DOCSLIB.ORG

Variations on Sun's Role in Climate Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Variations on Sun's Role in Climate Change University of Groningen Variations on Sun’s role in climate change Klaassen, Wim Published in: Physics today DOI: 10.1063/1.4796649 IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2008 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Klaassen, W. (2008). Variations on Sun’s role in climate change. Physics today, 61(10), 12-12. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4796649 Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 01-10-2021 Variations on Sun’s role in climate change Wim Klaassen Citation: Physics Today 61, 10, 12 (2008); doi: 10.1063/1.4796649 View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4796649 View Table of Contents: http://physicstoday.scitation.org/toc/pto/61/10 Published by the American Institute of Physics In the March 2008 issue of PHYSICS bution to our understanding of the The burden of proof then switches from TODAY, Nicola Scafetta and Bruce West Sun’s role in climate change, they must those making claims to the science com- show a graph (page 51) of global sur- build on an existing body of knowl- munity at large for disproving each and face temperature and total solar irradi- edge; ignoring more than a century of every such claim. ance. Two curves of TSI are shown. The physical science will not help. I urge the editors of professional red curve shows an increase of TSI since The policy community relies on science journals, including PHYSICS 1980 and is used to argue that global professional scientific publications to TODAY, to revisit their policies and pro- surface temperature is sensitive to TSI. provide sound information on relevant cedures regarding what constitutes an The reference citation for the figure says topics. When PHYSICS TODAY publishes article versus an opinion. Such distinc- that data for the red curve are from opinions that are physically unsound tions are not without consequence. http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk and http:// and defy basic scientific logic, the pol- www.acrim.com. icy community is misled. In my experi- Reference Both links show that TSI has not in- ence, once fundamental misconcep- 1. Project for Excellence in Journalism, The creased since 1980, but instead de- tions about science are introduced to State of the News Media 2004: An Annual creased during that period, so Scafetta the policy community, they are difficult Report on American Journalism, http:// to correct. Moreover, confusion and em- www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2004/ and West’s red curve disagrees with the journalist_survey_prc1.asp. barrassment produced by the process of cited data sources. That error is serious Anthony D. Socci because it leads to the inaccurate con- rooting out misconceptions can tarnish ([email protected]) clusion in the last sentence of the arti- a policymaker’s image of science. American Meteorological Society cle, that the report from the Intergov- Washington, DC ernmental Panel on Climate Change References should not be trusted. 1. J. L. Lean, Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L15701 We enjoyed the article titled “Is Cli- Wim Klaassen (2006). mate Sensitive to Solar Variability?” We 2. R. E. Benestad, “A Phenomenological ([email protected]) commend Nicola Scafetta and Bruce Sequel,” RealClimate.org, http://www University of Groningen .realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/ West for their courage in publishing a Groningen, the Netherlands 11/a-phenomenological-sequel. scientific piece that presents a socially and politically unpopular position. Rest assured that the Opinion piece Jay Gulledge Pew Center on Global Climate Change However, we are concerned about on solar contributions to climate change Arlington, Virginia the article’s placement in PHYSICS will find its way hastily into the TODAY as an opinion piece. Considering policy—or should I say political— the physical arguments, the reliance on community and will be misused to Publication of the recent Opinion observational and citable data sets, and stall efforts to limit greenhouse gas piece by Nicola Scafetta and Bruce West the attention to mathematical rigor, we emissions. And on what scientific struck me as potentially blurring the wonder what portion of the article is grounds? The work by Nicola Scafetta distinction between a peer-reviewed opinion. and Bruce West ignores decades of journal article and an opinion piece. W. H. Smith fundamental physical research and Presumably, opinion pieces are held to J. R. Smith is roundly criticized on technical a dramatically lower standard than ([email protected]) grounds.1,2 More important, their basic journal articles are in terms of peer Alexandria, Virginia approach to the question of how the review, burden of proof, and weight of Sun influences climate defies sound scientific evidence. Yet publishing It is good that PHYSICS TODAY re- scientific logic. something dubbed “opinion” that con- ported on the work of Nicola Scafetta Despite their sophisticated statistical tains scientific declarations of fact or and Bruce West. They have done by far treatments, the authors commit a fal- scientific assertions effectively blurs the the best work in relating solar vari- lacy by ignoring an established physi- crucial distinction between opinions ability to terrestrial climate, bringing cal forcing (greenhouse gases) while and peer-reviewed research articles. sophistication and rigor to a field dom- trying to assess the contribution of a PHYSICS TODAY’s audience seems to inated mostly by unsupportable posi- separate forcing (solar irradiance); both have a broad focus and therefore to be tions that the Sun’s effect is negligible push the climate in the same direction, less likely to evaluate the substance of on the one hand, or is responsible for if one assumes that the questionable the scientific claims raised in that or nearly all observed global warming ACRIM satellite time series on solar similar pieces. on the other. That solar variability has irradiance is accurate. With IR-trapping As has been noted in journalism cir- appreciable coupling to Earth’s climate gases omitted, the analysis by Scafetta cles, from the perspective of the public becomes obvious when an observer and West must overestimate the contri- and no doubt elements of the science notes the imprint of the Schwabe bution of total solar irradiance varia- community as well, “the distinction be- sunspot cycle on the climate tempera- tions to surface warming. Is the con- tween reporting and commentary has ture record.1 The identical scaleless tribution overestimated slightly or seriously eroded.”1 The same may well noise spectra for solar and terrestrial dramatically? The authors’ work offers be true for scientific journals; distinc- climate fluctuations provide additional no insights. tions between opinions and research support for coupling and for regarding Even if Scafetta and West take issue articles are largely meaningless to those the Earth–Sun network as a complex with the statistical treatments done by outside science, and that blurring may system. the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli- misinform public perceptions. Unfortunately, the Intergovernmen- mate Change, they should nonetheless The net effect is that the scientific tal Panel on Climate Change clings to its appreciate the indispensable require- community is more or less obligated to position that solar variability effects are ment to account for all relevant forc- respond to scientific claims made in negligible, to the detriment of its credi- ings, as the IPCC does in its analyses. If opinion pieces just as if they had met bility. Given known solar variability, the they hope to make an authentic contri- the standards of scholarly peer review. IPCC position can be rationalized only 12 October 2008 Physics Today www.physicstoday.org.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Where Did That “97% of All Scientists Agree” Comment Come From?
    Where did that “97% of all scientists agree” comment come from? By: Roy Spencer, Ph.D. May 26, 2014. Dr. Spencer is a principal research scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA's Aqua satellite. Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the "crippling consequences" of climate change. "Ninety-seven percent of the world's scientists," he added, "tell us this is urgent." Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous." Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate- warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities." Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research. One frequently cited source for the consensus is a 2004 opinion essay published in Science magazine by Naomi Oreskes, a science historian now at Harvard. She claimed to have examined abstracts of 928 articles published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion on Common Errors in Analyzing Sea Level Accelerations, Solar Trends and Global Warming
    Manuscript prepared for J. Name with version 4.2 of the LATEX class copernicus.cls. Date: 30 July 2018 Discussion on common errors in analyzing sea level accelerations, solar trends and global warming Nicola Scafetta Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM) Lab, Coronado, CA 92118, USA Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA Abstract. Herein I discuss common errors in applying ature reconstructions (e.g.: Moberg et al., 2005; Mann et al., regression models and wavelet filters used to analyze geo- 2008; Christiansen and Ljungqvist, 2012) since the Medieval physical signals. I demonstrate that: (1) multidecadal natural Warm Period, which show a large millennial cycle that is oscillations (e.g. the quasi 60 yr Multidecadal Atlantic Os- well correlated to the millennial solar cycle (e.g.: Kirkby, cillation (AMO), North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and Pa- 2007; Scafetta and West, 2007; Scafetta, 2012c). These find- cific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)) need to be taken into ac- ings stress the importance of natural oscillations and of the count for properly quantifying anomalous background accel- sun to properly interpret climatic changes. erations in tide gauge records such as in New York City; (2) uncertainties and multicollinearity among climate forc- ∼ ing functions also prevent a proper evaluation of the solar Cite this article as: Scafetta, N.: Common errors in ana- contribution to the 20th century global surface temperature lyzing sea level accelerations, solar trends and tempera- warming using overloaded linear regression models during ture records. Pattern Recognition in Physics 1, 37-58, doi: the 1900–2000 period alone; (3) when periodic wavelet fil- 10.5194/prp-1-37-2013, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 1 of 6
    Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 1 of 6 Larry Bell, Contributor I write about climate, energy, environmental and space policy issues. OP/ED | 1/10/2012 @ 4:12PM | 3,332 views Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change An extensively peer-reviewed study published last December in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics indicates that observed climate changes since 1850 are linked to cyclical, predictable, naturally occurring events in Earth’s solar system with little or no help from us. The research was conducted by Nicola Scafetta, a scientist at Duke University and at the Active Cavity Radiometer Solar Irradiance Monitor Lab (ACRIM), which is associated with the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California. It takes issue with methodologies applied by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) using “general circulation climate models” (GCMs) that, by ignoring these important influences, are found to fail to reproduce the observed decadal and multi-decadal climatic cycles. As noted in the paper, the IPCC models also fail to incorporate climate modulating effects of solar changes such as cloud-forming influences of cosmic rays throughout periods of reduced sunspot activity. More clouds tend to make conditions cooler, while fewer often cause warming. At least 50-70% of observed 20th century warming might be associated with increased solar activity witnessed since the “Maunder Minimum” of the last 17th century. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/01/10/global-warming-no-natural-predictable-c... 1/13/2012 Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 2 of 6 Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Astronomical Origin of the Hallstatt Oscillation Found in Radiocarbon and Climate Records Throughout the Holocene
