Anthropogenic Global Warming #3 – IPCC Global Warming Conclusions

Ok, now I will show the latest “summary for policy making” document available on the internet and here.  This document is the current IPCC recommendations to the world as to how humankind should address global warming.

Because of the nature of the IPCC discussed in my first and second post, we already know they must have very strong wording in this document.  My article Anthropogenic Global Warming #2 discusses the review process as related to the full report here.

The summary for policy makers is key though as all of the conclusions are highlighted by themselves and the extreme nature of IPCC policy becomes evident.

First quote

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is
now evident from observations of increases in global
average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting
of snow and ice and rising global average sea level
(Figure SPM.1). {1.1}

This first statement is absolutely questionable by itself.  I will discuss that in another post but the earth has cooled since 1998.  That is not what is shown in this curve.

Here are the temperature curves used to support the above statement.

Ok, these curves are not very accurate.  I don’t know where they come from but this is the same organization who published the hockey stick curve in their 3rd report.  Fortunately, after a wide range and massive discrediting of the hockey stick, they didn’t use it in this 4th report.  I think the best site currently for accurate temperature graphs is right here in wordpress.  I have been all over the internet and this site does the best job of plotting the raw (the datasets provided from all government sources are “corrected” and the corrections are in question) data.  At least though the data is not fabricated like above.

If you have come this far in my blog you need to see the link above and look at his trend analysis.  I copied one graph from his site here.

 

From Digital Diatribes of a Random Idiot - (Not an idiot)

From the second graph the data is presented as an Anomaly temperature which is 1/100 of a degree C temperature difference from an arbitrary number chosen by the agency producing the data.  So an anomaly of 40 is 0.4degrees C change from the arbitrary baseline.

The smoothing of the second graph masks the downward drop of the data in 2008 slightly but as the Digital Diatribes site notes, the earth has been cooling off for the last 10 years.

A second graph from digital diatribes Illustrates this point.

From Digital Diatribes of a Random Idiot - (Not an idiot)

You would never know that from the rhetoric.  The dataset for this graph was HadCrut.

Another claim from the IPCC summary.

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures
since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the
observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.
7 It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic
warming over the past 50 years averaged over
each continent (except Antarctica) (Figure SPM.4). {2.4}

This is very much disputed as the claim they are making is derived from computer models.  The earth has warmed, the causes and the actual magnitude of the causes are in question.

Altered frequencies and intensities of extreme weather,
together with sea level rise, are expected to have mostly
adverse effects on natural and human systems. {3.3.5}

Several scientists involved in this report have refuted this claim.  One even resigned due to the politicizing of this issue. See his resignation letter warning the public here.

Anthropogenic warming could lead to some impacts
that are abrupt or irreversible, depending upon the rate
and magnitude of the climate change. {3.4}

Above is another broad and overly general rhetoric stating irreversibility not backed up by facts.

Both bottom-up and top-down studies indicate that
there is high agreement and much evidence of substantial
economic potential for the mitigation of global
GHG emissions over the coming decades that could
offset the projected growth of global emissions or reduce
emissions below current levels (Figures SPM.9,
SPM.10).15 While top-down and bottom-up studies are
in line at the global level (Figure SPM.9) there are considerable
differences at the sectoral level. {4.3}

Unrealistic statement as to economic potential of emissions control.  Everyone knows cost does not help supply more of something but in fact adding cost sells less.  This reverse thinking is part of the doublespeak of the IPCC.

IPCC strategy for mitigation of energy supply.

Improved supply and distribution efficiency; fuel switching from coal to gas; nuclear
power; renewable heat and power (hydropower, solar, wind, geothermal and
bioenergy); combined heat and power; early applications of carbon dioxide capture
and storage (CCS) (e.g. storage of removed CO2 from natural gas); CCS for gas,
biomass and coal-fired electricity generating facilities; advanced nuclear power;
advanced renewable energy, including tidal and wave energy, concentrating solar,
and solar photovoltaics

None of the proposed options are reasonable for replacing fossil fuel due to costs with todays technology.  Perhaps in 50 years they might be but they are a long way off.  See my series on Energy and Politics.

More fuel-efficient vehicles; hybrid vehicles; cleaner diesel vehicles; biofuels; modal
shifts from road transport to rail and public transport systems; non-motorised
transport (cycling, walking); land-use and transport planning; second generation
biofuels; higher efficiency aircraft; advanced electric and hybrid vehicles with more
powerful and reliable batteries.

Even if every car went to 40 miles per gallon and we dropped fuel consumption in half, the powerplants built in China and India would oustrip the effort.  Anyone who thinks the US could use public transport hasn’t lived here.

There is high confidence that neither adaptation nor
mitigation alone can avoid all climate change impacts;
however, they can complement each other and together
can significantly reduce the risks of climate change. {5.3}

This is a bold and false statement.  Greenhouse gas emissions will continue to climb for the next 50 years weather or not technically advanced countries sacrifice their economies for climate change.  China and India alone are adding 2 coal fired power plants every week!  Emissions cannot be stopped through these suggested processes, but without the possibility of resolution there would be no reason for the IPCC to exist.

Ok, thats the report on the IPCC.

IPCC formed in 1998 for the purpose of identifying human caused global warming climate change

In 1999 they predictably find global warming and form 3 more organizations to expand their influence

Since that time the IPCC has produced only the most extreme predictions on the environment.  This includes the “hockey stick graph” which was the data used to push the (fault filled) Kyoto accord and is now considered an embarassment to the field.

They continually predict the worst outcomes, including overstated sea level rise, overstated temperature rise and overstated storm intensity projections.

One of the themes of this summary is the consensus on this subject.  It is alluded to several times in the summary paper and they report high confidence in all of the conclusions most important to their survival.

On top of all of it, they completely fail to recognize that the earth has been cooling off for the last 10 years.

I think its  pretty clear what the IPCC is.  Don’t you?

We cannot trust this organization make decisions on our energy policy.

Come back to read Anthropogenic Global Warming #4.  Where I will discuss the temperature records.