Paul Beckwith, Climate Systems Scientist out of Ottawa, Ontario is also excellent. As a former research scientist, I’m delighted to see we have two trustworthy experts trying to reach out & explain to people what’s happening, through social media.
Brainwashed numbskulls. It is not co2, magnetosphere loss, solar forcing, and you will not be prepared for the ride up and coming if you keep listening to that nonsense, but maybe it will be a Darwin moment..nevermind...please continue
As a Texas resident for 23 years ,I have never witnessed a summer this hot. The summer of 1980 in Texas was very hot. Temperatures did not dip below 100 degrees for more than 50 straight days
Hi, I’m a former research biologist. I’m not an expert on the climate, but there is crossover between the fields. As a result, I’ve been following what’s been happening from ever increasing average global temperatures. I wish the government & fossil fuel industry had not done such a good job in convincing everyone things are fine. At my age, the last thing I want to experience is these regularly occurring natural disasters, destruction & upheaval we’re beginning to finally pay attention to, bc it’s become so obvious here in the States, & around the globe. This is bc we’ve reached a tipping point of sorts, in which ave global temperatures have risen enough to cause other systems to start adding to our now climate “crises.” Systems would include warming and melting of glaciers & ice sheets of course, but also melting of permafrost.. which stores methane, as long as it doesn’t thaw. Also frozen lakes warming and releasing methane. There’s so many tipping points, I won’t mention them all here. What I will say is, those systems will now trigger further tipping points… like the super warming of the Atlantic ocean we’re seeing. I wish I could say it’s going to stop or slow down, but I can’t bc no serious measures are being taken immediately. Point of fact, it could already be too late to stop us from reaching an ave increase of 2C or more. Frankly, I’d rather not have to be around when that happens. The implications are enormous
@@dshepherd107you need too study the graph in the middle of the video (kobashi 2013). We’ve lived in a 200 year pause of volcanism. One good volcano, and we’ll wish we still had .5 C of warming.
@@jwatson2939 I think you need to look at the graph again. Notice that the slope of the temperature graph when it goes up is the same every time there is a slight pause in volcanoes. This is true from the 1300 through to the current warming. This suggests that the vast majority of the warming we are experiencing is due to a lack of volcanoes, not “greenhouse gases”. They will return, that seems guaranteed, so it’s not a question of “relying” on them, it’s a question of expecting and preparing for them. Also, not many gases in the atmosphere could be considered “permanent.” Even SO2 cycles out through acid rain as you mentioned. Hopefully you know what the carbon cycle is.
@@dshepherd107Your poor grasp on geophysical science has conflated clathrates, deep buried methane ice beyond the reach of surface temperatures, with surface permafrost, made up of frozen mineral soil and ice with a thin layer of detritus, that melts and refreezes every Summer. You need to issue a retraction, an apology _and then stay in your lane!_ *Magic CO2!* 😂🎉
@@faikerdogan2802 Or are supposed to be. But scientists are only human, with jobs to protect, and death threats to avoid, so there have been a substantial number of times I've noticed they were pulling their punches. Understandably so.
@@mrrecluse7002I've been deep into climate science since 2012, the year of the low sea ice surface record. I like to understand the Physics of stuff, from airplanes to black holes. Anyhoo, I don't feel I have the right to tell anyone there is no hope, I never believed in hope to begin with because I do what I can with what I have. So yeah, I had a really deep look into the environment, aka 'planetary boundaries'. The worse is we do not have the economic system to get us out of here. We are ran by junkies, "profit junkies". They don't give a damm about people. 'The top ten jobs that attract psychopaths'. Article is easy to find. And keep fighting ✊
At time 6:00, Jason claims that "the most recent major volcanic eruption was 32 years ago". What about the 2022 eruption just off Tonga which Wikipedia describes as "the largest atmospheric explosion ever recorded by instrumentation"? This volcano should have been mentioned in that a large amount of it occurred under water. It injected 45 million metric tonnes of water vapour (which is responsible for approximately half of the global greenhouse gas effect). This increased the water vapour content of the upper atmosphere by 5%. There are a number of serious scientific papers which point out that this volcano has the potential to increase global temperatures for up to five years. Of course this effect is in addition to the other factors mentioned in the video.