    Geophysical Research Abstracts Vol. 19, EGU2017-10075, 2017 EGU General Assembly 2017 © Author(s) 2017. CC Attribution 3.0 License. On the astronomical origin of the Hallstatt oscillation found in radiocarbon and climate records throughout the Holocene Nicola Scafetta (1), Franco Milani (2), Antonio Bianchini (3), and Sergio Ortolani (3) (1) University of Naples Federico II, Department of Earth Sciences, Environment and Resources, Naples, Italy ([email protected]), (2) Astronomical Association Euganea, Padova, Italy, (3) INAF & Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Padova, Italy An oscillation with a period of about 2100-2500 years, the Hallstatt cycle, is found in cosmogenic radioisotopes (14C and 10Be) and in paleoclimate records throughout the Holocene. This oscillation is typically associated with solar variations, but its primary physical origin remains uncertain. Herein we show strong evidences for an astronomical origin of this cycle. Namely, this oscillation is coherent to a repeating pattern in the periodic revolution of the planets around the Sun: the major stable resonance involving the four Jovian planets - Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune - which has a period of about p = 2318 yr. Inspired by the Milankovic’s´ theory of an astronomical origin of the glacial cycles, we test whether the Hallstatt cycle could derive from the rhythmic variation of the circularity of the solar system disk assuming that this dynamics could eventually modulate the solar wind and, consequently, the incoming cosmic ray flux and/or the interplanetary/cosmic dust concentration around the Earth-Moon system. The orbit of the planetary mass center (PMC) relative to the Sun is used as a proxy.
    [Show full text]
  • I WHEN EXPERTS TALK, DOES ANYONE LISTEN? ESSAYS ON
    WHEN EXPERTS TALK, DOES ANYONE LISTEN? ESSAYS ON THE LIMITS OF EXPERT INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION by Eric Roman Owen Merkley M.A., McGill University, 2013 B.A. (Honours), Wilfrid Laurier University, 2011 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Political Science) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2019 © Eric Roman Owen Merkley 2019 i The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the dissertation entitled: When experts talk, does anyone listen? Essays on the limits of expert influence on public opinion in partial fulfillment of the requirements submitted by Eric Roman Owen Merkley for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science Examining Committee: Paul J. Quirk Supervisor Richard G. C. Johnston Supervisory Committee Member Frederick E. Cutler Supervisory Committee Member Gyung-Ho Jeong University Examiner Mary Lynn Young University Examiner ii Abstract There are large gaps in opinion between policy experts and the public on a wide variety of issues. Scholarly explanations for these observations largely focus on the tendency of citizens to selectively process information from experts in line with their ideology and values. These accounts are likely incomplete. This dissertation is comprised of three papers that examine other important limitations of expert influence on public opinion on topics featuring widespread expert agreement. The first paper looks at the degree to which information on expert agreement is available in the information environment of the average citizen – the news media – and whether or not such information is clouded by media bias towards balance and conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • The Little Ice Age Was 1.0-1.5 Oc Cooler Than Current Warm Period According to LOD and NAO
    The Little Ice Age was 1.0-1.5 oC cooler than current warm period according to LOD and NAO Adriano Mazzarella* and Nicola Scafetta Meteorological Observatory – Department of Science of the Earth, Environment and Resources, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II - Naples, Italy * Correspondent author: [email protected] Abstract We study the yearly values of the length of day (LOD, 1623-2016) and its link to the zonal index (ZI, 1873-2003), the Northern Atlantic oscillation index (NAO, 1659-2000) and the global sea surface temperature (SST, 1850-2016). LOD is herein assumed to be mostly the result of the overall circulations occurring within the ocean-atmospheric system. We find that LOD is negatively correlated with the global SST and with both the integral function of ZI and NAO, which are labeled as IZI and INAO. A first result is that LOD must be driven by a climatic change induced by an external (e.g. solar/astronomical) forcing since internal variability alone would have likely induced a positive correlation among the same variables because of the conservation of the Earth’s angular momentum. A second result is that the high correlation among the variables implies that the LOD and INAO records can be adopted as global proxies to reconstruct past climate change. Tentative global SST reconstructions since the 17th century suggest that around 1700, that is during the coolest period of the Little Ice Age (LIA), SST could have been about 1.0-1.5 °C cooler than the 1950-1980 period. This estimated LIA cooling is greater than what some multiproxy global climate reconstructions suggested, but it is in good agreement with other more recent climate reconstructions including those based on borehole temperature data.
