tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/climatology-21490/articlesClimatology – The Conversation2021-05-07T12:43:31Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1596842021-05-07T12:43:31Z2021-05-07T12:43:31ZWarming is clearly visible in new US ‘climate normal’ datasets<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/399032/original/file-20210505-21-9lx20u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=41%2C0%2C6827%2C4582&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sunrise in Stone Harbor, New Jersey.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/summer-sunrise-royalty-free-image/1171419055">Robert D. Barnes via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Anyone who listens to weather reports has heard meteorologists comment that yesterday’s temperature was 3 degrees above normal, or last month was much drier than normal. But what does “normal” mean in this context – and in a world in which the climate is changing? </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.noaa.gov/">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a> has released updated “climate normals” – datasets that the agency produces every 10 years to give forecasters and the public baseline measurements of average temperature, rainfall and other conditions across the U.S. As the state climatologist and assistant state climatologist for Colorado, we work with this information all the time. Here’s what climate normals are, how they’ve changed, and how you can best make sense of them.</p>
<h2>What are the new normals?</h2>
<p>NOAA’s <a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/noaa-delivers-new-us-climate-normals">National Centers for Environmental Information</a> released the new set of normals, covering 1991-2020, on May 4, 2021. Climatologists have been performing calculations on data from long-term observing stations around the country for a wide range of parameters, including high and low temperature, precipitation and snowfall. </p>
<p>The data also includes more detailed statistics, like the normal number of days below freezing or those with more than an inch of snowfall. NOAA puts data from individual stations onto a grid to enable the creation of useful maps for the entire country, even in places with relatively few observing stations. This provides a wealth of information for anyone interested in the climate of a specific area. </p>
<h2>Why are normals updated?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.wmo.int/datastat/wmodata_en.html">World Meteorological Organization</a> sets international standards for climatological normals, defined as a 30-year periods that are regularly updated. The idea is to have global consistency for analysis. The 30-year normals also create a benchmark that represents recent climate conditions and serves as a reference for assessing current conditions. </p>
<p>Climate change highlights the need for regularly updating these normals. For the past 10 years, weather professionals have used the 1981-2010 climate normals as our reference. But we’ve <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-and-1991-2020-us-climate-normals">observed above-average temperatures much more frequently</a> than below-average temperatures from 1991-2020 for much of the U.S. Updating the normals is a way to calibrate to our most recently observed climate. </p>
<p>And as the climate continues to change, the further away in time we get from the “normal” period, the less representative that period will become. Using a very long period of time, or not regularly updating the period, could lead to including observations that would be extremely unlikely in our climate today. </p>
<p>On the other hand, there are situations in which it makes sense to consider periods longer than 30 years – for example, to understand long-term changes to the climate or to monitor extremes.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Most of the U.S. had more months in 1991-2020 that were warmer than the 1981-2010 average than months that were colder." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398197/original/file-20210430-13-ekujn8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Difference in the number of months that had above-normal vs. below-normal temperature by county for the period 1991-2020, with respect to the 1981-2010 normals. Areas in red and brown had far more months that were were warmer than normal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Becky Bolinger</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The concept of ‘normal’ in weather and climate</h2>
<p>An old saying, <a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/06/24/climate-vs-weather/">often attributed to Mark Twain</a>, asserts that “climate is what you expect, and weather is what you get.” Calculations of normal climate conditions for particular locations show how this works.</p>
<p>For example, data from the long-term weather and climate observing station in Fort Collins, Colorado, where we work, shows that precipitation in summer (June, July and August) over the 30 years from 1991 to 2020 varied significantly from year to year. The lowest summer rainfall was 1.48 inches in 2002 and the highest was 14.79 inches in 1997. Most years, it’s somewhere between 3 and 5 inches.</p>
<p>But few years match the average value, just shy of 5 inches. So even though we call this the “normal” amount of rainfall, in most years the total is higher or lower – sometimes by quite a bit. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Average summer precipitation in Fort Collins, Colorado, can vary by a factor of 10 from year to year." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=592&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=592&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398195/original/file-20210430-16-17n2m8a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=592&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Summer precipitation at Fort Collins, Colorado, for the years 1991-2020. The black circle indicates the 30-year average precipitation of 4.97 inches.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Russ Schumacher and Becky Bolinger</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Looking at summer temperatures from the same station, let’s compare the previous 30-year period, 1981-2010, with the most recent 30-year period, 1991-2020. The data shows a shift toward higher temperatures between the two time periods. The normal summer temperature increased by nearly 1 degree, from 69.6 to 70.4 F. This “new normal” for the past 30 years reflects climate warming that has occurred both locally and globally. </p>
<figure>
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/1562/test_transition.gif?1620247860">
<figcaption><span class="caption">Comparing the 1981-2010 and 1991-2020 normals for Fort Collins, Colorado, shows how summers there are warming. The black circle indicates the average value for each time period. Credit: Russ Schumacher and Becky Bolinger.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What the new normals show</h2>
<p>The key change that’s reflected in shifting from the 1981-2010 normals to the new 1991-2020 set is dropping the 1980s and adding the 2010s. The climate has been warming, so the new normals show <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-and-1991-2020-us-climate-normals">higher temperatures for most regions and most months of the year</a>. </p>
<p>Across the continental U.S., the temperature rose by about 0.5 F on average from the 1981-2010 to 1991-2020 period. The new average is 1.2 F warmer than that of the 20th century. A couple of exceptions are cooling observed in the spring over the Northern Great Plains and cooling over the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic in November. December shows the greatest amount of warming. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Average temperatures were higher across most of the U.S. in 1991-2020 than in 1981-2010." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398472/original/file-20210503-13-zktu9e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Difference between 1991-2020 average and 1981-2010 average temperatures for each month, with annual change in the bottom panel. Oranges and reds show where the new normals are warmer; blues and purples show where the new normals are cooler.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Russ Schumacher and Becky Bolinger, data from NOAA</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Precipitation is more variable than temperature from year to year and decade to decade. As a result, the changes in normal precipitation represent a mix of effects from long-term climate change and natural variations. </p>
<p>Overall, the 2010s were very wet in much of the central and eastern U.S. and dry in the west, and the normals reflect that. Average annual rainfall in Houston increased by over an inch, to 55.6 inches per year, while at Phoenix, Arizona, it dropped from an already dry 8.02 inches to a parched 7.22 inches per year. </p>
<p>On a monthly basis, some of the most notable patterns to emerge are widespread drying in November, particularly over the Gulf states and along the Pacific Coast, and a wetter pattern over the eastern half of the country in April. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Most of the Central and Eastern U.S. was wetter in 1991-2020 than in 1981-2010, while most Western states were drier." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/398474/original/file-20210503-23-1wrjapr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Difference between 1991-2020 average and 1981-2010 average precipitation for each month, with the annual change in the bottom panel. Browns shading shows where the new normals are drier; green shading shows where the new normals are wetter.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Russ Schumacher and Becky Bolinger, data from NOAA</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Shifting to new climate normals can have counterintuitive effects. For example, in the next few years there may be a better chance that you’ll see what are now described as cooler-than-normal temperatures in a given day or month. Using Fort Collins again as an example, before the update, a summer average temperature of 70 F would have been slightly warmer than normal. Now that same summer would go down as being slightly cooler than normal, even though it would still be warmer than around 100 of the 127 years in the history of that location. </p>
<p>Meteorologists and climatologists are already starting to incorporate these new normals into our work. But when you hear the term “normal,” keep in mind that it reflects a 30-year snapshot and represents a different reality today than it did 30, 60 or 100 years ago. </p>
<p>[<em>Get our best science, health and technology stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/science-editors-picks-71/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=science-best">Sign up for The Conversation’s science newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/159684/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Russ Schumacher receives funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station for research on and monitoring of Colorado's weather and climate.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Becky Bolinger receives funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station to monitor the climate of Colorado.</span></em></p>The US is shifting to a new set of climate ‘normals’ – data sets averaged over the past 30 years. But normal is a relative concept in a time of climate change.Russ Schumacher, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science and Colorado State Climatologist, Colorado State UniversityBecky Bolinger, Assistant State Climatologist and Research Scientist in Atmospheric Science, Colorado State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1501702020-11-17T18:48:48Z2020-11-17T18:48:48ZHow chemical clues from prehistoric microbes rewrote the story of one of Earth’s biggest mass extinctions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369758/original/file-20201117-19-o78hjw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C17%2C3872%2C2086&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Microbial mats in Shark Bay, Western Australia, similar to those that lived around 200 million years ago.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Yalimay Jimenez Duarte WA-OIGC, Curtin University</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Chemical clues left behind by humble microbes have rewritten the timeline of one of the biggest mass extinction events in Earth’s history.</p>
<p>The so-called “end-Triassic mass extinction”, thought to have occurred just over 200 million years ago, wiped out swathes of prehistoric creatures both on land and in the oceans. It was prompted by the breakup of the supercontinent Pangea, which triggered massive volcanic activity that flooded the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and acidified the oceans.</p>
<p>But our new research, <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/11/10/1917661117">published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a>, suggests these cataclysmic events actually happened later than previously thought.</p>
<p>We made this discovery by examining molecular fossils — trace chemicals derived from microbial “mats” that bathed in prehistoric waters. </p>
<h2>A likely story</h2>
<p>Traditionally, scientists have placed the mass extinction event, and the volcanic upheaval that presaged it, at about <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/Triassic-Period/Terrestrial-reptiles-and-the-first-mammals">201 million years ago</a>.</p>
<p>They came to this conclusion after studying rocks of that age from the Bristol Channel, UK, which show a distinctive chemical signature. The ratios of different isotopes of carbon within these rocks suggest this was the moment when the global atmosphere changed, as huge amounts of methane were pumped into the skies due to massive volcanic activity covering the central Atlantic, in turn altering the chemical composition of rocks that formed during this time.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="View of St Audrie's Bay, UK" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369761/original/file-20201117-15-1vh39ka.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Bristol Channel is home to rock formations that give an insight into prehistoric life (and death) some 200 million years ago.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Calum Peter Fox</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But we made a discovery that challenged this assumption. We found evidence of ancient microbial mats in the same region, at the same time. It was these flourishing communities of microbes that actually created the change in the chemical signature of the rocks, rather than a global volcanic event.</p>
<p>These microbial mats formed as the region’s waters changed from salty seawater to brackish or fresh water, and water levels dropped to puddle-like centimetre depths. This is another reason why scientists mistook this event for a mass extinction — marine creatures disappeared from the local fossil record at this time not because they had all died out, but because it was no longer marine. </p>
<p>Of course, the world’s marine creatures had only earned a relatively brief reprieve. We know the volcanic cataclysm did occur, but just not as long ago as previously assumed. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/elementary-new-theory-on-mass-extinctions-that-wiped-out-life-48806">Elementary new theory on mass extinctions that wiped out life</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Still going strong</h2>
