It kinda feels like the conclusion is that 2037 will likely be worst than the brief El Niño heat of 2027. Everything will have more heat and more energy, etc.
the el nino phase of ENSO heats up the planet by redistributing warm western Pacific surface water over the cool equatorial waters of the southeast Pacific, so redistributes heat and water vapor transfer to the atmosphere but not changing heat content much. As this piece describes, this is much different from the global warming signal, more concentrated at the poles, where the surface heat budget is increasing. Many thanks to you for pointing out the difference.
Andrew and Zeke, I really enjoyed this piece. I especially appreciate your effort to take a complicated climate problem, think it through yourselves, and then explain it in a way that the general public can understand. This kind of scientific communication is important.
One small thought from my own reading: when we present quantitative projections such as 1.76°C, I would love to see the statistical result connected even more explicitly to the underlying physics.
I fully respect what the observations and regressions tell us. But a calculated number and the physical meaning we assign to that number are not necessarily the same thing. In a coupled and highly complex Earth system, I tend to be a little more conservative about numerical precision unless we can also explain the physical mechanisms supporting it.
Perhaps the most interesting question is not only what number the data give us, but how much of the physics behind that number we truly understand.
Very thoughtful work, and thank you both for bringing these difficult questions to a much wider audience.
Good analysis, worth expanding later this year/next as damages appear -- the media needs to know to what extent this is a harbinger. BUT it seems likely that in the 2030s, '40s, etc. the worst shocks will be in the years of an El Nino. So the disasters we will see in the coming 12 months are in fact harbingers of similar but worse disasters in future El Nino years?
The worst effects *in some places* will occur during El Nino years. In other places, the worst impacts will be La Nina years. It depends on where you are and what impacts you're sensitive to. e.g., El Nino years have fewer Atlantic hurricanes and, in TX where I live, it's a bit more pleasant than neutral or La Nina years.
1.5? 1.65? 1.85? I think scientists have missed a trick. Of course those of us who are interested in Climate Change have understood the concept AND the science. The public at large are another matter.
1.5 of warming is not linear nor are it's effects equally felt.
Instead we have lumps and bumps of condensed climate impacts globally.
To reach the parts of society that other climate news can't we need to change the messaging.
1.5 is not alive. Locally it could mean 10.5, To you and I.
Not a global average temperature. Instead a local temperature increase. Europe 2026 is a case in point.
Please continue your good work.
If you have a conscience you must respect the science 🌏❤️🙏
Great elucidation about what the super el nino may bring, Zeke! A fellow substacker uses the phrase "ratchet effect" when we go from one state to the next and it's harder to revert. We are in uncharted territory and hope it won't ratchet up the heat.
No one, least of all Andrew and Zeke, is claiming they're the "alpha and omega" of their thousands of rigorously trained, mutually disciplined, formally publishing peers around the world. Dr. Hansen gets a big thanks. So do Drs. Dessler and Hausfather. They're not enemies! Nobody needs to save face. They're all heroes. None of them is The Messiah. WRT global warming at least, there aren't any.
Not a very good one.. because El Niño is only one third of the equatorial Pacific ENSO. The cold phase La Ninas tend to balance out the effects of the warm El-Ninos.
But Ken, it will never be of sufficient use to *you*! Of course it's not all about you, is it? Many others, myself included, find it sufficiently useful for our purposes.
RCP8.5 provides the best signal-to-noise if you're trying to extract the forced signal. Thoughtless demonization of RCP8.5 signals a lack of knowledge of climate science.
I meant twenty five as written. I know it doesn't exist. I'm just making a point that the higher the number the higher the S/N ratio you will probably get. Therefore, to spell it out completely, high S/N ratio is not necessarily the best criterion. And pointing this out is not a denial of anything.
OK, I misread your comment. Yes, you could certainly use RCP25 if it existed. It doesn't, so RCP8.5 is the next best. I don't understand your objection to it.
Pour survivre il faudra s'adapter; ce qui veut dire d'émettre moins de chaleur, mois consommer d'énergie et donc enfin faire le choix d'abandonner définitivement les fossiles souterrains pour le Solaire et les vents qui seront plus forts et aussi dangereux.
It's nice having a beautiful sounding language on a burning planet loaded with greed and hate. The French helped us in our American revolution and am sure in the Earth Revolution. Terms of Treaties will have encumbered friendliness when done in French.
It kinda feels like the conclusion is that 2037 will likely be worst than the brief El Niño heat of 2027. Everything will have more heat and more energy, etc.
Will they say after 2037, "We coulda. We shoulda.", as they fought for water.
Lame drawdown is STILL and projected to be the only course of action.
As Earth burns.
the el nino phase of ENSO heats up the planet by redistributing warm western Pacific surface water over the cool equatorial waters of the southeast Pacific, so redistributes heat and water vapor transfer to the atmosphere but not changing heat content much. As this piece describes, this is much different from the global warming signal, more concentrated at the poles, where the surface heat budget is increasing. Many thanks to you for pointing out the difference.
Andrew and Zeke, I really enjoyed this piece. I especially appreciate your effort to take a complicated climate problem, think it through yourselves, and then explain it in a way that the general public can understand. This kind of scientific communication is important.
One small thought from my own reading: when we present quantitative projections such as 1.76°C, I would love to see the statistical result connected even more explicitly to the underlying physics.
I fully respect what the observations and regressions tell us. But a calculated number and the physical meaning we assign to that number are not necessarily the same thing. In a coupled and highly complex Earth system, I tend to be a little more conservative about numerical precision unless we can also explain the physical mechanisms supporting it.
Perhaps the most interesting question is not only what number the data give us, but how much of the physics behind that number we truly understand.
Very thoughtful work, and thank you both for bringing these difficult questions to a much wider audience.
Good analysis, worth expanding later this year/next as damages appear -- the media needs to know to what extent this is a harbinger. BUT it seems likely that in the 2030s, '40s, etc. the worst shocks will be in the years of an El Nino. So the disasters we will see in the coming 12 months are in fact harbingers of similar but worse disasters in future El Nino years?
The worst effects *in some places* will occur during El Nino years. In other places, the worst impacts will be La Nina years. It depends on where you are and what impacts you're sensitive to. e.g., El Nino years have fewer Atlantic hurricanes and, in TX where I live, it's a bit more pleasant than neutral or La Nina years.
That implies ratcheting up the heat if you say worst impacts will happen the La Nina years. Otherwise there would be no impact from this el Nino.
Il faut absolument que les gouvernants ouvrent les yeux et cessent de nier l'évidence. S'adapter ou disparaître.
Vivre le revolucion
1.5? 1.65? 1.85? I think scientists have missed a trick. Of course those of us who are interested in Climate Change have understood the concept AND the science. The public at large are another matter.
1.5 of warming is not linear nor are it's effects equally felt.
Instead we have lumps and bumps of condensed climate impacts globally.
To reach the parts of society that other climate news can't we need to change the messaging.
1.5 is not alive. Locally it could mean 10.5, To you and I.
Not a global average temperature. Instead a local temperature increase. Europe 2026 is a case in point.
Please continue your good work.
If you have a conscience you must respect the science 🌏❤️🙏
Oui, le pétrole c'est de la merde qui mijote depuis des millions d'années.
Le petrole c'set le duvel.
Great elucidation about what the super el nino may bring, Zeke! A fellow substacker uses the phrase "ratchet effect" when we go from one state to the next and it's harder to revert. We are in uncharted territory and hope it won't ratchet up the heat.
And Andrew, too!
Just curious Andrew and Zeke.. Alpha and Omega?
The BIG thanks should be to Dr James Hansen.
He said this months ago
Too much ego pride and last minute posting to save face here.
A and Z alpha and omega shame on you
"...shame on you"? Really, Jeff?
No one, least of all Andrew and Zeke, is claiming they're the "alpha and omega" of their thousands of rigorously trained, mutually disciplined, formally publishing peers around the world. Dr. Hansen gets a big thanks. So do Drs. Dessler and Hausfather. They're not enemies! Nobody needs to save face. They're all heroes. None of them is The Messiah. WRT global warming at least, there aren't any.
Dr. Hansen's measured tone is rational (https://grist.org/article/climate-movement-grandpa-james-hansen-says-the-green-new-deal-is-nonsense/). He's aware of the requirement for intersubjective verification, and is prepared to support his case. His leadership is strictly pragmatic, not messianic (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/cif-green/2010/aug/26/james-hansen-climate-change). He didn't start out as an activist, so much as a concerned grandfather. Substack followers must not erect a personality cult around him. It will only play into carbon capital's hands!
Yes. Johnnie come latelies who knew Hansen posted this before and just don't acknowledge him except for " professional tit tat"
A and Z ( I see a doppelganger ) should thank Hansen besides the fellow A noted.
