgue overflowed. Nine 48-foot meat trucks had to be brought in to store the dead bodies.

The world’s deadliest heat wave struck Europe in August 2003. A staggering 27,000 people in England, France, Germany and other parts of Europe died from the heat wave. More than 14,000 people died in France alone.

Survivors of the heat wave also suffered from dehydration, heat stroke, advanced stages of shock and fevers as well as irreversible brain damage.

Health spending was increased by $6.8 billion over five years by the French government. Due to the heat wave, medical costs soared.

Destructive Hurricanes Are More Likely and More Frequent

Hurricanes are fueled by warm ocean waters. Global warming, which is heating up ocean waters, is predicted to lead to more intense hurricanes.

According to a 2005 study done by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the destructive potential of tropical storms has doubled over the past 30 years. According to a study done by Georgia Institute of Technology, the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has doubled since the 1970s.

The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 shocked the world. Global warming is predicted to lead to more destructive hurricanes more frequently.

Global Warming Could Lead to Devastating Consequences For Our Economy

* If there isn’t enough snow or snow can not be created due to global warming, America’s $4.5 billion ski industry is dead.

* Global warming could lead to financial disasters for lobstermen. Studies have shown that temperatures ranging from 75 to 86 degrees F are lethal to lobsters.

In 1999, lobsters were dying in record numbers. By 2003, lobster populations were down 70% compared to 1998 levels.

* The taste and quality of wine depend on the soil and climate conditions in which the grapes are grown. Higher temperatures and less precipitation as well as more frequent and severe droughts due to global warming could have devastating effects on California’s $15 billion wine industry.

* And so on… and so on…

This post covered the causes, effects and dangers of global warming. The next post will cover how we can prevent, stop or slow global warming — even small changes can make a big difference.

House, EPA to tackle climate policy alternatives

WASHINGTON – Congress and the Obama administration have two options when it comes to global warming: write a new law to deal with it or use existing ones to do the job.

Both approaches await scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators Monday.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee planned to begin work on legislation that, for the first time, would limit the emissions blamed for global warming.

"It is clear that the choice is no longer between doing something and doing nothing to curb greenhouse gas pollution. It is a choice between regulation and legislation," said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., "We believe that the bill we have crafted in the Energy and Commerce Committee ... protects consumers and provides businesses with the certainty they need to adapt to our clean energy future."

Across the Potomac River in Virginia, the Environmental Protection Agency scheduled a public hearing on a proposal that could lead to regulating six greenhouse gases under existing law.

Which proposal will ultimately win out depends mostly on Congress. The House bill would largely pre-empt the EPA from forcing industries to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Instead, it writes a new chapter that would put a price on each ton of pollution and allow industry to decide how to meet increasingly more stringent targets.

The bill also requires more electricity to be generated from renewable sources such as wind and solar.

President Barack Obama has made it clear that he prefers new legislation to cope with the problem.

In his weekly radio address Saturday, the president called the bill "a plan that will finally reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and cap the carbon pollution that threatens our health and our climate."

And EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson at a hearing last week told lawmakers that the EPA finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and welfare would not necessarily lead to regulation. She said the agency was compelled to weigh in on the threat posed by greenhouse gases after a 2007 Supreme Court ruling found them to be air pollutants.

Dozens of people are signed up to testify at the EPA hearing, including environmentalists, scientists, religious leaders and climate change skeptics.

The House Energy committee wants to complete work and vote on the climate and energy bill by the end of the week. But Republicans concerned that the 932-page proposal will drive up energy prices and harm the economy are expected to drag out the proceedings by offering hundreds of amendments.

NOAA benefits from “spendulus”

Maybe they can buy some new thermometers and shelters:

USHCN station, St. Johns, AZ

Contact: David Miller FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

202-482-0013 Mar. 3, 2009

202-329-4030 (cell)

NOAA Receives $830 Million Through Recovery Act

The Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will receive $830 million in funds as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The agency will use the funds, equivalent to 20 percent of NOAA’s 2008 budget, for projects that protect life and property and conserve and protect natural resources.

The act provides $230 million for habitat restoration, navigation projects, vessel maintenance, and other activities. An additional $430 million will be dedicated for construction and repair of NOAA facilities, ships and equipment, improvements for weather forecasting and satellite development. A total of $170 million will also be directed for climate modeling activities, including supercomputing procurement and research into climate change.

“Whether providing grants for habitat restoration or issuing contracts for construction and repair of our facilities, these funds will create jobs while advancing our vital mission to the American people,” said Mary Glackin, deputy under secretary for oceans and atmosphere. “We will ensure that the Recovery Act funding is used as effectively as possible and in a manner that will allow for maximum transparency and accountability.”

Department of Commerce agencies receiving one-time funds through the act are required to submit a plan to Congress with specifics on how allocations will be spent within 60 days of the legislation being enacted. Once completed, NOAA’s plan will be available to the public at the Department of Commerce and NOAA Web sites. Requests and applications for funding will be accepted when instructions and rules are posted for specific projects.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law by President Obama on Feb. 17, 2009. It is an unprecedented effort to jumpstart our economy, create or save millions of jobs, and put a down payment on addressing long-neglected challenges so our country can thrive in the 21st century. The Act is an extraordinary response to promote economic recovery and growth, and includes measures to modernize our nation’s infrastructure, enhance energy independence, expand educational opportunities, preserve and improve affordable health care, provide tax relief, and protect those in greatest need.

NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.

On the Web:

Recovery Act: http://www.recovery.gov

”Climate flicker” at the end of the last glacial period

From ETH in Zurich, this interesting essay on the last glacial period has some interesting points to ponder. h/t to Sid Stafford - Anthony

The last glacial period was characterised by strong climatic fluctuations. Scientists have now been able to prove very frequent and rapid climate change, particularly at the end of the Younger Dryas period, around 12,000 years ago. These fluctuations were accompanied by rapid changes in circulation in the oceans and the atmosphere.

Researchers are able to determine when glaciers were stable and when they melted by studying titanium content in glacial lake sediments. (Picture: siyublog/flickr)

Sediment deposits in lakes are the climate archives of the past. An international team of researchers from Norway, Switzerland and Germany have now examined sediments originating from the Younger Dryas period from the Kråkenes Lake in northwest Norway. In the sediments, they found clues that point to a “climate flicker” at the end of the last glacial period, oscillating between colder and warmer phases until the transition to the stable climate of the Holocene, our current interglacial period. The short-term, strong fluctuations of the Younger Dryas would have dwarfed the “extreme weather phenomena” seen today, according to Gerald Haug, professor at the Department for Earth Sciences at ETH Zürich and co-author of the study, which was published online yesterday in “Nature Geoscience”.

Seasonal sediment deposits

Seasonal sediment accumulation, for example, gave scientists clues to these strong climate fluctuations. They can be read in lakes in a similar way to reading rings on trees. In warmer phases and melting glaciers, the accumulation of sediments increases. More clues on the changes in glacier growth were given by the element titanium, which is present in the sediments. Glaciers erode their bedrock, and in doing so concentrate the titanium contained in the sediments they are carrying. The sediments containing titanium are washed into the glacier’s draining lakes in the meltwater. The amount of sediment and the titanium content can therefore allow us to deduce when the glaciers were stable and when they melted. The researchers interpreted the maxims, recurring every 10 years, as phases of strong glacier activity caused by temperature fluctuations and thus as warmer times.

A seemingly self-preserving cycle

The scientists also examined a sediment core from seabed deposits of the same age in the North Atlantic. They reconstructed the original temperature and salt concentration of the water based on microfossils and the oxygen isotope ratio in the sediment. It was shown that the results from the lake sediments corresponded to those from the sea sediments. “The melting of glaciers was caused by the warm Gulf stream advancing into this region,” Gerald Haug explains. This increase in temperature caused the west winds to shift to the north and brought warm air to northern Europe. However, the meltwater draining into the Atlantic lowered the salt concentration and the density of the surface water, changing the convection in the ocean, which in turn allowed new sea ice to form. Subsequently, the Gulf Stream and the west winds were again forced out of the North Atlantic area and the region cooled down once again. These processes were repeated for around 400 years, until the current interglacial period was able to stabilise itself.

The Würm glaciation began around 100,000 years ago and lasted until around 10,000 years ago. In this period, there were strong fluctuations between warm and cold phases, particularly in the North Atlantic area. The Younger Dryas, which ushered in the current interglacial period, is one of the best-known and best-researched abrupt climate changes of that glaciation. It began around 12,900 years ago and at first caused an abrupt temperature drop in the northern hemisphere, as well as a temperature rise of up to 10°C in less than 20 years towards the end, around 11,700 years ago.

Unclear mechanisms

Up until now, there have been several studies which document the glacial conditions during the Younger Dryas period of 1,200 years. However, the mechanisms which caused it, sustained it and finally led to an interglacial period have yet to be fully understood. The researchers believe that further high-resolution studies of this type could give insights into how glacial periods are triggered and how they are brought to an end.

High CO2 boosts plant respiration, potentially affecting climate and crops

Here’s something you don’t see everyday: a university sending out a press release showing the potential benefits on crop yields of elevated atmospheric CO2 levels. - Anthony
Public release date: 9-Feb-2009

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-02/uoia-hcb020609.php
Contact: Diana Yates
diya@illinois.edu
217-333-5802
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

High CO2 boosts plant respiration, potentially affecting climate and crops

The leaves of soybeans grown at the elevated carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels predicted for the year 2050 respire more than those grown under current atmospheric conditions, researchers report, a finding that will help fine-tune climate models and could point to increased crop yields as CO₂ levels rise. The study, from researchers at the University of Illinois and the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, appears this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Plants draw CO₂ from the atmosphere and make sugars through the process of photosynthesis. But they also release some CO₂ during respiration as they use the sugars to generate energy for self-maintenance and growth. How elevated CO₂ affects plant respiration will therefore influence future food supplies and the extent to which plants can capture CO₂ from the air and store it as carbon in their tissues. While there is broad agreement that higher atmospheric CO₂ levels stimulate photosynthesis in C3 plants, such as soybean, no such consensus exists on how rising CO₂ levels will affect plant respiration.

IMAGE: Andrew Leakey and assistants at work in the Soy FACE facility at Illinois. Click here for more information.

