Sky Full

Still raining here. Went to Haverfordwest earlier and it was raining there too......couldn't find anyone selling umbrellas though??? Must have been raining for about 48 hours non-stop by now. The roads are very wet. Am now looking forward to the colder, dryer, sunnier weather we are expecting in early December.......

Steady rain falling again this morning. I can't remember the last time we managed to string two completely dry days together one after the other and I can't wait for a really strong winter high pressure to set up over the UK. A week of dry, sunny, crisp days would be really welcome in the run-up to Christmas. Not much sign of this happening though.....

I for one do not regret the industrial revolution - I value and enjoy the comforts and benefits of modern technology as much as the next person and in fairness the Victorians didn't really know what problems they were unleashing on future generations, did they? What I do regret is that the human race is blighted by a general tendency towards selfishness and greed. The powerful have nearly always exploited the weak in almost every nation and every society in every period of human history, from the day that we discovered how to make weapons. There are always exceptions to this of course but nearly all successful societies in human history relied on exploitation and suppression of the vast majority by the tiny minority. To this day the people who make decisions about the future of the planet are mostly acting in their own short term best interests and not for the long term benefit of the majority. You know who I'm talking about..... 250 years of industrial and scientific progress will be a tiny drop in the ocean of the Earths history compared to the possible tens of thousands of years it might take for the Earth to recover from the damage we are doing and it matters little how much of the worlds financial wealth filters down to the poorest alive today if human life on Earth becomes impossible in another 250 years.

China is indeed a huge consumer of coal: China produces and consumes almost as much coal as the rest of the world combined - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) WWW.EIA.GOV Here is another moral issue which is difficult to resolve: is it hypocritical to criticise any other country for using coal to power its growth after Europe and the USA did the same in the 19th and 20th centuries, during part of which period China was exploited ruthlessly which arguably contributed to the rise of communism? Whatever the western nations can do to reduce CO2 output from their comfortable position of advanced development, the rest of the world is playing industrial catch-up and their growth will cancel out all efforts we make to cut back..... Only if the world's scientists can crack the secret of safe, affordable, low emission power generation (e.g. atomic fusion power) can we truly expect to reverse the output of CO2 over the next 50 years. So perhaps all the world's leaders could sit down and agree to stop spending money on nuclear weapons and space exploration and instead concentrate the world's research investment on finding a new ultra low emission power source. In the meantime, it's worth noting that China is not using her coal in an irresponsible way and she is doing her best to minimise pollution and CO2 emissions.... Everything You Think You Know About Coal in China Is Wrong - Center for American Progress WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG China’s new coal-fired power plants are cleaner than ours—and stronger on climate change.

Here, in my opinion, is the main problem with trying to get people to change their lifestyles to limit climate change: the people who might be able to make the changes needed to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide are not the people who will see the effects of climate change - good or bad. Those who have the power now to change laws, change industry and change national energy policies are already (mostly) too old to live long enough to see if those changes work. If an individual is unable to see a direct threat to their own life or future (or possibly to their immediate family) there is little chance that they will be willing to make substantial changes to their lifestyle for the benefit of a future generation. I suggest that there is no incentive for them to act because it won't affect their own lives. Only those who are currently very young, or the yet unborn, will be alive long enough to see how the world copes with increases in global temperatures in 50 or 100 years. By the time these people are old enough to be in positions of power and able to take truly effective action, it may well be too late to reverse the changes. In summary: apart from tinkering around the edges, the world's 'great and good' will by and large continue to do little about the rate at which carbon dioxide is being emitted world-wide and only future generations will get to see the results. In the meantime the rest of us can only look on and try to make a difference no matter how small.

Yes - here is a chart from the ECM showing predicted total accumulated snow depth up to Saturday 6:00pm.... Snowdonia and other high ground in mid-Wales could see their first significant snow this winter. It has to be said that other models are showing much smaller amounts of snow so it remains to be seen whether this is an accurate forecast. In the meantime it's a beautiful cloudless sunny morning here which is a pleasant change from the many rainy days we have had recently. My thoughts are with those in the Midlands and North of England who have had torrential rain in the last 24 hours and are now having to deal with floods - again. It certainly seems to have been a wetter than average Autumn this year in many places.

