DOCSLIB.ORG

Climate Change: Examining the Processes Used to Create Science and Policy, Hearing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Climate Change: Examining the Processes Used to Create Science and Policy, Hearing CLIMATE CHANGE: EXAMINING THE PROCESSES USED TO CREATE SCIENCE AND POLICY HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 Serial No. 112–09 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 65–306PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. RALPH M. HALL, Texas, Chair F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas Wisconsin JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland DAVID WU, Oregon FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma BRAD MILLER, North Carolina JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois W. TODD AKIN, Missouri GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia BEN R. LUJA´ N, New Mexico SANDY ADAMS, Florida PAUL D. TONKO, New York BENJAMIN QUAYLE, Arizona JERRY MCNERNEY, California CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland Tennessee TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi HANSEN CLARKE, Michigan MO BROOKS, Alabama ANDY HARRIS, Maryland RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana DAN BENISHEK, Michigan VACANCY (II) C O N T E N T S Thursday, March 31, 2011 Page Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 Opening Statements Statement by Representative Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 7 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 8 Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Minority Mem- ber, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Rep- resentatives ........................................................................................................... 8 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 Witnesses: Dr. J. Scott Armstrong, Professor of Marketing, the Wharton School, Univer- sity of Pennsylvania. Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 12 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 15 Dr. Richard Muller, Professor of Physics, University of California, Berkeley and Faculty Senior Scientist, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 40 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 41 Dr. John Christy, Director, Earth System Science Center, University of Ala- bama in Huntsville Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 45 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 46 Mr. Peter Glaser, Partner, Troutman Sanders, LLP Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 83 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 84 Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 96 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 97 Dr. W. David Montgomery, Economist Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 101 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 103 Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions Dr. J. Scott Armstrong, Professor of Marketing, the Wharton School, Univer- sity of Pennsylvania ............................................................................................. 154 Dr. Richard Muller, Professor of Physics, University of California, Berkeley and Faculty Senior Scientist, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory ......................... 160 Dr. John Christy, Director, Earth System Science Center, University of Ala- bama in Huntsville .............................................................................................. 167 Mr. Peter Glaser, Partner, Troutman Sanders, LLP ............................................ 175 (III) IV Page Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology ................................................................................................ 183 Dr. W. David Montgomery, Economist .................................................................. 196 Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record Material submitted by Representative Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ................ 202 Material submitted by Mr. Peter Glaser, Partner, Troutman Sanders, LLP ..... 212 Material submitted by Representative Dana Rohrabacher, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 256 CLIMATE CHANGE: EXAMINING THE PROCESSES USED TO CREATE SCIENCE AND POLICY THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m., in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ralph Hall [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. (1) 2 3 HEARING CHARTER COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Climate Change: Examining the Processes Used to Create Science and Policy THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 10:00 A.M. TO 12:00 P.M. 2318 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING PURPOSE On Thursday, March 31, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. the House Committee on Science, Space, andTechnology will hold a hearing to examine processes used to generate key climate change science and information used to inform policy development and deci- sion-making. WITNESSES • Dr. J. Scott Armstrong, Professor of Marketing, the Wharton School, Univer- sity of Pennsylvania. • Dr. Richard Muller, Professor of Physics, University of California, Berkeley and Faculty Senior Scientist, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory • Dr. John Christy, Director, Earth System Science Center, University of Ala- bama in Huntsville • Mr. Peter Glaser, Partner, Troutman Sanders, LLP • Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology • Dr. W. David Montgomery, Economist BACKGROUND All aspects of modern life operate within a known range of