Dan's Wild Wild Science Journal

Nasa has released an interesting image of Earth. It’s a composite of hundreds of images of the Earths clouds. No borders have been added. Just clouds. Where there are clouds most of the time you see gray.

Image from NASA Modis sensor on the TERRA Satellite, of cloud cover averaged over October 2009. Click for the full size image (Large)

In places where the satellite saw clouds some of the time, but not often, you get a blue gray and areas where the satellite saw almost no cloud in any of the satellite passes, you get a dark blue.

Say you want to live in a place where there is almost always sunshine. Look at the image, move to a dark blue spot. Like a mix of rain and sun, gray blue will do you! What is most interesting here is that the difference in cloud cover, between land and sea, allows the continents to show up quite well in many areas!

Note also that there is little cloud cover over Greenland or the Antarctic. These spots have the Earth’s only remaining ice sheets. The cold air above the ice means the air can hold little moisture. The Antarctic especially, is a great white desert.

A desert I long to visit.

The band of constant cloud cover near the Equator is the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).

As I came into the station car park on Monday, I noticed a beautiful deck of Cirrocumulus Undulatas clouds high over the Huntspatch.

The ripples in the cloud are formed the same way that ripples form in a pond when you throw a rock in. Waves in the atmosphere can be caused by air flowing over mountains, or from strong convection. Actually there are quite a few processes, but anything that makes the air move vertically can start the process.

Meteorologists have a technical name for this. Gravity Waves.

These waves can travel hundreds, if not thousands of kilometers, if conditions are right. We do not see this often in Summer, but as the winds aloft pick up in the autumn, the clouds get more and more interesting!

I have mentioned it before, but I will mention it again, There is a fabulous book on clouds that you will really enjoy. The Cloud Book by Richard Hamblyn. Knowing something about them, only adds to their beauty.

Richard Feynman (Yes, of course I stood up when I typed his name.) talked about this in one of his lectures, albeit he was talking of science knowledge in general. He used a flower, and waves on a beach to tell his students that because he understood how they worked (down to the subatomic level), they were still beautiful and even more so!

Later,
Dan

This last week brought an update on the Arctic sea ice from the NSIDC folks. It also saw the publication of a paper in SCIENCE that made almost all of us who follow climate science, sit up and notice. Neither is particularly good news, and that may be an understatement.

Courtesy National Snow Ice Data Center (NSIDC-NOAA)

First the ice- or lack of same.

2007 saw the lowest amount of Arctic Ocean ice on record. I happened to be in the High Arctic in August (The record low was reached the following month). We traveled down a hundred plus miles of the fabled NW Passage and saw very little ice at all. The sudden drop in 2007 stunned the science world. The best guess of the IPCC were that the Arctic ocean would not be substantially ice free in Summer until around 2090. Those days are gone.

At the current rate of melt, the ice may be mostly gone by 2050 and some scientists are betting 2040.

It’s not just the coverage of ice that is changing. Far more dramatic in my opinion is the changes in thickness. The thicker ice that survives for multiple summers is disappearing. This is a strong indication that the summer melt will accelerate quickly.

Ice thickness changes from NASA/NOAA ICESAT (Click to enlarge)

What will the September bring? It’s looking more and more as if we may approach the 2007 melt. We are already running ahead of last years near record.

It is important to understand that the ice will not just drop a little more each year. There are many factors that govern how much ice melts each year. Ocean currents, and prevailing winds are two of the most important. The year to year fluctuations are caused by weather. The long term decline is caused by Climate.

Now onto clouds..

The affects that clouds have on our climate is one of the least understood aspects of climate. While you may think that clouds act to reflect the suns energy and act to cool the planet, this is not always the case. Clouds at night, trap heat in. Thin cirrus clouds actually cause warming and a deck of low clouds in daytime does act to cool the planet.

Someone told me awhile back, that we did not need to worry about climate change because as the earth got warmer, the oceans would evaporate more and the extra clouds would cool us right down. (and we did all that radiation Physics for nothing!)