“There’s been a great deal of controversy about how plant respiration responds to elevated CO₂,” said U. of I. plant biology professor Andrew Leakey, who led the study. “Some summary studies suggest it will go down by 18 percent, some suggest it won’t change, and some suggest it will increase as much as 11 percent.” Understanding how the respiratory pathway responds when plants are grown at elevated CO₂ is key to reducing this uncertainty, Leakey said.

His team used microarrays, a genomic tool that can detect changes in the activity of thousands of genes at a time, to learn which genes in the high CO₂ plants were being switched on at higher or lower levels than those of the soybeans grown at current CO₂ levels. Rather than assessing plants grown in chambers in a greenhouse, as most studies have done, Leakey’s team made use of the Soybean Free Air Concentration Enrichment (Soy FACE) facility at Illinois. This open-air research lab can expose a soybean field to a variety of atmospheric CO₂ levels - without isolating the plants from other environmental influences, such as rainfall, sunlight and insects. Some of the plants were exposed to atmospheric CO₂ levels of 550 parts per million (ppm), the level predicted for the year 2050 if current trends continue. These were compared to plants grown at ambient CO₂ levels (380 ppm).

The results were striking. At least 90 different genes coding the majority of enzymes in the cascade of chemical reactions that govern respiration were switched on (expressed) at higher levels in the soybeans grown at high CO₂ levels. This explained how the plants were able to use the increased supply of sugars from stimulated photosynthesis under high CO₂ conditions to produce energy, Leakey said. The rate of respiration increased 37 percent at the elevated CO₂ levels. The enhanced respiration is likely to support greater transport of sugars from leaves to other growing parts of the plant, including the seeds, Leakey said. “The expression of over 600 genes was altered by elevated CO₂ in total, which will help us to understand how the response is regulated and also hopefully produce crops that will perform better in the future,” he said.

IMAGE: Illinois plant biology professor Andrew Leakey led a team that discovered that soybean leaves speed up their metabolism in response to rising CO2. Click here for more information.

Philadelphia’s Climate in the Early Days

January, 1790 was a remarkable year in the northeastern US for several reasons. It was less than one year into George Washington’s first term, and it was one of the warmest winter months on record. Fortunately for science, a diligent Philadelphia resident named Charles Pierce kept a detailed record of the monthly weather from 1790 through 1847, and his record is archived by Google Books. Below is his monthly report from that book.

JANUARY 1790 The average or medium temperature of this month was 44 degrees This is the mildest month of January on record. Fogs prevailed very much in the morning but a hot sun soon dispersed them and the mercury often ran up to 70 in the shade at mid day. Boys were often seen swimming in the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers. There were frequent showers as in April some of which were accompanied by thunder and lightning The uncommon mildness of the weather continued until the 7th of February.

Compare that to January, 2009 with an average temperature of 27F, 17 degrees cooler than 1790. One month of course is not indicative of the climate, so let us look at the 30 year period from 1790-1819 and compare that to the last 10 “hot” years.

From Charles Pierce’s records, the average January temperature in Philadelphia from 1790-1819 was 31.2F. According to USHCN records from 2000-2006 (the last year available from USHCN) and Weather Underground records from 2007-2009, the average January temperature in Philadelphia for the last ten years has been 29.8 degrees, or 1.4 degrees cooler than the period 1790-1819. January, 2009 has been colder than any January during the presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, or Monroe. January 2003 and 2004 were both considerably colder than any January during the terms of the first five presidents of the US. Data can be seen here.

According to several of the most widely quoted climate scientists in the world, winters were much colder 200 years ago than now - yet the boys swimming in the Delaware in January, 1790 apparently were unaware.

Another interesting fact which can be derived from Charles Pierce’s data, is that January temperatures cooled dramatically during the period 1790-1819 - as can be seen in the graph below. The cooling rate was 13F/century. What could have caused this cooling? We are told by some experts that variations in solar activity can only affect the earth’s temperature by a few tenths of a degree. CO2 levels had been rising since the start of the industrial age. The downward trend is fairly linear and does not show any sharp downward spikes, so it is unlikely to be due to volcanic activity. What other “natural variability” could have caused such a dramatic drop in temperature?

Looking at the sunspot records for that period, something that clearly stands out is that solar cycle 4 was very long, and was followed by a deep minimum lasting several decades. Perhaps a coincidence, but if not - Philadelphia may well be in for some more very cold weather in coming winters.

Source for graph:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/k37032647541h753/fulltext.pdf

Climate Warming Altering The Behavior of the NAO

Researchers from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) in Massachusetts are studying the growth layers of Beremuda Brain Coral to to determine the long-term behavior of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). The NAO is a very important driver of climate fluctuations in the North Atlantic and is certainly a major influence on the weather in North America and Western Europe, especially during the winter months. What they found is quite interesting.

Excerpts from the WHOI press release below..........

"Because they (coral) are slow growing and have long life-spans, corals can provide high resolution records that are well dated and centuries long", said Nathalie Goodkin, lead author of the study.

The team found the variability of the NAO decade-to-decade (multi-decadal scale) has been larger, swinging more wildly, during the late twentieth century than in the early 1800s, suggesting that variability is linked to the mean temperature of the Northern Hemisphere.

"When the Industrial Revolution begins and atmospheric temperature becomes warmer, the NAO takes on a much stronger pattern in longer-term behavior," said Goodkin. "That was suspected before in the instrumental records, but this is the first time it has been documented in records from both the ocean and the atmosphere."