<p>Remarkably, the microbial mats recorded in UK samples are similar to <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2020.560336/full?&utm_source=Email_to_authors_&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=T1_11.5e1_author&utm_campaign=Email_publication&field=&journalName=Frontiers_in_Microbiology&id=560336">living microbial mats in Australia</a>, such as in Western Australia’s Shark Bay. It’s amazing to think similar microbial communities are still living on Australia’s shorelines to this day. </p>
<p>Microbes have also been useful resources in research to learn about several other mass extinction events too, such as the “Great Dying” that marked the end of <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/307/5710/706.abstract">the Permian period</a> roughly 252 million years ago, and the dramatic demise of the dinosaurs in a mass extinction some <a href="https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/48/4/328/580289/Microbial-life-in-the-nascent-Chicxulub-crater">66 million years ago</a>. </p>
<p>For example, pigments and lipid remains from microbial mats found in the Chicxulub crater in the Gulf of Mexico — formed by the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs — show that photosynthetic processes had <a href="https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/48/4/328/580289/Microbial-life-in-the-nascent-Chicxulub-crater">bounced back within 200,000 years of the impact</a>.</p>
<p>Microbial mats also have helped to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/srep02768">preserve</a> an amazing range of fossil evidence from prehistoric animals, including soft tissues, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-13873-4">red blood cells</a> and chemical clues to ancient animals’ diets.</p>
<h2>A warning from prehistory</h2>
<p>While we don’t know exactly how much later the global end-Triassic mass extinction event actually occurred, what we can say is that our research sounds a stark warning for potential future mass extinctions on Earth.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Schematic diagram of environmental changes" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369738/original/file-20201117-21-4x9frb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Schematic diagram showing the factors driving global ecological change in the modern day and at the end of the Triassic period.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Victor Lesh</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The end of the Triassic Period featured huge environmental shifts, including declines in biodiversity, ocean acidification, reduced oxygen levels, habitat destruction, nutrient shifts and changing sea levels. </p>
<p>Knowing more about these changes will provide crucial information that could help understanding the threats our own ecosystems face today, and potentially help safeguard them for the future.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/triassic-mass-extinction-may-give-clues-on-how-oceans-will-be-affected-by-climate-change-39655">Triassic mass extinction may give clues on how oceans will be affected by climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kliti Grice receives funding from ARC. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Calum Peter Fox receives funding from ARC. </span></em></p>The end-Triassic mass extinction was a cataclysm for the world’s prehistoric species, killed off by volcanoes that altered Earth’s seas and skies. But new research shows it didn’t happen when we thought.Kliti Grice, John Curtin Distinguished Professor of Organic and Isotope Geochemistry, Curtin UniversityCalum Peter Fox, Researcher, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1408122020-09-11T10:01:39Z2020-09-11T10:01:39ZWhy clouds are the missing piece in the climate change puzzle<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/357535/original/file-20200910-15-1ds0rno.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4752%2C3165&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/E9aetBe2w40">Sam Schooler/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>How much our world <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/hot-planet/global-warming-how-hot-exactly-is-it-going-to-get/">will warm this century</a> depends on the actions we take in coming decades. In order to keep global temperature rise below 1.5°C and avoid dangerous levels of warming, governments need to know how much carbon they can emit, and over what timeframe.</p>
<p>But current climate models don’t agree on where that threshold lies. In <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab97c9">new research</a>, we discovered one of the reasons why there is such a large range of estimates for how much carbon can be safely emitted: the uncertain behaviour of clouds. In some climate models, clouds strongly amplify warming. In others, they have a neutral effect or even dampen warming slightly. So why are clouds likely to play such a pivotal role in deciding our fate?</p>
<p>Projections by climate models typically reveal global temperatures rising almost in tandem with the total amount of carbon emitted over time. This is represented by the black line in the graph below. To avoid exceeding a certain level of warming, the world needs to limit how much carbon is emitted so that it remains within a certain carbon budget. In climate models where clouds amplify warming, this carbon budget is smaller (red dashed line and arrow). Where clouds have a near neutral or damping effect, the carbon budget is larger (blue dashed line and arrow).</p>
<p><strong>Remaining carbon budgets in climate model projections</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Graph showing relationship between cumulative emissions and global temperature, explained in previous paragraph." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346677/original/file-20200709-42-19vqpzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paulo Ceppi</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why are clouds so important?</h2>
<p>Clouds can act like a parasol, cooling the Earth by reflecting sunlight away from the planet’s surface and back into space. But they can also act like an insulating blanket, warming the Earth by preventing some of the heat in our atmosphere from escaping into space as infrared radiation. This “blanket” effect is particularly noticeable during the winter, when cloudy nights are typically much warmer than cloud-free ones.</p>
<p>Which of these two effects dominates – parasol or blanket – depends on the altitude and thickness of the clouds. As a general rule, the higher a cloud is, the more effective it is at preventing heat from escaping into space. The thicker a cloud is, the better it is at reflecting sunlight away from Earth’s surface.</p>
<p>High, thin clouds let sunlight through while effectively preventing heat from escaping to space as infrared radiation, providing a net warming effect. Low, thick clouds strongly reflect sunlight, while having little impact on infrared radiation escaping to space, creating a net cooling effect.</p>
<p>As the atmosphere contains far more low, thick clouds than high, thin clouds, the parasol effect dominates and our planet would be much hotter if clouds did not exist.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Diagram showing how different clouds trap heat or reflect sunlight, as explained two paragraphs prior." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/346673/original/file-20200709-87080-1iac67g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Thick, low clouds tend to act as a parasol, while high, thin clouds act as a blanket.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paulo Ceppi</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The clouds are changing</h2>
<p>Global warming is expected to cause changes in the amount of cloud cover, and the height and thickness of these clouds in the future, shifting the balance between the parasol and blanket effects of clouds. The knock-on effect this will have on temperature is known as cloud feedback. Climate change projections cannot ignore cloud feedback, as even relatively small changes in cloud properties can have significant implications for global temperature.</p>
<p>To predict how clouds will change in the future, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.465">our research</a> combines evidence from observations and climate models with theoretical understanding of cloud physics. Taken together, this tells us that clouds are more likely to amplify global warming than they are to dampen it for two reasons. </p>
<p>First, the cover of low clouds is expected to decrease in the tropics as global temperatures rise, reducing their parasol effect. Second, it is well understood that high clouds will move into higher regions of the atmosphere as it warms, making them more effective blankets. These warming effects may be mitigated slightly by an increase in the thickness of clouds at high latitudes only, particularly over the Southern Ocean around Antarctica, but this will not cancel out the overall warming effect.</p>
<p>While we do know that clouds will likely amplify global warming, there is still a great deal of uncertainty about how strong this effect will be. Here climate models are of little help, as they can only simulate the bulk properties of the atmosphere over scales of tens of kilometres and several hours. Tiny cloud droplets form and evaporate in minutes. Models miss these small-scale details, but they’re needed for accurate predictions.</p>
<p>Climate models have to resort to simplifications in order to represent clouds, which introduces error. As different models make different simplifications in their portrayal of cloud processes, they also make different predictions of the cloud feedback, which results in a range of global warming projections and differences in our remaining carbon budget. For a given future carbon emissions scenario, clouds are the single most important factor behind the differences in future warming predicted between models.</p>
<h2>Should we be worried?</h2>
<p>Climate sensitivity, the amount of long-term global warming expected if we double the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, is currently estimated to lie between <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/summary-for-policymakers/">1.5° and 4.5°C</a>. This consequences of this level of warming are already disturbing, but several new climate models currently being developed by world-leading researchers are projecting warming <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085782">in excess of 5°C</a>. These new models also feature an improved representation of cloud processes, so this seems to suggest that global warming could be even worse than we thought.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/just-how-hot-will-it-get-this-century-latest-climate-models-suggest-it-could-be-worse-than-we-thought-137281">Just how hot will it get this century? Latest climate models suggest it could be worse than we thought</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Thankfully, there are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz9549">alternative projections</a> that point towards more moderate warming. The same models with the highest long-term warming also overestimated warming trends that have already been observed. In the meantime, further research efforts are underway to pin down the role of clouds in climate sensitivity.</p>
<p>It is clear that our planet will continue to warm as we carry on emitting carbon into the atmosphere. But by how much will remain written in the clouds.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/140812/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paulo Ceppi receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ric Williams receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council.</span></em></p>Clouds can act as both blanket and parasol – warming our atmosphere at the same time as cooling it. But which effect will dominate?Paulo Ceppi, Lecturer in Climate Science, Imperial College LondonRic Williams, Professor of Ocean Sciences, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1378092020-06-19T05:15:26Z2020-06-19T05:15:26ZDespite clear skies during the pandemic, greenhouse gas emissions are still rising<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/335303/original/file-20200515-138620-16dpoxb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C2%2C1917%2C1072&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Strict physical distancing restrictions have resulted in cleaner air, but atmospheric carbon dioxide levels continue to rise. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">PeteLinforth/Pixabay</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Physical distancing to prevent the spread of coronavirus has resulted in reports of <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2020/drop-in-air-pollution-over-northeast">reduced air pollution</a> in some countries. However, this is <a href="https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2636/Rise-of-carbon-dioxide-unabated">not showing up as reduced carbon dioxide emissions</a>. </p>
<p>In Indonesia, the <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/303/1/012055">Climate Center Risk and Opportunity Management (CCROM) of IPB University</a> in collaboration with the <a href="http://www.nies.go.jp/index-e.html">National Institute for Environmental Studies-Japan</a> has recorded reduced air pollution via <a href="https://ccrom.airmon.or.id/">real-time air-quality monitoring</a> in Bogor city of West Java province. </p>
<p>The level of <a href="https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution">nitrogen dioxide</a>, a greenhouse gas harmful to human health and the environment, <a href="https://ccrom.airmon.or.id/">dropped 7.2%</a> between April and May 2020, compared to the same period in 2019.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Baca juga:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/low-level-air-pollution-increases-lung-cancer-risk-15939">Low-level air pollution increases lung cancer risk</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, the global trend of increasing levels of carbon dioxide, another greenhouse gas, has continued during the pandemic. </p>
<p>The Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii <a href="https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2636/Rise-of-carbon-dioxide-unabated">recorded an increase</a> of 2.4 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide (CO₂) to a total of 417.1 ppm in May 2020.</p>
<p>It means the pandemic has had no direct impacts on reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.</p>
<p>This is why. </p>
<h2>Still prone to fires</h2>
<p>Strict physical distancing does not correlate to reduced fire hotspots in Indonesia. Instead, the <a href="https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/missions/3rd-party-missions/current-missions/terraaqua-modis">Terra/Aqua MODIS</a> satellites, with a confidence level of more than 80%, <a href="http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/home/main">recorded 155 and 66 hotspots</a> in Indonesia in April and May 2020, respectively. </p>
<p>Hotspots do not directly reflect a fire occurrence. Rather, it captures a heat source on the land surface that can be used to assess fire risk in a region.</p>
<p>In 2015, fires ravaged <a href="http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/pdf/luas_kebakaran">2.6 million hectares</a> due to slash-and-burn methods to clear areas that were dominated by peatlands. A dry season influenced by El Nino climate variability also contributed to the increasing spread of hotspots. </p>
<p>That year, NASA satellites detected more than <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/dec/01/indonesia-forest-fires-how-the-years-worst-environmental-disaster-unfolded-interactive">130,000 hotspots</a>.</p>
