the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

SPPI report on Illinois Climate Change

Posted by Jeff Id on October 5, 2010

Bob Fergusen has forwarded me a report on climate change in Illinois ,which is of course, where I live.

Full report is here – illinois_state_report[1]

Now Illinois is a liberal state, which means that we have a large number of people who spend a great deal of time thinking of ways to commit industrial suicide by government.  This report prepared by SPPI, lays out some of the truth of the weather in Illinois and the benefit of cutting emissions completely state wide.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this report, we provide a review of Illinois’ climate history and show that there is little observational evidence of unusual long-term climate changes taking place that could be linked to anthropogenic “global warming”—despite the frequent prognostications to the contrary, often accompanied by doom and gloom scenarios.

Instead of rising temperatures, the trend in the state’s annual average temperature history has been near zero for more than a century. Instead of an increasing frequency of drought, the state’s moisture conditions have improved over the long run. Instead of failing crops, the state’s agricultural yields have been increasing. Instead of worsening impacts from heat waves, the state’s population has become less sensitive to extreme high temperature events. Air pollution from ozone is declining. The trend towards greater tornado occurrences is explained by improvements in storm detection rather than in real changes in the number of storms. Vector-borne disease outbreaks are more a matter of extant climate and social conditions than climate change. And the change in the water levels of the Great Lakes is more strongly tied into natural variability than anthropogenic climate change.

Along with the observed climate history of Illinois, we analyze what the future impacts on the climate will be if Illinois ceased all of its greenhouse gas emissions, now and forever. What we find is eye-opening. Even a complete cessation of greenhouse emissions from Illinois will only slow the climate model projected future rate of global warming by about seven thousandths (≈0.007) of a ºC per century. The impact of sea level will be an equally meager four hundredths of an inch. These changes are scientifically and realistically meaningless.

What’s worse, is that greenhouse gas emissions are increasing so rapidly in developing countries, that new emissions from China alone will completely subsume the entirely of Illinois’ hypothetical emissions cessation in only about four months time! Clearly, any plan merely calling for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will fare even poorer. There is simply no climatic gain to be had from emissions reductions in Illinois.

The report has some interesting details including a statewide declining temp this century (I haven’t verified), and ends with this comment which I happen to agree with.

And all this economic hardship—in the midst of a recession—would come with absolutely no detectable impact on the course of future climate. This is the epitome of an all pain and no gain scenario.


22 Responses to “SPPI report on Illinois Climate Change”

  1. j ferguson said

    Assuming I haven’t misunderstood what I’ve read, none of the currently discussed schemes for GHG reduction through government imposed controls or carbon tax if implemented would have any substantial effect.

    Maybe this is where we can get a handle on stopping this runaway alarmist nonsense.

    Their solutions won’t work and a solution which would have the effect they desire is impractical.

  2. mrpkw said

    Illinois is not a liberal state.

    Cook County is.

    But sadly they have far too much influence on the rest of us poor bastards that have chosen to remain here.

  3. “a statewide declining temp this century (I haven’t verified)”
    Indeed there was, because 2008 and 2009 were cold in Ill., and that affects a short trend. But if you go back 3,4, or 5 decades, periods of large CO2 increases, then the uptrend is there. Here are some numbers (NOAA source)

    2000-2009 -4.90 C/century
    1980-2009 0.43 C/century
    1970-2009 1.98 C/century
    1960-2009 1.88 C/century
    1950-2009 1.53 C/century
    1940-2009 0.50 C/century
    1930-2009 0.06 C/century
    1920-2009 -0.53 C/century
    1910-2009 -0.37 C/century
    1900-2009 -0.12 C/century

  4. Oops, I misnumbered some starting years there – the trends are

    2000-2009-4.90 C/century
    1990-2009 0.43 C/century
    1980-2009 1.98 C/century
    1970-2009 1.88 C/century
    1960-2009 1.53 C/century
    1950-2009 0.50 C/century
    1940-2009 0.06 C/century
    1930-2009-0.53 C/century
    1920-2009-0.37 C/century
    1910-2009-0.12 C/century
    1900-2009 0.14 C/century

  5. Brian H said

    Fools and their money …

  6. Jeff Id said

    Fools and my money.

