GSP
-
Posts
263 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Learn About Weather and Meteorology
Community guides
Posts posted by GSP
-
-
Some important changes medium term run to run leaving many options still on the table.
-
Out to 126 and that low is too near Iceland again.
-
5 minutes ago, Paceyboy said:
The -40c 850s shown in Northern Siberia on the 18z GFS and their potential journey towards is fascinating, exciting but also a scary prospect.
Let's face it, even if that airmass propelled itself toward us it would inevitably be moderated but if it was sort of -20c 850s for any period of time around 5 days or longer, this country would be in serious trouble.
I remember looking forward to the 2018 BFTE and when it came my boiler kept cutting out due to condensate pipe freezing and eventually the heating broke completely as a valve went in the CH system. Once this happened I was praying that the weather would warm up and go above freezing as my house was being kept above 10c by patio heaters etc and it was unbearably cold with the easterley near gale howling through our dog flap, that ironically faces east!
If a more severe, prolonged version occurred this year, especially in the main height of winter it would be incredible/ epic but would feel for people in peril. In these situations the cold can gain the upper hand and deliver such an impact on our normal routines and life, i.e. no thaw, heavy snows, burst pipes, unbearable windchill. The likes of which we never normally see.
Having said that it would assist lockdown, reduce traffic and keep people inside.
Yes, it has to be a careful what you wish for.
Makes you wonder how many people would be caught out/affected by something they haven’t encountered before by the extreme cold possible shown on some charts f it was to arrive here in some form.
-
4
-
-
Such a large temperature differential between the very cold air to the north and relatively mild air to the south wants to create a lot of rain in the UK’s vacinity.
-
On 06/02/2020 at 16:12, GSP said:
Thank you for your reply.
Interesting you say we should expect increased temps with cleaner air in the near term. Is that message out there for Joe Public as I am sure some maybe expecting instant results through reducing omissions.
And they might want to know want 'near term' means as in duration as this could be 10 years, 50 years in man terms. 50 years of sustained warming through having cleaner air actually may put us near the precipice.
I suspect Joe Public would be horrified to hear through having cleaner air means sustained higher temps increasing at a faster rate for the near term (whatever that is, 10 years, 20 years, a 100 years ?!). We will breach that precipice more quickly through our actions of reduced emissions!
Not a message that is wanted out there but what one should be the statement on this as the current message is a lie.
Cleaner air will warm the climate even faster. Not many will like that message, but that is the reality.
-
Thank you for your reply.
Interesting you say we should expect increased temps with cleaner air in the near term. Is that message out there for Joe Public as I am sure some maybe expecting instant results through reducing omissions.
And they might want to know want 'near term' means as in duration as this could be 10 years, 50 years in man terms. 50 years of sustained warming through having cleaner air actually may put us near the precipice.
-
On 05/02/2020 at 14:00, BornFromTheVoid said:
The earth does indeed go through natural warming and cooling cycles, with natural change in CO2 a key part of this. However, the current warming rate is greater than anything experienced in thousands of years at least. This is related to CO2 levels, which are currently higher than they've been for millions of years (and other greenhouse gas contributions).
The studies conducted after the flights were ground are a little more ambiguous than that. The initial study found that the daily temperature range increased a lot, but not so much the actual average temperature. So it was warmer in the day and cooler at night. A recent paper (which I'll try to find) placed most of the blame on weather conditions during that time, but it's still clear that the lack of contrails did alter the temperature range.
Temperatures have been warming at an (arguably) accelerating rates since the 1970s, rather than since the turn of the century. But the warming influence of our GhG emissions go back further.
Humanity is putting a substantial amount of aerosols or pollution into the atmosphere that is actually causing cooling by reflecting sunlight away. So if we clean up the atmosphere, so to speak, you are right that temperatures will likely climb even faster. But this is because the full effect of our GhG emissions will be felt, rather than returning to some natural climate base state. The climate was slowly cooling for thousands of years before the industrial revolution, and solar forcing has also been dropping over the last few decades, so the natural base state now is substantially cooler than how it is in reality.
