The Polar ice melting? Not so fast! A Limerick.

The Icecaps we see at the poles

are growing again, who controls?

With less cold it snows more

makes more ice than before.

Just one of the clouds many roles.

In the winter it is now warmer at the poles.  The temperature records indicate  a noticeable recent warming in the Arctic, with large spikes up and down, up to 3 degree Celsius difference from year to year, especially the Arctic. So, how much has the Arctic melted? Here is a chart of Arctic ice cover for the date of May 31 for the last 39 years.

If this trend continues, all ice may melt in 300 to 400 years, faster if there is further warming and nothing else is changing. Let’s take a look at the Arctic above the 80th latitude, an area of about 3,85 million square kilometers, less than 1% of the earth’s surface, but it is there where global warming is most pronounced. Here are two charts from the last 2 years, ending with Jul. 22,  2017.

Starting at summer 2016, the Arctic was melting quite normally, but something else happened, shown in the chart below:

Every 5 years or so, the Arctic suffer a large storm with full hurricane strength during the summer. In 2016 there was not one, but two such storms, and as they happened late in the season when the ice is rotten they resulted in a large ice loss, making the ice minimum the lowest on record, and the ice volume nearly 4,000 Gigatons (Gt) less than the 10 year average. Then the temperature from October thru April did run 7 degree Celsius warmer than normal with a spike as high as 20 degrees warmer. Yet today the deficit is down to less than 100 Gt. What happened? It snowed more than normal. In the Arctic, it did get warmer under clouds, warmer still when it snowed. Take a look at Greenland and what has happened this freezing season. It has snowed and snowed and Greenland has accumulated 150 Gt more ice than normal. The Arctic ice sheet is at this point in the season about 50 Gt below the ten year average (July 21), and this is with Arctic temperatures being seven degrees warmer than normal during the cold season. The counterintuitive conclusion is that it may very well be that warmer temperatures produces accumulation of snow and ice, colder temperatures with less snow accumulates less. (By the way, it snowed less than half as much on the ice caps during the last Ice Age as it does now.) What happens during the short Arctic summer? With more snow accumulated it takes longer to melt last years snow, so the temperature stays colder longer. This year, Arctic temperature has been running colder than normal every day since May 1 with no end in sight. If this melting period ends without melting all snow, more multi year ice will accumulate, and if it continues unabated, the next Ice Age will start.

Rising CO2, more clouds, a blessing or a curse? A Limerick.

The clouds that we see in the sky
is really the reason for why
we will not overheat;
Shields us from solar heat.
A feedback on which we rely.
I am a climate realist, that means I look at the totality of what is happening to the climate with increasing CO2 levels, and what it means for our future.

Climate alarmists and IPCC believe that the thermal response to increasing CO2 is a positive feedback from increasing water vapor that results from higher ocean temperatures, melting permafrost releasing Methane and melting of the polar ice caps. All this leads to much higher temperatures. Current climate model averages indicate a temperature rise of 4.7 C by 2100 if nothing is done, 4.65 C if U.S keeps all its Paris commitments and 4.53 C if all countries keep their part of the agreement. In all cases, with or without Paris agreement we are headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.

As the chart indicates, implementing all of the Paris agreement will delay the end of mankind as we know it by at most 4 years.

Myself and quite a few scientists, meteorologists, but mostly engineers believe the feedback loop in nature is far more complicated than that, in fact, there is a large negative feedback in the system, preventing a temperature runaway, and we have the observations to prove it.  The negative feedback manifests itself in 2 ways:

Inorganic feedback, represented by clouds. If there were no clouds, the tropics would average a temperature of  140 F  thanks to the greenhouse effect. The clouds reflect back up to 300 W/m2 into space rather than the same energy being absorbed into water or soil. Clouds are highly temperature dependent, especially cumulus and cumulonimbus clouds. The figure below shows temperature at the equator in the Pacific Ocean.

Cumulus clouds are formed in the morning, earlier the warmer it is, and not at all if it is cold, thunderstorms appear when it is warm enough. The figure shows how temperature in the equatorial Pacific rises until about 8:30 a.m, then actually declines between 9 and 12 a.m. even as the sun continues to rise. The feedback, which was positive at low temperatures becomes negative at warmer temperatures, and in the equatorial doldrums, surface temperature has found its equilibrium. No amount of CO2 will change that. Equatorial temperature follows the temperature of the ocean, warmer when there is an el niño, cooler when there is a la niña. Here is a chart of temperature increases since satellite measurements began as a function of latitude.

The tropics follow the ocean temperature closely, no long term rising trend, the extratropics are also stable.

Not so at the poles. the temperature record indicate a noticeable warming with large spikes up and down, up to 3 degree Celsius difference from year to year, especially the Arctic. So, how much has the Arctic melted? Here is a chart of Arctic ice cover for 31 May for the last 39 years.

If this trend continues, all ice may melt in 300 to 400 years, faster if there is further warming and nothing else is changing. Let’s take a look at the Arctic above the 80th latitude, an area of about 3,85 million square kilometers, less than 1% of the earth’s surface, but it is there where global warming is most pronounced. Here are two charts from the last 2 years, ending with Jul. 19,  2017.

