Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless. Some experts warn that a change in the climate may affect the ambitious projects for the exploration of the Arctic that have been launched by many countries.
Just recently, experts said that the Arctic ice cover was becoming thinner while journalists warned that the oncoming global warming would make it possible to grow oranges in the north of Siberia. Now, they say a cold spell will set in. Apparently, this will not occur overnight, Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory, says.
"Journalists say the entire process is very simple: once solar activity declines, the temperature drops. But besides solar activity, the climate is influenced by other factors, including the lithosphere, the atmosphere, the ocean, the glaciers. The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%. This means that sun’s activity could trigger certain changes whereas the actual climate changing process takes place on the Earth".
Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle. Yuri Nagovitsyn comments.
"Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040 but it won’t be as pervasive as in the late 17th century".
Somewhere historians are most certainly already writing the final chapters of a long overdue book, "The Rise and Fall of the Global Warming movement". The news from Pulkovo makes it all the more important to concentrate on the real threat of a cooling world. Although it is good to know that scientists do not think that the next cooling period will be as pervasive as the one in the late 17th century.
Hopefully the Russian scientists are right about the possibilities of Arctic exploration even in colder circumstances:
Even though pessimists say global cooling will hamper exploration of the Arctic, experts say it won’t. Climate change and the resulting increase in the thickness of the Arctic ice cover pose no obstacles to the extraction of oil and gas on the Arctic shelf. As oil and gas reserves of the Arctic sea shelf are estimated to be billions of tons, countries are demonstrating more interest in the development of the Arctic. Climate change will also have no impact on the Northern Sea Route, which makes it possible to cut trade routes between Europe, Asia and America. Professor Igor Davidenko comments.
9 comments:
Russia's different view on climate change, including the anticipation of global cooling via solar modulation, is the centerpiece of my book Don't Sell Your Coat, linked below:
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Sell-Your-Coat-ebook/dp/B0072VSQFQ/ref=kinw_dp_ke?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2
This idea totally contradicts the historical record in which the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods each peaked on the order of one 1,200- 1,400 years apart. To judge from that, we should have another two hundred plus years of warmer weather before a major cooling. Present conditions are not even as cold as the cold period in the middle of the twentieth century. It is more likely that the Dansgaard–Oeschger or Bond events govern this.
This idea totally contradicts the historical record in which the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods each peaked on the order of one thousand years apart. To judge from that, we should have another two hundred plus years of warmer weather before a major cooling. Present conditions are not even as cold as the cold period in the middle of the twentieth century.
We accept that the weather and climate systems are chaotic. Chaotic systems have 'emergent' patterns but these cannot be considered simple linear repetitions. Basing hopes of a continuing 21st century warm period on a series of previous warm periods each of diminishing strength is not a scientific approach.
Judging the future by the past is more scientific than Twainian extrapolations. Weather is cyclical and the interactions between cycles appear chaotic.
Since when does a 200 year cycle have a 200 year cold period. Does a year have 12 month winter? It is nonsense to conflate half cycles with whole cycles.
The sun's output has only reached at most a hundred year low placing us at the coldest point of a two hundred year cycle. It can only get warmer.
There has been no net warming since 1997 with CO2 up more than 8%.The earth entered a cooling trend in 2003 which is likely to last 30 years and perhaps for hundreds of years more. Here are the summary conclusions from my post “Global Cooling- Methods and Testable Decadal Predictions” on my blog at
http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com
3. Summary
1 Significant temperature drop at about 2016-17
2 Possible unusual cold snap 2021-22
3 Built in cooling trend until at least 2024
4 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2035 – 0.15
5 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 – 0.5
6 General Conclusion – by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed,
7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the little ice age.
8 The effect of increasing CO2 emissions will be minor but beneficial – they may slightly ameliorate the forecast cooling and help maintain crop yields .
9 Warning !! There are some signs in the Livingston and Penn Solar data that a sudden drop to the Maunder Minimum Little Ice Age temperatures could be imminent – with a much more rapid and economically disruptive cooling than that forecast above.
For links to the data and the peer reviewed papers supporting these forecasts check the other posts on Global Cooling and Climate on that same website
CO2 is a “trace gas” in air, insignificant by definition. It absorbs 1/7th as much IR, heat energy, from sunlight as water vapor which has 80 times as many molecules capturing 560 times as much heat making 99.8% of all "global warming." CO2 does only 0.2% of it. For this we should destroy our economy?
Carbon combustion generates 80% of our energy. Control and taxing of carbon would give the elected ruling class more power and money than anything since the Magna Carta of 1215 AD.
See The Two Minute Conservative via Google or: http://tinyurl.com/7jgh7wv When you speak ladies will swoon and liberal gentlemen will weep.
Post a Comment