Good point. It looks like they forgot to include the thickness of Arctic fox pelts in the index though.
On 12/9/09 4:31 PM, "Ken Caldeira" <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, on a minor note: > > They should have called the index what they are now calling the cumulative > index. > > The index should be a measure of the state of the system, not a change in the > state, if they seek to emulate the Dow Jones Index. > > > ___________________________________________________ > Ken Caldeira > > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > > [email protected] > http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 > > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Mike MacCracken <[email protected]> > wrote: >> It would be helpful if the IGBP (or some other group like Alan's, which has >> more capability to generate such an index better than most) also had a >> variability index that included volcanic eruption effects and El Nino/La >> Nina effects on at least global average temperature (in that we essentially >> can estimate these, or at least can get a good sense of them by correlation >> and fancier analyses of past observations); of course, a problem is that the >> two may not be completely independent. [I'd add in solar variations if I >> thought we understand them well enough to do, but in any case best estimate >> is that they are smaller--or at least smoother.] >> >> And if one were clever, one might even do a short-term variation chart for >> the CO2 concentration (volcanic eruptions, by scattering light, are thought >> to temporarily enhance carbon uptake; ENSO can also have an effect, as can >> variations in fires), and they even might have a variability index for how >> volcanic eruptions and ENSO affect sea level (or ocean heat content). >> >> Finally, it is a bit surprising to me (and will be misleading later) that >> IGBP uses minimum summer sea ice cover as an index--when this goes to zero, >> it presumably will imply that there is no more change going on in the this >> component of the Earth system, which will be wrong. It seems to me they need >> to figure out some composite cryosphere index. The sea ice component might >> be the average annual fractional coverage of sea ice or sea ice >> volume--though that too could go to zero change in the future, but more >> distantly. Then add in mountain glacier and ice sheet components, with some >> weighting--or maybe make it total ice loss per year from Arctic sea ice, >> mountain glaciers, the ice sheets, and even permafrost. This would be >> equivalent to the energy going into melting all the ice, so one of the terms >> in the global energy balance (along with ocean heat uptake). >> >> Mike >> >> >> On 12/9/09 9:22 AM, "Alan Robock" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> > Dear Ken, >>> > >>> > No. >>> > >>> > First, there was no eruption in 1996 that affected climate. And how can >>> > you cherry-pick and choose the same year for El Chichón, whose effects >>> > were largely masked by the huge El Niño that year, and choose the year >>> > after the eruption for Pinatubo? Which is it? So your theory that >>> > these data show beneficial effects from eruptions is wrong. >>> > >>> > Second, volcanic eruptions cause drought, ozone depletion, and loss of >>> > direct solar power. So you have to take the good with the bad and >>> > carefully evaluate all the effects. >>> > >>> > Alan >>> > >>> > Alan Robock, Professor II >>> > Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program >>> > Associate Director, Center for Environmental Prediction >>> > Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-732-932-9800 x6222 >>> > Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644 >>> > 14 College Farm Road E-mail: [email protected] >>> > New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock >>> <http://envsci.rutgers.edu/%7Erobock> >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Ken Caldeira wrote: >>> > >>>> >> The IGBP has developed a "Climate Change Index": >>>> >> >>>> >> *The index gives an annual snapshot of how the planet?s complex systems ? >>>> >> the ice, the oceans, the land surface and the atmosphere - are >>>> responding to >>>> >> the changing climate. >>>> >> *...* >>>> >> **The index dips in just three years, 1982, 1992 and 1996 and looks >>>> >> effective at capturing major natural events that affect climate, and >>>> their >>>> >> knock-on effect on the planet. The dip in the curve in 1992 may have >>>> been >>>> >> caused by the massive Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption in Indonesia in >>>> 1991. >>>> >> The eruption was large enough to affect temperature and sea level on a >>>> >> planetary scale. The other falls coincide with the El Chichon volcanic >>>> >> eruption in Mexico in 1982 and the volcanic eruption on the Caribbean >>>> island >>>> >> of Montserrat in 1996.* >>>> >> >>>> >> If the IGBP's "Climate Change Index" only shows improvements after large >>>> >> volcanoes, is the IGBP telling us something about the potential for >>>> >> intentional intervention in the climate system? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> ___________________________________________________ >>>> >> Ken Caldeira >>>> >> >>>> >> Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology >>>> >> 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA >>>> >> >>>> >> [email protected] >>>> >> http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab >>>> >> +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> >> From: Virginie Le Saout <[email protected]> >>>> >> Date: Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 6:30 PM >>>> >> Subject: IGBP Climate Change Index >>>> >> To: >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> *IGBP Climate-Change Index * >>>> >> >>>> >> * * >>>> >> >>>> >> *EMBARGO: 9 December 09:00 CET (08:00 GMT, 03:00 EST, US)* >>>> >> >>>> >> * * >>>> >> >>>> >> * * >>>> >> >>>> >> *Press conference: UNFCCC - COP15,* *Asger Jorn Room, Hall H, Bella >>>> Center, >>>> >> Copenhagen.