What if there is no Climate Emergency ?

Screenshot 2019-09-25 at 12.10.57.png

What if there is no Catastrophic Risk from Man-made Global Warming ?

What if Man-made CO2 emissions are not the “Climate Control Knob” and CO2 is really is a non-problem ?

But what if there is a real Global Cooling Catastrophe in the offing ?

 

It is the propaganda of Catastrophic Global Warming / Climate Change alarmists that has illogically conflated Carbon Dioxide, the beneficial trace gas that sustains all life on earth and which may cause some minor warming, with real and dangerous pollutants to create the “Great Global Warming Scare / Climate Change Scare / Climate Emergency / etcetera”, with their “we are all going to fry in the next few years” narrative”.

The temperature progression of Greenland Ice Cores, (above), shows that each high point in the past of our current benign Holocene epoch, (Optimum – Minoan – Roman – Medieval – Modern), has been colder than its previous high point.  For the last 3 millennia, since 1000BC, cooling has been progressing at a rate considerably higher than during the earlier Holocene that encompassed the highest temperature of the Holocene Climate Optimum.

As the Holocene epoch is now some ~11,000 years old, on a geological time scale experience of previous interglacials shows that it should be ending very soon.  It is therefore much more likely that the Holocene will continue to cool at at least the current rate as it has done for the past 3 millennia, unless it terminates suddenly like earlier interglacials.

 

 

The role of Atmospheric CO2

To establish any realistic policy the following points about the role of atmospheric CO2 and man-made CO2 emissions need to be recognised:

  • The greater part of the Greenhouse effect, (more than ~90% – 95%) arises from water as vapour and clouds in the atmosphere.

https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

  • The warming Greenhouse effect is essential to all life on earth, assuming that without it at ~+33°C planet Earth would be a very cold and inhospitable place indeed.
  • The role of water as vapour or clouds is fully acknowledged by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC.  Nonetheless they only concentrate their alarmist views on Man-made CO2 emissions.  This is not surprising, after all the adverse role of Man-made CO2 emissions and their supposed climate impact is built into the IPCC mandate.

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf      (page 666 of the IPCC assessment.)

  • Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide CO2 is not pollutant.
  • The world needs its atmospheric CO2 for the survival and fertilisation of all plant life.
  • So atmospheric Carbon Dioxide is the very stuff of life.
  • Atmospheric CO2 is essential for PHOTOSYNTHESIS in plants, it supports all life on earth
  • At about half the current atmospheric concentration of CO2, plant Photosynthesis falters and the world soon dies.
  • In comparison with its Geological past the World is now in a period of comparative CO2 starvation, because most of the CO2, once at least 10 times more abundant in the atmosphere at the time when plants evolved, has since been sequestered in the oceans as limestone, Calcium Carbonate.

CO2 concentration came close to the fatally low level, (~150 ppmv), during the last ice age, 110,000BC – 10,000BC.  The dangerously low level of atmospheric CO2 could well be exceeded in any coming Ice Age.  Colder oceans absorb more CO2 and ocean life sequesters it as limestone.

This is the way our world will eventually die of atmospheric CO2 starvation in a future glacial period.

Increased CO2 concentration promotes plant growth throughout the planet and reduces the water needs of plants.  According to NASA, ~15% extra green growth across the planet is already attributed to the relatively recent increase in CO2 concentration.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

Man-kind as a whole contributes only a small amount of the CO2 in the Carbon cycle, (~3% per annum), and any extra atmospheric CO2 is rapidly absorbed by the oceans and the biosphere, (with a half-life probably as short as ~5 years).

If any extra CO2 were to have some minor warming effect, it would be all to the good.  Atmospheric CO2, whether Man-made or mostly naturally occurring, cannot therefore be considered as a pollutant.

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/moore-positive-impact-of-human-co2-emissions.pdf

However added CO2 from Mankind’s use of fossil fuels is unlikely to be sufficient to avoid the adverse cooling effects of our soon to be ending Holocene interglacial.

The diminishing warming effectiveness of increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

There is no straight-line relationship between CO2 concentration and temperature.

The effectiveness of CO2 as a warming Greenhouse gas rapidly diminishes logarithmically as concentration increases.  The consequences of the is logarithmic diminution mean that all further CO2 induced temperature increases can only be absolutely marginal and that there can never be any further Catastrophic Man-made Global warming.