It's quite a long way out at 10 days away but we might as well cheer ourselves up with a couple of nice chilly charts showing potential for easterlies:. ECM +240h Must be said that the other models don't show this set-up - as yet!

I think we've dodged the worst of this one. It seems set to affect the south coast of England mainly with south Wales being on the northern edge of the depression so not in the path of the highest winds. Its quite pleasant here right now with watery sunshine and only a light breeze. If only it would stay like this!

It feels a little strange here right now - no wind or rain and a circle of blue sky directly over head. Looking at the pressure chart: .....it seems that the centre of the depression is directly over us at the moment and there is no sign of the 50mm+ rain forecast for this location or the 50mph+ wind gusts. Probably the nearest I'll ever come to being 'in the eye of a storm'! No doubt the conditions will worsen quickly as the depression scoots off towards the east..... EDIT: Now the forecast is for 40mph+ gusts and 40mm rain here - so something of a downgrade that I'm not unhappy to see....

WOT?? NO GHOULS......! ? ?

Met Office is showing yellow warnings for rain (south and west Wales) and wind (south Wales - mainly coastal areas) for tomorrow. Here are some indications of the rainfall total expected over the weekend and maximum wind gusts, from the ECM, GFS, ICON and ARPEGE: RAINFALL TOTAL FOR NEXT48 HOURS: ECM :- ICON :- ARPEGE :- MAXIMUM WIND SPEEDS (gusts) AT 10:00am Saturday morning: GFS ICON ARPEGE They don't all agree on the details but it's fair to say it will be wet and windy tomorrow especially on west and south facing coasts of Wales.....

Before we can look forward to the fun and games of December and January, it seems that we have to endure some more pretty unsettled Atlantic driven weather in the immediate future... Here are four takes on the outlook for the 4th November as seen by the models this morning: UKMO: ECM GFS GEM They don't all agree on the exact detail (when do they ever?) but the consensus is that we can look forward to a substantial depression bringing wet and windy conditions again. Not my idea of an Indian Summer unless that equates to the monsoon season

I can confirm that the forecasts and warnings are correct - heavy persistent rain since first thing morning here must be racking up the total to severe levels in some parts by now. Accompanied by gusty winds and 100% overcast, this is a day to forget unless you're a duck, maybe. Predicted to continue until tomorrow afternoon, and I shall definitely be staying in.

I don't have any data to hand right now to support this, but surely we are seeing far more species being threatened or at least in stress, than those which are benefitting from the changing climate? Even the relatively small changes which have been measured to date seem to be causing havoc with corals, many fish and bird species, insects and even large mammals. It may be true that humans survived the relatively rapid warming after the last ice age, but that was moving from an extreme climate to a benign one? I don't know whether they 'thrived' in those conditions, but bear in mind there were probably less than a couple of million alive in the whole world then. We now have 6 billion to feed and if some of the major food chains are disrupted or destroyed by climate change then I can't see us 'thriving' in the future. It's also possible to argue that any land made available for extra farming in northern latitudes could be cancelled out by coastal regions being lost to rising sea levels....

25 minutes ago, Devonian said: No, of course not. But, by your logic, because people get robbed in countries we also have no control of that means we should not disapprove of robbery and not do something about robbery here? Journeys start with single steps... I agree with your sentiments entirely and I think we are trying to do things in this country - introducing electric cars as fast as we can, decommissioning old coal fired power stations in favour of ever increasing wind and solar power, fitting low energy light bulbs in all homes and business premises, improving (slowly) our recycling habits etc. I'm sure we can all think of other examples. It is therefore frustrating to hear about the intentions of other large countries who seem to be ignoring the impact their actions might have on the climate. That some of these countries are under-developed compared with us makes it very difficult for us to criticise them - either we must allow them to raise their economies to the same levels as our own, or we must downgrade our own standards of living, diet and lifestyles to match theirs. Only then can we criticise without hypocrisy. But it's not going to happen because we love our lifestyles too much to want to give anything up....

Today we have enjoyed a string of very heavy showers all morning coming one after the other. Must be accumulating a good few millimetres by now. Some beautiful cloud formations at times, though - really towering cumulus fringed by sunlit sky.

