Number one, the Earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements. Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect. And number three, our computer climate simulations indicate that the greenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to affect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves.
*************
RECENT RELEVANT https://cityofangels25.blogspot.com/2025/12/1988-debate-on-climate-change-abc-news.html
****************************
My first viewgraph, which I would like to ask Suki to put up if he would, shows the global temperature over the period of instrumental records which is about 100 years. The present temperature is the highest in the period of record. The rate of warming in the past 25 years, as you can see on the right, is the highest on record. The four warmest years, as the Senator mentioned, have all been in the 1980s. And 1988 so far is so much warmer than 1987, that barring a remarkable and improbable cooling, 1988 will be the warmest year on the record.
Now let me turn to my second point which is causal association of the greenhouse effect and the global warming. Causal association requires first that the warming be larger than natural climate variability and, second, that the magnitude and nature of the warming be consistent with the greenhouse mechanism. These points are both addressed on my second viewgraph. The observed warming during the past 30 years, which is the period when we have accurate measurements of atmospheric composition, is shown by the heavy black line in this graph. The warming is almost 0.4 degrees Centigrade by 1987 relative to climatology, which is defined as the 30 year mean, 1950 to 1980 and, in fact, the warming is more than 0.4 degrees Centigrade in 1988.
The probability of a chance warming of that magnitude is about 1 percent. So, with 99 percent confidence we can state that the warming during this time period is a real warming trend. The other curves in this figure are the results of global climate model calculations for three scenarios of atmospheric trace gas growth. We have considered several scenarios because there are uncertainties in the exact trace gas growth in the past and especially in the future.
We have considered cases ranging from business as usual, which is scenario A, to draconian emission cuts, scenario C, which would totally eliminate net trace gas growth by year 2000. The main point to be made here is that the expected global warming is of the same magnitude as the observed warming. Since there is only a 1 percent chance of an accidental warming of this magnitude, the agreement with the expected greenhouse effect is of considerable significance.
Moreover, if you look at the next level of detail in the global temperature change, there are clear signs of the greenhouse effect. Observational data suggests a cooling in the stratosphere while the ground is warming. The data suggest somewhat more warming over land and sea ice regions than over open ocean, more warming at high latitudes than at low latitudes, and more warming in the winter than in the summer. In all of these cases, the signal is at best just beginning to emerge, and we need more data.
Some of these details, such as the northern hemisphere high latitude temperature trends, do not look exactly like the greenhouse effect, but that is expected. There are certainly other climate change factors involved in addition to the greenhouse effect. Altogether the evidence that the Earth is warming by an amount which is too large to ba a chance fluctuation and the similarity of the warming to that expected from the greenhouse effect represents a very strong case, in my opinion, that the greenhouse effect has been detected, and it is changing our climate now.
Then my third point. Finally, I would like to address the question of whether the greenhouse effect is already large enough to affect the probability of extreme events, such as summer heat waves. As shown in my next viewgraph, we have used the temperature changes computed in our global climate model to estimate the impact of the greenhouse effect on the frequency of hot summers in Washington, D.C. and Omaha, Nebraska. A hot summer is defined as the hottest one-third of the summers in the 1950 to 1980 period, which is the period the Weather Bureau uses for defining climatology.
So, in that period the probability of having a hot summer was 33 percent, but by the 1990s, you can see that the greenhouse effect has increased the probability of a hot summer to somewhere between 55 and 70 percent in Washington according to our climate model simulations. In the late 1980s, the probability of a hot summer would be somewhat less than that. You can interpolate to a value of something like 40 to 60 percent. I believe that this change in the frequency of hot summers is large enough to be noticeable to the average person. So, we have already reached a point that the greenhouse effect is important.
It may also have important implications other than for creature comfort. My last viewgraph shows global maps of temperature anomalies for a particular month, July, for several different years between 1986 and 2029, as computed without global climate model for the intermediate trace gas scenario B. As shown by the graphs on the left where yellow and red colors represent areas that are warmer than climatology and blue areas represent areas that are colder than climatology, at the present time in the 1980s the greenhouse warming is smaller than the natural variability of the local temperature. So, in any given month, there is almost as much area that is cooler than normal as there is area warmer than normal. A few decades in the future, as shown on the right, it is warm almost everywhere.
However, the point that I would like to make is that in the late 1980’s and in the 1990’s we notice a clear tendency in our model for greater than average warming in the southeast United States and the midwest. In our model this result seems to arise because the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of the United States warms more slowly than the land. This leads to high pressure along the east coast and circulation of warm air north into the midwest or the southeast.
There is only a tendency for this phenomenon. It is certainly an imperfect tool at this time. However, we conclude that there is evidence that the greenhouse effect increases the likelihood of heat wave drought situations in the southeast and midwest United States even though we cannot blame a specific drought on the greenhouse effect. Therefore, I believe that it is not a good idea to use the period 1950 to 1980 for which climatology is normally defined as an indication of how frequently droughts will occur in the future.
If our model is approximately correct, such situations may be more common in the next 10 to 15 years than they were in the period 1950 to 1980. Finally, I would like to stress that there is a need for improving these global climate models, and there is a need for global observations if we’re going to obtain a full understanding of these phenomena. That concludes my statement, and I’d be glad to answer questions if you’d like.
****************
PDF hwe: https://pulitzercenter.org/sites/default/files/june_23_1988_senate_hearing_1.pdf
Primary Source: Excerpt of “Greenhouse Effect and Global Climate Change” the June 23, 1988 Hearing Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate
Dec 13, 2007 If we stay on business as usual i think for even another decade or so then we are likely to get warming this century of several degrees fahrenheit and that would be really a different planet that would be the warmest that it has been since the middle pliocene that's about three million years ago and at that time there was no ice in the arctic during the summer and fall and sea level was about 25 meters which is about 80 feet higher than it is now so that is a very different planet about half a billion people now who live near the coastlines which would be underwater if we got a sea level rise of 80---
[MORE to Come shortly in Heating Planet blog's pursuit of the story of how humans failed to respond to this crisis as it plays out now out of our control and the propaganda industry continues to tell us what is happening before our eyes is not happening; and humans who have plastic in their brains believe the lies because it's easier to be stupid than to make a few sacrifices and change the way you live who cares about next generations- ke]
No comments:
Post a Comment