Tweet of the week - Another record year?

A new year begins, so it is almost time to see how 2014 measures with previous years - did the warming trend continue?

Will 2014 be the warmest year on record? Watch this space #climate2014 pic.twitter.com/6kF4rZDs7M
— WMO | OMM (@WMOnews) January 2, 2015

To the surprise of all (... not really), the Earth continued warming. At the beginning of December, the WMO issued a press release that stated that, if 2014 continued the same trend in November and December as what was observed from January to October, it would be among the hottest - if not the hottest - year on record. Global air average temperature (Jan-Oct) was 0.57°C higher than the 1961-1990 reference period. Over land average air temperature was 0.86°C higher.

 

Average temperature over land will continue warming faster that over the sea. Figure 1 shows the change in surface temperature per degree Celsius of global mean change, as projected for the 21st century (IPCC, 2013).

Fig. 1: mean surface temperature increase per °C of global
mean temperature increase. Source: IPCC, AR5

 

This means that the average global temperature is just that, an average. A warming in 2°C is not distributed equally around the globe, but there can be cooler areas and other areas that are much warmer. While the globe may increase 1°C, the continents will be around 1.25-1.5°C warmer. The figure also shows that the warming will be even higher in the Arctic regions, because the localised ice-albedo feedback will allow an increase in absorbed radiation.

 

The final verdict on 2014 is still to come, but it will likely not be a surprise.

Tweet of the week - Arctic Report Card

In the last post we saw when the Antarctic and Arctic cooled enough to allow the formation of ice sheets. Now the Arctic is warming at an alarming rate. NOAA has an Arctic Report Card were it presents the state of the Arctic based on Snow covered days, albedo, ocean temperatures and even polar bears!

#Arctic warming twice the global average. Will #Santa have to move? http://t.co/Z6RzF6JWWh pic.twitter.com/1AZePNl8s9
— NOAA Climate.gov (@NOAAClimate) December 24, 2014

Tweet of the week - Losing ice

This week NASA tweeted this:

An increase of sun’s energy absorbed in the Arctic aligns with the decrease in sea ice: http://t.co/04sE2z74vp #AGU14 pic.twitter.com/h6eiov9X4P
— NASA (@NASA) December 17, 2014

The picture shows the change in sea ice (left) and in absorbed solar radiation (right) since the year 2000. As expected, areas with greater absorbed radiation show the greatest decrease in sea ice. This also means the albedo will be lower in the areas with less ice, causing even more heating in those areas. We've seen the ice albedo feedback before, in the Snowball Earth and the Ordovician mass extinction, but working the other way around: cooling promotes the ice to expand, so the albedo rises, reflecting more sunlight, which leads to more cooling. Now we are seeing the opposite: warming in the Arctic means there is more sea ice melting, lowering the albedo (exposing the dark sea), which absorbs more heat and there is more warming. 

Overland and Wang (2013) looked into different studies and methods regarding sea ice loss and found that the Arctic could be nearly ice free (less than 1 million km²) in summer by the first half of this century. One of these studies, by "trendsetters", found that if the current sea ice loss trend continues, this could happen as soon as 2020. Models predict a later date, around 2040 at the earliest. 

Tweet of the Week - What if?

The tweet of the (last) week is thought provoking. What would happen if all life disappeared from our planet? Not just us humans, but all animals and plants...

Life disappears from the Earth. What happens then? http://t.co/hhN3dpVQBG pic.twitter.com/mGYQqXlvpg

— New Scientist (@newscientist) December 12, 2014

As we have seen, life appearing had a great impact on the planet: oxygen levels rose in the atmosphere and reduced CO₂, causing the Earth's temperature to plunge.  If we all disappeared, the opposite would happen: O₂ levels would fall and CO₂ would be on the rise again, causing great warming. 

Other possible changes? Without plants, precipitation patterns would be altered, causing the continents to be drier and hotter. The ozone layer would also be in trouble with the falling levels of  O₂. 