10.51 here, over 4 tons to heat the house alone (oil and wood)! - but then we don't commute to work and we don't fly..... Obviously this is a very rough gauge of 'carbon footprint' but it would be good to see the results for some of the more high profile Extinction Rebellionists ...... I keep coming back to this - I can't see how any one, hundred, or indeed million of us individually reducing their carbon output by one or two points is going to make any difference. It's going to take the governments of the USA, Canada, Russia, India, China, Brazil and a few European countries to make massive changes to their industries and travel infrastructure to reverse the present trend. The odds are stacked against us, I'm afraid.

Your lower than average annual mileage is the key to this issue. There can be no argument that electric cars are more environmentally friendly than petrol cars (although I am not so sure there is much difference between petrol and diesel overall). But the problem is not with the type of engine fitted, it's the number of miles travelled each year by the car, and the number of people in it, that really counts. A way needs to be found to reduce the overall number of miles driven by cars every year - that 2 mile return trip to the school, or to the shops, or the 10 mile commute when public transport is available for the same journey etc. There is a problem with this of course - there is no bus service where I live and the nearest bus stop is over a mile and half away. The nearest station is six miles away and the nearest with any kind of regular service is 10 miles away. Ironically, half a mile away is the track bed of an old railway line closed in the 1960s for lack of profit...... If this was still open it would allow me and all the people living in villages on the route to get around without using a car. There are thousands of miles of old railway no longer in use. Perhaps it might be worth considering massive investment in expanding and improving the public transport system nationwide - not just in London. New railways, tram systems and electric bus services serving all parts of the country, even the most remote villages, at very low or even free fares, regardless of cost or profit. This is the only way to get people out of their cars and reduce overall emissions. Mind you, none of this would be of any use unless the rest of the world followed suit. Fat chance.

These protests are all very well intentioned but the actions available to individuals like you and me to combat climate change are trivial in the global sense and utterly futile when we are talking about turning the central heating down or even buying an electric car (all that electricity still has to be generated somewhere). What is needed is world-wide intergovernmental action of a kind which is well-nigh impossible to agree let alone implement. Take air travel, for instance - a serious polluter and greenhouse gas creator. We can't even begin to imagine mass air travel being halved or even reduced - it's increasing year by year. So what about a token gesture - why don't we ban all take-offs and landings of private jets in this country? I don't think I need to give the reason why even this would never be contemplated - those that make the decisions like to travel in private jets - don't they...... Despite the protests and any other voices of reason trying to get the necessary changes made, I am convinced that people in power around the world will not act until the rising sea water is lapping at their own front doors.

A lovely sunny calm day here today for a change! I managed to get some spring bulbs planted - a bit late but its been too wet before now. More unsettled weather to come but hopefully a respite towards the end of the month. Fingers crossed then.

Although I don't disagree with you, Ed, I have to wonder how the top 1% will get by when the rest of us are extinct? They might be safe in their biospeheres but who is going to produce their food, manufacture their electronic toys, and mend their toilets? Someone has to be spared for all these mundane duties - seems there will always be a 'them' and 'us' even after doomsday! Now - get to the back of the queue..... ?? ?? ??

Thanks Knocker - that was a very interesting quotation and summary. You are an absolute mine of information and of links to others with information or data, and we are lucky to have you! To take this question a little further, if it is unlikely that human actions alone could cause a runaway greenhouse effect in the foreseeable or even the far distant future, it must be arguable that there continues to be a reasonable hope for humankind to live out its natural evolution on earth. I have always believed that even moderate climate change might be capable of upsetting the delicate balance of nature, eventually bringing about the extinction of all complex animal life on the planet and that this would then remain the state of the world for many millions of years until different forms of life emerge and evolve to cope with the new conditions, much like the events of pre-history. Perhaps climate change / global warming could be limited in its effects, serious though they may be, and life including humans may continue to exist after the worst happens, albeit in much reduced numbers and variety and even perhaps at the extreme edge of survival? Not that this is should provide any excuse to continue consuming the worlds resources at the present rate, of course....

Long post alert..... Sorry. I think I understand the motives of the protesters and I applaud the people involved for trying to raise the profile of these issues although I don't especially agree with their methods because they are disruptive to many other ordinary people. However, I am unable to understand what action they expect individuals to take. As somebody who is concerned about the possibility (in the worst case) of the end of most of the life on the planet, I wish to do my best to avert the doom which is being predicted, but what is the best action I can take? Four years ago I spent a chunk of my limited and finite savings on solar water heating panels on a south facing roof slope, thinking that it would reduce my dependence on oil for the boiler. The result is not conclusive - lots of hot water on warm sunny days (when I don't need it), not much benefit if any on cold, cloudy days (when I DO need it). Have I saved on some oil consumption? Yes, I expect so, but I now have a leaky roof in adverse weather (of which we get a lot) and overall I don't think my 'action' has really done anything measurable to affect the climate. On the other hand, I still drive a diesel car although I could by now have probably changed it for petrol or even a hybrid. I choose to drive a diesel because I believe it is actually more climate friendly than the affordable alternatives available to me. My diesel has done 125K miles and looks good for another 125K if I look after it. Diesel engines are generally more fuel efficient than petrol engines, and also more robust and longer lasting so they don't need scrapping so often. If everyone kept their car as long as I have perhaps there would be less need of new cars, reducing the consumption of raw materials to manufacture them, and reducing the waste from scrapped cars. My point, though, is that any rather small and insignificant actions like these by even millions of individuals are unlikely to save the planet if half the predictions of climate scientists are accurate. What is needed are tremendous sweeping changes in the way we - humanity- generate energy, produce food and travel around. This might include solving the challenge of fusion energy power generation, eliminating beef from the human diet, hydroponics, extensive networks of electric vehicle charging points or, better still, electro-magnetic recharging embedded in roads, or, best of all, enormous development of public transport so that personal transport by car can be almost eliminated. The problem is that most if not all these kinds of developments require a) huge sums of money; b) world-wide intergovernmental co-operation, and c) the willingness of vested capital and company shareholders to forego profits in lieu of world changing progress for the benefit of all mankind. There is a name for this....Utopia....and I am afraid if it ever happens it will be too late to change the direction in which we are already travelling.

Thanks for the reply Devonian (a great Epoch, that). I hope it didn't sound like I am against any effort being made to counter man-made climate change - I am in favour of any steps we can take to reduce the threat of global warming - but I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that there is little chance of successful action given the current human population of the planet and its projected growth rate in the future. Thanks for this link Knocker - it's clearly an extremely complex phenomenon and its effects seem to be difficult to accurately forecast with current levels of analysis and observation. Returning to my question regarding the habitability of the Earth if all the ice were to melt, there was a reference to this which implied that the extra water vapour in the atmosphere would create more clouds which, although they are reflective are even more effective as a greenhouse gas and so would also further increase global temperatures. As I understand this, in an extreme future, the Earth could conceivably become another Venus shrouded in insulating clouds with runaway surface temperatures rendering all life impossible...... Best we try and find a solution before this happens, then.

This is a very useful thread for those of us who are worried by the conflicting opinions and data which jostle each other in the climate warming debate and confuse the unqualified onlooker. There is plenty of atmospheric temperature based evidence to demonstrate that the global climate is warming but, in my opinion, still far too much reliance being placed on the ability of the human race to brake or even reverse the process. The issue I wish to raise relates to the increasingly rapid retreat of the worlds glaciers and the drastic reduction in the size of the Arctic / Antarctic ice sheets. There can be no argument about this because photographic evidence clearly shows glaciers retreating back up mountains in every range in the world. The Antarctic ice sheet has been shown by satellite images to be breaking up for decades now and we all know that the North Pole could be ice free within 20 years. Given that the ice bound regions of the world have for millennia reflected back into space a portion of the Suns energy and prevented the oceans in those areas from absorbing heat from the sun, my worry is this: as the ice gradually disappears is it not the case that the sun will have an increasingly warming effect on the globe which becomes self-accelerating (i.e. the more the ice melts, the warmer it gets, and the more the ice melts etc....). Land and oceans left ice free will absorb far more energy and contribute to the overall warming far more than when covered with ice. It seems too late to hope that we can replace the ice which has already melted so, even if we reduce our emissions today, is it also too late to stop the rest of the ice from melting now? If this is true, could the world continue to heat up due to its less reflective nature even with zero emissions from mankind? Is this process being taken into account by climate warming models? Have there been any studies to show what the world would be like - habitable or not? - if it were to become largely ice-free (apart from sea level rises which would be devastating enough on their own)? Sorry .... Far too many questions in one post!