chubbs

Per chart below comparing Philadelphia and Wilmington airports, Philadelphia airport had a bad sensor or some other measurement issue starting at the end of 2021 and lasting most of last year. It was corrected in Dec and is now running cooler. So yes the Philadelphia airport was roughly 1F too warm last year, but not due to "heat island contamination" The difference between Chester County coop stations and the Philadelphia airport is mainly caused by excess cooling at several of the the coop stations between 1940 and 1970 as the stations were modernized (clearly seen in your chart). Below is the bias-adjusted data for Chester County from NOAA since 1940. When properly adjusted, the Chester County data shows considerable warming since 1940, in good agreement with the Philadelphia airport. Finally you have biased the Coatesville Coop data by tacking on your own cooler house since 2004. The non-adjusted data from Coatesville by itself matches the airport very well as shown below. If you exclude 2022, with the bad airport sensor, warming since 1970 is 3.3F at Philadelphia and 3.5F at Coatesville. What you attribute to "heat island contamination" is just poor analysis and confirmation bias on your part.

We've been over this a million times. When properly adjusted for measurement method changes over the years, the Chesco coop data shows warming. West Chester as an example below (this site only has plots through 2013), note the multiple station changes. After 1970 the data doesn't need much adjustment. This is also the period of strongest warming. Coatesville, ENantmeal, and phl below. The "heat island" hasn't missed Chesco Finally NOAA's long term temperature trend for Chesco, using all the local temperature measurements.

8/30 and 8/31 at Freya glacier in eastern Greenland roughly 3000'. The interesting weather continues next week with a big melt event to kick off the accumulation season.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-the-uks-insane-40c-heat-was-forecast-weeks-in-advance/

Per this study, AMOC collapse promotes La Nina. https://phys.org/news/2022-06-huge-atlantic-ocean-current-downif.html https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01380-y

Why are Atlantic hurricane seasons becoming more active? Per this study, its roughly a 50/50 split between more favorable weather patterns/ENSO etc. and a warming ocean. https://wcd.copernicus.org/articles/3/471/2022/wcd-3-471-2022.html

My bias is consensus science. What's yours?

Good thread on what is needed for 1.5C. Top 15 solutions below. Nothing earthshaking. Mainly renewables, diet, and better stewardship of natural world. Dr. Jonathan Foley on Twitter: "At Project Drawdown, we evaluated many different climate solutions -- for their potential size and cost. Here are the top solutions to get to 1.5˚C https://t.co/4DFKeoq68E" / Twitter

India's power generation mix. They are "onboard" with renewables, but growing too fast to reduce fossil fuel use. Note that use factor for fossil is much higher than renewables.

Prior to the past few months, haven't noticed any de-coupling of global temperature from enso.

Matches up with re-analysis data indicating a roughly 9-month warming period now, despite the nina. Wondering if this is recovery from the Australian fire aerosol. In any case, the next nino is going to find an atmosphere that can hold more heat than 2016.

Made an attempt to check how the recent past has tracked the paper findings. Below is 2011-2021 against a 1981-2010 normal, i.e the last ten years vs the previous 30. The AMOC signal can be seen but the cooling center is SE of Greenland and S of Iceland and heights have tended to rise recently near Greenland. Also visible is broad global warming, and a nina signal in the Pacific. The nina signal is not surprising considering enso decade trends since 1980. Guess one message is be careful analyzing regional circulation trends.

There is going to be pain. That's the nature of fossil fuels, particularly oil. A commodity based on a resource that depletes. New field/wells are constantly needed to maintain current production. Now we are chasing oil sands, deep offshore, fracking etc. These are all expensive and need ongoing large investment just to maintain current production. Fracking is particularly problematic from a boom/bust standpoint, because individual wells deplete rapidly. Our current pain started in the pandemic when oil prices crashed, causing investment to slow. US oil production dropped giving OPEC more pricing power. At that point an oil shortage and price increase was inevitable. Putin is taking advantage of the commodity cycle just like Middle East oil barons did 50 years ago. Nothing new. Too late to impact this crisis, but we could minimize the next. The resource base for renewables is larger than fossil fuels and more evenly distributed. Solar and wind are mass produced in automated factories. They can ramp quickly, doubling every 2-4 years recently. Renewables and EV have finally reached the scale where one or two more doublings will have a big impact in reducing fossil fuel demand. Yes, a transition will take time, money and innovation. Target the bad actors from a geopolitical, economic and climate standpoint first. A transition is going to happen anyway, as renewable, EV +storage economics are outpacing fossil/combustion. Just a matter of whether its fast enough and targeted properly to minimize future geopolitical, economic, and/or climate pain.

US gulf coast from Miss to Key West. https://tamino.wordpress.com/2022/02/25/sea-level-rise-30-year-forecasts-from-noaa/

As the satellite sea level record lengthens it becomes easier to see acceleration. Nina can slow and even briefly reverse sea level rise - 2010/11 a good example. No slowdown visible in this nina, though

Remember when that came out. Hard to believe it is still quoted, but I've learned to never underestimate confirmation bias.

There is a double whammy as aerosol emissions decrease in China and other developing countries, which also increases forcing. The good news: methane emission reductions would have a rapid impact due short lifetime. We should be using methane reductions to offset the forcing boost from reduced aerosols.

Per the video, a freight train is a better analogy. Pulling away from the station currently. Unfortunately, we spend too much time in the caboose looking backwards.

Wind generation in Texas is soaring as a winter storm whips the state, adding an unexpected surge of electric supply as the bitter cold drives up demand on the state’s power grid. Wind farms were producing about 17.5 gigawatts at 9:55 a.m. local time, 85% higher than the day-ahead forecast, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or Ercot as the grid operator is known. Wind is accounting for about 30% of the grid’s electricity supply. A gigawatt is enough to power about 200,000 Texas homes. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wind-gives-unexpected-boost-texas-165429559.html

Its not the heat, its the humidity. Here we show that surface equivalent potential temperature, which combines the surface air temperature and humidity, is a more comprehensive metric not only for the global warming but also for its impact on climate and weather extremes including tropical deep convection and extreme heat waves. We recommend that it should be used more widely in future climate change studies. https://www.pnas.org/content/119/6/e2117832119

Not good when back-to-back moderate ninas barely get you to the trendline, after 40+ years of warming.

You are covering a lot of bases. Not aware of any new feedbacks. Snow/ice feedback is well understood. You may be confusing impacts, tipping points and feedbacks. Can you provide references? As far as the future. Warming is directly related to CO2 emissions. The more we emit the more we warm. Irreversible for tens of thousands of year, unless we remove CO2 from the atmosphere, which won't be cheap or easy. So yes we will be dealing with AGW for a long time, but the amount of warming is up to us. We are far from helpless, shortsighted yes, helpless no.

The feedbacks impacting temperature aren't changing significantly. Higher global temperature or ocean heat content generally means higher forcing from greenhouse gases.