<p>These fires in peat area <a href="http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/adminppi/dokumen/Indonesia-2nd_BUR_web.pdf">released 802 million tons (Mt) of CO₂e (carbon dioxide equivalent)</a> in 2015, making it one of the worst emission events in the country.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/342923/original/file-20200619-70376-1sipq1c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Satellite image of Southeast Asian haze in 2015.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/86681/smoke-blankets-indonesia">wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The first one was forest and peat fires back in 1997 during a very strong El Nino event. Fires burned down an estimated <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-306-47959-1_2">45,600 square kilometers</a> or 4.5 million hectares in Kalimantan and Sumatra, releasing an estimated between <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01131">0.81 Gt and 2.57 Gt of carbon</a> or 2,970-9,423 Mt of CO₂e.</p>
<p>The average annual emission from peat fires from 2000 to 2016 was <a href="http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/adminppi/dokumen/Indonesia-2nd_BUR_web.pdf">248Mt of CO₂e</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/7/074006/pdf">Dried peatlands</a> expose the upper soil to oxygen, triggering decomposition and making it flammable. Burning peat releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Baca juga:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/weve-got-a-climate-goal-of-1-5-degrees-so-how-do-we-get-there-52413">We've got a climate goal of 1.5 degrees – so how do we get there?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Approaching peak dry season <a href="https://www.bmkg.go.id/iklim/prakiraan-musim.bmkg">in August</a>, peatland will still be vulnerable to fires. </p>
<p>If no efforts are made to restore peatlands by rewetting them, these will become a major source of emissions.</p>
<p>Since May, the Indonesian government has been preparing to <a href="https://jakartaglobe.id/news/govt-to-use-artificial-rains-to-prevent-peat-wildfires">create rain over Sumatra and Borneo islands</a> to prevent forest and peat wildfires. </p>
<p>The country has been struggling to control these fires, which are becoming an annual event.</p>
<h2>Bounce back better</h2>
<p>While there are immediate efforts such as cloud seeding to create rain and reduce emissions from the forestry sector, this is a time for reflection on the need to adopt sustainable development pathways. </p>
<p>The pathway of sustainable development isn’t a new one for Indonesia.</p>
<p>There are multiple policies that already aim for greener development, such as <a href="http://www.fao.org/redd/en/">REDD+</a> (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) and promoting renewable energy development.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Baca juga:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/energy-efficiency-could-help-avoid-the-need-to-build-up-to-50-power-plants-in-indonesia-136426">Energy efficiency could help avoid the need to build up to 50 power plants in Indonesia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Currently, however, the REDD+ scheme excludes peat fires due to <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/363/1/012026">high uncertainty about estimates of burnt peat areas</a>.</p>
<p>Under REDD+, Indonesia’s emissions were cut by <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/05/indonesia-norway-redd-payment-deforestation-carbon-emission-climate-change/">11.23 million tons of CO₂e</a> in 2017. Indonesia will receive <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/05/indonesia-norway-redd-payment-deforestation-carbon-emission-climate-change/">US$56 million</a> from Norway for this effort. </p>
<p>The scheme allows countries with forests to receive payments for preserving their forests areas by, for instance, planting endemic trees and implementing bans on logging specific trees, and for managing to reducing releases of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere while revitalising local economies of communities near forest areas.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Baca juga:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/earths-wilderness-is-vanishing-and-just-a-handful-of-nations-can-save-it-106072">Earth’s wilderness is vanishing, and just a handful of nations can save it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It produces multiple benefits for Indonesia – saving the forests, receiving payments and reducing carbon emissions. The latter is linked to Indonesia’s commitment to reduce emissions by 2030 by <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/Indonesia%20First/First%20NDC%20Indonesia_submitted%20to%20UNFCCC%20Set_November%20%202016.pdf">29%</a>, or <a href="http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/berita-ppi/3150-kontribusi-penurunan-emisi-grk-nasional,-menuju-ndc-2030.html">834 million ton of CO₂e</a>, under a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, and by 41% (<a href="http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/berita-ppi/3150-kontribusi-penurunan-emisi-grk-nasional,-menuju-ndc-2030.html">1,081 million ton CO₂e</a>) with international support.</p>
<p>However, the coronavirus pandemic is challenging climate change commitments. Nations will be focusing on bouncing back economically. </p>
<p>With predicted <a href="https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/04/20/stimulus-may-not-be-enough-to-prevent-economic-meltdown-fiscal-agency.html">cuts to economic growth</a> resulting from this virus, concerns are growing that Indonesia will clear more forests and depend on cheap fossil fuel to buffer the financial impacts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Baca juga:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-zealands-covid-19-budget-delivers-on-one-crisis-but-largely-leaves-climate-change-for-another-day-138524">New Zealand's COVID-19 budget delivers on one crisis, but largely leaves climate change for another day</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Under these circumstances, keeping Earth healthy is fundamental. Hence, this is a good opportunity to shift to a sustainable development pathway that produces low carbon emissions and promotes renewable energy. </p>
<p>Even though physical distancing restrictions have reduced air pollution, greenhouse gases are still being emitted and we are still in climate crisis. </p>
<p>At this moment, we should get ready to take a great leap during the post-pandemic economic rebound to catch up on delayed mitigation actions and consider immediately shifting to renewable energy.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Editor’s note : The previous article states 471.1 ppm, when it is supposed to be 417.1 ppm.</em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/137809/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Annuri Rossita tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.</span></em></p>Despite clear air as a result of the pandemic reducing human activities, our emissions still soar.Annuri Rossita, PhD student/Research Assistant, Applied Climatology of Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, IPB UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1104152019-01-25T11:52:12Z2019-01-25T11:52:12ZUniversity scientists feel the pain of the government shutdown, too<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255472/original/file-20190124-196235-lnw4qb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Federal and university employees normally work side by side on many big science projects.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">ITAE</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>I am very fortunate. My work involves research on topics of interest and importance (OK maybe I’m biased) related to the climate and <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-warm-blob-in-the-pacific-and-what-can-it-tell-us-about-our-future-climate-40140">oceanography of the North Pacific</a>, and the weather of the Pacific Northwest.</p>
<p>My primary office is at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, in Seattle, Washington, in a lovely setting on the shore of Lake Washington. My coworkers are an interesting bunch of folks doing a variety of work ranging from the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14577">chemical oceanography of deep-sea volcanoes</a> to the causes and effects of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0323.1">declining sea ice in the Arctic</a>. This research involves the design and fabrication of innovative instrumentation, with most of this activity carried out in the laboratories and test benches on site.</p>
<p>It’s usually a bustling place. But these days, it’s been distressingly quiet.</p>
<p>The reason, of course, is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/us-government-shutdown-2018-48781">partial shutdown of the federal government</a>, which has resulted in the furlough of “non-essential” employees of NOAA, a branch of the Department of Commerce.</p>
<p>I’m actually an employee of the University of Washington, so in principle, I should not be affected by the shutdown. But that’s far from the case, and my situation is by no means isolated.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255460/original/file-20190124-196238-1frjwan.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A UW research scientist works with two NOAA scientists on an instrument before heading out on a cruise to Mexico’s northern coast.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.washington.edu/news/2016/05/10/uw-part-of-noaa-led-cruise-to-study-west-coast-ocean-acidification/">Simone Alin/NOAA</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO) at UW has about 115 employees – and 89 of them have a federal facility as their primary place of work. The JISAO contingent at the NOAA lab actually outnumbers the federal employees. And JISAO is just one of <a href="https://ci.noaa.gov">16 cooperative institutes at universities</a> in the U.S. through which academic and NOAA scientists collaborate.</p>
<p>As a principal investigator whose paycheck comes from the university, I’ve been more hampered than crippled by the shutdown. There remains a seemingly infinite amount of work that can be done: papers to read, current projects needing attention, proposals to prepare. Much of this kind of work can be done away from the office. And I must admit that I kind of enjoyed the first few days; if nothing else the phone hardly rings at the temporary office I’m using.</p>
<p>But now I am getting really peeved. I was counting on being able to make headway on a study of past cold-air outbreaks in the Pacific Northwest, and really need to use a web application maintained by NOAA’s Air Resources Laboratory. Some other research in my pipeline requires climate model data sets hosted by NOAA, but again, no dice.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=330&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=330&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=330&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255470/original/file-20190124-196218-q5dfx7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Screenshot of what greets visitors to many NOAA websites during the shutdown.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://government-shutdown.noaa.gov">NOAA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One might suppose that a slowing of the research being conducted in my field is no big deal. But there are ramifications. </p>
<p>Take weather forecasting. Both day-to-day forecasts and seasonal projections rely on complex computer models. These models need care and feeding; there is continual development and improvement carried out by a cadre of federal and nonfederal (academic and contractor) types. All of this is basically on hold. To be sure, forecasts are still being produced by National Weather Service personnel temporarily working for free, but it is a setback. And this kind of pause is happening all over the country, in a variety of disciplines, at research centers that collaborate with federal agencies – when the government isn’t shut down.</p>
<p>The work not being done will have some lasting effects. For example, a research cruise in the Atlantic Ocean scheduled to begin in about a month was going to include instrumentation for measuring various chemical properties including pH. Now it looks like equipment will not be able to be prepped and shipped in time. This will constitute a serious gap in the record.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=189&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=189&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=189&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255471/original/file-20190124-196215-1y1ej5o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ongoing monitoring – like this time series of temperatures on the Bering Sea shelf – is necessary to track accurately how environmental conditions are changing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Phyllis Stabeno/NOAA</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It bears emphasizing that there are a variety of roles filled by JISAO personnel at NOAA, and the extent to which these individuals can roll with the punches associated with the shutdown also varies. </p>
<p>Support scientists employed by the university are in a particularly tough spot. These are the people who carry out the essential tasks of preparing and calibrating equipment, going to sea on research cruises – a duty generally less glamorous than the term suggests – analyzing samples in the lab, and processing and posting the precious data that we go to so much trouble to collect. There is not much glory here, but these folks are committed to what they are doing and take justifiable pride in their work.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255477/original/file-20190124-196244-3gncys.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Workstations at NOAA/PMEL are now empty, even though many of the people who staff them are actually employed by the university.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Jed Thompson/JISAO</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As the shutdown has dragged on, and PMEL and other federal facilities remain closed, the options for these individuals have become increasingly limited. Those whose work directly involves equipment and instrumentation are especially in a bind. Many have been able to be productive by updating manuals or online training, but are running out of things to do. Those tasked with data processing and management often use specialized software on their desktop computers – this kind of work can’t be done on one’s laptop at the local Starbucks.</p>
<p>JISAO and federal employees work alongside one another, and the distinctions are usually blurred. In many cases, these folks have similar duties and tenures, and it’s not much more than a matter of chance whether one is a federal or nonfederal employee.</p>
<p>But now that distinction is important, because different rules are in play for the federal and nonfederal employees. Federal employees on furlough will be receiving back pay. This does not apply to JISAO employees, and for that matter, all their counterparts across the country associated with the different agencies being directly affected by the impasse.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255474/original/file-20190124-196250-mil0hs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At a certain point during the shutdown, people run out of work to do.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">University of Washington</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If JISAO employees cannot carry out meaningful work benefiting the grant projects they’re working under, they must either find a project to which they can contribute (which is difficult to say the least), take vacation time, or worst of all in most cases, go on leave without pay.</p>
<p>Some individuals have already been forced to use leave or go without pay, with poor prospects for reimbursement, and I fear that their ranks will swell. JISAO is doing what it can on behalf of its employees, as are the other NOAA cooperative institutes, especially toward minimizing the “nuclear option” of forced leave without pay. Given the requirements accompanying university employees working on federal grants, that is proving to be no cinch.</p>
<p>Here’s a fervent plea for an agreement to be reached somehow so that we can get back to our regular work. I am chomping at the bit, and I expect that I speak for a lot of people.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110415/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas Bond does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Lots of academic scientists collaborate with federal employees and resources on their research projects. And at the moment they can’t. A climatologist explains the bind they’re in.Nicholas Bond, Washington State Climatologist and Associate Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, University of WashingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1017572018-09-10T10:38:09Z2018-09-10T10:38:09ZThe 19th-century tumult over climate change – and why it matters today<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234312/original/file-20180830-195331-1b4qpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Weather towers like this one in a park in Vienna were a popular way for the 19th-century public to track the influence of weather on their lives.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:19100106_wien_wetterhauschen_im_stadtpark.jpg">Source: Wikimedia</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Back in the 19th century, when tractors were still pulled by horses and the word “computer” meant a person hired to carry out tedious calculations, climate science made front-page news. </p>
<p>One European forester remarked in 1901 that few questions had “been debated and addressed from so many sides and so relentlessly” as that of the climatic effect of deforestation. Recalling this crowded, noisy and wide-ranging conflict – a “hurly-burly” over the “climate question,” as the scientist <a href="https://www.springer.com/us/book/9780792361282">Eduard Brückner</a> called it at the time – reminds us that climate science has not always been the elite, well-mannered pursuit that it is today.</p>
<p>Might this popular, participatory approach have been an advantage? Given <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/climate/global-energy-demand.html">the ongoing rise in global greenhouse gas emissions</a> five years after a U.N. report found that humans are “<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24292615">the dominant cause</a>” of global warming, it’s a question worth asking. </p>
<h2>The science of climatology is born</h2>
<p>As I write about in my <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo24768042.html">book about the history of climate science</a> in the 19th century, the possibility that human actions might wreak havoc with the climate became a widespread concern for ordinary people across Europe, North Africa and the Americas. </p>
<p>Farmers knew intuitively that even a small change in baseline climate greatly increased the risk of extremes, and a single drought could ruin a farming community, even if followed by years of good weather. As one farmer in Central Europe put it in a letter to a local paper, you couldn’t rightly grasp the import of climate change unless you were “dependent on the yield of a few small plots of land,” and until you had “kept a lookout for a hearty rainfall day by day throughout the dry summer for several years, in vain…You must have seen your favorite fruit trees mourning with wilting leaves.” </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234698/original/file-20180903-41720-kvlmh6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">19th-century photographs like this one, by the self-educated Bohemian naturalist Friedrich Simony, contribute evidence of recent glacier retreat related to anthropogenic climate change. Simony was among the earliest explorers of the high Alps, and his images of them were of wide scientific and popular interest in his day.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Friedrich Simony</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When a dry spell hit, the question of the day was whether man-made changes to the environment, including deforestation, swamp drainage and urban growth, might be robbing the atmosphere of the moisture necessary for agriculture and human health to flourish. The evidence came from historical records of extreme weather events, as well as from newly established experimental forestry stations. It was hashed out in newspapers, town councils and national parliaments, where the trade-offs between conservation and development were likewise up for debate.</p>
<p>In this historical context, the science called <a href="http://climatology.co.uk/">climatology</a> developed into a multifaceted research program that offered many different things to many different people. It was, on one hand, an academic field of study, straddling physics, geography and medicine, which investigated the sensitivity of living things to the complex variation of atmospheric conditions across the surface of the Earth. </p>
<p>But it was also a public-oriented enterprise intent on empowering individuals and communities to improve their own health and prosperity. Climatology informed doctors and patients, for instance, about weather that might speed or delay a recovery; it taught engineers about the height of floodwaters and the strength of storms; it offered farmers knowledge of rainfall, extreme temperatures, the length of growing seasons and the frequency of damaging hail. Climatology was a planetary science, yet one that was also intimately concerned with the variability of atmospheric conditions on the scale of a single field of wheat. </p>
<p>What’s more, it was a 19th-century version of what we have come to call “citizen science.” It relied on people of all walks of life to report on the weather and its effects on their health and crops. Farmers and vintners supplied harvest dates to track the seasons from one year to the next, while sailors and fishermen informed early schemes for classifying clouds and winds.</p>
<p>Exchanges like these had far-reaching consequences. They kept scientists’ attention focused on issues of concern to their communities; they inspired experts to clarify their terms in everyday language; they honed the acuity with which the public perceived changes in their natural environment; and they gave rise to vibrant discussions of science in the popular press. </p>
<p>Ultimately, this give-and-take sustained the public’s trust in science. <a href="https://www.zamg.ac.at/cms/de/images/geophysik/karl-kreil/view">Karl Kreil</a>, the founder of the largest climatological observing network in continental Europe in the 19th century, proudly proclaimed his “dual” identity, both scholar and public servant. His successor, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/108249a0">Julius Hann</a>, insisted on the importance of “public feeling” for the science of weather and climate. </p>
<h2>The merits of messy science</h2>
<p>To a scientist today, this approach may sound unpromising, neither fish nor fowl, incapable of producing a unified theory or yielding reliable forecasts. Indeed, 19th-century climatology has been dismissed by historians as a scientific <a href="https://history.aip.org/climate/climogy.htm">“backwater,”</a> mere prologue to the modern science of climate that dawned with the computer age.</p>
<p>However, I see the power of 19th-century climatology as lying precisely in its <a href="http://ceupress.com/book/orderly-mess-0">messiness</a>, to borrow a term from Helga Nowotny. Climatology didn’t aspire to become a “pure” science. Indeed, its impurity makes it worth remembering today. As unruly as it might appear to scientists of the 21st century, its multifariousness seems altogether appropriate to a subject as complex as the Earth’s climate. Climate change is not one phenomenon but many, and it means different things to different living creatures. It is a catastrophe unfolding at different spatial and temporal scales, from the distant to the here and now. It demands not one way of knowing but many.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1153&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1153&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234314/original/file-20180830-195301-kbwupx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1153&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Weather towers in public parks were a popular way for the 19th-century public to track the influence of weather on their lives.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetters%C3%A4ule#/media/File:Wetters%C3%A4ule_der_Firma_Wilhelm_Lambrecht_von_1895,_Modell_III_Tourist.jpg">Gemeinfrei</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The principal virtue of the messy and often cacophonous field of 19th-century climatology is what philosophers of science call <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/titles/7156.html">pluralism</a>. This means pursuing not a single, all-encompassing theory, but a multiplicity of perspectives that cannot be unified, but only loosely coordinated. </p>
<p>Encouraging scientific pluralism makes sense for a democratic society that acknowledges that different observers inevitably see things differently, and that alternative perspectives, if held to appropriate standards of rigor, may shed important light on scientific questions. The advantages of <a href="https://www.springer.com/us/book/9789400739314">pluralist science</a> include its flexibility when confronted with new evidence and its capacity to learn from multiple frameworks, even if those frameworks cannot be reconciled with each other.</p>
<p>By contrast, over the past 30 years, climate scientists have responded to political controversy by pursuing monism, or a single unified approach. In the face of skepticism, they have, understandably, prioritized consensus-building. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234336/original/file-20180830-195328-hj0juh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Only about 20 years ago did the work of climate science narrow to focus almost exclusively on the construction of a few comprehensive, predictive computer models of global change.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://cds.nccs.nasa.gov/tools-services/3d-model-analysis/">NASA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>They have done so largely by means of “integrated global assessments,” such as the work of the <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a>. These have involved bodies of experts charged to reach agreement on a narrow set of questions, which they typically accomplish by reducing their statements to the vaguest, blandest terms. These experts have tended to come from the physical sciences and economics, to the exclusion of many other relevant disciplines; and they have been overwhelmingly white, male and European or North American. </p>
<p>Consensus-building has also rested on one particular form of knowledge: predictive modeling. What counts as evidence has narrowed to mean only what can be fed into a computer model that simulates the effects of a warming planet, even when it comes to describing the subtle interactions between environmental and social change. Even here, diversity has been minimized, as researchers have concentrated on elaborating the complexity of only a small number of models.</p>
<h2>Creating a climate dialogue</h2>
<p>The consensus-building approach of recent climate science has successfully established anthropogenic climate change as an indisputable fact. But it has failed to translate that knowledge into action.</p>
<p>The solution may lie in a return to pluralism. In talking with scientists, I have found that some of them feel that monism has failed them. Instead, they are pinning their hopes on new forums that promise to integrate a wider array of disciplines and draw stakeholders into the research process. These initiatives take a collaborative, iterative approach to knowledge-making, one that allows policymakers, entrepreneurs, indigenous communities and other concerned citizens to help shape the course of research. </p>
<p>Examples include the <a href="http://extremeweather.columbia.edu/">Initiative on Extreme Weather and Climate</a>, which works with city governments and insurance companies to assess risks and develop adaptation strategies, and the <a href="https://www.green-win-project.eu/">Green-Win project</a>, which coordinates dialogue among a variety of constituencies in order to develop green-growth plans that work for everyone. In another example, one scientist working with the project <a href="https://projecttracks.net/">Transforming Climate Knowledge with and for Society</a> is revising the scientific definition of <a href="https://bjerknes.uib.no/en/people/mathew-stiller-reeve">the monsoon season in Bangladesh</a> to better reflect locals’ experiences of it. </p>
<p>Implementing initiatives like these means resisting the pressure of monism, and it isn’t easy. As one of Green-Win’s leaders, Jill Jaeger, remarked to me, “People don’t know how to have a dialogue any more.” My hope is that the case of 19th-century climatology will remind us what a genuine dialogue looks like.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101757/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Deborah Coen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Climate science in the computer age is the pursuit of elite scientists. A historian of science sees an upside to the popular, participatory approach of studying changes to the climate from the 19th century.Deborah Coen, Professor of History and Chair of the Program in History of Science and Medicine, Yale UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1008502018-08-07T13:51:54Z2018-08-07T13:51:54ZWhen temperatures rise, so do crime rates: evidence from South Africa<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230006/original/file-20180731-136661-xiq3dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1%2C133%2C664%2C674&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">This sign could be interpreted literally.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Over the past few decades there has been a growing <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237950620_Homicide_in_Sao_Paulo_Brazil_Assessing_spatial-temporal_and_weather_variations">worldwide interest</a> in examining the relationship <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0013916510397758">between weather and various types of crime</a>. Most research in this area has however produced inconsistent and often paradoxical results. For example, some studies have found <a href="https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/44/2/276/562930">no seasonal fluctuations</a> in crime. Others have however found <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0013916510397758">an increase in crimes</a> during either the colder winter months or warmer summer months.</p>
<p>Very little is known, however, about how the magnitude and spatial distribution of criminal activity in South Africa is affected by climatic conditions. So we set out <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03736245.2018.1498384">to determine</a> whether there is an association between criminal activity and climate in the country’s capital city, Tshwane.</p>
<p>We were specifically interested in whether the magnitude of crime changes depending on extreme weather conditions, notably temperature and rainfall. In other words: do extremely hot days or high-rainfall days experience higher or lower rates of violent, property or sexual crime? </p>
<p>We also wanted to know whether the spatial distribution of violent, property or sexual crime changes depending on the type of extreme weather event. Simply put, does crime occur in different places on extremely cold days than it does on really hot ones? </p>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03736245.2018.1498384">Our results</a> indicate a strong association between temperature and criminal activity. That is, as the temperature goes up, so too, does crime. There’s a less significant association between rainfall and crime. The spatial distributions of all types of crime are found to differ significantly depending on the type of weather extreme observed.</p>
<p>The results could help law enforcement agencies better understand how weather affects crime patterns in South Africa’s urban areas and develop and implement appropriate crime prevention measures.</p>
<h2>Diving into data</h2>
<p>The notion that there’s a relationship between criminal activity and climate is nothing new. Over a century ago Belgian sociologist and scholar Adolphe Quételet <a href="https://archive.org/details/treatiseonmandev00quet">observed</a> that crimes against people reach a maximum during the warmer summer months, while crimes against property reached a peak during winter.</p>
<p>He <a href="http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195396607/obo-9780195396607-0130.xml">later developed</a> the temperature-aggression theory, which provides a psychological explanation for the increase in crime during warmer months. It suggests that warmer temperatures will lead to an increase in an individual’s frustration and discomfort levels and so increase the likelihood of aggression. This could in turn result in interpersonal crimes such as assault.</p>
<p>We used data and statistical analysis to find an association – if any – between extreme weather conditions and crime in the nation’s capital, Tshwane. We obtained climate data for the city from the South African Weather Service for a 5-year period from September 2001 to the end of August 2006.</p>
<p>Next, we calculated daily average temperatures before extracting the ten hottest for each year of the five years. That gave us a dataset of 50 days. The process was repeated for low-temperature days, high-rainfall days, no-rainfall days and random-rainfall days.</p>
<p>Then came crime data for the same period. We obtained this from the South African Police Services’ Crime and Information Analysis Centre. The data included the geographical location of each crime; the date and time of day that each crime was committed; and the specific type of crime committed. A total of 1,361,220 crimes were reported in the five-year period across 32 different categories. All crime was then categorised into either violent, sexual or property crimes before we calculated a count of crime per type per day.</p>
<p>Next, we used a recently developed <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143622809000046">spatial point pattern test</a> to determine whether the spatial distribution of crime on the three types of days – very hot, very cold and rainy – changes. That is, does the spatial patterning of crime in Tshwane change depending on certain rainfall and temperature conditions?</p>
<h2>What we found</h2>
<p>Our findings demonstrate that the amount of violent, sexual and property crime in the city of Tshwane is significantly affected by temperature and, to a lesser extent, rainfall.</p>
<p>The magnitude of violent, sexual and property crime was higher on hot days compared to cold or random temperature days. Violent crimes increased by 50% on hot days compared to very cold days. Sexual crimes increased by 41% and property crime by 12%. Violent and sexual crimes in Tshwane also decreased on high-rainfall days. Surprisingly, property crime was found to increase slightly on heavy rainfall days, though only by 2%.</p>
<p>Second, the spatial distribution of violent and property crime was found to differ on days by temperature and rainfall. There is a considerable change in the way that particularly violent and property crime is spatially distributed in Tshwane depending on the weather conditions. We also found that the distribution of sexual crime did not seem to differ significantly by temperature or rainfall.</p>
<p>More research is needed to confirm these findings and to determine if the results can be generalised to other urban areas in South Africa.</p>
<h2>Applications</h2>
<p>The results of this research have the potential to inform how law enforcement agencies and other relevant stakeholders tackle crime in South Africa.</p>
<p>Our findings can be used to identify communities that are more prone to crime under certain meteorological conditions and allow stakeholders to target these neighbourhoods and plan interventions. It also allows stakeholders to adequately develop and implement suitable intervention practices in similar at-risk neighbourhoods.</p>
<p>For the police and others responsible for specifically addressing long-term solutions to crime, crime pattern analysis can utilise the understanding of how weather events influence crime patterning and provide measures to take appropriate action.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100850/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gregory Breetzke does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Data and statistical analysis were used to find an association - if any - between extreme weather conditions and crime in South Africa’s capital.Gregory Breetzke, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, University of PretoriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/909292018-03-06T19:30:30Z2018-03-06T19:30:30ZMaking climate models open source makes them even more useful<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209045/original/file-20180306-146675-1qxavh2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">MiMA: an open source way to model the climate.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Martin Jucker</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Designing climate experiments is all but impossible in the real world. We can’t, for instance, study the effects of clouds by taking away all the clouds for a set period of time and seeing what happens. </p>
<p>Instead, we have to design our experiments virtually, by developing computer models. Now, a <a href="https://www.geosci-model-dev.net/11/843/2018/">new open-source set of climate models</a> has allowed this research to become more collaborative, efficient and reliable.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-scientists-adjust-temperature-records-and-how-you-can-too-36825">Why scientists adjust temperature records, and how you can too</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Full climate models are designed to be as close to nature as possible. They are representations of the combined knowledge of climate science and are without a doubt the best tools to understand what the future might look like. </p>
<p>However, many research projects focus on small parts of the climate, such as sudden wind changes, the temperature in a given region, or ocean currents. For these studies, concentrating on a small detail in a full climate model is like trying to find a needle in the haystack.</p>
<p>It is therefore common practice in such cases to take away the haystack by using simpler climate models. Scientists usually write these models for specific projects. A quote <a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/05/13/einstein-simple/">commonly attributed to Albert Einstein</a> maybe best summarises the process: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”</p>
<p>Here’s an example. In <a href="http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0127.1">a paper from last year</a> I looked at the temperature and wind changes in the upper atmosphere close to the Equator. I didn’t need to know what happened in the ocean, and I didn’t need any chemistry, polar ice, or even clouds in my model. So I wrote a much simpler model without these ingredients. It’s called “MiMA” (<strong>M</strong>odel of an <strong>i</strong>dealised <strong>M</strong>oist <strong>A</strong>tmosphere), and is freely available <a href="http://mjucker.github.io/MiMA/">on the web</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8UfaFnGtCrk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">MiMA.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The drawbacks of simpler models</h2>
<p>Of course, using simpler models comes with its own problems. </p>
<p>The main issue is that researchers have to be very clear what the limits are for each model. For instance, it would be hard to study thunderstorms with a model that doesn’t reproduce clouds. </p>
<p>The second issue is that whereas the scientific results may be published, the code itself is typically not. Everyone has to believe that the model does indeed do what the author claims, and to trust that there are no errors in the code.</p>
<p>The third issue with simpler models is that anyone else trying to duplicate or build on published work would have to rebuild a similar model themselves. But given that the two models will be written by two (or more) different people, it is highly unlikely that they will be exactly the same. Also, the time the first author spends on building their model is then spent a second time by a second author, to achieve at best the same result. This is very inefficient.</p>
<h2>Open-source climate models</h2>
<p>To remedy some (if not all) of these issues, some colleagues and I have <a href="https://www.geosci-model-dev.net/11/843/2018/">built a framework of climate models called Isca</a>. Isca contains models that are easy to obtain, completely free, documented, and come with software to make installation and running easier. All changes are documented and can be reverted. Therefore, it is easy for everyone to use exactly the same models. </p>
<p>The time it would take for everyone to build their own version of the same model can now be used to extend the existing models. More sets of eyes on one model means that errors can be quickly identified and corrected. The time saved could also be used to build new analysis software, which can extract new information from existing simulations.</p>
<p>As a result, the climate models and their resulting scientific experiments become both more flexible and reliable. All of this only works because the code is publicly available and because any changes are continuously tracked and documented.</p>
<p>An example is my own code, MiMA, which is part of Isca. I have been amazed at the breadth of research it is used for. I wrote it to look at the tropical upper atmosphere, but others have since used it to study the life cycle of weather systems, the Indian monsoon, the effect of volcanic eruptions on climate, and so on. And that’s only one year after its first publication.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-models-too-complicated-heres-one-that-everyone-can-use-48758">Climate models too complicated? Here's one that everyone can use</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Making models openly available in this way has another advantage. Using an accessible proof can counter the mistrust of climate science that is still prevalent in some quarters. </p>
<p>The burden of proof automatically falls on the sceptics. As all the code is there and all changes are trackable, it is up to them to point out errors. And if someone does find an error, even better! Correcting it is just another step to make the models even more reliable.</p>
<p>Going open source with scientific code has many more benefits than drawbacks. It allows collaboration between people who don’t even know one another. And, most importantly, it will make our climate models more flexible, more reliable and generally more useful.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90929/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Martin Jucker receives funding from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science. </span></em></p>The creation of climate models with open source code, available for anyone to use, has improved scientific collaboration and helped research get more efficient.Martin Jucker, Maritime Continent Research Fellow, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/892402017-12-18T19:14:31Z2017-12-18T19:14:31ZClimate scientists and policymakers need to trust each other (but not too much)<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199669/original/file-20171218-27591-1bh5wna.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Trust is everything.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">oneinchpunch/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At a time when the effects of climate change are <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24672">accelerating</a> and published science overwhelmingly supports the view that humans are responsible for the rate of change, powerful groups remain in denial across politics, the media, and industry. Now more than ever, we need scientists and policymakers to work together to create and implement effective policy which is informed by the most recent and reliable evidence.</p>
<p>We know that trust between scientists and policymakers is important in developing policy that is informed by scientific evidence. But how do you build this trust, and how do you make sure that it genuinely leads to positive outcomes for society?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nature-v-technology-climate-belief-is-politics-not-science-12611">Nature v technology: climate 'belief' is politics, not science</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In response to these questions, our recent Perspective in <a href="http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/s41558-017-0010-z">Nature Climate Change</a> explores the dynamics of trust at the interface of climate science and policy. </p>
<p>We suggest that while trust is an important component of the science-policy dynamic, there can be such a thing as “too much” trust between scientists and policymakers. </p>
<p>Understanding this dynamic is crucial if we are to deliver positive outcomes for science, policy, and the society that depends on their cooperation.</p>
<h2>What happens when there is ‘too much’ trust?</h2>
<p>Trust between climate scientists (researchers in a range of disciplines, institutions, and organisational settings) and policymakers (civil servants in government departments or agencies who shape climate policy) is useful because it enhances the flow of information between them. In a trusting relationship, we can expect to see a scientist explaining a new finding directly to a policymaker, or a policymaker describing future information needs to a scientist. </p>
<p>Together, this arrangement ideally gives us science-led policy, and policy-relevant science.</p>
<p>But as <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0170840615585337">scholars of trust have warned</a>, there is a point beyond which these positive benefits of trust can turn sour. </p>
<p>Think about a hypothetical situation in which a scientist and policy-maker come to trust each other deeply. What happens if one of them starts to become loose with the facts, or fails to adhere to professional standards? Is their trusting counterpart more, or less, likely to identify the poor behaviour and respond appropriately?</p>
<p>Over time, a trusting relationship may evolve into a self-perpetuating belief of trustworthiness based on the history of the relationship. This is where scientists and policymakers may find themselves in a situation of “too much” trust. </p>
<p>We know that science advances by consensus, and that this consensus is shaped by rigorous research and review, and intense debate and scrutiny. But what if (as in the hypothetical example described above) a policy-maker’s trust in an individual scientist means they bypass the consensus and instead depend on that one scientist for new information? What happens if that scientist is – intentionally or unintentionally – wrong?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199635/original/file-20171218-17869-1r8dla.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">More trust is not always best. ‘Too much’ trust can cause perverse outcomes at the science-policy interface.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0170840615585337">Adapted from Stevens et al. (2015)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When you have “too much” trust, the benefits of trust can instead manifest as perverse outcomes, such as “blind faith” commitments between parties. In a situation like this, a policymaker may trust an individual scientist so much that they do not look for signs of misconduct, such as the misrepresentation of findings.</p>
<p>Favouritism and “capture” may mean that some policymakers provide information about future research support only to selected scientists, denying these opportunities to others. At the same time, scientists may promote <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378015000485">only their own stream of research instead of outlining the range of perspectives in the field</a> to the policymakers, narrowing the scope of what science enters the policy area. </p>
<p>“Cognitive lock-in” might result, where a policymaker sticks to a failing policy because they feel committed to the scientist who first recommended the course of action. For example, state-of-the-art climate forecasting tools are available in the Pacific but are <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718517301860">reportedly underused</a>. This is partly because the legacy of trusting relationships between scientists and policymakers in the region has led them to continue relying on less sophisticated tools.</p>
<p>“Too much” trust can also lead to overly burdensome obligations between scientists and policymakers. A scientist may come to hold unrealistically high expectations of the level of information a policymaker can share, or a policymaker may desire the production of research by an unfeasible deadline.</p>
<h2>What’s the right way to trust?</h2>
<p>With this awareness of the potentially negative outcomes of “too much” trust, should we abandon trust at the climate science-policy interface all together? </p>
<p>No. But we can – and should – develop, monitor, and manage trust with acknowledgement of how “too much” trust may lead to perverse outcomes for both scientists and policy-makers. </p>
<p>We should aim for a state of “<a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0170840615585337">optimal trust</a>”, which enjoys the benefits of a trusting relationship while avoiding the pitfalls of taking too trusting an approach.</p>
<p>We propose five key strategies for managing trust at the climate science-policy interface.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Be explicit about expectations for trust in a climate science-policy relationship. Climate scientists and policy-makers should clarify protocols and expectations about behaviour through open discussion as early as possible within the relationship.</p></li>
<li><p>Transparency and accountability, especially when things go wrong, are critical to achieving and maintaining a state of optimal trust. When things do go wrong, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/27759989">trust repair</a> can right the relationship.</p></li>
<li><p>Implement systems for monitoring trust, such as discussion groups within scientific and policy organisations and processes of peer review. Such approaches can help to identify the effects of “too much” trust – such as capture, cognitive lock-in, or unrealistically high expectations.</p></li>
<li><p>Manage staff churn in policy and scientific organisations. When scientists or policy-makers change role or institution, handing over the trusting relationships can help positive legacies and practices to carry on.</p></li>
<li><p>Use intermediaries such as <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.1752/abstract">knowledge brokers</a> to facilitate the flow of information between science and policy. Such specialists can promote fairness and honesty at the science-policy interface, increasing the probability of maintaining ‘optimal trust’.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-this-the-moment-that-climate-politics-and-public-opinion-finally-match-up-50062">Is this the moment that climate politics and public opinion finally match up?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Embracing strategies such as these would be a positive step toward managing trust between scientists and policymakers, both in climate policy and beyond.</p>
<p>In this time of contested science and highly politicised policy agendas, all of us in science and policy have a responsibility to ensure we <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378015000485">act ethically</a> and appropriately to achieve positive outcomes for society.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89240/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politicians are always being told to trust what climate scientists are telling them. But can you have too much of a good thing? What happens when the exchange of ideas becomes too cosy?Rebecca Colvin, Knowledge Exchange Specialist, Australian National UniversityChristopher Cvitanovic, Research Fellow, University of TasmaniaJustine Lacey, Senior Social Scientist, CSIROMark Howden, Director, Climate Change Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/707492017-02-10T09:48:38Z2017-02-10T09:48:38ZIntroducing the terrifying mathematics of the Anthropocene<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153887/original/image-20170123-8067-162fdbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>Here are some surprising facts about humans’ effect on planet Earth. We have made enough concrete to create an exact replica of <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/owen-gaffney/15-ways-you-know-youre-in_b_9764330.html">Earth 2mm thick</a>. We have produced enough plastic to wrap Earth in clingfilm. We are creating “<a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2053019613514953">technofossils</a>”, a new term for congealed human-made materials – plastics and concretes – that will be around for tens of millions of years. </p>
<p>But it is the scale that humans have altered Earth’s life support system that is the most concerning. </p>
<p>In 2000, Nobel laureate <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1995/">Paul Crutzen</a> and Eugene Stoermer proposed that human impact on the atmosphere, the oceans, the land and ice sheets had reached such a scale that it had pushed Earth into a new epoch. They called it the <a href="http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-26590-2_3">Anthropocene</a> and argued the current Holocene epoch was over. </p>
<p>The Holocene began 11,700 years ago as we emerged from a deep ice age. Over the past 10,000 years, the defining feature of the Holocene has been a remarkably <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855">stable Earth system</a>. This stability has allowed us to develop agriculture and hence villages, towns and eventually cities – human civilisation. </p>
<p>We use pretty powerful rhetoric to describe the Anthropocene and current human impact. As The Economist <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/18744401">stated in 2011</a>, humanity has “become a force of nature reshaping the planet on a geological scale”. We are like an asteroid strike. We have the impact of an ice age. </p>
<p>But what does this really mean? Does it mean, for example, that we are having as big an impact as these natural forces are having right now, or is it, somehow, more profound?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153895/original/image-20170123-8051-1mcz1td.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Humans: the new asteroids.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Meteor_Crater_(crop-tight).jpg">Steve Jurvetson</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The maths of the Anthropocene</h2>
<p>In our <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2053019616688022">recent study</a>, we wanted to find the simplest way to mathematically describe the Anthropocene and articulate the difference between how the planet once functioned and how it now functions. </p>
<p>Life on Earth, the chemical and physical composition of the atmosphere and oceans, and the size of the ice sheets have changed over time because of slight alterations to Earth’s orbit around the sun, changes to the sun’s energy output or major asteroid impacts like the one that killed the dinosaurs. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153897/original/image-20170123-8067-15mqfgu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cyanobacteria changed the world; now it’s our turn.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AClyndrospermum_(Cyanobacteria).JPG">Matthew J Parker</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>They can also change due to geophysical forces: <a href="http://www.geosci.usyd.edu.au/users/prey/ACSGT/EReports/eR.2003/GroupD/Report1/web%20pages/assignment_1.html">continents collide</a>, cutting off ocean currents so heat is distributed in a new way, upsetting climate and <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X0600536X">biodiversity</a>. </p>
<p>They also shift due to sheer internal dynamics of the system – new life evolves to drive great planetary shifts, such as the <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/07/28/the_great_oxygenation_event_the_earth_s_first_mass_extinction.html">Great Oxidation Event</a> around 2.5 billion years ago when newly evolved <a href="http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanointro.html">cyanobacteria</a> began emitting the deadly poison oxygen that killed all simple life forms it came in touch with. Life had to evolve to tolerate oxygen. </p>
<p>Taking as our starting point a <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v402/n6761supp/full/402c19a0.html">1999 article</a> by Earth system scientist Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, we can say the rate of change of the Earth system (E) has been driven by three things: astronomical forcings such as those from the sun or asteroids; geophysical forcing, for example changing currents; and internal dynamics, such as the evolution of cyanobacteria. Let’s call them A, G and I. </p>
<p>Mathematically, we can put it like this: </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=144&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=144&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=144&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=181&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=181&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154430/original/image-20170126-30419-xthjlj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=181&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It reads: the rate of change of the Earth system (dE/dt) is a function of astronomical and geophysical forcings and internal dynamics. It is a very simple statement about the main drivers of the system. </p>
<p>This equation has been true for four billion years, since the first life evolved. In his article, Schellnhuber argued that people must be added into this mix, but his theory came before the full impact of humanity had been assessed. In the past few decades, this equation has been radically altered. </p>
<p>We are losing biodiversity at rates tens to hundreds of times faster than natural rates. Indeed, we are approaching <a href="https://theconversation.com/earths-sixth-mass-extinction-has-begun-new-study-confirms-43432">mass extinction rates</a>. There have been five mass extinctions in the history of life on Earth. The last killed the non-avian dinosaurs 66 million years ago, now humans are <a href="https://theconversation.com/study-humans-causing-sixth-extinction-event-on-earth-43439">causing the sixth</a>. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-carbon-idUSKCN0WN1QR">rate we are emitting carbon dioxide</a> might be at an all time high since that time too. Global temperatures are rising at a rate 170 times faster than the <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6269/aad2622">Holocene baseline</a>. The global nitrogen cycle is undergoing its largest and most rapid change in possibly <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6269/aad2622">2.5 billion years</a>. </p>
<p>In fact, the rate of change of the Earth system under human influence in the past four decades is so significant we can now show that the equation has become:</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=156&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=156&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=156&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=197&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=197&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154431/original/image-20170126-30413-1vidj7b.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=197&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>H stands for humanity. In the Anthropocene Equation, the rate of change of the Earth system is a function of humanity. </p>
<p>A, G and I are now approaching zero relative to the other big force – us – they have become essentially negligible. We are now the dominant influence on the stability and resilience of the planet we call home. </p>
<p>This is worth a little reflection. For four billion years, the Earth system changed under the influence of tremendous solar-system wide forces of nature. Now this no longer holds. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/156329/original/image-20170210-28716-jndst2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A new reality</h2>
<p>Heavenly bodies of course still exert some force; so does the ground beneath our feet. But the rates at which these forces operate are now negligible compared with the rate at which we are changing the Earth system. In the 1950s or 1960s, our own impact rivalled the great forces of nature. Now it usurps them entirely. </p>
<p>This should come as a shock not only to environmentalists but to everyone on Earth. But our conclusion is arguably a modest addition to the canon of academic literature. The scale and rate of change has already been well established by <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2053019614564785">Earth system scientists</a> over the past two decades. </p>
<p>Recently, Mark Williams and colleagues argued that the Anthropocene represents the third new era in <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2053019615591020">Earth’s biosphere</a>, and astrobiologist David Grinspoon argued that the Anthropocene marks one of the major events in a planet’s “life”, when <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2016/12/18/506036420/a-planet-with-brains-the-peril-and-potential-of-self-aware-geological-change">self-aware cognitive processes become a key part of the way the planet functions</a>. </p>
<p>Still, formalising the Anthropocene mathematically brings home an entirely new reality. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=655&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=655&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154435/original/image-20170126-30419-1csizfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=655&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The equations that shape our planet.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Owen Gaffney, Will Steffen</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The drama is heightened when we consider that for much of Earth’s history the planet has been either very hot – a greenhouse world – or very cold – an icehouse world. These appear to be the deeply stable states lasting millions of years and resistant to even quite major shoves from astronomical or geophysical forces. </p>