I should have mentioned Tonga. It is as southern hemisphere, so should have a low northern hemisphere temperature flextime as there is very little water vapor and sulfur aerial exchange across the equatorial region. I should check if Tonga had strong southern hemisphere climate perturbations.
@@JasonBoxClimate It had severe regional consequences following the eruption. Australia had record floods on the eastern seaboard, likely influenced by the eruption and ejection of water vapour into the atmosphere.
Thanks Jason. "The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha‘apai (HTHH) erupted in January 2022. The underwater caldera shot 146 metric megatons of water into the stratosphere, potentially contributing to atmospheric warming over the next 5 years, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change." Can you remember what happened with the crazy global weather after that? It is still happening.
"The model [in your source] calculated ... that water vapor [from the eruption] could increase the average global temperature by up to 0.035°C over the next 5 years. "
Australia experienced major flooding events after the Toga volcano last year. So much moisture in the atmosphere. Under water eruption would have put huge amount of heat into the ocean system.
How about the fact that underw volcanos are all over the in the oceans and we know of maybe a fraction of them. Warming oceans releases CO2 at a higher rate. This is just one example of many that shows that what we don't know about global climate can just about fill the Grand Canyon! It's so complex and complicated! Some people in the science community say we know more about our solar system than what is going on under the surface of our oceans! Food for thought.
Thank you, Dr. Box. This is clear and concise, short enough to send around to people that don't understand what's happening at all. Or people that are stuck in the "everything's fine" cycle of BS. I appreciate what you're doing. I also appreciate your mentioning of Leon, because he is awesome. I am grateful to be in a small group with him on Twitter, where just a few of us converse, and I've learned so much behind the scenes. Thank you again.
👋🏼from 🇨🇦 and THANK YOU, for sharing all your research, thoughts, feelings, observations, best guesses and just everything. Hoping more people will find you, follow and pay attention bc there's nothing better than 'truth' from a trusted source.
There was a large volcanic eruption last year. The undersea volcano was deep enough that most of the global cooling gases were absorbed by the sea but shallow enough that the steam added 10% more water vapor to the atmosphere, according to NASA. Since water vapor makes up 95% of all GHG, I believe that that one eruption had more of an effect than the 0.28% of the GHG that are man-made. There are over 300,000 known undersea volcanoes, many in the Pacific, each adding heat to the water.
Are they or their effects new phenomena or have their contributions been there all along? Are those effects studied? Do we have historical data? Can't meaningfully measure effects without enough data.
@@wmanadeau7860 The short answer to most of your questions is I don't know and it is somewhat unknowable. There are over 300,000 known undersea volcanoes and the Pacific is The Ring of Fire. There are always active volcanoes but if they are deep, the only sign is the heat. If they are shallow, there is ash and gasses that emerge and they have a cooling effect. I don't know the frequency of the ones that emit steam. The likelihood of spotting one prior to the launch of satellites in 1978 is virtually impossible and since little ash was emitted there would be no record in soil or ice. We know more about the surface of Mars than we know about the bottom of the ocean. To me, it stands to reason that the volcanoes that made Hawaii were to deep for a period, the right depth for a period, and are now in the period where they are above sea level, which is to say they have happened many times before. Our planet goes through many cycles, ranging from 11 years to 100,000 years. We are in a spiral galaxy and as we travel around the center, sometimes we are above or below the galactic disk and we receive more cosmic rays, which influences cloud formation. We know a lot about some cycles and not so much about others. All the different cycles tug and pull on our planet. Sometimes the forces amplify each other and sometimes they cancel each other out. I don't know enough to say I where we are at in the cycles but I have seen some charts that indicate a possibility of the beginning of a cooling trend in 2050. I heard some chatter that the Yellowstone cauldera is becoming more active but it could just be rumblings. The fact that it is hard to predict the volcanoes we can see and measure leads me to believe that something could be increasing undersea but it could be a thousand years before another volcano breaches the surface. I really don't know. We don't know what we don't know. The volcano last year seems like a major influence to our climate to me.
