There is a big change in the weather today but the thing everyone is talking about is the smoke from the Minnesota wildfire. Tony mentioned it in a blog post recently and here is a link to an animation showing some of the smoke. Wildfires are quite typical in Canada and the Western U.S. every year and we do observe some of that smoke from time-to-time but most times it is not close enough to smell. The Pagami Creek fire ongoing in Minnesota is close enough that is smells like a campfire is burning right here in the office. It makes me want to take a vacation camping in the woods – just not in a spot with a wildfire. The cold air advection behind the cold front (that moved through last night) is also keeping the smoky air closer to the surface. The wind will turn more westerly this afternoon and early evening so that should take the smell away, but later tonight and tomorrow the wind will be out of the northwest again and might usher the smoke straight through our area.

___________________________

Besides wildfires, hurricanes, and blasts of cool air dominating the headlines this time of year, another item that catches attention in September is the amount of arctic sea ice. It has been predicted the arctic sea ice will disappear during the Summer within the next decade or two – due to anthropogenic global warming (AGW), and it will be devastating to the arctic region, and it will eventually mean the end of the biosphere, and many more bad things. Because of the various predictions, people watch the amount of ice quite closely to see if it keeps getting lower. 2007 was the year with the lowest amount of ice measured since 1979, when comprehensive instrumental monitoring began. There is other evidence, human and natural records, indicating that the arctic has been substantially ice free in the recent past (since the last ice age).

According to the NSIDC, this year will probably end up tying the recent record (2007) for the lowest extent of arctic sea ice. Prior to this year, the amount of Summer ice had been staying at or slightly above the 2007 record. If the gradual trend of warmer temps continues (whether by AGW or other natural forces) then I would expect the sea ice extent to get a little lower each year.

In other ice news, at least one ice expert was shocked at how much ice melted from a notable glacier in northwest Greenland. You can see the before and after pictures here. Apparently the area within the picture is quite large and to see it in person would be much more impressive. The pictures probably do not do it justice. Anyway, I wasn’t too shocked by the pictures, although I think it would be cool to see it in person. I have never been to Greenland.

Medvezhiy Glacier in Tajikistan

While many glaciers around the world are in retreat, it does not mean they do not grow or advance from time-to-time. Take a look at how dramatic the movement of the Medvezhiy glacier in Tajikistan has been. It has moved more in the last couple months than in the last 22 years.

Whether more ice is melting or not, the effect are not always what one might assume. As I noted a couple weeks back, the global sea level actually went down by quite a bit last year. It is likely a short term drop, but it reminds us that things do not always proceed in a linear fashion.

In any case, research has shown that sea levels can change quite abruptly while responding to cues from the climate, so the future will likely continue to surprise.

Have a good Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Arctic climate, Climate Change, Environment, Fire

A few months ago I posted a blog entry questioning if the state of the atmosphere and earth is as bad as promoted in some media and government outlets. The answer seemed to be that there are plenty of problems (even serious problems) but that it wasn’t as apocalyptic as the headlines sometimes portray.

Since it is often good to review “common knowledge”, verify previous research, and get a different viewpoint, here are some other items of interest that run a little contrary to previously held knowledge:

1. For a while now it has been reported that droughts and famines will become much more of a problem in a potentially warmer world in the future. One of the studies used to come to this conclusion was found to be flawed. A re-analysis of plant productivity trends found no statistically significant trends for over 85% of the vegetated surface of the earth. If droughts and floods become more extreme in the future, there will no doubt be negative effects on the food supply, but for the time being, it isn’t as bad as originally thought.

2. In contrast to the gradual increase of sea levels over the last couple of decades, the level actually fell last year – by quite a bit. It appears that the transition from El Nino to La Nina and copious amounts of rainfall in Brazil and Australia caused most of the significant drop in global sea-level. Even though this trend is counter to what has been expected from year-to-year due to anthropogenic global warming (AGW), it is not too likely it will continue to go down. If the global temperature goes up over coming decades then more of the ice caps will melt and it is not likely that any amount of rain over land will reduce the higher levels of the ocean.

3. In AGW research, there has been an awakening of sorts. A few years ago researchers at the National Polytechnic Institute of the Ukraine suggested that cosmic rays could be having a larger influence on the global temperature than previously thought. Vitaly Rusov and his colleagues were roundly criticized and mocked for this theory. Even after lab results clearly showed that cloud droplets were affected by cosmic rays, any link to global warming was almost completely dismissed. There were also some follow up statistical studies that did not show a strong link between climate warming/cooling and the flux of cosmic rays. Then a funny thing happened. The more people looked at the theory, the more it looked as if cosmic rays might play a small but quantifiable part in the global temperature scheme. Now even more research has confirmed that cosmic rays can change aeresol (cloud particle) production in the atmosphere. The most recent confirmation comes from CERN in Switzerland. I am still unconvinced that cosmic rays play a major role in the climate, but it seems it should be studied further and be considered as a part (albeit quite small) of future climate modelling.

4. On the subject of past mocking and ridicule, I am unsure if the backers of Peak Oil theory can be matched when speaking about the abiogenisis theory of oil formation. People who promoted the abiogenesis theory were trashed in many an online forum, mainly by Peak Oil theorists. It was fossil fuel theory or nothing. We were running out of oil in the late 1990s, 2005, 2008, 2010, sometime in the near future, because all the fossil fuel on the planet was created in a short period of time hundreds of millions of years ago, we know how much is left, and it is not much! Thankfully some people continued to think seriously about how carbon and hydrogen get into the earth’s mantle and what happens in the heat and pressure. Now more substantial research is going into the abiogenesis theory.

I have no doubt that we are reaching the limits of fossil fuel production with our current technology, but I don’t think we are headed back to the stone age anytime soon. Whether or not there is some new hydrocarbon fuel being created within the earth at this very moment, we should be focusing on cleaner more stable energy sources for the future. If you doubt that we might be polluting too much, negatively affecting the environment, or not using too much fossil fuel, just take a look at this little animation of the earth demonstrating the areas where humans have essentially taken over. Hint, it is the vast majority of the land surface.

Have a fine Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Climate Change, Oceans, Peak Oil