In other words there can be “no Climate Emergency” caused by increasing levels of CO2.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 10.06.07.png

A concentration of atmospheric CO2 greater than 200 ppmv equivalent to ~77% of CO2’s Greenhouse effectiveness is essential to maintain plant life and thus all life on earth.  Plant life will be extinguished with CO2 levels at ~150ppmv.

CO2 is not causing global warming

This logarithmic diminution effect is caused by the overlapping energy wavelengths between greenhouse gasses and water vapour in the atmosphere.  An illustration  of the CO2 diminution effect with increasing concentrations, can be imagined as if one was painting over a window with successive layers of white paint.  The first layer will still be translucent, subsequent layers will progressively reduce the translucency until the window is fully obscured and thereafter any further paint layers can make no further difference to the fact that the window is already fully obscured. 

At the current level of ~400 ppmv, ~87% of the effectiveness of CO2 as a Greenhouse gas is exhausted.

Screenshot 2019-06-29 at 14.26.41

With only 13% of CO2 effectiveness remaining, so little of its potential as a greenhouse gas now remains that there is no possibility of ever reaching the “much feared” +2°C temperature rise or more predicted by alarmists, that they think would be caused by future Man-made CO2 emissions.

From now increasing CO2 in the atmosphere can only lead to very limited further warming and certainly not to any catastrophic and any dangerous temperature increase.  The simple assumptions supporting this are set out below.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 14.02.30.png

Logarithmic diminution operates as follows:

https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/the-diminishing-effect-of-increasing-concentrations-of-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-on-temperature/

  • 77% of the CO2 greenhouse effect of CO2, 0 – 200 ppmv, is essential to maintain and fertilise plant life and thus all life on earth.
  • Even if it is assumed that all the increase from 300ppmv – 400ppmv is Man-made, it would give 4.2% of the Greenhouse effect and a temperature rise of between 0.14°C – 0.07°C
  • A possible immediate future rise from 400ppmv – 500ppmv could only give a rise of between 0.11°C – 0.05°C
  • A later rise of CO2 from 500ppmv – 1000ppmv, were it to occur, can only give a further rise of between 0.33°C – 0.17°C
  • This ignores the statement by the IPCC that only 50% of CO2 increase is Man-made, which would reduce the range of increased temperature values by half.
  • This also ignores the assumption made in Climate models that there is massive positive and escalating feedback from further increasing CO2 emissions:  even if such feedback was proven, any continuing warming from CO2 emissions would still remain marginal as a result of the logarithmic diminution effect.

Alarmists consider that level of +2°C to be catastrophic and sadly they have convinced many of the Western world’s politicians.  Economically this is not so, and any increase up-to a further +2°C would be beneficial.  Global temperature would then approach the very abundant period of the previous Eemian interglacial epoch 110,000 years ago, when hippopotami thrived in the Rhine delta.

https://academic.oup.com/reep/article/12/1/4/4804315

It is now likely that the impact of any rise in CO2 concentrations on global temperature is only marginally insignificant and immeasurable, even at its greatest assessed effectiveness.  In fact that temperature rise could well be beneficial.

To bring India and the Developing world, (some 4.1 billion people, ~44% of the world population), up to the current level of development of China, as indicated by CO2 emissions/head, over the coming decades their CO2 emissions are bound to escalate by at least a further 20 billion tonnes per annum, (+~60%).

So faced with this inevitable escalation, all the attempts by Western Nations to control global temperature by the limitation of their own CO2 emissions from fossil fuels can now only ever have marginal or immeasurable further and self-harming effects.

https://www.lomborg.com/press-release-research-reveals-negligible-impact-of-paris-climate-promises

Therefore, any de-carbonisation efforts by Western Nations are misguided and irrelevant.

 

Fossil fuels are a gift of nature.  They are like a battery of energy created by sunlight several million years ago.  They have enabled all the civilised development in the West and will continue to support the growth in prosperity of the developing world.  Fossil fuels are not running out.  Fracking developments can occur almost anywhere worldwide.  For example there are 300 years’ worth of Coal in the UK alone.

An alternate view

The above calculations have worked through the conventional “IPCC wisdom” on the Man-made Greenhouse effect for Global warming showing that the Man-made effect is only marginal in future at most.

However an alternative scientific view now justifiably asserts that the greenhouse effect is controlled virtually exclusively by cloudiness and the Man-made contribution can only be about +0.01°C.  This effectively negates any consideration at all of Man-made global warming.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

J. KAUPPINEN AND P. MALMI

Abstract.

In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the green house gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature.

