Independent Research

Hi

I had a lot of exchanges with an independent scientist around 2008. After listening to the top management of the IPCC at the global forum, we delivered a warning to the IPCC that the earth's temperature will not stop when emissions stop. We were counting on a theoretical emissions freeze in 2010,

Unfortunately, this independent scientist passed away from cancer a few years later.

In the long run up to 2022, I've had the privilege of learning a lot more.

But if we put ourselves in our worldview in 2008, the time-response between changing CO2 and global temperature was 115 years and the corresponding climate sensitivity was 8C

I attach the report from Aug 2008. The doc file is called the Nobel Prize, because it was part of an analysis of the Nobel Prize awarded to the IPCC in 2007.

 

We are dealing here with probably the most important point in the whole current climate debate: Does the temperature stay ???

Already the attached document provides good motivation for the fact that the temperature will not stop when all emissions are stopped.

The consequence is that NetZero (zero emissions in 2045 ) cannot work. When all emissions are stopped, the earth continues roughly 115 years and the final temperature can be estimated at +5.45 C for every +100 ppm , calculated from pre-industrial levels (year 1700 , 275 ppm) , all according to the attached document.

This also agrees well with Prof James Hansen who last 10 years claimed climate sensitivity= 6, which gives time lag 85 years.

In his world, the earth continues roughly 85 years before the end temperature is reached.

 

Some of the heaviest climate models confirm James Hansen's view quite well.

A. Hadley model from the MetOffice in the UK

B. US NCAR model CESM2

C. European Cooperative Model EC-Earth3

These were to form the basis of the IPCC 2021 report but the IPCC has rather written down the climate sensitivity to below 3 in the last report.

The 2021 Nobel Prize celebrates climate sensitivity 2.3

You climate scientists must have an idea and know so much more today in 2022, than what we knew when the attached report was written in 2008.

Urge: Bring all this up for debate in DN, as this also contains the answer to your article: don't spread the image that it is too late to save the climate

Back in 2008, our report showed that stopping emissions would do almost no measurable good. It is too late to save the climate through zero emissions.

Johan Rockström describes any climate sensitivity above 3 as a scientific earthquake in which the emissions budget disappears in one fell swoop.

Ref https://www.svd.se/den-heliga-graal-klimatkansligheten-skakas-i-grunden

 

In recent years, I am increasingly leaning towards the climate sensitivity being 36 and the time factor being about 700 years. But this is of secondary importance. It is enough to accept climate sensitivity = 5 to be able to design a workable climate policy. Roughly speaking, 99% of the solution lies in actively backing CO2 and methane, and 1% lies in zero emissions (solar wind......)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a real need to highlight the facts. How else will we manage to cut 200 Gt CO2 and 2 Gt methane/year, starting no later than 2025. Will the IPCC become the main factor slowing down a functioning climate policy by continuing to claim climate sensitivity =3 ? Will the IPCC be the main factor in enforcing the end of civilization ??

MVH Bengt Ovelius

 


 

 

 

Analysis by Örjan Hallberg, Hallberg Independent Research 2008-08-16 D

(Actually taken from an announcement made by the Nobel Prize awarded to the IPCC in 2007)

 

IPCC and the global temperature increase

Örjan Hallberg, Hallberg Independent Research, 2008.

When last year's IPCC climate report was presented, it was found that the temperature increase lag was estimated to be small. If we stop increasingCO2 in the atmosphere now, the report says the temperature will rise by only 0.6 degrees more. So the IPCC says that the increase inCO2 from 280 ppm in 1850 to 400 ppm today (=+120 ppm) will not lead to a total temperature increase of more than 1.1 degrees since 1850.

But if we look back half a million years, we see that the temperature has always fluctuated by about 8 degrees whenthe CO2 content has varied by about 120 ppm. See Figure 1.

clip8717

Figure 1. Temperature andCO2 content over the last 410000 years.

The same pattern of temperature andCO2 content has been repeated for at least the last 600 000 years. TheCO2 content varies between glacial cycles from 180-280 ppm. Figure 1 does not show thattheCO2 content has now suddenly risen sharply from 280 ppm to 400 ppm. The steady-state response to this step function has been calculated by the IPCC to be 1.1 degrees C.

Plotting temperature as a function ofCO2 content shows a clear trend of temperature that is stable at any given time andCO2 content. Figure 2 shows this relationship.

clip8718

Figure 2.CO2 content and temperature over the last 410 000 years.