The article is very interesting, going through some other changes that could happen. It really shows how life is deeply connected with the climate!

Tweet of the week - The weather in 2050

This week, as part of the UN Climate Change Conference in Lima, the WMO has been releasing a daily video with a weather report of a day in 2050 for different countries. These reports are based on a climate change scenario where we keep increasing our greenhouse gas emissions - and they are quite alarming!

#Weather2050 reports. Today from Vietnam. Climate change is already happening #COP20 http://t.co/qeGt8Qrnby pic.twitter.com/j1eeWGzDYO
— WMO | OMM (@WMOnews) December 3, 2014

You can find all the videos (including an earlier batch of videos released in September during the UN Climate Summit) in the WMO website.

Here is the one for Spain, remembering the 2010 heatwave with some "nostalgia".

Let's talk climate change

In between talking about billions and millions of years ago, I woud like to remind you that on Monday, December 1st the UN Climate Change Conference will begin in Lima, Peru!  

Let the games begin... #COP20 in Lima :-) pic.twitter.com/W8GiSRYRpj

— #COP20 Lima (@LimaCop20) November 28, 2014

As we have seen, our climate has changed before for different reasons, ranging from tiny microorganisms to huge continents, but generally changes have taken a very long time - thousands or millions of years. Today we are seeing an accelerated climate change, in a very short timescale.

In its latest report the IPCC said:

"Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems."

So, it is also up to us to make the necessary changes to try to mitigate the effects as much as possible. This meeting will be important leading up to Paris 2015, and will mark the trend of where we are heading to in the future.

If you want to follow the action, http://newsroom.unfccc.int/lima/ is a good place to start. Oh, and of course there is an app!
Google play
Appstore

Vulnerability

Along with the regular posts, I will be posting shorter* ones about climate change today. Let's start with vulnerability!

A few days ago the UNEP tweeted an interesting map of a ranking of countries by vulnerability.

This map compares 3 lists of countries ranked by #climatechange vulnerability. Surprised? http://t.co/TmY5EusCti pic.twitter.com/B4Dpj6chLl
— UN Environment (@UNEP) November 1, 2014

Well yes, I was surprised. 

First, because there is a lot of discrepancy between the indices, with several countries appearing among most vulnerable and least vulnerable lists simultaneously. The second thing I noticed is that Peru appears to have no data. 

So let's look at the three indices used to make the map. 

DARA Climate vulnerability monitor

Uses 34 indicators to link the effects of climate change with the economic, ecological and social costs. In the social aspect it includes deaths and number of people affected.

Notre Dame Global Adaptation (GAIN) Index

Their vulnerability score is based on 36 indicators. From the page: "ND-GAIN measures overall vulnerability by considering six life-supporting sectors: food, water, health, ecosystem service, human habitat, and infrastructure."  The total ND GAIN score includes each countries readiness along with the vulnerability.

Germanwatch's Global Climate Risk Index

Uses information of the social and economic effects of extreme weather events that occurred between 1990 and 2009. It does not consider indirect effects or events, such as glacier melting. In the social aspect, it only includes deaths associated with extreme weather events, not number of people affected. It produced two rankings, one for the most affected countries from 1990-2009 and another only for 2009. 

Basically, even though the three indices are related to climate change vulnerability, they are not looking at the same things and are not necessarily comparable. Also, each methodology will have certain limitation based on the data used, so that can explain why the results are not as expected. If something doesn't make sense at first, look at the methodology and data used! This doesn't mean an index is wrong or right, it is just that they have a different goal and will use different data. Each webpage linked has a lot of very interesting information, so check them out.

I must note that I still don't understand why Peru appears as "data non available", since it was analyzed in all three indices (ND GAIN: 71 out of 180 in the vulnerability index; Germanwatch: 47th most affected from 1990-2009 and 51st in 2009; DARA CVM: severely vulnerable). What this shows is that we must all be prepared! Every country will probably be affected in one way or another and it is in our hands NOW to take the necessary measures to be ready.

*Did I say shorter at the beginning?