@@douglasjacobs882 Steam as you say, would have a warming effect as higher humidity in the atmosphere has a greenhouse effect, but it take a tremendous amount of steam to have an impact. Volcanoes are far more famous for their ash and gas emissions which have a cooling aerosol effect. I highly doubt that any one volcano in existence can hold a candle to the amount of atmospheric humidity that an El Nino is capable of increasing. I think a major contributing factor to the amplification of El Nino / La Nina effects is the warming of the atmosphere itself. For every 1 degree C rise in atmospheric temps, the atmosphere can hold 7% more humidity. This helps to explain why flash floods like what we saw in Pakistan last year and Libya this year are more common, or the increasing intensity of heavy rains from hurricanes, typhoons and tropical depressions like Doksuri raining 28 inches on the second largest city in China over 5 days. On Sept 23rd, global 2m atmospheric temps (60 N to 60 S) were .62C higher than the previous Sept 23rd record. This is a record in itself, since a .62C increase over any record previous daily temp is a record in itself. I'm not sure if the planet has ever warmed so quickly from one daily record to the next, certainly over the last 44 years but we could educatedly guess that it hasn't happened in 200,000 years or more, since the age of modern man. A greater than .62C drop is not so hard to imagine but a greater than .62C increase is more difficult. I bring this up because we are seeing things in climate that are man made and far out of the norm. The atmosphere of 3 days ago was capable of holding 4% more humidity than last year which was in and of itself, a record. Couple this with our current El Nino pumping humidity into the atmosphere and, well, hopefully you see my point.
@@Lorne.Mccuaig "but it take a tremendous amount of steam to have an impact" The volcano I referenced added 10% to global water vapor, if that is not a tremendous amount, what would it take for it to be tremendous? Water vapor is 95% of GHG and is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. The percentage of manmade CO2 is 3% of the total 0.04% CO2 in the atmosphere. Is that a tremendous amount? Does an El Nino increase water vapor by 10%, like the 2-day volcano event I specifically mentioned? The volcano was deep enough that most ash and other gasses didn't make it to the surface but shallow enough to create (a tremendous amount) of steam. All the heat from the volcano did not get converted to steam, some of it dissipated into the surrounding water. Deeper volcanos, of which there are 300,000 known undersea volcanos, transfer all of their heat to surrounding water. The Pacific Ocean is called the ring of fire, a vast number of undersea volcanos that are monitored but assumed to be consistent. If you assume undersea volcanos are consistent, the only source of ocean heat is from the surface. We don't know if the volcanos are consistent. "The atmosphere of 3 days ago was capable of holding 4% more humidity than last year which was in and of itself, a record. " If 4% more compared to a year ago is a record, a tremendous amount, why would you not consider 10% more over a 2-day period a tremendous amount? The 28" over 5-days rain event in China increased from what it was 20 years ago but it is a lower rain event then what happened 70 years ago. A couple years ago, a storm dumped 54" of rain in one day, it was a large storm but not a record, which was set over a 100 years ago. How do you determine a large rain event is due to AGW, and not just an infrequent natural event?
@@douglasjacobs882 The Tonga volcano you are referring to is theorized to warm the planet as much as .06C. As far as volcanoes "steaming into the atmosphere, there really isn't much else out there of note to my knowledge and to put .06C into perspective, Sept 23rd was warmer than the previous 2022, a record high world atmospheric temp by .62C. This by the way, is the widest known variation from previous daily records going back 44 years. Why is this variation of .62C from a previous daily record so wide? Ever higher man made GHG's. El Nino. Warming oceans. Higher solar radiation forcing. Lower aerosols (sulphates). Check out Jason Box's video from a month ago on YT, he gives 5 reasons and touches briefly on Tonga, but disputes the .06C conclusion from the data, saying it's more like .02 to .03 if I remember correctly. He's a climatologist, you should check him out, he's good.
And I might add that we have had the coolest and wettest July and August That I have experienced in 45 years of farming. There is something wrong if you have to wear a jacket on certain days in the hottest months of summer.
