G20 Summit Ends with Opt-outs for Trump on Climate, Trade
July 9, 2017
(AFP) - World leaders made concessions on trade and climate language to Donald Trump Saturday at the end of the most fractious and riot-hit G20 summit ever, in exchange for preserving a fragile unity of the club of major industrialised and emerging economies.
But the gesture opened the door for others, with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warning that Ankara was now leaning towards not ratifying the landmark Paris climate accord.
Erdogan's threat brought further disarray to a summit that was marred by bilateral quarrels and strife over climate protection and trade.
And in one of the weekend's more bizarre scenes, Trump raised eyebrows by leaving a discussion and letting his daughter Ivanka take his place.
In a departure from final summit declarations that tend to outline consensus on issues that range from fighting terrorism to financial governance, the extraordinary conclusion this year spelt out differences on core issues.
It acknowledged Trump's decision to take the United States out of the 2015 Paris deal and clearly stated Washington's wish to continue using and selling fossil fuels
The declaration also stated for the first time the right of countries to protect their markets with "legitimate trade defence instruments" -- wording that essentially gives Trump wiggle room to push on with his "America First" policy.
The nationalistic stance has set him on collision course with many of America's allies, who warned Trump against an isolationist path and starting a trade war.
"Where there is no consensus, the communique spelt out the discord," said host Chancellor Angela Merkel.
- 'Problem' with Paris deal -
But with Trump determinedly leading the US out of the climate accord ratified by 153 countries, Erdogan said he was leaning towards not completing the ratification process.
"After that step taken by America, the position that we adopt is in the direction of not passing it in parliament," Erdogan said.
He also suggested some other, unidentified G20 countries had a "problem" with the agreement.
Thomas Bernes from the think-tank Centre for International Governance Innovation described the final declaration as a "masquerade".
"When compared to the G20 dynamic since the London summit in 2009, it's a step back: a clear signal against protectionism to fight the financial crisis becomes a mixed signal."
- Trail of destruction -
If the meetings within the tightly secured venue were anything but harmonious, outside chaos and violence gripped Germany's second city.
Ten minutes' walk from the summit, charred road barricades, trashed shops, debris and shattered glass bore testimony to an anarchic Friday night of street clashes between protesters and police, when commandos chased militants who hurled rocks from rooftops.
The clashes blocked US First Lady Melania Trump at her residence on Friday, forcing G20 organisers to completely alter a programme for spouses of visiting leaders.
On Saturday, thousands of anti-riot cops were again on guard, as helicopters hovered overhead, with tens of thousands of demonstrators on the march.
Fresh clashes erupted early Sunday in the streets of Hamburg following the end of the G20 summit, with protesters setting fire to a number of vehicles and police reporting more officers injured and more arrests.
- Trump vs. Putin -
Within the summit walls, world leaders were dancing a delicate diplomatic waltz, with discord not only dogging the main G20 conferences, but also adding tension to bilateral asides.
Host Merkel herself admitted that "deep differences" remain with Erdogan after they met on the sidelines of the summit.
But it was Trump's first head-to-head with Russia's leader President Vladimir Putin that stole the show.
A day after Trump slammed Moscow's actions in Ukraine and Syria, the two men had a "robust and lengthy exchange" about allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 US election, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said.
But Tillerson, who was present at the meeting that ran for two hours and 15 minutes, also said the two alpha-male leaders "connected very quickly" with "very clear positive chemistry".
Trump said Saturday that the tete-a-tete was "tremendous" while Putin gave an upbeat assessment of what it meant for future ties.
"There is every reason to believe that we will be able to at least partially re-establish the level of cooperation that we need," Putin said.
After scoring at his Russian encounter, Trump turned to another thorny meeting, this time with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
North Korea's first intercontinental ballistic missile test announced this week was the key issue, with Trump warning Thursday that Pyongyang's military sabre-rattling would bear "consequences".
Entering into talks, Trump told his Chinese counterpart that "something has to be done" on North Korea.
In a summit with its fair share of odd and awkward moments, it was Ivanka's appearance at one discussion alongside Xi, Merkel and Erdogan that caused the biggest stir.
Historian Anne Applebaum took to Twitter to denounce what she described "an unelected, unqualified, unprepared New York socialite" being seen as "the best person to represent American national interests."
Merkel though sought to play down the case, saying that it is "in line with what other delegations do".
Solar Cycles and Global Temperatures
The solar cycle or solar magnetic activity cycle is the nearly periodic 11-year change in the Sun's activity (including changes in the levels of solar radiation and ejection of solar material) and appearance (changes in the number and size of sunspots, flares, and other manifestations).
They have been observed (by changes in the sun's appearance and by changes seen on Earth, such as auroras) for centuries.
The changes on the sun cause effects in space, in the atmosphere, and on Earth's surface. While it is the dominant variable in solar activity, aperiodic fluctuations also occur.
Solar cycles have an average duration of about 11 years. Solar maximum and solar minimum refer respectively to periods of maximum and minimum sunspot counts. Cycles span from one minimum to the next.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
Solar Cycle 23
Solar cycle 23 was the 23rd solar cycle since 1755, when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began.[1][2] The solar cycle lasted 12.3 years, beginning in August 1996 and ending in December 2008. The maximum smoothed sunspot number (SIDC formula) observed during the solar cycle was 180.3 (November 2001), and the starting minimum was 11.2.[3] During the minimum transit from solar cycle 23 to 24, there were a total of 817 days with no sunspots.
This cycle lasted 11.6 years, beginning in May 1996 and ending in January 2008. The maximum smoothed sunspot number (monthly number of sunspots averaged over a twelve-month period) observed during the solar cycle was 120.8 (March 2000), and the minimum was 1.7.[17] A total of 805 days had no sunspots during this cycle.[18][19][20]
Solar Cycle 24
On January 4, 2008, a reversed-polarity sunspot appeared, heralding the arrival of Solar Cycle 24.
Solar Cycle 24 - should end in late 2018 or early 2019 (11 years, unless it is a longer than usual cycle, as was cycle 23, 12.3 years)
Solar Cycle 24 - should end in late 2018 or early 2019 (11 years, unless it is a longer than usual cycle, as was cycle 23, 12.3 years)
The current solar cycle began on January 4, 2008,[13] with minimal activity until early 2010.[14][15] It is on track to have the lowest recorded sunspot activity since accurate records began in 1750.
The cycle featured a "double-peaked" solar maximum. The first peak reached 99 in 2011 and the second in early 2014 at 101.[16]
The cycle featured a "double-peaked" solar maximum. The first peak reached 99 in 2011 and the second in early 2014 at 101.[16]
Solar Cycle 24 is the 24th solar cycle since 1755, when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began. It is the current solar cycle, and began in December 2008 with a smoothed minimum of 2.2 (SIDC formula). There was only minimal activity until early 2010. It reached its maximum in April 2014 with smoothed sunspot number only 116.4, the lowest in over a century.
The current solar cycle is currently the subject of research, as it is not generating sunspots in the manner which would be expected. Sunspots did not begin to appear immediately after the last minimum (in 2008) and although they started to reappear in late 2009, they were at significantly lower rates than anticipated.
Prior to the minimum between the end of Solar Cycle 23 and the beginning of Solar Cycle 24, there were essentially two competing theories about how strong Solar Cycle 24 would be.
In early 2013, after several months of calm, it was obvious that the active 2011 was not a prelude to a widely predicted late 2012-early 2013 peak in solar flares, sunspots and other activity. This unexpected stage prompted some scientists to propose a "double-peaked" solar maximum, which then occurred. The first peak reached 99 in 2011 and the second peak came in early 2014 at 101.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle_24
The level of understanding of solar impacts on weather is low.
We are in a declining phase of solar cycle 24.
This latest "Solar Sunday" video was created on 21st May 2017. The video looks at the current situation with regards to the current solar cycle, Solar Cycle 24.
Solar activity is currently at very low levels with just a small number of sunspots. The GWV solar tracker show that sunspot and solar flux are declining compared to where they was when we began the solar tracker last Autumn.
This decline in solar activity is to be expected because we are moving inexorably down into solar minimum (expected around 2018-2019); however, this ins't a linear process so we do some "spikes" in sunspot numbers while the overall trend in both sunspot numbers and solar flux is downwards.
In terms of SC24 sunspot numbers are now at a similar level to where they were in 2010. The big difference between now and 2010 is that 2010 was moving out of solar minimum while the 2017 is moving from solar maximum into solar minimum.
Comparing the current situation in terms of solar activity with the last time was in a "declining" phase of a solar cycle - The last solar cycle SC23 - we can see that solar activity now is at similar levels to where it was around 2005 and 2006.
