Oh... also an interesting report on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) as canonical scenarios to be used with these models. > > Eric - > > Great back-of-envelop summary/speculation and I second your desire for > someone well-steeped in these modeling/assessment issues. > > We (speaking out of school for Merle, Stephen, and the team that went > to and met with the Stockholm Team last month) would love to find > someone with that depth/breadth of knowledge in this group (or one > degree away). I am remiss/slow in following up with the *one* member > of the Stockholm Resilience Center I met there who *might* either have > this level of depth/breadth or know someone who does. > > I am trying hard to come up to speed, but the number of models and > types of approaches and hidden agendas/constraints/assumptions are > still overwhelming. The IPCC seems to be the *best* official source > that is most broadly accepted, etc. but tends to be one or two levels > of detail above the kinds of questions I have (and you are asking here). > > I am interested in something much broader than just the > geo/bio/cryo/hydro/aero-science of it all, though THAT is huge and > complicated enough as it is. The Integrated Assessment Models that > join this *physical* domain with the socio(political)economic domain > seems most well discussed by the work of the Coupled Model > Intercomparison Project (CMIP) lead by LLNL and tied into the World > Climate Research Programme (WCRP) who are providing some of the "heavy > lifting" for the IPCC's next (VI) report due in 2021. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupled_Model_Intercomparison_Project > > https://www.wcrp-climate.org/ > > - Steve > > On 1/19/20 2:00 PM, David Eric Smith wrote: >> Would be interesting to know what the buffers are, that weren’t in >> that run of models. >> >> Temperatures are lower than forecast, but Greenland and Antarctic ice >> sheet melting rates are higher. They seem like small land areas, and >> the ice volume small, but specific heat of melting is large per >> volume compared to specific heat of air, and the atmosphere, while >> thick compared to ice, is only 10-20 km high (to the top of the >> troposphere; stratosphere up to maybe 50km at much-reduced density >> and much increased transparency because it is dry). So troposphere >> maybe 20-40 times the depth of the west antarctic ice sheet, though >> only a lowermost layer of that is melting, and I don’t know the >> thickness per unit time lost. Specific heat of dry air is about 1 >> J/gK, while heat of melting of clean water is 334 J/g. Ice is about >> 1000 times as dense as air, so one has a volume ratio of about 3x10^5 >> to play with, per degree Kelvin. >> >> Greenland plus Antarctica (wikipedia-level area estimates) are about >> 3% of earth surface area. So if one divided by a column density >> ratio of 30:1 and multiplied by an area ratio of 0.03, one has about >> 1/1000. So a full melt of Greenland and Antarctic ice could buffer >> about 300K of atmospheric temperature change at a >> dimensional-analysis-level estimate. If the full rate of melting >> were mis-estimated by a factor that extends the ice sheet lifetimes >> by 600 years, that would give about 1/2 degree per year buffering >> capacity. >> >> I don’t know what is or isn’t in the models up to 2014, because I >> haven’t followed these things closely, but unless what I wrote above >> is nonsense, it seems that a mis-estimate of just continental ice >> sheet melting is not wildly out of scale to account for unmodeled >> buffers. >> >> One also wants to take into account arctic se ice, which if I really >> is on a faster melting schedule then some models predicted, though I >> don’t have even a good impressionistic memory of what I have heard on >> that. >> >> And of course there is the heat-transport rate of cyclonic storms, >> from sea surface to the top of the troposphere, where radiative >> transfer through the stratosphere will be much faster than that from >> the interior of the troposphere or the surface. My understanding is >> that predicting frequency and intensity of typhoons etc. is still >> something of a challenge area, but I don’t know if that affects >> parameters used in GCM and heat-transfer models enough to count as an >> un-modeled buffer. >> >> Would be great if there is somebody on this list who has a >> comprehensive enough knowledge of the state of this literature to >> give the kind of survey of the state of the art in response to >> questions, that is hard to get from broadcast. Good as it is, >> broadcast just contains whatever it contains, and doesn’t have the >> responsiveness of a person who can hear a question in context and >> then recruit knowledge for a matched reply. >> >> Eric >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jan 20, 2020, at 1:55 AM, Pieter Steenekamp >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Fortunately it seems that the earth is warming much slower than what >>> the models predicted. So just maybe we have hope? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> <image.png> >>> >>> >>> >>> _https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-climate-reality/_ >>> >>> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 22:36, Jochen Fromm <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Trump's channel Fox News is owned by the Australian Murdoch >>> family. Can two families ruin the entire planet? Trump in >>> America and Murdoch in Australia are creating tremendous damage. >>> If Climate Change leads to an uninhabitable world, as David >>> Wallace-Wells describes in his book, these two families >>> certainly contributed to it >>> >>> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GVPFH5V/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 >>> >>> >>> The Washington Post writes: >>> "When we think of industries that must change to prevent further >>> global warming, we tend to imagine carbon-intensive concerns >>> such as mining, aviation and energy production. But the Murdoch >>> media and the rest of the climate denialist industry will also >>> need a transition plan. They do not have long to implement it." >>> >>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/16/australias-catastrophic-fires-are-moment-reckoning-murdochs-media-empire/ >>> >>> -Jochen >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