climate conditions. That range of variability requires that all sectors, from agriculture to transpor- tation, have a measure of resiliency built into them. Our ability to adapt to chang- ing climate conditions is predicated on our ability to better account for risk and pre- pare proportionate responses to those risks. Advancements in climate science may reduce uncertainty and provide a better idea about the risks we face, thus allowing for more informed decisions to be made that impact the quality of our lives. Weather and Climate Weather is defined as the state of the atmosphere with respect to wind, tempera- ture, cloud cover, moisture, pressure, etc. at a given point in time. Climate is de- fined as the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region aver- aged over a period of years or more. 1 In addition, spatial elements such as latitude, terrain, altitude, proximity to water and ocean currents affect the climate. The dif- ference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Whereas weather con- sists of short-term changes in the atmosphere, climate is determined by cycles of variability that operate within timescales that span from millennia (i.e. ice ages) to months (i.e. seasons). Scientific Process, Integrity, and Debate Since the dawn of science, man has tried to describe and measure the natural world. Through an iterative process of data collection, formulation of hypotheses, and testing and refining these hypotheses, a knowledge base of information is built that yield theories and allow for predictive models to be built that describe them. 1 http://www.nws.noaa.gov/glossary/ 4 Experiments are conducted to test these hypotheses, theories and models. As new observations are incorporated throughout the process, the theories must be able to assimilate these new data or change to accommodate new facts. Confidence in a the- ory grows only if it is able to survive a rigorous testing process, it is supported by multiple and independent lines of evidence, and competing explanations can be ruled out. The American Physical Society
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic - the New York Times
    12/11/2017 The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic - The New York Times https://nyti.ms/Ouq7Yv Opinion | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic By RICHARD A. MULLER JULY 28, 2012 Berkeley, Calif. CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause. My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which I founded with my daughter Elizabeth. Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases. These findings are stronger than those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations group that defines the scientific and diplomatic consensus on global warming. In its 2007 report, the I.P.C.C. concluded only that most of the warming of the prior 50 years could be attributed to humans. It was possible, according to the I.P.C.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tropical Skies: Falsifying Climate Alarm (Pdf)
    THE TROPICAL SKIES Falsifying climate alarm John Christy The Global Warming Policy Foundation GWPF Note 17 THE TROPICAL SKIES Falsifying climate alarm John Christy © Copyright 2019 The Global Warming Policy Foundation Contents About the author vi 1 Measuring the greenhouse effect 1 2 The importance of the troposphere 2 3 Another metric 4 4 Hiding the problem 7 About the author Dr John R. Christy is the director of the Earth System Science Center, Distinguished Profes- sor of Atmospheric Science and Alabama State Climatologist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, where he has been employed for over 30 years. His responsibilities include managing a science centre with over 80 employees, working on several research projects ranging from developing and launching space-based instruments to studying impacts of significant weather events in developing countries, to high-resolution studies of air pollu- tion (air-chemistry and meteorology). His own research concerns developing, constructing and refining global and regional climate data records that can be used to test claims ofcli- mate variability and change and to understand the climate’s sensitivity to various forcing factors. This work has resulted in almost 100 peer-reviewed publications. This paper is based a talk given by Dr Christy at the Palace of Westminster on 8 May 2019. vi 1 Measuring the greenhouse effect When I grew up, science was defined as a method of discovering information. You would make a claim or a hypothesis, and then you would test that claim against independent data. If it failed, you rejected your claim and you started over again.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 18-1451 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- NATIONAL REVIEW, INC., Petitioner, v. MICHAEL E. MANN, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals --------------------------------- --------------------------------- MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE AND BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER --------------------------------- --------------------------------- KIMBERLY S. HERMANN HARRY W. MACDOUGALD SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL Counsel of Record FOUNDATION CALDWELL, PROPST & 560 W. Crossville Rd., Ste. 104 DELOACH, LLP Roswell, GA 30075 Two Ravinia Dr., Ste. 1600 Atlanta, GA 30346 (404) 843-1956 hmacdougald@ cpdlawyers.com Counsel for Amicus Curiae June 2019 ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM 1 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37.2, Southeast- ern Legal Foundation (SLF) respectfully moves for leave to file the accompanying amicus curiae brief in support