    [Show full text]
  • World Climate Declaration
    World Climate Declaration GLOBAL CLIMATE INTELLIGENCE GROUP WWW.CLINTEL.ORG World Climate Declaration GLOBAL CLIMATE INTELLIGENCE GROUP WWW.CLINTEL.ORG There is no climate emergency Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experi- encing a period of warming. Warming is far slower than predicted of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change. Climate policy relies on inadequate models policy tools. They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as 2 also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO is beneficial. CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth 2 2 is favorable in the air has promoted growth CO is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on2 Earth. More CO for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO yields of crops worldwide. in global plant biomass.
    [Show full text]
  • Empirical Evidence for a Celestial Origin of the Climate Oscillations And
    Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications Nicola Scafetta 1,2 1Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM) Lab, Coronado, CA 92118, USA 2Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA. Abstract We investigate whether or not the decadal and multi-decadal climate oscillations have an astronomical origin. Several global surface temperature records since 1850 and records deduced from the orbits of the planets present very similar power spectra. Eleven frequencies with period between 5 and 100 years closely correspond in the two records. Among them, large climate oscillations with peak-to-trough amplitude of about 0.1 oC and 0.25 oC, and periods of about 20 and 60 years, respectively, are synchronized to the orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn. Schwabe and Hale solar cycles are also visible in the temperature records. A 9.1-year cycle is synchronized to the Moon’s orbital cycles. A phenomenological model based on these astronomical cycles can be used to well reconstruct the temperature oscillations since 1850 and to make partial forecasts for the 21st century. It is found that at least 60% of the global warming observed since 1970 has been induced by the combined effect of the above natural climate oscillations. The partial forecast indicates that climate may stabilize or cool until 2030-2040. Possible physical mechanisms are qualitatively discussed with an emphasis on the phenomenon of collective synchronization of coupled oscillators. Please cite this article as: Scafetta, N., Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (2010), doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2010.04.015 Keywords: planetary motion, solar variability, climate change, modeling 1.
    [Show full text]
  • ACRIM Total Solar Irradiance Satellite Composite Validation Versus TSI Proxy Models
    ACRIM total solar irradiance satellite composite validation versus TSI proxy models Nicola Scafetta1,2 • Richard C. Willson1 arXiv:1403.7194v1 [physics.geo-ph] 28 Mar 2014 Nicola Scafetta Richard C. Willson 11Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM) Lab, Coronado, CA 92118, USA. 2Duke University 2 Abstract The satellite total solar irradiance (TSI) database provides a valuable record for investigating models of solar variation used to interpret climate changes. The 35-year ACRIM total solar irradiance (TSI) satellite compos- ite time series has been updated using corrections to ACRIMSAT/ACRIM3 results for scattering and diffraction derived from recent testing at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics/Total solar irradiance Radiome- ter Facility (LASP/TRF). The corrections lower the ACRIM3 scale by about 5000 ppm, in close agreement with the scale of SORCE/TIM results (solar constant ≈ 1361 W/m2) but the relative variations and trends are not changed. Differences between the ACRIM and PMOD TSI composites, particularly the decadal trending during solar cycles 21-22, are tested against a set of solar proxy models, including analysis of Nimbus7/ERB and ERBS/ERBE re- sults available to bridge the ACRIM Gap (1989-1992). Our findings confirm the following ACRIM TSI composite features: (1) The validity of the TSI peak in the originally published ERB results in early 1979 during solar cycle 21; (2) The correctness of originally published ACRIM1 results during the SMM spin mode (1981–1984); (3) The upward trend of originally published ERB results during the ACRIM Gap; (4) The occurrence of a significant upward TSI trend between the minima of solar cycles 21 and 22 and (5) a decreasing trend during solar cycles 22 - 23.