I got after BM ( Bill McKibben ) for alluding to Hansen as doomsayer
Hansen has been right
World has been wrong.
"I'm not The Messiah!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW8fDw8VzKI)
And Greta Spectations..she's Godsend
And the climate messiah says
May the Light be with you (EAR)
Hansen is Iowa Tamesun in EAR. An indy Jones guy
MP's LOB is the source of "Biggus Diggus".. the one who builds the canals and reservoirs in Earth Also Rises ( in progress )
I look forward to reading it 8^D!
Is the title Hemingway-esque?
I believe in reuse. You are very familiar with that in sw, Mal.
A Tale of Three Earths:
Earth1A Goldilocks bound Jahc Nemo is the protagonist
Earth2B Us. We are planet b or 2b
Earth3C Did not find the holy pail. It's hot there
Consider a few chapter titles:
WHORE AND PIECE. how we plundered Earth
DR STRANGECARE On Earth3C is the protagonist
THE PELLET GUN BRIEF Strangecare's answer to gun control
Hello heated world.
It was the heated times. It was the outta times.
So began the apatholypse in the carbongeddon
And so on
Connecting the pale blue dots of my gibberish
As Earth burns...
“Yes”, replied the old man as he rested under his reflectella.Bull tipping was easier in his younder years.
Just be nice!
Wish they all would be nice to Hansen
SOMETHING WICKED COMES THIS WAY
Dr. James Hansen has posted this awhile back.
The super el Nino has arrived
That is just a harbinger
Of the wicked heat on march gathering forces
We never listen We never heed
We put up lame defenses
We worship our steel belted radials
radials
Well, worship melted ones
And pray there is no judgment on lack of empathy
As Earth 🔥
Excellent article, thanks
ENSO yins and yangs.. la nina neutral el nino.
They are ratchetted up from an unprecedented base heat.
This is unchartered territory.
Water cycle is on steroids
Dry becomes drier
Wet becomes deluge
Rich get richer
Poor get poorer
AI gets smarter
Hearts get colder
As Earth burns..
"Where oh where has all the water gone?", the trio sang.
Great RCP8.5 ressurection as a signal-to-noise harbinger Andrew! The ghost of RCP8.5 haunts us now as Earth burns.
So is El Niño a preview of the future?
Not a very good one.. because El Niño is only one third of the equatorial Pacific ENSO. The cold phase La Ninas tend to balance out the effects of the warm El-Ninos.
How "good" a preview do you want?
Something useful.
But Ken, it will never be of sufficient use to *you*! Of course it's not all about you, is it? Many others, myself included, find it sufficiently useful for our purposes.
Give it up, Ken. You got nuthin'.
Maybe not useful, but go ahead try...if you can. Let's see what you have come up with.
Why *on earth* would I bother? You're not here in good faith!
I have no idea why you would want to be useful.
Why are you still using RCP8.5?
RCP8.5 provides the best signal-to-noise if you're trying to extract the forced signal. Thoughtless demonization of RCP8.5 signals a lack of knowledge of climate science.
What if a (hypothetical) RCP25 would provide an even better signal-to-noise ratio? Would I still be a climate denier for criticizing such a choice?
You want the largest emissions to get the largest forced change and maximize the S/N ratio. RCP2.5 will never do that.
I meant twenty five as written. I know it doesn't exist. I'm just making a point that the higher the number the higher the S/N ratio you will probably get. Therefore, to spell it out completely, high S/N ratio is not necessarily the best criterion. And pointing this out is not a denial of anything.
OK, I misread your comment. Yes, you could certainly use RCP25 if it existed. It doesn't, so RCP8.5 is the next best. I don't understand your objection to it.
The objection is that it is unrealistic/unlikely as determined by IPCC. Higher S/N ratio doesn't justify using it, in my opinion.
Pour survivre il faudra s'adapter; ce qui veut dire d'émettre moins de chaleur, mois consommer d'énergie et donc enfin faire le choix d'abandonner définitivement les fossiles souterrains pour le Solaire et les vents qui seront plus forts et aussi dangereux.
Les fossils c'set merde..et Trump
Maurice,
It's nice having a beautiful sounding language on a burning planet loaded with greed and hate. The French helped us in our American revolution and am sure in the Earth Revolution. Terms of Treaties will have encumbered friendliness when done in French.