Your use of excellent visuals combined with your reading of carefully edited text makes for compelling content. I am a 72 years old and spent my career collecting global climate data in a variety of forms for a major research institute. Your products are accurate, thoughtful, and not at all hysterical. As humans we are clearly maladapted to this challenge. See "Don't look up".
When it comes from Jason I know I can trust the information. I'm extremely grateful for the accurate big picture. You're explaining what's behind the jump and spike in temperatures globally. Something that hovers in the back of my mind is tipping points. Surely this is going to play a role in accelerating the rise in the future what do you think?
I believe natural methane feedback loops were the first feedback loop to be bridged that we are only starting to become aware of, and it's just the first domino...
@@Mike80528 I was just talking about positive feedback loops within nature the other day and how they are fairly rare. It's scary to think of a positive feedback loop the entire planet is waiting to hit a certain level to do... something. Best of luck to us all if this happens
@@Mike80528 "just the first domino..." And it's such a big one. The sources are many. The potential volumes are huge. The warming effects, though shorter lived than CO2, are so much greater. With the increased temperatures that will release that methane now baked into the system it really doesn't look very promising does it?
@@bunsw2070to answer you question last year yes this year no. But that because of the increasingly wavier jet stream. So your question is the wrong question to ascertain whether the global is heating is increasing. Global average temperatures are at record highs as has been widely reported.
@@JasonBoxClimate so I understand the Walker Cycle and ENSO, how does the ocean give up some of its heat energy back to the atmosphere? Did ENSO also release more heat energy in 2012 then previous ElNino Cycles? also, the Marine heat wave off the coast of Vermont and Pensivania associated with the deadly flash flooding in those states?
An easy way to consider it is that the area heated by the El Nino effect is absorbing less heat from the atmosphere as soon as it starts. The heat no longer being absorbed in that area has to accumulate and be absorbed someplace else. Although nothing on a global scale occurs that quickly.
Excellent summary, thank you! Some people have raised the injection of water vapor into the stratosphere -- very unusual -- by the 2022 Hunga-Tonga Hunga volcanic eruption. Someone at JPL was studying this, IIRC. Is it possible that this has also added to the goosing of 2023 temperatures? I also wonder whether the energy used in phase changes -- ice melt and evaporation -- is already included in the pie chart at 2:30, or if that's an additional sink.
I don't think so. If the eruption had a significant impact the atmospheric scientists would know about it. Also I don't think eruptions eject water vapour into the stratosphere, and the bit about "phase changes" does not sound right either.
I'm also surprised that Jason did not mention the Tonga eruption, if only to show that it's effect is negligible. From what I've read it emitted little sulphur but injected a huge amount of water vapour into the stratosphere where it will stay for some time.
@@jitteryjet7525 My understanding is most of the water vapour from the Tonga eruption has already rained out. The Tonga eruption was so powerful it injected water vapour into the stratosphere. First time that had happened since the instruments were on line to measure stratospheric water vapour.
"The underwater caldera shot 146 metric megatons of water into the stratosphere, potentially contributing to atmospheric warming over the next 5 years, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change."
Oh man...... we're going to cook here in South Africa this coming summer. El niño ussually causes severe drought conditions in the Western, northern and southern parts of the country, and crazy flash foods in the East. Farmers should take note now already and safeguard against financial loss and loss of livestock. Remember the 7-year drought that decimated the Western and Northern Cape a few years back? Well, we're in for another round of suffering. Take care everyone..😢
Beginning of democracy only men voted, now most voters are women. Men have lost their rights to put their subjects down and control the population. Hence we are doomed, and other civilizations that become feminised, ancient rome and greece, the same thing happened.
@@chrisyarnold6205 Even that is too late to save us. Thanks to women voting, and they dont want to die, there is over a billion grandmas preaching human rights. This overpopulation will kill us all.
