From: Kevin Trenberth <[email protected]>
To: Michael Mann <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:36:36 -0600
Cc: Tom Wigley <[email protected]>, Stephen H Schneider <[email protected]>, Myles Allen <[email protected]>, peter stott <[email protected]>, "Philip D. Jones" <[email protected]>, Benjamin Santer <[email protected]>, Thomas R Karl <[email protected]>, Gavin Schmidt <[email protected]>, James Hansen <[email protected]>, Michael Oppenheimer <[email protected]>

   Mike
   Here are some of the issues as I see them:
   Saying it is natural variability is not an explanation.  What are the physical processes?
   Where did the heat go?  We know there is a build up of ocean heat prior to El Nino, and a
   discharge (and sfc T warming) during late stages of El Nino, but is the observing system
   sufficient to track it?  Quite aside from the changes in the ocean, we know there are major
   changes in the storm tracks and teleconnections with ENSO, and there is a LOT more rain on
   land during La Nina (more drought in El Nino), so how does the albedo change overall
   (changes in cloud)?  At the very least the extra rain on land means a lot more heat goes
   into evaporation rather than raising temperatures, and so that keeps land temps down: and
   should generate cloud.  But the resulting evaporative cooling means the heat goes into
   atmosphere and should be radiated to space: so we should be able to track it with CERES
   data.  The CERES data are unfortunately wonting and so too are the cloud data.  The ocean
   data are also lacking although some of that may be related to the ocean current changes and
   burying heat at depth where it is not picked up.  If it is sequestered at depth then it
   comes back to haunt us later and so we should know about it.
   Kevin
   Michael Mann wrote:

     Kevin, that's an interesting point. As the plot from Gavin I sent shows, we can easily
     account for the observed surface cooling in terms of the  natural variability seen in
     the CMIP3 ensemble (i.e. the observed cold dip falls well within it). So in that sense,
     we can "explain" it. But this raises the interesting question, is there something going
     on here w/ the energy & radiation budget which is inconsistent with the modes of
     internal variability that leads to similar temporary cooling periods within the models.
     I'm not sure that this has been addressed--has it?

   m

   On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

   Hi Tom
   How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where
   energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter.  We are not
   close to balancing the energy budget.  The fact that we can not account for what is
   happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as
   we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not!  It is a travesty!
   Kevin
   Tom Wigley wrote:

     Dear all,

     At the risk of overload, here are some notes of mine on the recent

     lack of warming. I look at this in two ways. The first is to look at

     the difference between the observed and expected anthropogenic trend relative to the pdf
     for unforced variability. The second is to remove ENSO, volcanoes and TSI variations
     from the observed data.

     Both methods show that what we are seeing is not unusual. The second

     method leaves a significant warming over the past decade.

     These sums complement Kevin's energy work.

     Kevin says ... "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment
     and it is a travesty that we can't". I do not

     agree with this.

     Tom.

     +++++++++++++++++++++++

     Kevin Trenberth wrote:

     Hi all

     Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming?  We are asking that here
     in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on
     record.  We had 4 inches of snow.  The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal
     is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F.  The low was about
     18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.  This is January weather
     (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last
     night in below freezing weather).

     Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth's
     global energy. /Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability/, *1*, 19-27,
     doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [PDF]
     <[1]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth.papers/EnergyDiagnostics09final.pdf>
     (A PDF of the published version can be obtained from the author.)

     The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a
     travesty that we can't.  The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on
     2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong.  Our
     observing system is inadequate.

     That said there is a LOT of nonsense about the PDO.  People like CPC are tracking PDO on
     a monthly basis but it is highly correlated with ENSO.  Most of what they are seeing is
     the change in ENSO not real PDO.  It surely isn't decadal.  The PDO is already reversing
     with the switch to El Nino.  The PDO index became positive in September for first time
     since Sept 2007.   see
     [2]http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/ocean_briefing_gif/global_ocean_monitorin
     g_current.ppt

     Kevin

     Michael Mann wrote:

     extremely disappointing to see something like this appear on BBC.  its particularly odd,
     since climate is usually Richard Black's beat at BBC (and he does a great job). from
     what I can tell, this guy was formerly a weather person at the Met Office.