Starting at summer 2016, the Arctic was melting quite normally, but something else happened that is not shown in the chart. Every 5 years or so, the Arctic suffer a large storm with full hurricane strength during the summer. In 2016 there was not one, but two such storms, and as they happened late in the season when the ice is rotten they result in a large ice loss, making the ice minimum the lowest on record, and the ice volume nearly 4,000 Gigatons (Gt) less than the 10 year average. Then the temperature from October thru April did run 7 degree Celsius warmer than normal with a spike as high as 20 degrees warmer. Yet today the deficit is down to less than 100 Gt. What happened? It snowed more than normal. In the Arctic, it gets warmer under clouds, warmer still when it snows. Take a look at Greenland and what has happened this freezing season. It has snowed and snowed and Greenland has accumulated 150 Gt more ice than normal. So, at this point in the season we are a total of 1650 Gt ahead of last year at this date (July 21), and this is with Arctic temperatures being seven degrees warmer than normal during the cold season. The counterintuitive conclusion is that it may very well be that warmer temperatures produces accumulation of snow and ice, colder temperatures with less snow accumulates less. What happens during the short Arctic summer? With more snow accumulated it takes longer to melt last years snow, so the temperature stays colder longer. This year the Arctic temperature has been running colder than normal every day since May 1 with no end in sight. If this melting period ends without melting all snow, multi year ice will accumulate, and if it continues unabated, a new ice age will start.

The second feedback loop is organic. More CO2 means more plant growth.  According to NASA there has been a significant greening of the earth, more than 10% since satellite measurements begun. This results in a cooling effect everywhere, except in areas that used to be treeless where they have a warming effect. The net effect is that we can now feed 2 billion more people than before without using more fertilizer. Check this picture from NASA, (now they can publish real science again) showing the increased leaf area extends nearly everywhere.

In addition, more leafs changes the water cycle, increases evapotranspiration, and more trees and vegetation reduces erosion and unwanted runoff. Good news all around.

In short, taking into account the negative feedback occurring the earth will warm up less than 0.5 degrees from now, not at all in the tropics, and less than 3 degrees at the poles. Without the Paris agreement there will be no increase in the death rates in the cities, except from the slight increase of city temperatures due to the urban heat effect. With the Paris agreement we will have to make draconian cuts in our use of electricity, meaning using much less air conditioning and even less heating, and life expectancy will decline.

We need energy. It takes a lot of energy to clean up the planet. Developing nations should be encouraged to use electricity rather than cooking by dried cow-dung. Coal is limited, and we should leave some for our great great grandchildren. Oil and gas should be preserved for aviation, since there is no realistic alternative with a high enough energy density. Therefore I am an advocate for Thorium based nuclear energy, being safer than Uranium based nuclear energy, and, properly implemented will produce about 0.01% of the long term radioactive waste compared to conventional nuclear power plants. And there is a million year supply  of Thorium available. Once the electricity power plants have fully switched away from coal and gas, then and only then is it time to switch to electric cars.  https://lenbilen.com/2017/07/14/twenty-two-reasons-to-rapidly-develop-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/

Humor in China? You must be kidding. Even Winnie the Pooh is now banned, a Limerick.

Now China banned Winnie the Pooh.

Not much that a small bear can do.

For the Pooh is a thing

Too much like Xi Jinping,

he nixed Twitter humor, boo-hoo.

Twitter is limited to very few characters, so the best use of it is to include pictures. This is what led Winnie the Pooh to be banned in China. The pictures are really pretty good. Like this:

This one is from 2013

And this:

Here the Japanese Prime minister i portrayed as Eeyore

And this is just too cute:

It is clear that banning Winnie the Pooh now after having enjoyed it for four or more years can only mean that China is tightening the screws on free speech even further. Are they ready to go even more totalitarian?

 

Bear arms or bare arms, a Limerick.

A number of female House Democrats wore sleeveless clothing on Friday, tweeting in support of “Sleeveless Friday.” The action was part of the push to modernize the House dress code.

Bear arms or bare arms is at play,

a second amendment display,

so oft misunderstood,

one for choice, one for good.

The Dems keep on going astray.

A lesson from the Kurds:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The ISIS are cowards, they flee

when women as soldiers they see.

For they go right to hell

if they die, that’s the spell.

Or is it, they go covfefe?

Just keep your aim! Still the leader :

What a difference between Trump and Obama on meeting with Putin. Two Limericks.

President Trump met Vladimir Putin July 7 2017 in Hamburg. The meeting was scheduled for 35 minutes to shake hands and size each other up, instead it lasted for over 2 hours. It lasted so long that at one time Trump’s support team sent in his wife Melania to remind him he was to meet with Theresa May in a few minutes, but he continued for another hour, so his meeting with the British P.M. got postponed. The meeting was frank and robust, and they agreed on a cease fire in Syria and a common goal with respect to North Korea, but disagreements were out in the open to be tackled by normal diplomacy.