Most climate models have assumed that clouds will increase a bit and act to cool as we warm up. This is a negative feedback. If the paper published in Science this week is right, the truth is just the opposite!

Amy Clement from the Univ. of Miami and others have published the results of a detailed study of clouds over the Pacific. Using surface and satellite records, they found that as the ocean warmed, the clouds DECREASED! This is a positive feedback. Fewer clouds will allow more sun in, causing more warming and even fewer clouds.

From Clement et al.,Science; July24,2009

They found that the one climate model that seems to show this best is the Hadley Center model in the UK. It’s one of the main models and is known for having a higher sensitivity.

The Climate sensitivity is defined as the warming we would expect for a doubling of the CO2 levels. The IPCC has given a range of 2.5C to 4.0 C for this and you will often see the mid range of 3C quoted in mass media. We will likely reach this doubling in 40-60 years. If Clement and her fellow authors are right, the climate sensitivity might be closer to the Hadley model at 4C.

This would mean that we have less time to reduce our emissions, and the goal of holding the warming to 2C, will be very difficult to reach. Even with more massive cuts in emissions than we thought. Note the IPCC will still be correct (albeit at the upper range) in their forecasted climate sensitivity!

Science does not deal in certainties, the language of science is probability. Even if we were to reach the emissions goals set out by politicians at the G8 awhile back, we would still have a 50% chance of exceeding 2C. And, that is if Clement et al. are wrong!

I told you the news wasn’t good.

Yes they all have something in common.

One of the negatives of working as a Meteorologist in TV, is that you are usually the only one on duty who has a background, and avid interest in science. The rest are (and I love them) News Weasels! ( I actually work with a bunch of supremely talented people, who save me from my grammar frequently)

Image from 1908 Tunguska Blast in Siberia

One of our directors is the son of two scientists, His Mother is a Chemist and his late Father had a PhD in Physics and was an expert in materials. We talk daily about science topics, and I really feel he should go into science, he has an incredibly inquisitive mind, and loves a mystery (Kids never seem to follow their parents careers- do they?).

Daniel is moving to Orlando soon and I will miss our conversations greatly. When I found out the Universe could expand faster than c, he was the only one at work who really appreciated the glory of the idea!

He told me today of Michael Kelley, an Atmospheric Scientist at Cornell, who noticed something weird. Often, three days after a shuttle launch, a display of Noctilucent clouds shows up in Alaska! Sure enough Kelley has a paper in press about this in Geophysical Research Letters.

Noctilucent Clouds credit NASA/Veres Viktor

Noctilucent clouds are very rare clouds that form about 50 miles high at the edge of the Thermosphere and Mesosphere. They are called night shining clouds, because at that altitude they can be lit by the sun when it is totally night below (No I have never seen them, but I carry extra underwear just in case).

He apparently discovered this from research into these clouds, and he also discovered a brilliant display in England in 1908. Right after the famous Tunguska blast in Siberia. It’s long been thought this blast, which leveled trees for hundreds of miles, and produced the energy of 200 atom bombs, was a meteoroid hitting Earth’s atmosphere. This may very well confirm that it was a comet that did it! The Tunguska meteorite blew up before hitting the ground, and this leads us to the TV show Mythbusters.

In a recent episode, they guys were amazed that if you put thermite in a can on top of a block of ice, the ice would explode! (see the video boys and girls!)

Daniel and I watched the video and discussed the Physics of it. We were uncertain. Daniel thought to call his Mom, who NASA trusts for chemistry knowledge. She knew the answer immediately! The block of ice turned to vapor so quickly that the expansion caused the explosion. When water turns from a liquid to a gas the volume increases (We looked it up) by 1096 times. (Thanks to Physicist Robert Muller of UCB, I remembered it was about 1000 times.) So mystery solved.

The Tunguska meteorite blew up for possibly similar reasons, Comets are really just dirty snowballs. The change to gas caused by the intense heating may have caused it to explode. Just like the block of ice on Mythbusters. This is apparently the conclusion Michael Kelley reaches in his soon to be published paper.