We should be in true solar minimum for SC24 within the next 12-18 months, so before much longer we'll have a "crash" in sunspot numbers, sustained over several weeks or even months.
Looking further back through the solar cycles we can see that SC24 continues to run closely to SC12 (1877-1890), and SC24 is confirmed as being one of the weakest solar cycles recorded, although not as weak as the Dalton Minimum cycles number 5 and 6.
We continue to wait for official guidance and forecasts for the next solar cycle 2C25 but using the mean monthly smoothed sunspot numbers chart we can see that when we have such dramatic falls in sunspot activity such as we've seen during SC24 is often followed by a solar cycle as weaker or occasionally even weaker than the previous solar cycle.
http://www.gavsweathervids.com/sc24-25.html
The Dalton Minimum was a period of low solar activity, named after the English meteorologist John Dalton, lasting from about 1790 to 1830. Like the Maunder Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Dalton Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average global temperatures. The Oberlach Station in Germany, for example, experienced a 2.0°C decline over 20 years. The Year Without a Summer, in 1816, also occurred during the Dalton Minimum. Solar cycles 5 and 6, as shown below, were greatly reduced in amplitude. [Source]We continue to wait for official guidance and forecasts for the next solar cycle 2C25 but using the mean monthly smoothed sunspot numbers chart we can see that when we have such dramatic falls in sunspot activity such as we've seen during SC24 is often followed by a solar cycle as weaker or occasionally even weaker than the previous solar cycle.
http://www.gavsweathervids.com/sc24-25.html
Solar Update June 2017–the sun is slumping and headed even lower
Guest essay by David Archibald at Watts Up With That
June 7, 2017
Guest essay by David Archibald at Watts Up With That
June 7, 2017
Solar cycle 24 has seen very low solar activity thus far, likely the lowest in 100 years.
Figure 1: F10.7 Flux 2014 – 2017
The F10.7 flux shows that over the last three and a half years the Sun has gone from solar maximum through a bounded decline to the current stage of the trail to the minimum. Solar minimum is likely to be still three years away.
The Full Post is HERE. Stay tuned. It was a record snow year in California and cosmic ray counts continue to increase. It is going to be an interesting climate year.
In our last post Fritz Vahrenholt and Frank Bosse looked at solar activity and the impacts on the North Atlantic Oscillation. Today they present a post here on more papers on the NAO.
North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) couple to solar activity: New studies find a time-lag of 3 years
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated/ edited by P Gosselin)
In our book “The Neglected Sun” we describe how climate is driven significantly by ocean and solar cycles. The climate science establishment prefers to ignore all of this. But lately things have turned around, as a number of scientists have been researching the subject and are publishing on this almost on a weekly basis. It is indeed becoming increasingly clear that ocean cycles are in fact coupled to a certain extent with solar activity. An important paper on this was published in the Environmental Research Letters in May, 2015. A team of scientists led by M. B. Andrews of the Hadley Centre of the British Met Office examined the relationship between the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and solar activity cycles. It has long been known that the NAO swings to the positive mode when solar activity is strong. Conversely negative NAO values often fall when solar activity is weak. For more information of the NAO see Wikipedia here.
The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is a climatic phenomenon in the North Atlantic Ocean of fluctuations in the difference of atmospheric pressure at sea level between the Icelandic low and the Azores high. Through fluctuations in the strength of the Icelandic low and the Azores high, it controls the strength and direction of westerly winds and storm tracks across the North Atlantic. It is part of the Arctic oscillation, and varies over time with no particular periodicity. Unlike the El Niño-Southern Oscillation phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean, the NAO is a largely atmospheric mode. It is one of the most important manifestations of climate fluctuations in the North Atlantic and surrounding humid climates.
The North Atlantic Oscillation is closely related to the Arctic oscillation (AO) or Northern Annular Mode (NAM), but should not be confused with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO).
Westerly winds blowing across the Atlantic bring moist air into Europe. In years when westerlies are strong, summers are cool, winters are mild and rain is frequent. If westerlies are suppressed, the temperature is more extreme in summer and winter leading to heat waves, deep freezes and reduced rainfall. A permanent low-pressure system over Iceland (the Icelandic Low) and a permanent high-pressure system over the Azores (the Azores High) control the direction and strength of westerly winds into Europe. The relative strengths and positions of these systems vary from year to year and this variation is known as the NAO. A large difference in the pressure at the two stations (a high index year, denoted NAO+) leads to increased westerlies and, consequently, cool summers and mild and wet winters in Central Europe and its Atlantic facade. In contrast, if the index is low (NAO-), westerlies are suppressed, northern European areas suffer cold dry winters and storms track southwards toward the Mediterranean Sea. This brings increased storm activity and rainfall to southern Europe and North Africa.”