    [Show full text]
  • NICOLA SCAFETTA Laurea in Fisica (1997) Presso Università Degli Studi
    NICOLA SCAFETTA Laurea in Fisica (1997) presso Università degli Studi di Pisa, Ph.D. in Fisica (2001) presso l' University of North Texas. Professore Associato presso il Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra dell'Università di Napoli Federico II, nel S.S.D. GEO/12 (Meteorologia, Climatolgia e Oceanografia) sin dal 2014. Associato all’ Osservatorio Meteorologico di San Marcellino dell’Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II. Il sottoscritto ha studiato e lavorato come ricercatore e professore negli USA dal 1998 al 2014 nei dipartimenti di fisica dell’ University of North Texas, Duke University, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, e alla Elon University. Componente dell'Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM, JPL-NASA, California, USA) finalizzato a studiare la variabilità della luminosità del sole. Il sottoscritto è autore di 107 pubblicazioni scientifiche internazionali inclusi due libri e 88 peer reviewed articoli. E’ stato revisore per circa 50 riviste internazionali in fisica e geofisica, tra le quali Nature Communications, Physical Review Letters, Earth-Science Reviews, Climate Change, Climate Dynamics, and Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics e molte altre. Il sottosctitto ha lavorato nel campo dei sistemi complessi e della fisica statistica con applicazioni soprattutto nel campo della climatologia e dell’ambiente e in fisica solare. Gli studi del sottoscritto hanno approfondito le seguenti tematiche: interpretazione e modelli predittivi riguardanti i cambiamenti climatici, influenze climatiche dovute a forzanti astronomici e solari, variabilità solare e meccanica celeste, zonazione climatica di regioni e città (ad esempio Napoli), interpretazione e modelli predittivi di eventi meteorologici estremi legati ad alluvioni, siccità, crisi di smog cittadino ecc., effetti climatologici e meteorologici sull'attività sismica mondiale e locale (ad esempio, del Vesuvio), analisi frattali e nonlineari.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Sensitivity by Energy Balance with Urban and Natural Warming
    Ken Gregory, P.Eng. Friends of Science Climate Sensitivity by Energy Balance with Urban and Natural Warming By Ken Gregory, P.Eng. 2020-06-14 The sensitivity of the Earth’s climate to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG) is the most important parameter in climate science. Climatologists Nicholas Lewis and Dr. Judith Curry published a paper in the Journal of Climate in 2018 (LC2018)1 that used the observationally-based energy balance method to estimate the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) and the Transient Climate Response (TCR). The ECS is the global average surface temperature change due to a doubling of CO2 after allowing the oceans to reach temperature 2 equilibrium, which takes about 1500 years for the upper 3 km of the ocean. The TCR is more relevant to climate policy as it is the global surface temperature change at the time of the CO2 doubling assuming that the change in forcing takes place gradually over at least 70 years, which it does for the base and final periods used. A doubling of CO2 at the current exponential growth rate of 0.60%/year would take 116 years. The LC2018 paper states “The energy budget framework provides an extremely simple physically-based climate model that, given the assumptions made, follows directly from energy conservation.” The energy balance method relates the ECS and TCR to changes in the global mean surface temperature (GMST), the effective radiative forcing and the planetary radiative imbalance between a base and final period.3 The radiative imbalance is the downward solar radiation net of albedo (reflection) less the upward longwave radiation from the surface and the atmosphere at the top of the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • NICOLA SCAFETTA Ph.D. in Physics (Complex Systems, 2001), University of North Texas
    NICOLA SCAFETTA Ph.D. in Physics (complex systems, 2001), University of North Texas. Associate Professor at the Department of Earth Sciences of the University of Naples Federico II, in S.S.D. GEO / 12 (Meteorology, Climatology and Oceanography). I am associated to the Meteorological Observatory of San Marcellino of the University of Naples Federico II. I have studied and worked as researcher and as visiting professor at at the physics departments of the University of North Texas, Duke University, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, and at Elon University. Member of the Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM, JPL-NASA, California, USA) that studies the total solar irradiance. I have authored 107 international scientific publications including two books and 88 peer reviewed articles. I have served as a reviewer for about 50 international journals in physics and geophysics, including Nature Communications, Physical Review Letters, Earth-Science Reviews, Climate Change, Climate Dynamics, and Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. I worked in the field of complex systems and statistical physics with applications mostly in the field of climatology and of the environment. My studies have investigated the following issues: interpretation and predictive models concerning climate change, climatic influences due to astronomical and solar forcings, solar variability and celestial mechanics, climatic zonation of regions and cities (e.g. Naples), interpretation and predictive models of extreme weather events linked to floods, droughts, urban smog crises, etc., climatological and meteorological effects on global and local seismic and volcanic activity (e.g. Mt. Vesuvius), fractal analysis and non-linear systems.
    [Show full text]