of the Petition. Petitioner has consented to the filing of this amicus curiae brief. Respondent Michael Mann has withheld consent to the filing of this amicus curiae brief. Accordingly, this motion for leave to file is necessary. SLF is a nonprofit, public interest law firm and policy center founded in 1976 and organized under the laws of the State of Georgia. SLF is dedicated to bring- ing before the courts issues vital to the preservation of private property rights, individual liberties, limited government, and the free enterprise system. SLF regularly appears as amicus curiae before this and other federal courts to defend the U.S. Consti- tution and the individual right to the freedom of speech on political and public interest issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 2: Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA's Use of IPCC
    EPA’s Response to the Petitions to Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act Volume 2: Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA’s Use of IPCC U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Atmospheric Programs Climate Change Division Washington, D.C. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2.0 Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA’s Use of IPCC.................................................................6 2.1 Claims That IPCC Errors Undermine IPCC Findings and Technical Support for Endangerment ........................................................................................................................6 2.1.1 Overview....................................................................................................................6 2.1.2 Accuracy of Statement on Percent of the Netherlands Below Sea Level..................8 2.1.3 Validity of Himalayan Glacier Projection .................................................................9 2.1.4 Characterization of Climate Change and Disaster Losses .......................................12 2.1.5 Validity of Alps, Andes, and African Mountain Snow Impacts..............................20 2.1.6 Validity of Amazon Rainforest Dieback Projection ................................................21 2.1.7 Validity of African Rain-Fed Agriculture Projection ..............................................23 2.1.8 Summary..................................................................................................................33
    [Show full text]
  • Accommodating Climate Change Science: James Hansen and the Rhetorical/Political Emergence of Global Warming
    Science in Context 26(1), 137–152 (2013). Copyright ©C Cambridge University Press doi:10.1017/S0269889712000312 Accommodating Climate Change Science: James Hansen and the Rhetorical/Political Emergence of Global War ming Richard D. Besel California Polytechnic State University E-mail: [email protected] Argument Dr. James Hansen’s 1988 testimony before the U.S. Senate was an important turning point in the history of global climate change. However, no studies have explained why Hansen’s scientific communication in this deliberative setting was more successful than his testimonies of 1986 and 1987. This article turns to Hansen as an important case study in the rhetoric of accommodated science, illustrating how Hansen successfully accommodated his rhetoric to his non-scientist audience given his historical conditions and rhetorical constraints. This article (1) provides a richer explanation for the rhetorical/political emergence of global warming as an important public policy issue in the United States during the late 1980s and (2) contributes to scholarly understanding of the rhetoric of accommodated science in deliberative settings, an often overlooked area of science communication research. Standing on the promontory of the rocky rims in Billings, Montana, there is usually a distinct horizontal line between the clear, blue sky and the white, snowcapped Beartooth Mountains. But the summer of 1988 was different. A fuzzy, reddish tint lingered across the once pristine skyline of “Big Sky Country.” The reason: More than one hundred miles to the south, Yellowstone National Park smoldered in one of the most devastating forest fires of the twentieth century (Anon. 1988, A18; Stevens 1999, 129–130).
    [Show full text]
  • Response to Request for Input from Commissioner Allison Herron Lee, Securities and Exchange Commission
    Response to Request for Input from Commissioner Allison Herron Lee, Securities and Exchange Commission on Climate Risk Disclosures Benjamin Zycher Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute June 10, 2021 Estimation of climate “risks” by public companies would be futile, politicized, distorted by an imperative to avoid regulatory and litigation threats, and largely arbitrary, and thus would not serve the traditional goal of the provision of material information to investors. Submitted by webform: https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/ruling-comments This comment letter responds to a request for input from Securities and Exchange Commissioner Allison Herren Lee on the topic of climate “risk” disclosures by public companies.1 It is organized as follows: Summary I. Climate Uncertainties and Choices Among Crucial Assumptions. II. The Evidence on Climate Phenomena and the Effects of Climate Policies in the EPA Climate Model. III. Observations on the Materiality of Climate “Risks.” IV. Additional Observations and Conclusions. 1 See https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/lee-climate-change-disclosures#. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501(c)(3) educational organization and does not take institutional positions on any issues. The views expressed in this testimony are those of the author. 2 Summary • No public company and few, if any, government administrative agencies are in a position to evaluate climate phenomena, whether ongoing or prospective, with respect to which the scientific uncertainties are vastly greater than commonly asserted. • The range of alternative assumptions about central parameters is too great to yield clear implications for the climate “risks” facing specific public companies, economic sectors, and geographic regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change: Addressing the Major Skeptic Arguments