<p>But the past 2.5 million years have been uncharacteristically unstable, periodically flickering from cold to a gentle warmth.</p>
<h2>The consumption vortex</h2>
<p>So, who do we mean when we talk of H? Some will argue that we cannot treat humanity as one homogenous whole. We agree. </p>
<p>While all of humanity is now in the Anthropocene, we are not all in it in the same way. Industrialised societies are the reason we have arrived at this place, not Inuits in northern Canada or smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. </p>
<p>Scientific and technological innovations and economic policies promoting growth at all costs have created a consumption and production vortex on a collision course with the Earth system. </p>
<p>Others may say that natural forces are too important to ignore; for example, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-el-nino-and-la-nina-27719">El Niño weather system</a> periodically changes patterns globally and causes Earth to warm for a year or so, and the tides generate more energy than all of humanity. But a warm El Niño is balanced by a cool La Niña. The tides and other great forces of nature are powerful but stable. Overall, they do not affect the rate of change of the Earth system.</p>
<p>Now, only a truly catastrophic volcanic eruption or direct asteroid hit could match us for impact.</p>
<p>So, can the Anthropocene equation be solved? The current rate of change must return to around zero as soon as possible. It cannot continue indefinitely. Either humanity puts on the brakes or it would seem unlikely a global civilisation will continue to function on a destabilised planet. The choice is ours.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70749/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Scientific and technological innovations and economic policies promoting growth at all costs have created a consumption and production vortex on a collision course with the Earth system.Owen Gaffney, Anthropocene analyst and communicator. Co-founder Future Earth Media Lab, Director of media (Stockholm Resilience Centre), Stockholm UniversityWill Steffen, Adjunct Professor, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/643572016-08-24T20:26:40Z2016-08-24T20:26:40ZAn open letter to the Prime Minister on the climate crisis, from 154 scientists<p><em>Dear The Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister of Australia,</em></p>
<p><em>The following is an open letter signed by 154 Australian atmospheric, marine, environmental, biological and medical scientists, including several leading climatologists, for your and your government’s attention.</em></p>
<h2>There is no Planet B</h2>
<p>In July 2016, global temperatures soared to the <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/news/2479/nasa-analysis-finds-july-2016-is-warmest-on-record/">hottest in the 136 years of the instrumental record</a>, 0.1°C warmer than previous warm Julys in 2015, 2011 and 2009. It followed a <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/climate-trends-continue-to-break-%20records">succession of rising temperatures</a>, moving from 0.42°C above average in 2000, to 0.87°C above average by 2015.</p>
<p>Developments in the atmosphere-ocean system reported by major climate research organisations (including <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/">NASA</a>, the US <a href="http://www.noaa.gov/">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a>, the US <a href="https://nsidc.org/">National Snow & Ice Data Center</a>, the UK <a href="http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/science/science-behind-climate-change/hadley">Met Office Hadley Centre</a>, the <a href="http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/">Tyndall Centre</a>, the <a href="https://www.pik-potsdam.de/">Potsdam Institute</a>; the science academics of dozens of nations; and in Australia the <a href="http://www.csiro.au/">CSIRO</a> and <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/">Bureau of Meteorology</a>) include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>A rise of <a href="http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/">atmospheric carbon dioxide levels</a> to 404.39 parts per million (ppm; as of July 2016), an average rise of 3.08 ppm per year. This rate is <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13342/abstract">unprecedented in the geological record of the past 55 million years</a>, and is tracking towards the <a href="https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0804/0804.1126.pdf">stability threshold of the Antarctic ice sheet</a>, estimated at around 450ppm atmospheric CO₂.</p></li>
<li><p>The rise in greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere and oceans is leading to an <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/science/climate_assessment_2012.html">increase in extreme weather events</a> relative to the period 1950-60, including tropical storms such as those in Fiji, Vanuatu and the Philippines, with lives lost and <a href="http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/time-series">damage estimated in the billions of dollars</a>. In Australia the <a href="http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/OandA/Areas/Assessing-our-climate/State-of-the-Climate/2014-SoC-Report">frequency of extreme weather events has been increasing</a>, and since 2001 the number of extreme heat records has <a href="https://theconversation.com/sure-winter-felt-chilly-but-australia-is-setting-new-heat-records-at-12-times-the-rate-of-cold-ones-35607">outnumbered extreme cool records</a> by almost three to one for daytime maximum temperatures, and around five to one for night-time minimum temperatures.</p></li>
<li><p>Impacts on a similar scale are taking place in the ocean, where the <a href="http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/managing-the-reef/threats-to-the-reef/climate-change/how-climate-change-can-affect-the-reef/ocean-acidification">CO₂ rise has caused an increase in acidity</a> from pH 8.2 to 8.1 already. The pH is predicted to decrease to 7.8 by 2100, affecting coral reefs and the marine food chain.</p></li>
<li><p><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL061052/abstract">Ice sheet melt rates</a> have been increasing and the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/climate-science/climate-change-future/sea-level">rate of sea-level rise</a> has been accelerating, from roughly 1.7mm per year over the past century to 3.2mm per year between 1993 and 2010, and to about <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/">3.5mm per year</a> today. This threatens low-lying islands, deltas and lower river valleys where billions of people live – a problem that is compounded by increased variability of river flows in terms of floods and droughts.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>We are concerned that global warming, amplified by feedbacks from polar ice melt, methane release from permafrost, and extensive fires, may <a href="http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n5/full/nclimate2554.html">become irreversible</a>, including the possible collapse of the <a href="https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/td0802.pdf">Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation</a>, a crucial component of the global climate system that transfers heat from the tropics to the North Atlantic. </p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/acp-16-3761-2016.html">James Hansen</a>, NASA’s former chief climate scientist, “burning all fossil fuels would create a different planet than the one that humanity knows”. <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-science-idUSTRE58R3UI20090928">Joachim Schellnhuber</a>, Germany’s chief climate scientist, has summed up the situation by saying: “We’re simply talking about the very life support system of this planet.”</p>
<p>We note your broad agreement with this point, in light of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-18/what-are-our-leaders-really-thinking-about-climate-change/7420112">your 2010 statement</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…we are as humans conducting a massive science experiment with this planet. It’s the only planet we have got… We know that the consequences of unchecked global warming would be catastrophic… We as a human species have a deep and abiding obligation to this planet and to the generations that will come after us.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While the <a href="http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php">Paris Agreement</a> remains unbinding and global warming has received minimal attention in the recent elections, governments worldwide are presiding over a large-scale demise of the planetary ecosystems, which threatens to leave large parts of Earth uninhabitable.</p>
<p>We call on the Australian government to tackle the root causes of an unfolding climate tragedy and do what is required to protect future generations and nature, including meaningful reductions of Australia’s peak carbon emissions and coal exports, while there is still time.</p>
<p>There is no Planet B.</p>
<p><em>Yours sincerely,</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Christine Adams-Hosking, Conservation planner, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Stephen Adelstein, Medical scientist, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Ross Alford, Tropical ecologist, James Cook University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Wallace Ambrose, Archaeological anthropologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Martin Anda, Environmental engineer, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Marion Anderston, Geochemist, Monash University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Michael Archer, Paleontologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Leanne Armand, Marine Researcher, Macquarie University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Patricia Armati, Medical scientist, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Owen Atkin, Plant respiration researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Elaine Baker, Marine scientist, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Cathy Banwell, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Andrew Barnes, Aquatic animal health researcher, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Fiona Beck, Renewable energy researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Tom Beer, Climatic and environmental change researcher, CSIRO</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Andrew Blakers, Photovoltaics/energy storage researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Phillip Board, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Justin Borevitz, Plant geneticist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Caryl Bosman, Environmental planning researcher, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Bowman, Forestry researcher, University of Tasmania</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Timothy Broadribb, Plant Scientist, University of Tasmania</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Helen Brown, Environmental health researcher, Curtin University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Tim Brown, Medicine and environment researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Ralf Buckley, Conservation/ecotourism researcher, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Florian Busch, Plant scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Jason Byrne, Urban design researcher, Curtin University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Maria Byrne, Marine and developmental biologist, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Martina Calais, Renewable energy researcher, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Craig Carter, Engineering and IT researcher, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Phill Cassey, Ecologist, Adelaide University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Carla Catterall, Ecologist, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Juleen Cavanaugh, Biomedical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Fred Chow, Plant biologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor David Cohen, Geochemist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Steven Cooper, Evolutionary biologist, SA Museum</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Rod Connolly, Marine scientist, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Jann Conroy, Plant scientist, Western Sydney University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Lucy Coupland, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Joseph Coventry, Solar energy researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Chris Creagh, Physicist, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Patricia Dale, Environment/planning researcher, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Armanda Davies, Planning geographer, Curtin University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Ian Davies, Forestry fire management researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Kirsten Davies, Ethno-ecology and environmental law researcher, Macquarie University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Robert Davis, Vertebrate biologist, Edith Cowan University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Keith Dear, Global health researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Fjalar de Haan, Sustainability researcher, University of Melbourne</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Hans Peter Dietz, Medical scientist, Penrith Hospital</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Bob Douglas, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Mark Douglas, Medical scientist, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Jen Drysdale, Climate and energy researcher, University of Melbourne</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Angela Dulhunty, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Robyn Eckersley, Climate change governance researcher, University of Melbourne</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Elin Charles Edwards, Environmental geographer, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Eldridge, Evolutionary biologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Elsworth, Environmental ecologist, Western Sydney University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Jason Evans, Climate change researcher, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Isabelle Ferru, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Tim Flannery, Climate Council</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Barry Fox, Ecologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Evan Franklin, Solar energy researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Diego Garcia-Bellido, Paleontologist, University of Adelaide</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Stephen Garnett, Conservation and sustainability researcher, Charles Darwin University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr John Gillen, Soil scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Andrew Glikson, Paleoclimatologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Susan Gould, Climate change researcher, Griffith UNiversity</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Colin Groves, Anthropologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Huade Guan, Hydro-meteorologist, Flinders University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Neil Gunningham, Global governance researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Asish Hagar, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Nina Hall, Sustainable