Thank you for your reply.
Interesting you say we should expect increased temps with cleaner air in the near term. Is that message out there for Joe Public as I am sure some maybe expecting instant results through reducing omissions.
And they might want to know want 'near term' means as in duration as this could be 10 years, 50 years in man terms. 50 years of sustained warming through having cleaner air actually may put us near the precipice.
-
23 hours ago, BornFromTheVoid said:
The earth does indeed go through natural warming and cooling cycles, with natural change in CO2 a key part of this. However, the current warming rate is greater than anything experienced in thousands of years at least. This is related to CO2 levels, which are currently higher than they've been for millions of years (and other greenhouse gas contributions).
The studies conducted after the flights were ground are a little more ambiguous than that. The initial study found that the daily temperature range increased a lot, but not so much the actual average temperature. So it was warmer in the day and cooler at night. A recent paper (which I'll try to find) placed most of the blame on weather conditions during that time, but it's still clear that the lack of contrails did alter the temperature range.
Temperatures have been warming at an (arguably) accelerating rates since the 1970s, rather than since the turn of the century. But the warming influence of our GhG emissions go back further.
Humanity is putting a substantial amount of aerosols or pollution into the atmosphere that is actually causing cooling by reflecting sunlight away. So if we clean up the atmosphere, so to speak, you are right that temperatures will likely climb even faster. But this is because the full effect of our GhG emissions will be felt, rather than returning to some natural climate base state. The climate was slowly cooling for thousands of years before the industrial revolution, and solar forcing has also been dropping over the last few decades, so the natural base state now is substantially cooler than how it is in reality.
My first post so thank you for putting my post into a more suitable area of the site.
This is from a site called Newscientist.com
"First of all, it is worth bearing in mind that any data on global temperatures before about 150 years ago is an estimate, a reconstruction based on second-hand evidence such as ice cores and isotopic ratios. The evidence becomes sparser the further back we look, and its interpretation often involves a set of assumptions. In other words, a fair amount of guesswork".
I really am not qualified for this but doesn't this throw a lot of doubt on both sides of the coin? It could be graphs are drawn depending on what side of the fence you sit, but none are accurate.
Through my lifetime, with the cleaner air gone are the pea souper fogs of the sixties and early seventies but other seasonal events are rare or non existent nowadays. Snow and a two week cold spell (remember the fen ice skating and ice skating on dutch canals, both gone) summer Thunderstorms, even though temperatures have risen these are much rarer.
For me something happened to our climate as far back as the mid seventies. I remember Bert Ford saying at that time in one of his forecasts in November "Here is an area of high pressure over Norway, and it will probably sit here until April influencing our weather from time to time". Since the year he said that, that high pressure has found it very hard to establish itself in that area and is usually blown away by the jet stream. As far as I know, jet stream potentcy is caused by the difference in temp between the arctic and equatorial regions. It seems both regions may be warming so this should not have an effect on the jet stream as the changes cancel each other out.
So what is causing the jet stream to ramp up. Not climate so there must be something else?
In all, I still think the jury is out as to what is happening to the climate in this world and is not just restricted to man. There are other factors at work, or other factors at least not being considered.
If our cleaning of the air IS contributing to the increase in temps, just when will this stop if we have a fair way to go still?
Again while I do want to get rid of fossil fuels, I am concerned we are putting all our eggs in one basket thinking that if we continue to clean our air this will stop the increase in temps. Not totally unstanding the subject, we might be asking for greater trouble than we think if we are barking up the wrong tree.
Model output discussion - cold spell approaching?
in Forecast Model Discussion
Posted
After such a good GFS 0z, I wasn’t expecting such a good 6z in truth.
Yes, the words of caution at this stage are very valid. It just takes one pressure system not to behave as expected to throw a spanner in the cogs.
But my, are we getting interested now!