Time after time in science, an observation or a strange occurrence will lead to such interesting explanations. That’s why I so avidly support Science education. I want today’s kids to experience and appreciate the giddy wonder of how the Universe works!

Note: After writing this I discovered a story on space.com about it. The original story that caught Daniel’s eye was in National Geographic. They did not talk enough about the Meteor versus comet though!

While in Portland, Oregon for a Climate seminar and weather conference last month, I was told that I MUST visit Powell’s books.

I’m glad I did.

It has to be one of the best bookstores around. My daughter swears that Shakespeare Books in Paris is better, but I have not been in that one. Still, if you are in either city, take this as a hearty recommendation!

Powell's Books in Portland Oregon. Portland has a great light rail system.

Powell’s is huge with stacks of books on any subject. Their science collection is exceedingly excellent. My friend Jim Gandy who does on air weather in Columbia South Carolina (exc person-forecaster, you folks in Columbia are very lucky.) found a rare Meteorological text, and had it sent home by mail. My friend Bob Henson of NCAR found a great book on cloud identification.  Luckily they had another copy. Guess who has it! (I suspect with one hundred weather geeks in town, their Meteorology section has been thinned somewhat!)

Bob Henson wrote “THE ROUGH GUIDE TO WEATHER” and The ROUGH GUIDE TO CLIMATE CHANGE“. Both fabulous books. They have them at Powell’s. (It’s kind of weird being in a bookstore and seeing books written by people you know. I spotted four titles in weather written by friends and acquaintances!)

Even with the rapid spread of Kindles, and reading on your i-Touch etc, there is still something comfortable about reading an “old fashioned” book! I have read some really good ones recently, and have been planning a post to tell you about them. This is it…

I have already mentioned The Rough Guide books, but the other book I picked up is THE CLOUD BOOK by Richard Hamblyn. It was published in association with the UK Met. Office and has gorgeous photos. If you do not know the difference between a cumulus and an arcus, this book is for you. It would make a great birthday present for young person interested in Science. (Do it before their brains melt over guys/girls as the case may be- they will pick it back up after their hormones settle down.)

SIX EASY PIECES by the late Richard Feynman is also a must read. Also his THE PLEASURE OF FINDING THINGS OUT. I kick myself that I have just read it in my 49th year. Surely Feynman was one of the greatest minds in Physics of the twentieth century. Perhaps ANY century. If you appreciate Science, you will love Feynman. If you do not, you will after reading his other book. SURELY YOU ARE JOKING MR. FEYNMAN.(I have Oscar Wilde’s THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY on my bed stand, and I should have read that before now as well!)

Gavin Schmidt is another very smart person. He is a NASA Climate Scientist. His book along with Photographer Joshua Wilde has received rave reviews. Gorgeous pics and a look at climate change for non scientists and scientists alike. CLIMATE CHANGE-PICTURING THE SCIENCE is the title.

My biggest surprise of the Summer so far, was a book by Richard Dawkins I grabbed off the shelf. THE OXFORD BOOK OF MODERN SCIENCE WRITING is just an all around fascinating read. Everything from Carl Sagan to Evolutionary Biology is covered. The book has excerpts from dozens of the best minds in science.

For those who are not afraid of a little math and some thinking, David Archer’s book GLOBAL WARMING- UNDERSTANDING THE FORECAST is one of my faves. I am re-reading it now. Archer has one of my favourite quotes about the politics of his subject. “The target audience of denialism is the lay audience. It’s made to look like science, but it’s PR“. This is posted on Jules Klimaat Blog which is always a good read. (Mentioned in my blog on the Oregon Institute of Science)

I encounter this dressed up science that’s really PR frequently. Calling it out is one reason I started writing this blog. The other is to learn something new. I force myself to write about things I know little about sometimes. It’s  great way to learn! I am not a fan of Summer, and I count the days until September and the blue skies and dry air of autumn. One way I survive is to hole up in my bedroom, turn the AC on high, and READ. It’s not a bad way to escape the heat. Who knows, I bet I learn something too.

Vive Le Tour De France!

Dan

PS just go to Amazon, or your favourite online book dealer and you can find al of these books.