"Key Points: Asian black carbon aerosol can enhance US warming by changing the circulation"
"This study uses an atmosphere-ocean fully coupled climate model to investigate possible remote impacts of Asian carbonaceous aerosols on US climate change. We took a 21st century mitigation scenario as a reference, and carried out three sets of sensitivity experiments in which the prescribed carbonaceous aerosol concentrations over a selected Asian domain are increased by a factor of two, six, and ten respectively during the period of 2005–2024. The resulting enhancement of atmospheric solar absorption (only the direct effect of aerosols is included) over Asia induces tropospheric heating anomalies that force large-scale circulation changes which, averaged over the twenty-year period, add as much as an additional 0.4°C warming over the eastern US during winter and over most of the US during summer. Such remote impacts are confirmed by an atmosphere stand-alone experiment with specified heating anomalies over Asia that represent
---------------------------------------------------
- "Haiyan Teng, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
- Warren M. Washington, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
- Grant Branstator, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
- Gerald A. Meehl, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
- Jean-Francois Lamarque, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA"
===================================
6/7/12, "Asian Air Pollution Warms U.S More than Our GHG Emissions (More futility for U.S. EPA)," Masterresource.org, by Chip Knappenberger
“The whims of foreign nations, not to mention Mother Nature, can completely offset any climate changes induced by U.S. greenhouse gas emissions reductions…. So, what’s the point of forcing Americans into different energy choices?” [Over non-existent CO2 poisoning by us.]
A new study provides evidence that air pollution emanating from Asia will warm the U.S. as much or more than warming from U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The implication? Efforts by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (and otherwise) to mitigate anthropogenic climate change is moot.
If the future temperature rise in the U.S. is subject to the whims of Asian environmental and energy policy, then what sense does it make for Americans to have their energy choices regulated by efforts aimed at mitigating future temperature increases across the country—efforts which will have less of an impact on temperatures than the policies enacted across Asia?...
As I have repeatedly pointed out, nothing we do here (when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions) will make any difference either domestically, or globally, when it comes to influences on the climate."...
================================
The impact of Asian aerosols on both the US and the Arctic has been noted before. Following are 2 articles, first from 2012 about US, second from 2005 about the Arctic co-authored by James Hansen:
5/18/12, "CO2 Not to Blame for Southwest Droughts?" World Climate Report
"Now comes along a new paper published in Nature magazine by Robert Allen and colleagues which suggests that the drying trend which remains is being caused more by black carbon aerosols and tropospheric ozone than by greenhouse gas emissions. ...
"According to Allen et al.:
The authors argue that there is a good likelihood that black carbon emissions have been underestimated—especially those arising from Southeast Asia....“Our analysis strongly suggests that recent Northern Hemisphere tropical expansion is driven mainly by black carbon and tropospheric ozone, with greenhouse gases playing a smaller part.”...
The bottom line is that the primary influences on a major component of the earth’s atmospheric circulation and thus general weather patterns turns out to be, on further examination, not atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration changes, but rather black carbon (soot) and tropospheric ozone. And one impact from the forced atmospheric circulation changes is a tendency for more aridity across the Southwestern U.S.
So, the EPA can try all they want to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but no matter how successful they are, they will have little impact, if any, on the future of drought in the Southwestern U.S., as drought there is a complex interaction between natural variability and human climate alterations—of which, as shown by Allen et al., greenhouse gases play only a minor role.
So much for the “robust” signal that human greenhouse gases will lead to more drought in the Southwest."...
===============================
Per James Hansen and Dorothy Koch, Arctic black carbon comes mainly from Communist China and India:
Between 1980 and 1995, "BC (black carbon) emissions from developed countries have declined and aircraft are apparently not to blame. However, during this time BC emissions from China and India have nearly doubled:"
2/25/2005, "Distant origins of Arctic black carbon: A Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE experiment," Dorothy Koch and James Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Journal of Geophysical Research
p.1 "Black carbon (BC) particles, derived from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and biomass, may have a severe impact on the sensitive Arctic climate, possibly altering the temperature profile, cloud temperature and amount, the seasonal cycle, and the tropopause level and accelerating polar ice melting. We use the Goddard Institute for Space Studies general circulation model to investigate the origins of Arctic BC by isolating various source regions and types. The model suggests that the predominant sources of Arctic soot today are from south Asia (industrial and biofuel emissions) and from biomass burning.
These are the primary global sources of BC (approximately 20% and 55%, respectively, of the global emissions), and BC aerosols in these regions are readily lofted to high altitudes where they may be transported poleward. According to the model the Arctic BC optical thickness is mostly from south Asia (30%) and from biomass (28%) (with slightly more than half of biomass coming from north of 40 N)."...
------------------------------------------------
5/21/12, "G8: Leaders open up vital new front in the battle to control global warming," UK Telegraph, Geoffrey Lean
"It seems to have gone virtually unnoticed, but the world leaders at the weekend's G8 summit look as if they have taken the biggest step in years in tackling climate change. And it's quite apart from anything to do with carbon dioxide."...
Ed. note: Trillions have been diverted from taxpayers to the vast CO2 endangerment industry not least via an invented 'carbon trading' stock exchange and organized crime. It's being kept alive by The New York Times and The Washington Post. The whole thing would come crashing down if they told the truth but they can't do that. It would embarrass them to admit they were wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------
CO2 does not cause temperatures to increase. The CO2 trading program only benefits the rich and organized crime.
Lovelock says CO2 is up but temps remain the same. Lauded by Time Magazine in 2007, now retracts earlier predictions such as Florida sinking by 2040. Entire climate industry pivots on now disproved notion that CO2 causes rising temperatures.
4/23/12, "'I made a mistake': Gaia theory scientist James Lovelock admits he was 'alarmist' about the impact of climate change," UK Daily Mail, L. Warren
===============
7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe
===========================
10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro
----------------------------------------------
4/30/12, "HadCRUT Scientists Connect The Dots: Global Warming Has Switched To Global Cooling Over Last 15 Years," C3 Headlines
-----------------------------------------------
11/25/2009, "Global warming industry becomes too big to fail," Timothy Carney, Washington Examiner
----------------------------------------
4/16/09, "Wall Street realized there was money to be made by going green." Robert Redford
--------------------------------------
4/4/12, "The inconvenient truth of carbon offsets," Nature, Kevin Anderson
via Climate Depot
No comments:
Post a Comment