     We may do something about this on RealClimate, but meanwhile it might be appropriate for
     the Met Office to have a say about this, I might ask Richard Black what's up here?

     mike

     On Oct 12, 2009, at 2:32 AM, Stephen H Schneider wrote:

     Hi all. Any of you want to explain decadal natural variability and signal to noise and
     sampling errors to this new "IPCC Lead Author" from the BBC?  As we enter an El Nino
     year and as soon, as the sunspots get over their temporary--presumed--vacation worth a
     few tenths of a Watt per meter squared reduced forcing, there will likely be another
     dramatic upward spike like 1992-2000. I heard someone--Mike Schlesinger maybe??--was
     willing to bet alot of money on it happening in next 5 years?? Meanwhile the past 10
     years of global mean temperature trend stasis still saw what, 9 of the warmest in
     reconstructed 1000 year record and Greenland and the sea ice of the North in big
     retreat?? Some of you observational folks probably do need to straighten this out as my
     student suggests below. Such "fun", Cheers, Steve

     Stephen H. Schneider

     Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies,

     Professor, Department of Biology and

     Senior Fellow, Woods Institute for the Environment

     Mailing address:

     Yang & Yamazaki Environment & Energy Building - MC 4205

     473 Via Ortega

     Ph: 650 725 9978

     F:  650 725 4387

     Websites:  climatechange.net

               patientfromhell.org

     ----- Forwarded Message -----

     From: "Narasimha D. Rao" <[3][email protected] <[4]mailto:[email protected]>>

     To: "Stephen H Schneider" <[5][email protected] <[6]mailto:[email protected]>>

     Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 10:25:53 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific

     Subject: BBC U-turn on climate

     Steve,

     You may be aware of this already. Paul Hudson, BBC's reporter on climate change, on
     Friday wrote that there's been no warming since 1998, and that pacific oscillations will
     force cooling for the next 20-30 years. It is not outrageously biased in presentation as
     are other skeptics' views.

     [7]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

     [8]http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100013173/the-bbcs-amazing-u-turn-on
     -climate-change/

     BBC has significant influence on public opinion outside the US.

     Do you think this merits an op-ed response in the BBC from a scientist?

     Narasimha

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

     PhD Candidate,

     Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources (E-IPER)

     Stanford University

     Tel: 415-812-7560

     --

     Michael E. Mann

     Professor

     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)

     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075

     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663

     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [9][email protected] <[10]mailto:[email protected]>

     University Park, PA 16802-5013

     website: [11]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     <[12]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html>

     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [13]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     --

     ****************

     Kevin E. Trenberth                  e-mail: [14][email protected]

     Climate Analysis Section,           [15]www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     NCAR

     P. O. Box 3000,                     (303) 497 1318

     Boulder, CO 80307                   (303) 497 1333 (fax)

     Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO  80305

   --
   ****************
   Kevin E. Trenberth                  e-mail: [16][email protected]
   Climate Analysis Section,           [17]www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
   NCAR
   P. O. Box 3000,                     (303) 497 1318
   Boulder, CO 80307                   (303) 497 1333 (fax)
   Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO  80305

   --
   Michael E. Mann
   Professor
   Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
   Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
   503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
   The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [18][email protected]
   University Park, PA 16802-5013
   website: [19]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
   "Dire Predictions" book site:
   [20]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

--
****************
Kevin E. Trenberth                  e-mail: [21][email protected]
Climate Analysis Section,           [22]www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
NCAR
P. O. Box 3000,                     (303) 497 1318
Boulder, CO 80307                   (303) 497 1333 (fax)

Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO  80305

References

   1. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth.papers/EnergyDiagnostics09final.pdf
   2. http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/ocean_briefing_gif/global_ocean_monitoring_current.ppt
   3. mailto:[email protected]
   4. mailto:[email protected]
   5. mailto:[email protected]
   6. mailto:[email protected]
   7. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm
   8. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100013173/the-bbcs-amazing-u-turn-on-climate-change/
   9. mailto:[email protected]
  10. mailto:[email protected]
  11. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
  12. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  13. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  14. mailto:[email protected]
  15. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  16. mailto:[email protected]
  17. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  18. mailto:[email protected]
  19. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  20. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  21. mailto:[email protected]
  22. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html