"Anthropogenic (human-related) warming does not appear to be altering whether the NAO is in a positive or negative phase at multi-decadal time scales," said WHOI paleoclimatologist Konrad Hughen. "It does seem to be increasing variability. Clearly, this has implications for the future."

"As temperatures get warmer, there's potential for more violent swings of the NAO -- the phases becoming even more positive and even more negative," Hughen added. "If the NAO locks more into these patterns, intense storms will become more intense and droughts will become more severe."

---------------------------------

The WHOI has an an interesting graph showing the longer term variability of the NAO and how it is related to the warming.

Also, here is the update plot of the NAO index going back to 1950, courtesy of NOAA.....

Polar Sea Ice Changes are Having a Net Cooling Effect on the Climate

A guest post by Steven Goddard

One of the most widely discussed climate feedbacks is the albedo effect of polar sea ice loss. Ice has a relatively high albedo (reflectance) so a reduction in polar ice area has the effect of causing more shortwave radiation (sunlight) to be absorbed by the oceans, warming the water. Likewise, an increase in polar sea ice area causes more sunlight to be reflected, decreasing the warming of the ocean. The earths radiative balance is shown in the image below. It is believed that about 30% of the sunlight reaching the earth’s atmosphere is directly reflected - 20% by clouds, 6% by other components of the atmosphere, and 4% by the earth’s surface.

http://www.aer.com/scienceResearch/rc/rc.html

We all have heard many times that summer sea ice minimums have declined in the northern hemisphere over the last 30 years. As mentioned above, this causes more sunlight to reach the dark ocean water, and results in a warming of the water. What is not so widely discussed is that southern hemisphere sea ice has been increasing, causing a net cooling effect. This article explains why the cooling effect of excess Antarctic ice is significantly greater than the warming effect of missing Arctic ice.

Over the last 30 years Antarctic sea ice has been steadily increasing, as shown below.

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/s_plot.png

December is the month when the Antarctic sun is highest in the sky, and when the most sunlight reaches the surface. Thus an excess of ice in December has the maximum impact on the southern hemisphere’s radiative balance. In the Antarctic, the most important months are mid-October through mid-February, because those are months when the sun is closest to the zenith. The rest of the year there is almost no shortwave radiation to reflect, so the excess ice has little effect on the shortwave radiative (SW) balance.

This has been discussed in detail by Roger Pielke Sr. and others in several papers.

http://www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-222.pdf

http://www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-256.pdf

So how does this work? Below are the details of this article’s thesis.

1. As mentioned above, the Antarctic ice excess occurs near the December solstice when the sun is highest above the horizon. By contrast, the Arctic ice deficiency appears near the equinox - when the sun is low above the horizon. Note in the graph below, that Arctic ice reaches it’s minimum in mid-September - just when the sun is setting for the winter at the North Pole. While the September, 2008 ice minimum maps were dramatic, what they did not show is that there was little sunlight reaching the water that time of year. The deviation from normal did not begin in earnest until mid-August, so there were only a couple of weeks where the northern hemisphere SW radiative balance was significantly impacted. Thus the water in most of the ice-deficient areas did not warm significantly, allowing for the fast freeze-up we saw during the autumn.

The 2008 peak Arctic ice anomaly occurred near the equinox, when it had the minimum heating effect on the ocean.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png

By contrast, the peak Antarctic ice anomaly occurred at the December solstice, when it had a maximum cooling effect, as shown below.

2. The next factor to consider is the latitude of the ice, which has a strong effect on the amount of solar insolation received. Arctic sea ice is closer to the pole than Antarctic sea ice. This is because of the geography of the two regions, and can be seen in the NSIDC images below.

Antarctic sea ice forms at latitudes of about 55-75 degrees, whereas most Arctic ice forms closer to the pole at latitudes of 70-90 degrees. Because Antarctic ice is closer to the tropics than Arctic ice, and the sun there reaches a higher angle above the horizon, Antarctic sea ice receives significantly more solar radiation in summer than Arctic sea ice does in its’ summer. Thus the presence or absence of Antarctic ice has a larger impact on the SW radiative balance than does the presence or absence of Arctic ice.

At a latitude of -65 degrees, the sun is about 40 degrees below the zenith on the day of the solstice. Compare that to early September negative anomaly peak in the Arctic at a latitude of 80 degrees, when the sun is more than 70 degrees below the zenith. The amount of solar radiation hitting the ice surface at those maxima is approximately 2.2 times greater in the the Antarctic than it is in the Arctic = cos(70) / cos(40) .

The point being again, that due to the latitude and date, areas of excess Antarctic ice reflect a lot of SW radiation back out into space, whereas deficient Arctic ice areas allow a much smaller quantity of SW radiation to reach the dark surface of water. Furthermore, in September the angle of incidence of the sun above the water is below the critical angle, so little sunlight penetrates the surface, further compounding the effect. Thus the Antarctic positive anomaly has a significantly larger effect on the earth’s SW balance than does the Arctic negative anomaly.

3. The next point is an extension of 2. By definition, excess ice is further from the pole than missing ice. Thus a 10% positive anomaly has more impact on the earth’s SW balance than does a 10% negative anomaly.