    Climate Change: Addressing the Major Skeptic Arguments September 2010 Whitepaper available online: http://www.dbcca.com/research Carbon Counter widget available for download at: www.Know-The-Number.com Research Team Authors Mary-Elena Carr, Ph.D. Kate Brash Associate Director Assistant Director Columbia Climate Center, Earth Institute Columbia Climate Center, Earth Institute Columbia University Columbia University Robert F. Anderson, Ph.D. Ewing-Lamont Research Professor Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Columbia University DB Climate Change Advisors – Climate Change Investment Research Mark Fulton Bruce M. Kahn, Ph.D. Managing Director Director Global Head of Climate Change Investment Research Senior Investment Analyst Nils Mellquist Emily Soong Vice President Associate Senior Research Analyst Jake Baker Lucy Cotter Associate Research Analyst 2 Climate Change: Addressing the Major Skeptic Arguments Editorial Mark Fulton Global Head of Climate Change Investment Research Addressing the Climate Change Skeptics The purpose of this paper is to examine the many claims and counter-claims being made in the public debate about climate change science. For most of this year, the volume of this debate has turned way up as the ‘skeptics’ launched a determined assault on the climate findings accepted by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community. Unfortunately, the increased noise has only made it harder for people to untangle the arguments and form their own opinions. This is problematic because the way the public’s views are shaped is critical to future political action on climate change. For investors in particular, the implications are huge. While there are many arguments in favor of clean energy, water and sustainable agriculture – for instance, energy security, economic growth, and job opportunities – we at DB Climate Change Advisors (DBCCA) have always said that the science is one essential foundation of the whole climate change investment thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Weathering Heights 08 July 2020 James Hansen
    Weathering Heights 08 July 2020 James Hansen In 2007 Bill McKibben asked me whether 450 ppm would be a reasonable target for atmospheric CO2, if we wished to maintain a hospitable climate for future generations. 450 ppm seemed clearly too high, based on several lines of evidence, but especially based on paleoclimate data for climate change. We were just then working on a paper,1 Climate sensitivity, sea level and atmospheric carbon dioxide, 2 that included consideration of CO2 changes over the Cenozoic era, the past 65 million years, since the end of the Cretaceous era. The natural source of atmospheric CO2 is volcanic emissions that occur mainly at continental margins due to plate tectonics (“continental drift”). The natural sink is the weathering process, which ultimately deposits carbon on the ocean floor as limestone. David Beerling, an expert in trace gas biogeochemistry at the University of Sheffield, was an organizer of the meeting at which I presented the above referenced paper. Soon thereafter I enlisted David and other paleoclimate experts to help answer Bill’s question about a safe level of atmospheric CO2, which we concluded was somewhere south of 350 ppm.3 Since then, my group at Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions (CSAS), has continued to cooperate with David’s group at the University of Sheffield. One of the objectives is to investigate the potential for drawdown of atmospheric CO2 by speeding up the weathering process. In the most recent paper, which will be published in Nature tomorrow, David and co-authors report on progress in testing the potential for large-scale CO2 removal via application of rock dust on croplands.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 2: Observational Evidence of Climate Change Weather Stations Global Historical Climatology Network Stations
    8/31/16 Section 2: Observational Evidence of Climate Change Learning outcomes • how temperature, precipitation are measured • how global averages are calculated • evidence for recent climate change within the climate system • temperature, precipitation, sea level rise, cryosphere, extreme events GEOG 313/513 Global Climate Change Fall 20161 Prof J. Hicke Weather stations weather.usu.edu/htm/observatory-diagram www.inmtn.com/weather-station-installation.html Global Climate Change 2 Prof J. Hicke Global Historical Climatology Network stations Kitchen, 2013 © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. Global Climate Change 3 Prof J. Hicke 1 8/31/16 Global Historical Climatology Network stations >3800 stations with records >50 years 1600 stations with records >100 years 226 stations with records >150 years longest: Berlin, begun in 1701 (so >300 years) Global Climate Change 4 Prof J. Hicke wind Radiosondes speed, direction air temperature National Weather Service Altitude (log pressure) dew point temperature NOAA Temperature Global Climate Change 5 funnel.sfsu.edu Prof J. Hicke Atmospheric temperature from satellites Microwave sounding unit TIROS Operational Vertical Sounds (TOVS) NOAA en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements Global Climate Change 6 Prof J. Hicke 2 8/31/16 Warming in atmosphere Global Climate Change en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements7 Prof J. Hicke Three estimates of surface temperature trends Global Climate Change IPCC AR 5, WG I, 8 2013 Prof J. Hicke Most current global mean T from NASA GISS 2015 Global Climate Change 9 Prof J. Hicke 3 8/31/16 Bear in mind the distribution of stations certainty depends on spatial location more certain at global scale Global Climate Change 10 Prof J.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change in a Nutshell: the Gathering Storm James Hansen
    Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm 18 December 2018 James Hansen Young people today confront an imminent gathering storm. They have at their command considerable determination, a dog-eared copy of our beleaguered Constitution, and rigorously developed science. The Court must decide if that is enough. That is the final paragraph of my (thick) Expert Report written more than a year ago for Juliana v. United States. We are fortunate to have such a brilliant and dedicated group of attorneys who have assembled a score of experts and are working to ensure that young people receive their day in court. In the meantime, there are reasons why it may be useful to summarize the climate science story. Albert Einstein once said that a theory or explanation should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. And it depends on who the audience is. My target is the level of a Chief Justice or a fossil fuel industry CEO. This is a draft, because I want to be sure that there are no inconsistencies in my testimonies against the government, against the fossil fuel industry, and in support of brave people who have taken risks in fighting for young people. This 18 December version is only a slight revision to the 06 December ‘Nutshell’, because it is needed this week for a specific court case. I will revise it further, so suggestions are still welcome. However, bear in mind that this is aimed at the highly-educated open-minded Chief Justice and fossil fuel industry CEOs. I begin with an ‘Outline of Opinions’, but the aim here is not an ‘elevator speech’ or a summary for relatives and neighbors.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Transcript of Inaugural AARST Science Policy Forum, New York Hilton, Friday 20 November 1998, 7–9 Pm
    social epistemology, 2000, vol. 14, nos. 2}3, 131–180 A public debate on the science of global warming: is there su¶ cient evidence which proves we should limit greenhouse gas emissions because of climate change? Full transcript of inaugural AARST Science Policy Forum, New York Hilton, Friday 20 November 1998, 7–9 pm. JAMES E. HANSEN (aµ rmative) PATRICK J. MICHAELS (negative) 1. Moderator’s introductory remarks Dr Gordon R. Mitchell : … You know, it’s been said that rhetoric of science is nothing more than a bunch of covert neo-Aristotelians blowing hot air. Tonight, we plan to test that hypothesis when AARST hosts a public debate about global warming. Before the evening’s arguments cool o¶ , it is our hope that some of the heat and the light produced by this debate will start to melt away a few of the doubts that the rhetoric of science enterprise is a rare ed and detached scholarly project, of little relevance to con- temporary science policy discussions … But before I lay out tonight’s debate format and introduce the participants, I want to talk brie y about the origins of this event. At last year’s AARST preconference gathering in Chicago, Michael Hyde and Steve Fuller issued a charge to those gathered in the audience. This charge basically involved a call for relevance, a plea for ‘measurable outcomes ’ and ‘public engagement ’ in rhetoric of science scholarship. This call to action resonated deeply with my own political commitments, because I believe that privileged members of the academy shoulder a double-sided obligation.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Snow Snow-Atmosphere Coupling and Evaluation of Snow Forecasts
    Impact of Snow Snow-atmosphere coupling and evaluation of snow forecasts Emanuel Dutra [email protected] Thanks: Gianpaolo Balsamo, Patricia de Rosnay, Yvan Orsolini, Retish Senan, Yannick Peings © ECMWF November 2, 2015 Overview • Part 1: Snow atmosphere coupling: – Role of snow controlling heat/moisture/momentum exchanges; – Snow influence on atmospheric circulation: known mechanisms; – Sub-seasonal predictability studies: Impact of snow initialization; • Part 2: Current performance of ECMWF reanalysis & sub-seasonal forecasts of snow – Snow representation in the ECMWF model; – Surface reanalysis & forecasts initialization; – Evaluation of sub-seasonal forecasts of snow depth and cover Workshop on sub-seasonal predictability, 2 November 2015, ECMWF October 29, 2014 2 Importance of snow • Several fundamental physical properties of snow modulate the momentum/energy/water exchanges between the surface and the atmosphere: – Surface reflectance: • Albedo, snow-albedo feedback. – Thermal properties: • Effective de-coupling heat and moisture transfers. – Surface roughness: • Smoother than the underlying soil/vegetation: de-coupling of momentum transfers; – Phase changes: • Delayed warming during the melt period. • Snow cover acts as a fast climate switch. Surface temperature falls by about 10 K with fresh snowfall and rises by a similar amount with snowmelt (Betts et al., 2014) • Implications for all forecasts ranges (medium to seasonal). • Predictability impact: role of initial conditions & anomalies persistence; • Climate change impacts.
    [Show full text]