Andrews and his colleagues tried to determine if there is an empirical NA/solar relation in a simulation model. In earlier attempts the models were unable to get a handle on magnitude of the effect. But this time around the scientists were more successful. They recognized that they had indeed overseen a 3-year time lag with which the NAO follows the sun. Andrews et al also see an indication that other processes play a role – other than the pure atmospheric warming, and the dynamic effects thereof, taken into account up to now. The paper’s abstract follows:
A simulated lagged response of the North Atlantic Oscillation to the solar cycle over the period 1960–2009
Numerous studies have suggested an impact of the 11 year solar cycle on the winter North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), with an increased tendency for positive (negative) NAO signals to occur at maxima (minima) of the solar cycle. Climate models have successfully reproduced this solar cycle modulation of the NAO, although the magnitude of the effect is often considerably weaker than implied by observations. A leading candidate for the mechanism of solar influence is via the impact of ultraviolet radiation variability on heating rates in the tropical upper stratosphere, and consequently on the meridional temperature gradient and zonal winds. Model simulations show a zonal mean wind anomaly that migrates polewards and downwards through wave–mean flow interaction. On reaching the troposphere this produces a response similar to the winter NAO. Recent analyses of observations have shown that solar cycle–NAO link becomes clearer approximately three years after solar maximum and minimum. Previous modelling studies have been unable to reproduce a lagged response of the observed magnitude. In this study, the impact of solar cycle on the NAO is investigated using an atmosphere–ocean coupled climate model. Simulations that include climate forcings are performed over the period 1960–2009 for two solar forcing scenarios: constant solar irradiance, and time-varying solar irradiance. We show that the model produces significant NAO responses peaking several years after extrema of the solar cycle, persisting even when the solar forcing becomes neutral. This confirms suggestions of a further component to the solar influence on the NAO beyond direct atmospheric heating and its dynamical response. Analysis of simulated upper ocean temperature anomalies confirms that the North Atlantic Ocean provides the memory of the solar forcing required to produce the lagged NAO response. These results have implications for improving skill in decadal predictions of the European and North American winter climate.”
Other modellers also took a closer look at the sun’s control over the North Atlantic Oscillation. In June, 2014, Lin et al. presented a situation of a Atlantic ocean cycle (AMOC) slowdown for the 1915-1935 period in the Climate of the Past Discussion. The authors saw the rise in solar activity after 1914 as a trigger and were able to show the effect in their simulation. The abstract:
An abrupt slowdown of Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation during 1915–1935 induced by solar forcing in a coupled GCM
In this study, we explore an abrupt change of Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) apparent in the historical run simulated by the second version of the Flexible Global Ocean–Atmosphere–Land System model – Spectral Version 2 (FGOALS-s2). The abrupt change is noted during the period from 1915 to 1935, in which the maximal AMOC value is weakened beyond 6 Sv (1 Sv = 106 m3 s−1). The abrupt signal first occurs at high latitudes (north of 46° N), then shifts gradually to middle latitudes (∼35° N) three to seven years later. The weakened AMOC can be explained in the following. The weak total solar irradiance (TIS) during early twentieth century decreases pole-to-equator temperature gradient in the upper stratosphere. The North polar vortex is weakened, which forces a negative North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) phase during 1905–1914. The negative phase of NAO induces anomalous easterly winds in 50–70° N belts, which decrease the release of heat fluxes from ocean to atmosphere and induce surface warming over these regions. Through the surface ice–albedo feedback, the warming may lead to continuously melting sea ice in Baffin Bay and Davis Strait, which results in freshwater accumulation. This can lead to salinity and density reductions and then an abrupt slowdown of AMOC. Moreover, due to increased TIS after 1914, the enhanced Atlantic northward ocean heat transport from low to high latitudes induces an abrupt warming of sea surface temperature or upper ocean temperature in mid–high latitudes, which can also weaken the AMOC. The abrupt change of AMOC also appears in the PiControl run, which is associated with the lasting negative NAO phases due to natural variability.