4. Due to eccentricity of the earth’s orbit, the earth is 3% closer to the sun near the December solstice, than it is during the June solstice. This further compounds the importance of Antarctic ice excess relative to Arctic ice deficiency.

All of these points work together to support the idea that so far, polar ice albedo feedback has been opposite of what the models have predicted. To date, the effect of polar albedo change has most likely been negative, whereas all the models predicted it to be positive. There appears to be a tendency in the climate community to discount the importance of the Antarctic sea ice increase, and this may not be appropriate.

thanks to wattsupwiththat

Volcanoes Cool The Tropics, But Global Warming May Have Helped Override Some Recent Eruptions

Climate researchers have shown that big volcanic eruptions over the past 450 years have temporarily cooled weather in the tropics—but suggest that such effects may have been masked in the 20th century by rising global temperatures. Their paper, which shows that higher latitudes can be even more sensitive to volcanism, appears in the current issue of Nature Geoscience.

Scientists already agree that large eruptions have lowered temperatures at higher latitudes in recent centuries, because volcanic particles reflect sunlight back into space. For instance, 1816, the year following the massive Tambora eruption in Indonesia, became known as "The Year Without a Summer," after low temperatures caused crop failures in northern Europe and eastern North America. More extensive evidence comes in part from tree rings, which tend to grow thinner in years when temperatures go down.

This is Mount Bromo, an active volcano in East Java, Indonesia. (Credit: Paul Krusic, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory)

This is one of the first such studies to show how the tropics have responded, said lead author Rosanne D'Arrigo, a scientist at the Tree Ring Lab at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. "This is significant because it gives us more information about how tropical climate responds to forces that alter the effects solar radiation," said D'Arrigo. The other authors were Rob Wilson of Lamont and the University of St. Andrews, Scotland; and Alexander Tudhope of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland.

Along with tree rings, the researchers analyzed ice cores from alpine glaciers, and corals, taken from a wide area of the tropics. When things cool, not only do trees tend to grow less, but isotopes of oxygen in corals and glacial ice may shift. All showed that low-latitude temperatures declined for several years after major tropical eruptions. The samples, spanning 1546 to 1998, were taken from Nepal down through Indonesia and across the Indian and Pacific oceans; the ice cores came from the Peruvian Andes. The researchers used materials they collected themselves, as well as samples from the archives of other scientists.

The data show that the most sustained cooling followed two events: an 1809 eruption that probably took place in the tropics, but whose exact location remains unknown; and the 1815 Tambora eruption, one of the most powerful recorded in human history. Following Tambora, between 1815 and 1818, tropical temperatures dropped as much as 0.84 degrees C (1.5 degrees F) below the mean. A slightly bigger one-year drop came in 1731--0.90 degrees C (1.6 degrees F). The researchers say this may be connected to eruptions at the Canary Islands' Lanzarote volcano, and Ecuador's Sangay around this time.

D'Arrigo says that the study shows also that higher latitudes may generally be even more sensitive than the tropics. Some corresponding drops in northern regions following volcanism were up to three times greater. D'Arrigo said higher latitudes' greater sensitivity appears to come from complex feedback mechanisms that make them vulnerable to temperature shifts. This goes along with growing evidence from other researchers that, as the globe warms, the most dramatic effects are being seen with rapid melting of glaciers, sea ice and tundra at high latitudes. The authors say that, overall, eruptions in the 20th century have exerted fewer obvious effects in the tropics. They said this could be because there were fewer major events in that century--but they noted it could also be "because of the damping effect of large-scale 20th-century warming."

"Particularly warm decades may have partially overridden the cooling effect of some volcanic events," said D'Arrigo. Noting that few reliable instrumental records exist from before this time, she said, "This study provides some of the first comprehensive information about how the tropical climate system responded to volcanism prior to the instrumental period."

EU leaders agree on climate change deal

BRUSSELS, Belgium -- European leaders agreed Friday to stick to an ambitious plan to fight global warming through emissions cuts and renewable energy, and on ways to share the hefty costs of setting a global example.

The plan includes concessions to heavy industry and countries in Eastern Europe worried that the cost of curbing pollution would impede economic growth. The expense of the plan had caused uproar among many countries as the continent grapples with economic downturn.

The plan, agreed at an EU summit, lays out how the 27 member countries will cut carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who holds the bloc's rotating leadership, called the agreement historic and urged global partners to follow Europe's example at U.N. climate change talks in Poznan, Poland.

The French president says the 27-nation bloc has "now delivered" and it was "now the time" for others, including the United States and China, to follow suit.

"People will not follow Europe unless we set the example," he said.

EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso called the plans "the most ambitious proposals anywhere in the world."

"Europe has passed its credibility test," he said.

An EU deal could breathe new life into the U.N. climate talks, which were expected to wrap up Friday with a work plan for talks over the next year on a new global warming treaty. But that plan needs worldwide support.

The eyes of Europe's economic rivals were on the EU talks to see how the bloc manages to balance economic growth while keeping intact promises to rein in emissions.

"The overall political message that we have sent to the rest of the world is that Europe is taking the lead," Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said at a news conference after the talks, confirming that the leaders agreed on the climate package.

European diplomats haggled through the night on complex plans to fulfill promises made last year to meet so-called 20-20-20 targets: reducing greenhouse emissions by 20 percent and ensuring that 20 percent of energy comes from wind, sun and other renewable sources by 2020.