With Putin and Trump face to face

Which alpha-male did win the race?

It’s the art of the deal.

With T. Rex it’s for real.

Poles Missile Defense back in place.

Trump made an end-run on Putin by going first to Poland, a former Warsaw Pact country and re-arming them with the Patriot missile defense system and making preparations for exporting Liquid Natural Gas to Eastern Europe, thus making them independent of Russian Gas.

This is leadership.

42207D6C00000578-4675832-DINNER_DIPLOMACY_At_the_G20_Friday_night_couples_were_split_up_d-a-122_1499460224625

This too is real leadership, Melania Trump explaining something to Putin (in perfect German, which they both speak), and Putin, starstruck listens.

Totally opposite to Obama’s lack thereof.

Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin
Headline in Washington Post Aug. 6 2013: Obama cancels summit meeting with Putin. Obama will still attend the Group of 20 economic summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, but a top White House official said the president had no plans to hold one-on-one talks with Putin while there. Instead of visiting Putin in Moscow, the president will add a stop in Sweden to his early September travel itinerary.

Crybaby, why go to Sweden?
Putin will not give you Snowden?
Air Force One is no toy
You’re a man, not a boy.
Face it Obama, you’re beaten.

Why did he go to Sweden?
Was it to learn of the success of the 25% VAT (National sales tax)?
Was it their success in rooting out home schooling?
Was it their solid support of the Palestinians over the Israelis?
Was it confusion between Sweden and Norway? Norway, not Sweden gives out the Nobel Peace Prize, and he needs people who still admire him.
Was it to learn more about green energy?
Was it because Sweden has the ideal welfare state where even the conservatives are for it?
Was it because everybody belongs to a union in Sweden, even the employers have their union?
Was it to show Putin he is having more flexibility after the election?

Was it because Sweden now has 123 young men for every 100 young women thanks to taking in so many “refugees”, mostly young Muslim men of draft age?
Whatever the reason, it was not leadership.

China the leader in Climate Change. A Limerick.

Is China’s “clean energy” coal?

Use half of the world’s is their goal.

It pollutes with its soot

but they don’t give a hoot.

Their aim is for world-wide control.

From NYT: When China halted plans for more than 100 new coal-fired power plants this year, even as President Trump vowed to “bring back coal” in America, the contrast seemed to confirm Beijing’s new role as a leader in the fight against climate change.

How is China doing? From 2002 to 2012 China increased its coal production from one third of the world total to over one half of the world total. No, the rest of the world did not decrease, only U.S. did decrease coal production by about 10% between 2002 and 2012, the rest of the world increased its production, but China tripled its output. After 2014 China has slipped somewhat, but it still burns more than 47% of the world’s mined coal.

China has had a growth per year of between 8 and 10 percent per year for more than a decade, but growth is now down to below 7%. So China decided to call of building 100 coal fired power plants, from 1171 new coal fired plants down to 1071, or about half of the world’s planned coal fired plants.

Here is the installed capacity for China’s electricity production.

China has been praised for its strides in renewable energy. It has many mountains and rivers, so hydropower is a large part. But hydropower is best used as peak power, when the load is high or when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, since it can be instantly turned up or down, so coal power carries more like 73% of the load.

But coal is also used for heating and cement production. China has produced more cement in the last three years than the U.S. in the last hundred years. It takes a lot of cement to build artificial islands in the South China Sea. And then there are the ghost cities that can only be produced by total control central planning. Here is a chart of cement production and consumption in the world.

The result? Some of the world’s worst air pollution seen from space.

These brown clouds follow the coast up into the Arctic, where they deposit the soot on the snow and ice, lowering the albedo and causing the ice and snow to melt faster in the summer.

China is the leader in climate change.

 

Why did Sarah Palin sue the New York Times? A Limerick.

For what Sarah Palin did sue

concerns all of us, me and you.

Defamations galore

we must fight, and abhor

to keep this our land free and true.

From NYT editorial June 14, 2017.

Not all the details are known yet about what happened in Virginia, but a sickeningly familiar pattern is emerging in the assault: The sniper, James Hodgkinson, who was killed by Capitol Police officers, was surely deranged, and his derangement had found its fuel in politics. Mr. Hodgkinson was a Bernie Sanders supporter and campaign volunteer virulently opposed to President Trump. He posted many anti-Trump messages on social media, including one in March that said “Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.

At the time the political rhetoric was indeed heated, but it was concentrated on the hatred for Sarah Palin. This is my recollection from that time:

Arizona Tragic shootings. Blame Sarah First. Proverbs 30:15-16 (King James Version) The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give. There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is enough: The grave; and the barren womb; the earth that is not filled with water; and the fire that saith not, It is enough.

Hang Sarah in effigy: freedom of speech,  (1)

When Dem’s paint a bullseye, it is but to teach. (2)

The Lib’s are horseleeches,

Cry “Give” in their speeches.

When tragedy strikes – Times first Sarah besmeech. (3)

With many photos: https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/27/arizona-tragic-shootings-blame-sarah-palin-first-a-limerick-and-more/