Another paper on the solar impact on North Atlantic cycles – especially the NAO – appeared in the journal Annales Geophysicae. Sfîcă and colleagues reported there in February 2015:
The influence of solar activity on action centres of atmospheric circulation in North Atlantic
We analyse the response of sea level pressure and mid-tropospheric (500 hPa) geopotential heights to variations in solar activity. We concentrate on the Northern Hemisphere and North Atlantic in the period 1948–2012. Composite and correlation analyses point to a strengthening of the North Atlantic Oscillation and weakening (i.e. becoming more zonal) of the Pacific/North American pattern. The locations of points with lowest and highest sea level pressure in the North Atlantic change their positions between low and high solar activity.
Let’s now move to the Pacific Ocean. Here find the “El Niño–Southern Oscillation” (ENSO) phenomenon. Daniel Howard, Nir Shaviv and Henrik Svensmark are now able to show that the global sea level fluctuations (excluding the long-term trend) is at least 70% controlled by the ENSO and solar activity fluctuations. This team of scientists published their results in May 2015 in the Journal of Geophysical Research:
The solar and Southern Oscillation components in the satellite altimetry data
With satellite altimetry data accumulating over the past two decades, the mean sea level (MSL) can now be measured to unprecedented accuracy. We search for physical processes which can explain the sea level variations and find that at least 70% of the variance in the annually smoothed detrended altimetry data can be explained as the combined effect of both the solar forcing and the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The phase of the solar component can be used to derive the different steric and eustatic contributions. We find that the peak to peak radiative forcing associated with the solar cycle is 1.33 ± 0.34 W/m2, contributing a 4.4 ± 0.8 mm variation. The slow eustatic component (describing, for example, the cryosphere and large bodies of surface water) has a somewhat smaller peak to peak amplitude of 2.4 ± 0.6 mm. Its phase implies that warming the oceans increases the ocean water loss rate. Additional much smaller terms include a steric feedback term and a fast eustatic term. The ENSO contributes a peak to peak variation of 5.5 ± 0.8 mm, predominantly through a direct effect on the MSL and significantly less so indirectly through variations in the radiative forcing.”
By Frank Bosse and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt (Translated/edited by P. Gosselin)
April 23, 2017
The current cycle is the 3rd quietest overall since observations began in the 17th century. Overall only SC 5 and 6 (Dalton-Minimum) were quieter (so far). What is especially remarkable is that the 75 – 100 month period of the current cycle is the quietest of the such ever.
The coming cycle in early 2019 will be approximately 1/3 weaker than the current SC 24.
Over large timescales, the sun’s thermonuclear furnace strengthens at its core as the sun ages. The “solar constant” is currently ca. 1362 W/m², but is in fact not constant because it is increasing. There are a number of publications about this, and one recent study has come to the following result: Over the next 1.3 billion or so years, it is gradually going to get warmer as the sun will gain about 12% more strength compared to today. For the climate system that will result in about 41 W/m² in effective greater forcing (compared that to about 3.8 W/m² for a doubling of CO2, according to scientific literature). This will lead to a new modus for the earth’s climate, as temperatures will rise about 20°C. Naturally this is nothing to worry about, as by then we’ll be long gone.
That of course will not mean the end of life on earth as water will continue to exist and the earth will stabilize at its new plateau. And as the sun gains another 10% in strength, water will rapidly be lost into space. That will be the case in about 2.1 billion years. Later after that life as we know it will cease to exist on earth. And another 4 billion years later the sun will engulf the parched earth as it expands into a red giant.
But as far as we are concerned today, there is no need for pessimism! And don’t forget: there will continue to be an ice age every 100,000 or so years – just as this has been the case over the recent geological past (2 million years). And even if man should succeed in doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration, the earth will not turn into Venus. For that an additional forcing of 72W/m² would be necessary.
That of course will not mean the end of life on earth as water will continue to exist and the earth will stabilize at its new plateau. And as the sun gains another 10% in strength, water will rapidly be lost into space. That will be the case in about 2.1 billion years. Later after that life as we know it will cease to exist on earth. And another 4 billion years later the sun will engulf the parched earth as it expands into a red giant.
But as far as we are concerned today, there is no need for pessimism! And don’t forget: there will continue to be an ice age every 100,000 or so years – just as this has been the case over the recent geological past (2 million years). And even if man should succeed in doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration, the earth will not turn into Venus. For that an additional forcing of 72W/m² would be necessary.
No comments:
Post a Comment