Desperate to get a deal, France backed several opt-outs to the strict reductions it wants industries to make. The opt-outs are aimed at heavy industry that might flee abroad to regions with looser environmental rules.

France also proposed leeway for countries very dependent on coal and oil for power generation -- but the EU plan that this must be temporary.

The leaders also agreed on a euro200 billion ($258 billion) Europe-wide economic stimulus package to ease the effects of a recession. The downturn overshadowed talks on the costly climate deal.

Amazing discovery of green algae which could save the world from global warming

Melting icebergs, so long the iconic image of global warming, are triggering a natural process that could delay or even end climate change, British scientists have found.

A team working on board the Royal Navy’s HMS Endurance off the coast of Antarctica have discovered tiny particles of iron are released into the sea as the ice melts.

The iron feeds algae, which blooms and sucks up damaging carbon dioxide (CO2), then sinks, locking away the harmful greenhouse gas for hundreds of years.

British scientists have discovered that green algae could bury CO2 omissions at the bottom of the ocean

The team think the process could hold the key to staving off globally rising temperatures.

Lead researcher Professor Rob Raiswell, from Leeds University, said: ‘The Earth itself seems to want to save us.’

As a result of the findings, a ground-breaking experiment will be held this month off the British island of South Georgia, 800 miles south east of the Falklands. It will see if the phenomenon could be harnessed to contain rising carbon emissions.

Researchers will use several tons of iron sulphate to create an artificial bloom of algae. The patch will be so large it will be visible from space.

Scientists already knew that releasing iron into the sea stimulates the growth of algae. But environmentalists had warned that to do so artificially might damage the planet’s fragile ecosystem.

Last year, the UN banned iron fertilisation in the Great Southern Ocean.

The team working on board HMS Endurance off the coast of Antartica have discovered tiny particles of iron are released into the sea as ice melts

However, the new findings show the mechanism has actually been operating naturally for millions of years within the isolated southern waters. And it has led to the researchers being granted permission by the UN to move ahead with the experiment.

The scientist who will lead the next stage of the study, Professor Victor Smetacek, said: ‘The gas is sure to be out of the Earth’s atmosphere for several hundred years.’

The aim is to discover whether artificially fertilising the area will create more algae in the Great Southern Ocean. That ocean is an untapped resource for soaking up CO2 because it doesn’t have much iron, unlike other seas.

It covers 20million square miles, and scientists say that if this could all be treated with iron, the resulting algae would remove three-and-a-half gigatons of carbon dioxide. This is equivalent to one eighth of all emissions annually created by burning fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal.

It would also be equal to removing all carbon dioxide emitted from every power plant, chimney and car exhaust in the rapidly expanding industries of India and Japan.

However, the experts warn it is too early to say whether it will work.

The team from ice patrol ship HMS Endurance used sledgehammers to chip deep into the interior of a 33ft-long mass of polar ice from half-a-dozen house-sized icebergs that had blown ashore in Antarctica.

Once back in the UK, they used a special microscope to analyse the samples, which revealed what they had been looking for – tiny iron particles, only a few millionths of a millimetre wide, embedded deep within the ice. Until now, it was thought that the only source of iron in the Southern Ocean was wind blowing in metal compounds from the deserts of nearby continents like Australia. But the research has disproved this.

Lead researcher Prof Rob Raiswell thinks the process could hold the key to staving off globally rising temperatures

Prof Raiswell said: ‘These particles measure only a fraction of a millimetre, but they have great importance for the global climate.’

Rising global temperatures, particularly over the past 50 years, have increased the rate at which polar ice melts, causing sea levels to rise.

Ten of the warmest years on record have been since 1991, with experts predicting that 2009 could be the hottest year yet.

The climate-change effect is set to substantially increase over the coming decades, as developing industrial nations pump out more CO2. Temperatures along the Antarctic Peninsula alone have increased by 2.5C over the past 50 years.

But for every percentage point increase in the amount of ice that breaks off, Prof Raiswell calculates that a further 26million tons of CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.

Polar expert Professor Smetacek and a 49-strong German research team is due to set sail from Cape Town in the icebreaker Polarstern in the next few days to conduct their groundbreaking experiment.

Crucially, the scientists want to know how much algae will sink to the bottom of the ocean where the CO2 will be safely trapped.

Rob Raiswell a geochemist at the University of Leeds believes the project is controversial as they are unsure of the effects on the ecosystem

Algae that falls a couple of miles below the surface will remain there for hundreds of years; algae that remains only a few hundred metres from the surface releases carbon back into the atmosphere.

Dr Phil Williamson, scientific co-ordinator of the Surface Ocean Lower Atmosphere study, funded by the UK’s National Environment Research Council, called the research ‘exciting’.

‘We have images from satellites which show the ocean stays green for weeks afterwards but the
key will be whether it stays that way,’ said Dr Williamson.

Schemes to fertilise the seas with iron have in the past been driven by commercial interests. This is the biggest ever scientific attempt.

Last May, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity called a halt to fertilisation around the Antarctic until there was more detailed scientific data. But the British findings led to the go-ahead for Professor Smetacek’s team from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Bremerhaven, Germany.

Nonetheless, even Prof Raiswell has called the project ‘highly controversial’. He said: ‘Oceans aren’t isolated boxes and it would affect the surrounding areas as well.