water researcher, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Willow Hallgren, Atmospheric scientist, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Elizabeth Hanna, Environmental health researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor David Harley, Epidemiologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Robert S. Hill, Paleobotanist, University of Adelaide</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Marine climatologist and Great Barrier Reef researcher, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Geoff Hope, Archaeologist and natural history researcher, ANU</em> </p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Michael Howes, Environmental scientist, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Lesley Hughes, Climate change and species researcher, Macquarie University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Paul Humphries, Environmental scientist, Charles Sturt University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Phillip Jenning, Energy researcher, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Darryl Jones, Behavioural ecologist, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Hugh Jones, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Jochen Kaempf, Physical oceanographer, Flinders University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Jeffrey Keelan, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Peter Kershaw, Biogeographer and botanist, Monash University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Carsten Kulheim, Plant physiologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Rakkesh Kumar, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Lori Lach, Rainforest conservationist, James Cook University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Barry Lacopetta, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Trevor Lamb, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Tony Larkum, Plant biologist, University of Technology Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Annie Lau, Geography and environmental management researcher, University of Quensland</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Bill Laurance, Tropical environment and sustainability researcher, James Cook University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Fred Leusch, Soil, water and energy researcher, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Andrew Lowe, Plant conservationist, University of Adelaide</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Fabio Luciano, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Justin Marshall, Marine biologist, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Melanie Massaro, Ecologist and ornithologist, Charles Sturt University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor John F. McCarthy, Resource environment researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Allison McInnes, Plant biologist, UTS</em></p>
<p><em>AssociateProfessor Andrew McKenzie, Landscape planning researcher, University of Canberra</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Kathryn McMahon, Environmental researcher, Edith Cowan University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Andrew Millington, Land change scientist, Flinders University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Angela Moles, Evolutionary ecologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Renee Morris, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Barbara Norman, Urban planning researcher, University of Canberra</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Nikos Ntoumanis, Behavioural medicine researcher, Curtin University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Bradley Opdyke, Climate historian, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Richard G. Pearson, Marine and tropical biologist, James Cook University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Barrie Pittock, Climate scientist, CSIRO</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Jason Potas, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Susan Prescott, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Lynda Prior, Climate researcher, University of Tasmania</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Thomas Prowse, Biologist, University of Adelaide</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Marie Ranson, Molecular biologist, University of Wollongong</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Steve Redman, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Tracy Rogers, Evolutionary ecologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Chris Ryan, Eco-innovation researcher, University of Melbourne</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Oz Sahnin, Climate change researcher, Griffith University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Peter Sainsbury, Climate and health researcher, University of Sydney</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Sinclair, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Tom Sobey, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Will Steffen, Climate change researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Peter Steinberg, Marine scientist, UNSW Australia</em> </p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Christian Stricker, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Ian Suthers, Marine biologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Sue Taylor, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Sebastian Thomas, Sustainability researcher, University of Melbourne</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Andrew Thomson, Solar researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Thomas Thorsten, Marine biologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor Ian Tibbetts, Marine Scientist, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Tissue, Plant ecophysiologist, Western Sydney University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Matthias Tomczak, Oceanographer, Flinders University</em></p>
<p><em>Mr Shane Toohey, Medical scientist, University of Western Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Gail Trapp, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Patrick Troy, Human ecologist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Tom Trull, Antarctic, oceans and atmosphere researcher, CSIRO</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Tscharke, Medical scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Chris Turney, Antarctic climatologist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Tania Urmee, Renewable energy technologist, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor René Vaillancourt, Plant geneticist, University of Tasmania</em></p>
<p><em>Professor John Veevers, Earth scientist, Macquarie University</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Charlie Veron, Marine scientist, Australian Institute of Marine Science</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Phil Waite, Medical scientist, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Elaine Walker, Physics and energy researcher, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Hayden Washington, Environmental researcher, UNSW Australia</em></p>
<p><em>Professor David Watson, Water and society ecologist, Charles Sturt University</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Scarla J. Weeks, Biophysical oceanographer, University of Queensland</em></p>
<p><em>Professor Adrian Werner, Hydrologist, Flinders University</em></p>
<p><em>Mr Peter Weiske, Medical and environmental scientist, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Jonathan Whale, Energy researcher, Murdoch University</em></p>
<p><em>Associate Professor George Wilson, Wildlife management researcher, ANU</em></p>
<p><em>Dr Phillip Zylstra, Forests and fire researcher, University of Wollongong</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64357/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Glikson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Atmospheric, marine, environmental, biological and medical scientists join in calling for more focus on the damage being wrought by climate change.Andrew Glikson, Earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/487582015-10-13T03:52:37Z2015-10-13T03:52:37ZClimate models too complicated? Here’s one that everyone can use<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/98171/original/image-20151013-17809-1qw6t08.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Simpler climate models could help more people understand the processes behind the predictions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Pelfophoto/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Most people have a fairly clear position on human-induced climate change, despite the vast majority of people not knowing much about the scientific basis of the climate models used to study it. That’s understandable – they are very complicated indeed and not accessible for everyone.</p>
<p>In one sense it doesn’t matter if climate models are only understood by climate modellers, as long as they can interpret their research findings for others to understand. But it does leave them open to the suggestion that their research is somehow “inferior” to that of scientists who don’t use models – despite the fact that models are used in every field of science, from economics to astrophysics. </p>
<p>The essence of science is to model our world, so it follows that understanding the underlying model is essential in understanding the predictions and its uncertainties.</p>
<h2>Modelling the world</h2>
<p>The state-of-the-art climate models on which groups such as the <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> base their climate projections are developed from the models used in weather forecasting. Weather models primarily deal with questions such as “where does the wind blow from?” and “will it rain?” </p>
<p>These are essentially questions about how the atmosphere will circulate for the coming few days. This is why these kind of models are called “general circulation models” (GCMs). When extrapolating the climate, we essentially use longer-term forecasts of the same thing.</p>
<p>Today’s GCMs are probably the most complex and advanced scientific models ever created. But their complexity also makes them hard for the general public to understand, which in turn makes it less likely they will have faith in the models’ forecasts. To the general public (and even to other members of the climate research community) these GCMs are essentially black boxes – you put something in (such as increased CO₂ concentration) and you get a response out (warming temperatures). </p>
<p>These responses might be easier for the public to understand if we step back from the most complex models and instead use one that is easier to understand. There is no better way to learn than doing, so my lab has designed a climate model that people can try out for themselves.</p>
<h2>A simpler climate model</h2>
<p>A simpler approach of modelling the climate is often based on the first law of thermodynamics: the conservation of energy. It models how energy is going in or out of the system and by this it is modelling the energy balance of the surface of the earth. These models are called “Energy balance” models. </p>
<p>The new <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/">Monash Simple Climate Model (MSCM)</a>, which my research team developed, allows students and the public to use a real climate model to do their own climate simulations. It provides a simple model of the average global climate and its response to external factors such as changes in sunlight or CO₂ concentration. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97707/original/image-20151008-9664-4seejn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The MSCM interface for experiments with the mean climate.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The MSCM allows you to study the results of more than 2,000 different model experiments in an interactive way. You can take the <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/greb/cgi-bin/dmc_i18n.py?activetab=undefined&version=Basic&locale=EN&atmosphere=1&clouds=1&co2=1&heat_diff=1&heat_adv=1&albedo=1&hydro=1&vapour_diff=1&vapour_adv=1&ocean=1&model=0&atmosphere_s=0&clouds_s=0&co2_s=0&heat_diff_s=0&heat_adv_s=0&albedo_s=0&hydro_s=0&vapour_diff_s=0&vapour_adv_s=0&ocean_s=0&model_s=0&lat=&lon=&regions=0&location=Global%20mean%20%28default%29&country=0&city=">climate apart</a>, and see how it responds to different <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/greb/cgi-bin/scn2scn.py?locale=EN&scenario=102&scenario2=103&variable=01&mean=01">climate change scenarios</a>. It also provides <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/Tutorial.html?locale=EN">educational tutorials</a> about the climate, climate models and climate change, and even some <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/puzzles_i18n.html?locale=EN">fun puzzles</a>. </p>
<h2>Virtual worlds</h2>
<p>Experimental simulations are a key method in science. They allow you to address “what if?” questions that are not easily answered simply by observing the real world or by experimenting with it. </p>
<p>Using our model you can, for instance, address the question of what would happen if you [took away all clouds](http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/greb/cgi-bin/dmc_i18n.py?activetab=undefined&version=Basic&locale=EN&atmosphere=1&clouds=1&co2=1&heat_diff=1&heat_adv=1&albedo=1&hydro=1&vapour_diff=1&vapour_adv=1&ocean=1&model=0&atmosphere_s=1&clouds_s=0&co2_s=1&heat_diff_s=1&heat_adv_s=1&albedo_s=1&hydro_s=1&vapour_diff_s=1&vapour_adv_s=1&ocean_s=1&model_s=0&lat=&lon=&regions=0&location=Global%20mean%20(default). And how else are we to learn about clouds’ role in the climate system unless we see what happens when they’re not there? </p>
<p>Much as some people deride modelling as “not real science”, we only have one Earth and one climate, so we can’t do “real” experiments with it. By using models, we can test important questions such as what would happen if we <a href="http://monash.edu/research/simple-climate-model/mscm/greb/cgi-bin/rsp_dcnstrct_i18n.py?locale=EN&version=Basic&activetab=undefined&topography=1&clouds=1&humidity=1&heat_diff=1&heat_adv=1&albedo=1&ocean=1&hydro=1&vapour_diff=1&vapour_adv=1&topography_s=1&heat_diff_s=1&heat_adv_s=1&variable=01">double the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere</a>. In fact this may not be the best example, as we are well on the way to doing this experiment in real life – although the models should hopefully warn us of the impacts in time for us to avoid the real thing. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/97708/original/image-20151008-9679-1nphxig.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Comparison of the temperature changes in two different IPCC future climate change scenarios simulated with the MSCM.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Speaking of the future, a publicly accessible climate model could also be used in schools, helping to equip future generations with a better understanding of our climate system. For a generation that will grow up in a fast-changing climate, this will educate the public about what’s in store, and might also inspire the next generation of scientific modellers – of the climate as well as in many other areas of science.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/48758/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dietmar Dommenget receives funding from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science (CE110001028). </span></em></p>Climate models are complicated - and necessarily so if they are to recreate our complex world. But a new, simpler climate model aims to take some of the mystery out of the art of climate modelling.Dietmar Dommenget, Senior Lecturer, Climate Dynamics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.