Concluding as follows:

The IPCC climate sensitivity is about one order of magnitude too high, because a strong negative feedback of the clouds is missing in climate models. If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognise that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice. The major part of the extra CO2 is emitted from oceans [6], according to Henry‘s law. The low clouds practically control the global average temperature. During the last hundred years the temperature is increased about 0.1°C because of CO2. The human contribution was about 0.01°C.

We have proven that the GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 cannot compute correctly the natural component included in the observed global temperature. The reason is that the models fail to derive the influences of low cloud cover fraction on the global temperature. A too small natural component results in a too large portion for the contribution of the greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. That is why IPCC represents the climate sensitivity more than one order of magnitude larger than our sensitivity 0.24°C.

Because the anthropogenic portion in the increased CO2 is less than 10 %, we have practically no anthropogenic climate change. The low clouds control mainly the global temperature.

 

 

Nonetheless there is a real Climate catastrophe in the offing

That catastrophe is the exact opposite of the Climate alarmists “we are all going to fry narrative”.  It presages a very scary future for Man-kind and the biosphere in the comparatively near-term:

  • According to reliable Ice Core records the last millennium 1000 – 2000 AD was the coldest of our current Holocene interglacial.
  • The world has already been cooling at ~0.14°C / millennium, ~20 times the earlier rate since ~1000 BC, before Roman times.

https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/holocene-context-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-warming/

Screenshot 2019-09-25 at 18.08.58.png

  • But as can be seen in the rapid Recovery from the last Ice Age, 10,000 years ago, when temperature increased at a rate of ~+2.5°C / millennium, 18 times the present rate of temperature diminution, the world’s Climate can change much more radically and suddenly.
  • There is every reason to suspect that the World could meet a similar falling temperature cliff at the coming end of our present Holocene epoch, this century, next century or this millennium, with a similar rate of decline as at the end of the previous Eemian interglacial.

Screenshot 2019-10-19 at 06.44.53.png

  • The modern short pulse of beneficial Global warming stopped some 20 years ago and recent global temperatures are now stable or declining.
  • At 11,000 years old, our congenial, warm Holocene interglacial is coming towards its end. The Holocene epoch has been responsible for all man-kind’s advances, from living in caves to microprocessors.
  • The world is likely very soon, (in geological time), to revert to another period of true glaciation, again resulting in mile high ice sheets over New York. With much lower sea levels this was state of Western Europe only 16,000 years ago and gives an idea of what a new Ice Age will look like in due course.

Screenshot 2019-06-30 at 21.05.21.png

  • The prospect of even moving in a cooling direction is something to be truly scared about, both for the biosphere and for man-kind.
  • Some immediate cooling now seems likely in the near term, (this century), as a result of the state of the current Solar cycle.

How The Sun Affects Temperatures On Earth

Screenshot 2019-10-29 at 18.27.44.png

  • The weather gets worse in colder times.
  • Cold fatally reduces agricultural productivity.
  • Cooling is already evident.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 10.16.42.png

The Real Climate Crisis Is Not Global Warming, It Is Cooling, And It May Have Already Started

Midwest Braces for An “All-Out Blizzard Unheard Of For October”

Historic Midwest Blizzard Has Farmers “Expecting Massive Crop Losses”

And trying to control the “warming effect” of Man-made CO2 emissions in the Western world will do nothing to ameliorate the coming Cold Climate Catastrophe.

 

Conclusion

There is no Global Warming climate emergency.

“There is no climate emergency”

Spending any effort, for solely emotional and childish reasons, without:

  • rigorous scientific debate
  • true cost benefit analysis
  • without full engineering due diligence for any proposed technical solutions
  • let alone at UK GDP scale costs, (~£1 trillion+),

trying to stop the UK’s 1% or the EU’s 10% of something that has not been happening for 3 millennia has to be monumentally ill-advised.

https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/global-man-made-co2-emissions-1965-2018-bp-data/

It should be understood that the real reason for “Green” thinking is to bring Energy and Economic catastrophe to the capitalist Western world.

Green thinking and its induced policies should be regarded as a continuation of the “Cold War”.

Russia, China and India are mocking the way Western governments have been induced by their “Green” thinking to promote their policies of abject self-harm at great national cost and to no perceptible benefit.  This is supported by Western “useful idiots”, (Lenin’s term).  Lenin held them in utter contempt. 

The developing and Eastern worlds are certainly not going to be meekly following the deranged example of the “virtue signalling” West.

https://www.eurasiareview.com/05062019-china-and-india-will-watch-the-west-destroy-itself-oped/