‘We don’t know what effect that would have. The ecosystems are very complicated. If the iceberg iron is useful, then it will just buy us more time.

‘The Earth might have fightback mechanisms but we must still try to reduce our CO2 emissions.’

Prof Smetacek said the issue is too complex not to be explored by scientists. He warned: ‘Objections will be swept away when our powerlessness in the face of climate change becomes apparent.’

Soot reduction 'could help to stop global warming'

Cutting one of humanity's most common pollutants would have immediate cooling effect, Nasa claims

Governments could slow global warming dramatically, and buy time to avert disastrous climate change, by slashing emissions of one of humanity's most familiar pollutants – soot – according to Nasa scientists. A study by the space agency shows that cutting down on the pollutant, which has so far been largely ignored by climate scientists, can have an immediate cooling effect – and prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths from air pollution at the same time.

At the beginning of the make-or-break year in international attempts to negotiate a treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, the soot removal proposal – which is being taken seriously by experts close to the Obama administration – offers hope of a rapid new way of tackling global warming. Governments have long experience in acting against soot.

Cutting its emissions has a virtually instantaneous effect, because it rapidly falls out of the atmosphere, unlike carbon dioxide which remains there for over a hundred years. And because soot is one of the worst killers among all pollutants, radical reductions save lives and so should command popular and political support.

The study – from Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and published in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics – concludes that tackling the pollution provides "substantial benefits for air quality while simultaneously contributing to climate change mitigation" and "may present a unique opportunity to engage parties and nations not yet fully committed to climate change mitigation for its own sake."

Black carbon, the component of soot that gives it its colour, is thought to be the second largest cause of global warming after carbon dioxide. Formed through incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, wood and vegetation, it delivers a double whammy.

While in the air, it is spread around the globe by the wind, and helps to heat the atmosphere by absorbing and releasing solar radiation. And when it falls out it darkens snow and ice, at the poles or high in mountains, reducing its ability to reflect sunlight. As a result it melts more quickly, and exposes more dark land or water which absorbs even more energy, and so increases warming.

The bad news – as the Washington-based Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development points out – is that soot is causing global warming to happen much faster than expected. Its president, Durwood Zaelke, says "black carbon is exacerbating the climate situation": "Taking quick action is quite simply our only near-term option."

Rich countries have already reduced their emissions of black carbon from burning fossil fuels dramatically since the 1950s. The health benefits of a worldwide cut could be massive. Soot contains up to 40 different cancer-causing chemicals and can also cause respiratory and heart diseases. It is estimated to cause two million deaths in the developing world each year – mainly among children – when emitted from wood-burning stoves in poorly ventilated houses. In Britain, research has shown that people are twice as likely to die from respiratory disease when heavily exposed to soot emitted from vehicle exhausts.

Tackling these two health crises, the Nasa study concludes, would also be the most effective short-term way of slowing climate change. Its research shows that the "strongest leverage" on reducing global warming would be achieved by "reducing emissions from domestic fuel burning" in developing countries, particularly in Asia, and by "reduction in surface transport emissions in North America", especially from diesel engines.

In both cases solutions are known. Cookers using solar energy or biogas, for example, eliminate smoke. And last month California brought in measures to force trucks to fit filters to reduce diesel soot emissions by 85 per cent, estimating that they would save 9,400 lives over the next 16 years.

Global warming affecting migratory birds, says Indian ornithologist

Pune, Dec 31 : Indian ornithologist has said that global warming and the rising temperatures have brought about an imbalance in the timing of the winter arrival of migratory birds and the food stock available to them.

World over experts have been saying that rising temperatures could wipe out more than half of the earth's species in the next few centuries, linking climate change to past mass extinctions.

Unchecked climate change could force up to 72 per cent of bird species in some areas into extinction, but the world still has a chance to limit the losses, conservation group WWF said in a report.

From migratory insect-eaters to tropical honeycreepers and cold-water penguins, birds are highly sensitive to changing weather conditions and many are already being adversely affected by global warming, the new study said.

Many migratory birds are now missing out on vital foods as trees are bearing fruit earlier than the scheduled time due to global warming widely blamed by scientists on emissions from burning fossil fuels.

Echoing a fear over the diminishing numbers of birds due to this imbalance, Indian ornithologist Satish Pandey said, an imbalance was creeping in the cycle of arrival of migratory birds and availability of food to them.

"Due to global warming, when the birds arrive, the trees have already borne fruit and there is a shortage of food for the birds then. As result of lack of food, the birds become undernourished which in turn affect their reproductive ability. It has been noted that the birds which were earlier laying three to four eggs were now laying only one to two eggs, as result of which their population is declining," said Pandey.

These fears have been confirmed by the WWF report, which said the birds now indicated that global warming had set in motion a powerful chain of effects in ecosystems worldwide and added "Robust evidence demonstrates that climate change is affecting birds' behaviour -- with some migratory birds even failing to migrate at all."

Rising temperatures were also seen having disastrous impacts on non-migratory species, as their habitat ranges shifted.

The causes of global warming and climate change!

There are two competing theories for the recent global warming trend.

	The first is based on a theory which followed the warming trend that occurred between 1975 and 1998.
	The second theory is based on highly correlated data going back thousands of years.

