Fake Global Warming News

[BR14]

What is the peer reviewed evidence base for this assertion?

Two geezers dahn the pub, probably

[TwoWolves]

Global climate change, driven by human interaction with the environment is a reality. I went trekking in the Himalaya in the Mid Nineties and the ancient glacial melt was severe, villages were being crushed by landslides in ever-increasing numbers as the perma-frost retreated. Anyone noticed that Mammouth finds have accelerated?

However, we are now starting a movement into a Solar Minimum which will counter this warming for decades, even as long as a century which will lead to harsh winters and poor summer harvests. It is quite likely that world leaders will abandon all efforts to confront the original problem.

I'm hoping that the reprieve will give us time to find technological solutions rather than just wearing hair shirts and virtue signalling.

[pjclarke]

However, we are now starting a movement into a Solar Minimum which will counter this warming for decades, even as long as a century which will lead to harsh winters and poor summer harvests. It is quite likely that world leaders will abandon all efforts to confront the original problem.

Alas, no. The radiative forcing effect of both a Maunder Minimum sized reduction in insolation and the enhanced and growing influence of the now-enhanced greenhouse effect are well-quantified. The former would delay the latter by just 5 years, at best.

The current exceptionally long minimum of solar activity has led to the suggestion that the Sun might experience a new grand minimum in the next decades, a prolonged period of low activity similar to the Maunder minimum in the late 17th century. The Maunder minimum is connected to the Little Ice Age, a time of markedly lower temperatures, in particular in the Northern hemisphere. Here we use a coupled climate model to explore the effect of a 21st-century grand minimum on future global temperatures, finding a moderate temperature offset of no more than −0.3°C in the year 2100 relative to a scenario with solar activity similar to recent decades. This temperature decrease is much smaller than the warming expected from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by the end of the century.

Feulner and Rahmstorf 2010

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...42710/abstract

[OwlHoot]

I'm hoping that the reprieve will give us time to find technological solutions rather than just wearing hair shirts and virtue signalling.

Space sunshade

Several authors have proposed dispersing light before it reaches the Earth by putting a very large lens in space, perhaps at the L1 point between the Earth and the Sun. This plan was proposed in 1989 by J. T. Early.

In 2004, physicist and science fiction author Gregory Benford calculated that a concave rotating Fresnel lens 1000 kilometres across, yet only a few millimeters thick, floating in space at the L1 point, would reduce the solar energy reaching the Earth by approximately 0.5% to 1%.

The cost of such a lens has been disputed. At a science fiction convention in 2004, Benford estimated that it would cost about US$10 billion up front, and another $10 billion in supportive cost during its lifespan.

$20 billion seems chicken feed for the benefit this would provide, if it turns out to be needed.

[d000hg]

Have you people not SEEN Day After Tomorrow?

[pjclarke]

Have you people not SEEN Day After Tomorrow?

Or read Ringworld?

If we're talking sci-fi solutions, then I favour a hydroelectric dam across the Straits of Gibraltar or a few hundred square km of intensive solar in the North African desert powering the EMEA area.

(Or we could just burn less oil and coal)

[MarillionFan]

Global Cooling

https://www.conservationjobs.co.uk/a...antic-current/

Doomed I tell ya, doomed!

[northernladyuk]

Space sunshade



$20 billion seems chicken feed for the benefit this would provide, if it turns out to be needed.

As estimated at a 2004 SF convention...

[OwlHoot]

I favour a hydroelectric dam across the Straits of Gibraltar

The snag is by obstructing the cold water current from the Atlantic that might turn the Mediterranean into an anaerobic dead zone.

Likewise, excessive use of wave power would reduce oxygen absorption into the sea by suppressing wave foaming on the shore.

Or we could just burn less oil and coal

Doesn't all the dust and smog from Chinese coal-powered power stations have a net cooling effect, even after CO2 emissions are taken into account, well according to NASA anyway?

2015-12-21 Climate change shock: Burning fossil fuels 'COOLS planet', says NASA

[pjclarke]

Doesn't all the dust and smog from Chinese coal-powered power stations have a net cooling effect, even after CO2 emissions are taken into account, well according to NASA anyway?

Cooling, yes. Net, No.