etudiant

The forecast map suggests a warmer than usual Alaska, which was indeed the case until recently. However, there appears to have been a shift towards much colder since about the start of winter on Dec 22, with much below normal temperatures. So perhaps there will be some revision in the near future..

Careful about that, that was in 2015. The Arctic ice is in continuous flux, rotating around the pole with the older ice getting dumped down the Fram Strait between Greenland and Iceland. Very little Arctic ice is permanently fixed to the shores, mainly it gradually circulates around the pole. That is why the north coast of Iceland is littered with driftwood originating in Siberia. Afaik, there is nothing like the really old (100,000 to 2,000,000 years old) ice found in Antarctica in the north polar ice. That ice is all sea ice, totally vulnerable to a warm summer melt and it is not very useful to focus on the bits that are 3-5 years old, they just reflect whether the last few summers have been warmer or colder than usual.

Man has surely changed the climate, it is just not plausible that the massive changes we have implemented on the earth's surface and the associated biosphere would not impact the heat flows. There is argument about how much change, whether that change is reversible and what are the relevant time frames, but just calling it a hoax is unlikely to convince anyone.

While that is a forecast for Jan 1-6 of 2020, not of the temperatures now, it is pretty chilly already, with Fairbanks around 25 below zero F. Quite a swing from earlier.

I think we're basically in violent agreement, but really all you need to do is to fly over the western US. The landscape is blighted as far as the eye can see from 35000 feet by 1000 foot diameter irrigated fields, cooling the atmosphere and draining the aquifers to produce crops no one wants. I cannot see that as a natural process, no matter how hard I try.

Perhaps it would be easier if we accept that humans are in fact geoengineering right now. That may help put the risk of deliberate geoengineering into perspective.

Agree 100%, but of course the concern is that humans are already geoengineering the globe, with massive distortions in soil, water and air management due to agriculture, industry and settlement. So the threshold for intervention is correspondingly much lower, even though the uncertainties are as large as ever.

I have no expertise on the topic, but the uncertainties are indeed massive. Consequently it is questionable whether the researcher quoted in The Guardian can credibly assert that the oceans cannot absorb the needed amount of CO2. Of course, this also reinforces your other point, about the known and unknown risks inherent in any geoengineering effort.

Transitions are not so easy. Just ask the Federal Reserve, trying to unblow the current zero interest bubble. That said, I think you overestimate the difficulties. I think that populations are already under control in the industrialized world, with Europe, China, Japan and the US all under replacement fertility, leaving immigration to offset the decline. Only Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia still have high birth rates, largely driven by poverty. That can be cured within a generation, as China demonstrated. Separately, I do not think CO2 capture is a serious problem. The experiments in seeding the southern oceans with iron sulfate were hugely successful and underscore the late John Martins claim 'give me a half tanker of iron sulfate and I'll give you an ice age'.

Thank you, that is a real contribution to keeping the record straight.

Forecast is for heavy rain Dec 14th, so if your contractor works Saturdays, you should be able to find your leak. That said, my limited experience with leaks is that the water usually drips down some distance away from the actual leak, so look around for all potential culprits. I found very high grade clear silicon caulk a very effective help, sealing generously between the chimney and the flashing, especially where the flashing abutted the chimney. The contractor had wanted to take down the bedroom ceiling, as that was where the leak was showing, so I was forced to try to find a less disruptive solution. Fortunately the roof had a flat section that allowed access to the chimney, as it would have been much more involved had ladders and scaffolds been required..

It would be good to have the NYC annual snow fall totals for the 1600s and 1700s, as that covers the 'Little Ice Age' interval. My guess is that snow totals were above the recent 50" averages, but surely there is some historical record somewhere.

Although the map is not clear, the NOHRSC estimate is at least a factor of 10 too high. Central Park had barely enough snow to coat the grass, the 0.2" number given initially looked spot on to me. It is not confidence inspiring when 'final revisions' are obviously wrong.

Has anyone had any experience with the new IBM GRAF weather tracking/forecasting system? It seems to be inaccessible to ordinary mortals, but does it even perform at competitive levels with the Euro or the GFS?

Manhattan UES did not see much, a few desultory flakes disappearing on the wet ground. No slush at all.

Lot of moving parts to this. Difficult to be confident here in a snow forecast three days out. Fortunately I don't have to drive anywhere Wednesday morning, so can consider the outcome with equanimity.

Seems to be mostly a raw weather event here in Manhattan, thirties, windy and raining. No substantial snow thus far.

Very nice paper, thank you for posting this. I'm intrigued that the warm pool has been tracked since the start of the 1900s, a more than doubled warm area is massive and deserves to be highlighted more.

Saw that phenomenon in progress this morning in NYC Central Park , where there are lots of Ginkos. In still air, their leaves were just showering down, so by the afternoon, the trees were almost bare, with the leaves carpeting the ground right under the trees. It was very pretty in the afternoon sun, the green and gold leaves encircling the tree trunks.

quiet bar playing Xmas music= bad credit risk

I can see the appeal, but can't see how that type of place could earn enough to stay in business.

All these links refer to the same Bloomberg article, which has very little detail. It is easy to store solar heat for decades, just grow some trees. The new molecule, cost unspecified, stores and releases some unquantified amount of heat, but there is nothing about how fast or how the release is controlled. At this point, the article seems click bait, rather than useful reporting.

Afaik, the issue here is that incoming energy from the sun is more short wave, which is not as obstructed by greenhouse gases as are the longer wave length heat radiations, The effect is same energy incoming, less outgoing, resulting in a heating effect. Note that this leaves lots of room for discussion, as we have no full agreement on the effects of water vapor, the predominant green house gas, or of clouds, or of atmospheric convection, ocean heat flows etc etc. It is a very complex system and it is frankly a major achievement to have it modeled as well as it is. Major uncertainties still remain, but the existence of greenhouse effects is not one of them.

Still hugely impressive, 2000 pounds in a 200 day growing season requires 10 pounds a day average weight gain, so probably closer to 50 pounds per day at the peak. That plant might as well be directly connected to a tap, it must guzzle like fury. Wonder if it gets warm because it is growing so fast.

Thank you, csnavywx, very helpful links. Even without ability to pass the paywall, the summaries and the charts tell the story. The charts especially are pretty alarming. Sadly, seen that coal fired power plant construction is still very strong, particularly in China and India, i see no possibility of arresting the CO2 uptrend. We will see this future, like it or not.