Most agree that the temperature has increased about 0.6 - 0.7 Centigrade over the last century and that the level of CO2 or Carbon Dioxide a greenhouse gas has been increased in the atmosphere by 25-30% from pre industrial values.

	The first theory, which is the generally accepted one, is that the release of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuel and from land use are responsible for the resent temperature increase.
	The second theory is that the sun's magnetic field and the solar wind modulates the amount of high energy cosmic radiation that the earth receives. This in turn affects low altitude cloud cover and how much water vapor there is in the atmosphere and thus regulates the climate.

Lets look at some data!

Fig 1. Changes in C14 concentration during the last 1000 years.

Fig 1 is from "Cosmic Rays and Earth's Climate" by Henrik Svensmark

C14 or Carbon 14 which is created from cosmic radiation is the isotope which is best known as the isotope that archeologists use for dating biological archeological artifacts. The change in the C14 concentration in the atmosphere is dominated by variations in solar activity. When the solar activity is high the production of C14 is low, this is due to the shielding effect of the solar wind against cosmic rays.

Note here that the axis for the C14 concentration has been reversed. What we then can see is that the curve closely correlates to what is historical known about the major climate events from the last 1000 years.

The Maunder minimum refers to the period 1645-1715 when very few sunspots were observed on the sun. In this period the concentration of C14 was higher in agreement with a low solar activity.

The sharp drop for C14 during the 20th century is caused by the Suess effect. This effect is due from the burning of fossil fuels which lack C14. Complicating the picture, Carbon14 was also produced by nuclear bomb tests during the cold war.

Fig 2.Solar proxies Beryllium-10 and Sunspot numbers

Solar proxies credit Global Warming Art

Because of the Suess effect, the ratio of Carbon-14 in relation to other Carbon isotopes becomes contaminated with the Carbon released from burning of fossil fuels after 1900. The C14 variation in the atmosphere as an correct indicator of cosmic radiation is less reliable after the start of industrialization.

However Beryllium-10, another isotope doesn't suffer from this effect and is therefore a better indicator of the variation of cosmic radiation for the 20th century. Here again the graph is reversed and you can also see its correlation to the sunspot numbers. From the graph it becomes clear that the amount of Be-10 have been steadily decreasing during the last hundred years indicating a decrease of the cosmic radiation and a more active Sun. The Berrylium-10 is easily dissolved in water and this record is from Greenland ice cores. The half life time of Be10 is about 1.5 million years.

Fig 3. Climate history according to IPCC 1995

From these graphs it becomes obvious that variations in the Suns solar wind and magnetic activity is a major contributor to variations in the Earth's climate.

Although we have recordings of the variations in the climate from both historical as well as from geological records we don't have an exact measurements of the average temperature with any precision. What we have are rough estimates.

This was the reason that a team led by geophysicist Michael Mann made attempts to recreate a more accurate temperature recording of the earth's climate.

Fig 4. Mann's graph is an estimate from the latest 1000 years temperature variations. Adopted by IPCC 2001

Fig 4. This graph is taken from the UNEP/GRID-Arendal site

This graph is the so called Hockey Stick graph that Michael Mann et.al. created. This graph implies that the temperature variations were relative stable during the period between year 1000 and year 1900. After that time it has increased considerably.

This graph was attacked by global warming skeptics who questioned why they could not find the Medieval Warm period and the Little Ice Age. The reason is that the graph is flawed. The graph corresponds much better to the variation of CO2 than to temperature changes. Learn more on the hockey stick anomalies HERE

Fig 5. Graph which shows the relationship between solar cycle length and the temperature.

Fig 5 The graph is taken From beam Measurement of a CLOUD, Jasper Kirkby, Cern

A stark correlation for the period 1861-1989 between the sunspot cycle length and the temperature anomaly of the Northern Hemisphere was presented by Friis-Christensen and Lassen in 1991. The temperature data comes from 1995 IPCC.

Fig 6. Shows the flux of high energy cosmic rays reaching Earth. Red line - annual averages. The blue line is an 11 yr average

Fig 6. Taken from "Carbon Dioxide or Solar Forcing?", www.sciencebits.com, Nir Shaviv

The cosmic ray flux measured by ion chambers.

The ion chambers at ground level are sensitive to high energy particles. These particles are from cosmic radiation and originate from supernova explosions with several 10's of GeV. These are the particles responsible for the formation of low altitude cover of clouds. The ionization of the upper atmosphere are mainly made from lower energy particles originating from the Sun. Plot redrawn using data from Ahluwalia (1997).

Also, the decrease in high energy cosmic rays since the 1970's are less pronounced from low energy solar activity, which means that changes in Be10 or direct solar activity are less accurate in quantifying the solar -> cosmic ray -> climate link and its contribution to 20th century global warming. This lack of clear correlation from the solar wind and low energy cosmic radiation during the last decades have been used by some climatologists to try debunk the solar climate connection.

Fig 7. Correlation between high energy cosmic radiation and low cloud cover.

Fig 7. Taken from "Cosmic Rays and Climate", www.sciencebits.com, Nir Shaviv

The cosmic ray flux as measured by Neutron count monitors at low magnetic latitudes. The low altitude cloud cover is taken from ISCCP satellite data sets, by Marsh & Svensmark, 2003.