We will now try to figure out what steady-state temperature increase we can expect after we have raisedCO2 levels further up to 400 ppm. According to the graph in Figure 2, the increase from 280 to 400 ppm should lead to a steady-state temperature increase of about 8 degrees C from pre-industrial levels. Over the last 150 years, temperatures have started to respond to the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere but they are far from stabilising, especially asCO2 levels continue to increase at an accelerating rate.

Figure 3 shows the same data as in Figure 1, but with the addition of today's high level of CO2, which we have optimistically assumed will not increase from today's value. The graph also shows the increase in temperature that the IPCC believes will take place as a result of this huge increase in CO2 levels.

clip8719

Figure 3. Prehistoric levels of CO2 and corresponding temperature as shown in Figure 1. Time 0 corresponds to 1850. Increase in CO2 levels after 1850 (mainly since 1950) and temperature increase according to IPCC.

 

clip8720

Figure 4 shows the global temperature difference between a pre-industrial level and measured values to date. The blue boxes follow a regression line used for subsequent calculations. The rapid temperature variations observed between individual years are caused by normal climate changes and are superimposed on the slow change causedbya change inCO2 levels. Figure 3 also shows howtheCO2 content of the atmosphere has changed since 1850. Since 1970 it has increased by more than 2ppm per year.
Figure 4. Global temperature has been increasing since 1850.

Figure 4 can now be used to derive, through parameter optimisation, two properties of the temperature response to an incremental increaseinCO2 content. One property is the time lag we have, i.e. the characteristic response time until reaching 50% of the final steady-state temperature. The second property is the steady-state temperature increase that 100 ppmCO2 increase leads to.

By varying these two parameters to achieve the best fit between measured and calculated temperatures, we then obtain a model that can be used to predict future temperature trends.

Temperature stability

TheEarth receives 342 W/m2 and radiates the same amount if we have temperature balance. Since we have now changed the properties of the atmosphere, we do not emit as much as before, which leads to an increasing temperature. To achieve equilibrium, the temperature needs to be raised and, as shown in Figure 2, it may need to be raised by 8 degrees C even if we do not increasetheCO2 content further. Stefan Boltzmann's law can be used to calculate how much energy (E) is being stored per second perm2 right now.
E = 342(1-((273+15)/(273+15+8))4) = 36 W/m2
If this power is directed only at the ice, it will have melted into water within 29 years. If we assume that half goes to ice and half to heating land and water, the ice will be there until about 2070. But warming is accelerating because the authorities are doing nothing. Therefore, it is to be feared that coastal property prices could start to fall drastically in as little as 10 years when the timing of climate change becomes clear to the public.

Results

 

clip8721

The best fit was obtained when the characteristic time constant was 113 years for a steady-state temperature increase of 5.45 degrees after aCO2 increase of 100 ppm. Previous IPCC reports have stated that the characteristic time for atmospheric warming is 120-150 years, which is in excellent agreement with our analysis of actual data. Figure 5 shows reported and projected data for the case thatCO2 levels stabilize already in 2010 after a total increase of 120 ppm.CO2 emissions will not cease in 2010 so the temperature increase will be significantly higher.
Figure 5. Projected temperature increase ifCO2 levels stabilise already from 2010.
 
Figure 5 also includes the IPCC estimate for the case ofCO2 stabilisation from 2010 onwards. An analysis of the IPCC projections shows that it has now assumed a characteristic time of only 35 years and a temperature increase of only 1.1 C from 100 ppmCO2. Figure 6 shows in more detail that the IPCC model does not fit the historical data at all.

clip8722

Figure 6. Temperature increase in response to increasedCO2 according to historical data and the two models

Conclusions

There is no evidence that the IPCC is correct in saying that temperatures will only rise by 0.6°C if we stop increasing CO2 from 2010.

The analysis of already measured data supports the hypothesis that a 100 ppm increase inCO2 will raise the temperature by significantly more than 1.1 degrees C, specifically that the increase will be 5.45 degrees C per 100 ppm increaseinCO2 in the atmosphere. See ref [1-2] for links to underlying IPCC material etc.

References

1.Hallberg Ö. The thermal response to increasing CO2. http://hir.nu/CO2.htm

2.Hallberg Ö. Re: Climate change. BMJ, web published 2008-01-31
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/336/7637/165#188699

3.