  7. Rob R said

    There are now lots of US states covered by similar reports. These are archived somewhere at SPPI.

  8. slimething said

    Somebody always finds the urge to spin. The “warmest decade in history” is -4.90/dec, so it isn’t fair to include that in the ubiquitous “long term trend”, which apparently only applies to the last 30 years. Be sure if it were +4.90/dec, it would be perfectly consistent with AGW.

  9. kuhnkat said

    Nick Stokes,

    with the verified bias in NOAA temps I am surprised that even a Warmista like you would quote them!!

  10. ‘The “warmest decade in history” is -4.90/dec’
    Well, if you end the decade in Sept 2010 instead of Dec 2009, it comes back to -1.70 C/cen. That’s what short-term trends do.
    “I am surprised that even a Warmista like you would quote them”
    Same data as SPPI is quoting.

  11. Kenneth Fritsch said

    What Nick Stokes says is true – if you go back far enough there is little or no trend in Illinois but if you look at the last fews decades the trend is much larger and positive. Illinois also is a state where the trends south to north vary considerable with the southern trends, in general, much lower than the trends in the north.

  12. Jeff Id said

    Nick is rarely wrong. Any trends are hardly scary though.

  13. M. Simon said

    I have a short term trend for you. Yesterday between 6 AM and 3 PM there was a 20 deg. F temp rise. 20/9 = 2.22 deg/ hour. If we project that trend into the next month (aprox 190 hours) at the end of the month it will be 422 deg F plus the base of about 65 F. 487 deg F.

    Life as we know it will cease. Something must be done at once. Give me all your money.

  14. Brian H said

    M.S.;
    Nah. After extensive scientifical type study, I have concluded that it’s your fault. So pls off yerself forthwith!
    Pro’lem solved.

  15. Nick said

    It’s official! Global cooling started in Illinois! But what if it stays there?

  16. KevinUK said

    Jeff ID

    “Nick is rarely wrong”

    Were you being sarcastic when you typed that Jeff ID as my experience has been diametrically opposite from yours if you weren’t?

  17. PaulM said

    I can’t believe that Nick Stokes is still trying to pull the old dishonest IPCC trick to mislead people into thinking there has been an increasing trend.

    At least M Simon spotted the flaw, though it needs to be spelled out very clearly every time a warmist like Nick tries it on.
    Temperatures have gone up and down in the past. This means that longer trends, like 1900-2009, are likely to be much smaller than shorter ones like 1980-2009.

  18. Kenneth Fritsch said

    Illinois is my home state and I have studied its temperature reporting stations rather extensively. I have noted that nearby stations can have very different temperature trends – which leads me to question how well we can determine the uncertainty of the instrumental temperature record, given the amount of missing and sparse data both temporally and spatially, without having a handle on why we see these large differences.

  19. […] SPPI report on Illinois Climate Change « the Air Vent […]

  20. KevinUK said

    #17 PaulM

    “At least M Simon spotted the flaw, though it needs to be spelled out very clearly every time a warmist like Nick tries it on.

    That’s not just any old Nick, PaulM, that’s Professor Nick Stokes, BSc, Msc, PhD who clearly attend the Calculus for Climate Scientists course run by the Earth Science faculty at his university rather than the one given by the Engineering/Maths faculty. Now I know it beggars believe that someone with a PhD doesn’t understand that its not a good idea to fit a linear trend to data that goes up and down during a multi-decadal period of time (for good reasons and it’s called natural cyclic climatic variability and evidence for it is all over the global temperature record in different parts of the world) but hey as Steve M says ‘This is climate science’.

  21. Brian H said

    #20;
    Prezaktamente!
    What we need for such extrapolations is the the Drunkard’s Walk function, which draws a randomly wobbly and back-tracking trace onwards and up-or-downwards!

    That would be far better preparation for the real probable future than massaged trend-lines from “weathervane scientists”.

  22. BillyBob said

    1930-2009-0.53 C/century
    1920-2009-0.37 C/century

    So … its cooled since the 1920/1930 decades.

    I knew the 1930s were the hottest decade ever.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: