SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bearcatbob who wrote (70046)5/16/2016 11:31:31 AM
From: Eric  Respond to of 86350
 
Climate change

April breaks global temperature record, marking seven months of new highs

Latest monthly figures add to string of recent temperature records and all but assure 2016 will be hottest year on record


Global land and sea temperature was 1.11C warmer in April 2016 than the average temperature for April during the period 1951-1980. Photograph: Stephane Mahe/Reuters

Michael Slezak

@MikeySlezak

April 2016 was the hottest April on record globally – and the seventh month in a row to have broken global temperature records.

The latest figures smashed the previous record for April by the largest margin ever recorded.

It makes three months in a row that the monthly record has been broken by the largest margin ever, and seven months in a row that are at least 1C above the 1951-80 mean for that month. When the string of record-smashing months started in February, scientists began talking about a “climate emergency”.

Figures released by Nasa over the weekend show the global temperature of land and sea was 1.11C warmer in April than the average temperature for April during the period 1951-1980.



World's carbon dioxide concentration teetering on the point of no return

Read more: theguardian.com

It all but assures that 2016 will be the hottest year on record, and probably by the largest margin ever.

View image on Twitter




Follow



Gavin Schmidt @ClimateOfGavin

With Apr update, 2016 still > 99% likely to be a new record (assuming historical ytd/ann patterns valid).

2:40 PM - 14 May 2016

271271 Retweets

8787 likes


The new record broke the previous one by 0.24C, which was set in 2010, at 0.87C above the baseline average for April. That record itself broke one set three years earlier at 0.75C above the baseline average for April.

View image on Twitter




Follow


Stefan Rahmstorf @rahmstorf

NASA April temperature is out. Warmest April on record. Beats the previous record by largest margin ever. #climate

6:35 AM - 15 May 2016

671671 Retweets

162162 likes


The current blast of hot air around the globe is being spurred by a massive El Niño, which is a release of warm water across the Pacific Ocean. But it’s not the biggest El Niño on record and that spike in temperatures is occurring over a background of rapid global warming, pushing temperatures to all-time highs.

“The interesting thing is the scale at which we’re breaking records,” said Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at the University of New South Wales in Australia. “It’s clearly all heading in the wrong direction.

“Climate scientists have been warning about this since at least the 1980s. And it’s been bloody obvious since the 2000s. So where’s the surprise?” said Pitman.

Pitmans said the recent figures put the recent goal agreed in Paris of just 1.5C warming in doubt. “The 1.5C target, it’s wishful thinking. I don’t know if you’d get 1.5C if you stopped emissions today. There’s inertia in the system. It’s putting intense pressure on 2C,” he said.

The record temperatures were wreaking havoc with ecosystems around the world. They’ve triggered the third recorded global coral bleaching, and in Australia 93% of the reefs have been affected by bleaching along the 2,300km Great Barrier Reef. In the northern parts of the reef, it’s expected the majority of coral is dead, and on some reefs over 90% of the coral is dying.



Great Barrier Reef bleaching made 175 times likelier by human-caused climate change, say scientists

Read more: theguardian.com

A recent analysis showed the bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef was made 175 times more likely because of climate change, and the conditions that caused it would be average in fewer than 20 years.

The April figures come as the symbolic milestone of CO2 concentrations of 400 parts per million (ppm) have been broken at the important Cape Grim measuring station in Tasmania, Australia.

Reflecting on the CO2 concentrations, Pitman said: “The thing that’s causing that warming, is going up and up and up. So the cool ocean temperatures we will get with a La Niña are warmer than we’d ever seen more than a few decades ago … This is a full-scale punching of the reef system on an ongoing basis with some occasionally really nasty kicks and it isn’t going to recover.”



Follow

Ed Hawkins @ed_hawkins

Spiralling global temperatures from 1850-2016 (full animation)

t.co pic.twitter.com/Ypci717AHq

12:22 PM - 9 May 2016

theguardian.com



To: Bearcatbob who wrote (70046)5/16/2016 5:11:50 PM
From: Gary Mohilner  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 86350
 
Bob,

I'm well aware of what it takes to stop a battleship having been on some sea trials on them, and yes, it takes lots of time. My point is that the longer we wait to get started, the more radical the change becomes that's needed.

I believe that we need govt. based incentives to make it happen, but the U.S. alone can't do it, but we can lead the development and hopefully others will follow. Their is no doubt in my mind that the Chinese are fully aware how bad their use of coal fired generators is, but they're stuck until they transition to other forms, or find a way to truly have clean coal. Clean coal technology has been discussed for decades, but we've failed to achieve it, at least at a price that can be afforded.

As for green technology, I believe the day will come where everything from the windows, siding, roofing, etc. in our homes or commercial buildings will become solar collectors. They may not be as efficient as the solar cells today, but even on a cloudy day they'll generate more power than we consume. Because such construction will be mandated, the cost won't actually be that much higher as with mass production costs can be lowered. Certainly it will probably be 25 years or more before such massive change is possible, but we should be starting to work in that direction now.

The U.S. should be the leader in developing new product that look appealing, yet gather solar energy. We should work on turning our garbage into useful products, rather than polluting land fill. Certainly as you suggested, we need to dramatically improve on batteries, or some other forms of storing, and recapturing energy. Cost of such innovation is often high, but I'll contend that once you determine how to make that better battery, etc. finding ways to mass produce it can bring the cost into line with the products of today.

A few years ago MIT announced the development of a battery suitable for electric cars that could be fully recharged in 5 minutes, the problem is cost. I've got to believe that if that battery became the standard for all electric vehicles, the cost could be brought in line with current products. If cell size were something all manufacturers could agree on, producing the cells by the millions could be priced reasonably. The cells could be packaged into all sorts of configurations, and should a cell go bad, it could be individually replaced. This is something I understand can now be done with vehicles like my Prius, but I'm not certain that's true. If in fact full recharging was available in 5 minutes, or even 10, and a vehicle could get 200 miles or more between charges, I think it would be fully competitive with petroleum powered cars.

It's my understanding that Tesla charging stations are solar powered. A friend who has one has used nothing but the Tesla stations, not even plugging his car in at home. He either goes shopping while it's charging, or works on the internet, while he spends between half and hour and a couple hours if he's fully discharged. By the way, he also let the car drive itself over a few different freeways just using the turn signal to move to the appropriate lane for changing freeways. He never needed to touch the steering wheel, accelerator, or brake as the car did all the work. I don't know that charging will always be free for Tesla, or any others, once most if not all cars are electric, but if we can build a huge network of solar charging stations, the cost of charging should be far less than using gas. Of course, with solar power in our homes, charging the car at home will be free. The Tesla's of today certainly aren't economy cars, but the new model, and others that bring down the cost and extend the range to a few hundred miles will be, especially if they have batteries that can recharge in 10 minutes, or less.

We need to move in the direction of the Tesla, one drive will convince anyone they're not sacrificing anything on performance. The petroleum industry will be kicking and screaming, but ultimately we ought to need far less of what they're selling.

Tesla has proved it can be done, now many car makers are doing it, but not yet with the range of the Tesla, but not at the cost either. The key will be getting the range and rapid recharging, do that and the gas powered car will be as obsolete as the horse powered carriage.

Gary