* >>>> >> >>>> >> * * >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Some people still question whether Earth?s climate is changing as >>>> rapidly >>>> >> and profoundly as the majority of climate scientists suggest. But, what if >>>> >> the complexity of the Earth?s climate were distilled down to one number, in >>>> >> the same way that the Dow Jones Index condenses volumes of data into a >>>> >> single figure? What, then, would be the general trend? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> The IGBP Climate-Change Index is a first attempt to do just that. It >>>> brings >>>> >> together key indicators of global change: carbon dioxide, temperature, >>>> sea >>>> >> level and sea ice. The index gives an annual snapshot of how the >>>> planet?s >>>> >> complex systems ? the ice, the oceans, the land surface and the >>>> atmosphere - >>>> >> are responding to the changing climate. The index rises steadily from >>>> 1980 ? >>>> >> the earliest date the index has been calculated. The change is >>>> unequivocal, >>>> >> it is global, and, significantly, it is in one direction. The reason for >>>> >> concern becomes clear: in just 30 years we are witnessing major >>>> >> planetary-scale changes. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> The index dips in just three years, 1982, 1992 and 1996 and looks >>>> effective >>>> >> at capturing major natural events that affect climate, and their >>>> knock-on >>>> >> effect on the planet. The dip in the curve in 1992 may have been caused by >>>> >> the massive Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption in Indonesia in 1991. The >>>> >> eruption was large enough to affect temperature and sea level on a >>>> planetary >>>> >> scale. The other falls coincide with the El Chichon volcanic eruption in >>>> >> Mexico in 1982 and the volcanic eruption on the Caribbean island of >>>> >> Montserrat in 1996. If this link proves robust, the index is an >>>> excellent >>>> >> visual tool to show how external events can have rapid planetary-scale >>>> >> effects. Of course, the overall direction of change ? a climbing >>>> cumulative >>>> >> index ? highlights the extent human activities are having on the >>>> planet?s >>>> >> climate system. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Date >>>> >> >>>> >> Climate-change index >>>> >> >>>> >> Cumulative change in the index >>>> >> >>>> >> 1980 >>>> >> >>>> >> 24 >>>> >> >>>> >> 24 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1981 >>>> >> >>>> >> 37 >>>> >> >>>> >> 61 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1982 >>>> >> >>>> >> -19 >>>> >> >>>> >> 42 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1983 >>>> >> >>>> >> 39 >>>> >> >>>> >> 81 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1984 >>>> >> >>>> >> 9 >>>> >> >>>> >> 90 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1985 >>>> >> >>>> >> 8 >>>> >> >>>> >> 98 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1986 >>>> >> >>>> >> 5 >>>> >> >>>> >> 103 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1987 >>>> >> >>>> >> 31 >>>> >> >>>> >> 134 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1988 >>>> >> >>>> >> 33 >>>> >> >>>> >> 167 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1989 >>>> >> >>>> >> 18 >>>> >> >>>> >> 185 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1990 >>>> >> >>>> >> 34 >>>> >> >>>> >> 218 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1991 >>>> >> >>>> >> 10 >>>> >> >>>> >> 228 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1992 >>>> >> >>>> >> -25 >>>> >> >>>> >> 203 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1993 >>>> >> >>>> >> 14 >>>> >> >>>> >> 217 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1994 >>>> >> >>>> >> 21 >>>> >> >>>> >> 237 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1995 >>>> >> >>>> >> 47 >>>> >> >>>> >> 284 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1996 >>>> >> >>>> >> -6 >>>> >> >>>> >> 278 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1997 >>>> >> >>>> >> 35 >>>> >> >>>> >> 313 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1998 >>>> >> >>>> >> 37 >>>> >> >>>> >> 349 >>>> >> >>>> >> 1999 >>>> >> >>>> >> 15 >>>> >> >>>> >> 365 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2000 >>>> >> >>>> >> 7 >>>> >> >>>> >> 372 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2001 >>>> >> >>>> >> 19 >>>> >> >>>> >> 391 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2002 >>>> >> >>>> >> 34 >>>> >> >>>> >> 425 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2003 >>>> >> >>>> >> 28 >>>> >> >>>> >> 454 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2004 >>>> >> >>>> >> 15 >>>> >> >>>> >> 468 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2005 >>>> >> >>>> >> 43 >>>> >> >>>> >> 512 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2006 >>>> >> >>>> >> 29 >>>> >> >>>> >> 541 >>>> >> >>>> >> 2007 >>>> >> >>>> >> 33 >>>> >> >>>> >> 574 >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> The idea came about when several IGBP scientists including Steven >>>> Running, >>>> >> IGBP >>>> >> executive director Sybil Seitzinger, former IGBP director Kevin Noone, >>>> Kathy >>>> >> Hibbard, Mark Stafford Smith, Peter Cox, Suzi Kerr and Pierre >>>> >> Friedlingsten realised >>>> >> that the way various global datasets are reported throughout the year >>>> may be >>>> >> confusing. It is uncoordinated, there are a variety of unfamiliar units, >>>> and >>>> >> natural variability sometimes masks a trend. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Professor Seitzinger says, ?We felt people outside global-change >>>> research >>>> >> are not clear about the scale of the changes scientists are witnessing. >>>> The >>>> >> index is a response to these concerns.? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Why those four metrics? Professor Steven Running from the University of >>>> >> Montana says, ?The iconic Mauna Loa atmospheric CO2 concentration was >>>> >> obvious. Global air temperature is already widely reported at the end of >>>> >> each calendar year, so that was a logical choice too. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> ?We needed an oceanic measure and chose sea-level rise because the >>>> impact is >>>> >> global and of high public interest. The fourth metric concerns the >>>> >> cryosphere. Growing concern about the rate of loss of summer sea-ice in >>>> the >>>> >> Arctic led us to choose this metric. This parameter broadly represents >>>> the >>>> >> Earth system and it is interesting the summer sea-ice extent is >>>> shrinking >>>> >> much faster than models predicted five, ten years ago,? said Professor >>>> >> Running, a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change >>>> >> Fourth Assessment Report. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> In the future, other variables could be added. ?We did not identify any >>>> good >>>> >> land surface variable, because no good standard exists,? says Professor >>>> >> Running. ?But some day we may have annual albedo or land-cover change.? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Each parameter is normalised between -100 and +100. Zero is no annual >>>> >> change. One hundred is the maximum-recorded annual change since 1980. >>>> The >>>> >> normalised parameters are averaged. This gives the index for the year. >>>> The >>>> >> value for each year is added to that of the previous year to show the >>>> >> cumulative effect of annual change. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Professor Running says, ?Some of us thought we?d need a five-year >>>> rolling >>>> >> average to help dampen fluctuations and to elucidate core trends. But >>>> when >>>> >> we first produced the index it was obvious this was unnecessary: the >>>> index >>>> >> highlights the trend extremely effectively.? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> The index has been developed with input from a large number of >>>> scientists >>>> >> involved in global-change research. Some scientists questioned whether >>>> >> atmospheric carbon dioxide levels should be included. They argued that, >>>> >> because carbon dioxide drives changes in the three other parameters, it >>>> >> should be excluded. But others argue that it is human activity that is >>>> the >>>> >> external forcing agent. Additionally, as atmospheric carbon dioxide >>>> levels >>>> >> fluctuate, this in turn affects the effectiveness of other major carbon >>>> >> sinks: the oceans and the land. So, given the size of its influence on >>>> the >>>> >> climate, the arguments to include atmospheric carbon dioxide levels >>>> outweigh >>>> >> arguments for exclusion. Recalculating the index without carbon dioxide >>>> >> shows that carbon dioxide does not dominate the trend. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> IGBP scientists are discussing developing other indices relating to >>>> global >>>> >> change such as an index including land-use, fisheries exploitation, >>>> >> population, fire and extreme events, as well as backdating the new >>>> index. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> The index will be updated annually. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> See www.igbp.net <http://www.igbp.net> for more information >>>> >> >>>> >> Notes for editors >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Seven images are available. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Contact >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Owen Gaffney >>>> >> >>>> >> Director of communications >>>> >> >>>> >> International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme >>>> >> >>>> >> Email: [email protected] >>>> >> >>>> >> Tel: +46 86739556 >>>> >> >>>> >> Mob: +46 730208418 >>>> >> >>>> >> Skype: owengaffneyigbp >>>> >> >>>> >> Website: www.igbp.net <http://www.igbp.net> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> *International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme* >>>> >> >>>> >> The International Council for Science (ICSU) formed the International >>>> >> Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) in 1987 in recognition that climate >>>> >> change is one part of a much larger challenge: global change. IGBP's >>>> vision >>>> >> is to provide scientific knowledge to improve the sustainability of the >>>> >> living Earth. IGBP involves researchers from 74 nations and is based at >>>> the >>>> >> Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> www.igbp.net <http://www.igbp.net> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> >>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups >>>> >> "geoengineering" group. >>>> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> >> [email protected] >>>> <mailto:geoengineering%[email protected]> . >>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> > >>> > -- >>> > >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> > "geoengineering" group. >>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > [email protected] >>> <mailto:geoengineering%[email protected]> . >>> > For more options, visit this group at >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. >>> > >>> > >> >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
