Global Warming - the Smoking Gun has been produced....

[jpak]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150225132103.htm

Scientists have observed an increase in carbon dioxide's greenhouse effect at Earth's surface for the first time. The researchers, led by scientists from the US Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab), measured atmospheric carbon dioxide's increasing capacity to absorb thermal radiation emitted from Earth's surface over an 11-year period at two locations in North America. They attributed this upward trend to rising CO2 levels from fossil fuel emissions.
t
The influence of atmospheric CO2 on the balance between incoming energy from the Sun and outgoing heat from Earth (also called the planet's energy balance) is well established. But this effect has not been experimentally confirmed outside the laboratory until now. The research is reported Feb. 25 in the advance online publication of the journal Nature.

The results agree with theoretical predictions of the greenhouse effect due to human activity. The research also provides further confirmation that the calculations used in today's climate models are on track when it comes to representing the impact of CO2.

The scientists measured atmospheric carbon dioxide's contribution to radiative forcing at two sites, one in Oklahoma and one on the North Slope of Alaska, from 2000 to the end of 2010. Radiative forcing is a measure of how much the planet's energy balance is perturbed by atmospheric changes. Positive radiative forcing occurs when Earth absorbs more energy from solar radiation than it emits as thermal radiation back to space. It can be measured at Earth's surface or high in the atmosphere. In this research, the scientists focused on the surface.

<more>


From today's issue of Nature...

Journal Reference:
D. R. Feldman, W. D. Collins, P. J. Gero, M. S. Torn, E. J. Mlawer, T. R. Shippert. Observational determination of surface radiative forcing by CO2 from 2000 to 2010. Nature, 2015; DOI: 10.1038/nature14240

[randys1]

1. I wanna share this, need link please

[jpak]

3. fixed - oops!

[randys1]

6. Thanks

[csziggy]

4. The original source may not be online yet

It is cited in the OP: "From today's issue of Nature... "

If you search for the title cited, "Observational determination of surface radiative forcing by CO2 from 2000 to 2010" you will find numerous articles based on the preliminary release of the paper but I found no links to it, just this preliminary review: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature14240.html

Here is one article you can cite which is cited as the source for some other articles:
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2015/02/25/co2-greenhouse-effect-increase/

[randys1]

5. Thanks.

[jpak]

11. I was able to access it and copy the figure from the paper

n/t

[RobertEarl]

2. Methane at the Four Corners

Recently (no link) there was found a vast increase of methane at the Four corners region in the SW US. And the temperature there over the winter has been abnormally high thru the winter. Coincidence or what?

[longship]

7. Correlation does not imply causation. And no link? nt

[RobertEarl]

8. Don't tell me

You deny that methane is a greenhouse gas?

[longship]

10. No, I do not.

But it strains science quite a bit to infer that a temporary out gassing of methane has anything whatever to do with current weather in the same region. Like the methane somehow hung around or something.

First, climate is not weather, but I know you know that.

Second, I'd like to see a link to a credible, hopefully peer-reviewed, source.

Third, I would gladly change my opinion of your post if you could present credible data and analysis.

My best regards, Robert.

[RobertEarl]

12. Where did the methane come from?

That's what I wondered. DU had a few reports awhile back about the methane.

So you do agree that methane can capture and hold heat?

[RobertEarl]

13. 4 corners Methane link

hatrack (37,220 posts)

Four Corners Methane Cloud Size Of Delaware; NASA 1st Thought It Was Instrumental Error
When NASA researchers first saw data indicating a massive cloud of methane floating over the American Southwest, they found it so incredible that they dismissed it as an instrument error. But as they continued analyzing data from the European Space Agency’s Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric Chartography instrument from 2002 to 2012, the “atmospheric hot spot” kept appearing.

The team at NASA was finally able to take a closer look, and have now concluded that there is in fact a 2,500-square-mile cloud of methane—roughly the size of Delaware—floating over the Four Corners region, where the borders of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah all intersect.

A report published by the NASA researchers in the journal Geophysical Research Letters concludes that “the source is likely from established gas, coal, and coalbed methane mining and processing.” Indeed, the hot spot happens to be above New Mexico's San Juan Basin, the most productive coalbed methane basin in North America.

Methane is 20-times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2, and has been the focus of an increasing amount of attention, especially in regards to methane leaks from fracking for oil and natural gas. Pockets of natural gas, which is 95-98% methane, are often found along with oil and simply burned off in a very visible process called “flaring.” But scientists are starting to realize that far more methane is being released by the fracking boom than previously thought.

EDIT

http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/17/nasa-confirms-2500-square-mile-cloud-methane-floating-over-american-southwest

http://www.democraticunderground.com/112776546

[longship]

17. Thank you, Robert.

This documents the release, which I was willing to grant you. But there is no connection implied at the link between the methane and warmer local weather. Again, weather is not climate.

The methane release may very well may have a connection to local temperature increases. But science demands more than a correlation. I see no such connection at your link.

And, no, I don't like fracking anymore than you do, nor methane releases.

At best, your post is an hypothesis. And again, correlations do not necessarily imply causation.

Sorry, but I am a bit of a pedant on that issue.

[RobertEarl]

19. yep

Methane is known to be as much as 20 times better at holding heat than co2. That's science. As the OP states, science has now determined they have observed - at the surface - increased heat retention when co2 is present. It is a rather simple matter to replace co2 with methane and see that this known mass of methane in the 4 corners could result in warmer air in the area.

[longship]

14. Yup, most definitely. But three things.

1. It is extremely reactive in a reducing environment, like our atmosphere, so it does not stick around forever. Chemistry.

2. Wind, other weather, and Brownian motion would disperse methane quite quickly, so a release of methane at the four corners is not likely to result in local warming. Plus, weather is too complex to make that causal link. Physics.

3. Correlation does not imply causation. Science.

But yes, methane is a very powerful greenhouse gas. But I think that your post makes claims that cannot be taken to the bank.

Again, I will change my mind if there is peer-reviewed research to back you up. I just don't think any climate scientist is likely to step out on that ledge with you.

[RobertEarl]

16. That's ok

I wouldn't want to be on any ledge anywhere near you.

There is a methane producing bed in the four corners and it was seen and now the weather in the area is warmer than usual. Just an observation, no need for you to get your knickers in a twist.

[longship]

18. I avoid ledges at all costs, my friend. So you'd be safe.

Sorry for being a pedant. But you cannot imply causation from correlation.

BTW, it is a good observation, but I don't think climate scientists have addressed it. They are notoriously conservative. And the weather at the four corners, like that everywhere, is a bit chaotic.

Thanks for the reasonable discussion.

[stevenleser]

9. Unfortunately, the folks who need to take this in are either anti-science, make up their own science

(which of course is anything but) or both.

[Blue_In_AK]

15. Here's a little global warming for you.

My side yard in Anchorage, Alaska, today.




This looks like what we commonly refer to as "breakup," which in any normal year would be at least 6-8 weeks from now. It's currently 32 degrees here, a little cooler than the past couple of weeks. Our winter activities - skiing, snowmachining, dogsled races - have been cancelled or rerouted. Yesterday the entire state recorded highs above zero, which almost never happens this time of year.

We will gladly take back our snow, Boston.