Sulfur aerosols are hardly talked about by IPCC, appreciate you giving some attention to the issue. Leon is a great shout-out. Hopefully more work is done in that space. There's far too much we don't understand
In the late 1970s, Scientist had published a brief press release that stated the earth was cooling. They never did state that it was caused by a coming ice age. The media at the time, took the report WAY out of context and published reports that Earth was going into another ice age. To my understanding, scientist had no previous knowledge that sulfur would block the sunlight. Sulfur has a stronger ability to block photons from the sun then the co2 emitted by the fuel industry. The EPA made a law that mandated the removal of most sulfer from coal and fuel and that resulted in the Earth heating again.
Yep. They made us pay a trillion dollars to take the sulfur out of gasoline, diesel, and coal burning power stations, and now they want to start spraying burning sulfur in the atmosphere. 🙃
If your trying to imply "ah aerosols" the IPCC is wrong then you are incorrect. IPCC just analyzes 1000s of science papers and aerosols are one of the 3 main drivers of global warming. The sun and co2 being the other two.
@@JFB1111 The Sun changes are relatively minor, almost negligible and getting negligiblererer with each passing decade now. Earth will not be getting 150 million years worth of increasing solar output over the next couple centuries.
At last, a detailed and informative production in simple language appealing to the intelligence, and steering clear from the extremes (the dreadful armageddon or the illusive commercially biassed “wind electricity and EVs will save us all”). Before claiming a problem can or can’t be solved, or that some specific is a solution, it’s best to develop a better understanding of the problem, and of the orders of magnitude in presence. When the problem is both multifactorial and dynamic, not only transients but also steady states become… call it “complicated”. Adding bilateral effects (like oceans with respect to CO2 and heat - both intake & ‘out-spew’) further complicates the illusion prone soup that is simmering in the cauldron your mind. To make sense with what is happening is an essential part of disinformation avoidance. Thank you for this contribution, Prof. Box.
Very informative and clear explanation with also clear call for action. Thank you. Incidentally when this video finished I had an ad for BP and other video list had BP ad, interesting algorithm.
Thank you very, very much! We need that kind of information and commitment. Badly. Please keep it up! We have to start acting now! Otherwise we're gonna go extinct on stupidity, ignorance and greed. And we'll be the first species to know about it before.
There will be a massive termination shock if humans were to ever approach net zero and another one when civilization collapses due to agriculture collapse caused by climate collapse.
What? Carbon dioxide has a lifetime in the atmosphere of something like 300-1000 years according to NASA. www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/news/2915/the-atmosphere-getting-a-handle-on-carbon-dioxide.amp
Then another shock as the reactors at the world's 400+ nuclear power plants begin to melt down, one by one, as it becomes no longer possible to keep them safely maintained.
Regurgitating crap is still crap. None of you have a understanding, just a agenda leech filled regurgitated mess. AH BUT THE FILTER OF TIME WILL WEED THESE CO2 NUMBSKULLS THROUGH THE DARWIN MOMENT UP IN COMING FOR PLANET EARTH.
He is, and there are many climate scientists who say similar things. However in our universal suffrage democracy, where women dominate voting, he is not allowed to talk about over population. Old ladies want to survive, and keep the status quo of them dominating the ballot box. None of his solutions will work, only population control will, but that should have happened a century ago.
Videos by tony heller are an excellent source of information. He explains climate and weather events in a way that everyone can understand. He uses graph’s and historical data.
Thanks for this presentation. Can you comment or make other videos addressing my questions below? How is total solar irradiance measured or calculated? Why does the daily TSI chart seem to show so much less scatter in recent years, while also showing much lower peaks than the 1970's/80's? It would seem that higher averages would typically go with higher peaks, When that doesn't happen an explanation as to why the distribution has changed would be in order. The absorption chart seems to show 100% absorption for both CO2 and H2O in the 2 to 3 micron range. This doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain please?
One thing I notice is the motte and bailey argument. Warmers point to the hottest temperatures yet. Deniers point out that there have been hotter events in the past. The Deniers are then accused of cherry picking even though the warmers are happy to declare every weather event as evidence.
Will look forward to the next video. Because if affecting the global temperature is as simple as adding or removing sulphur to ships fuels then it should be easy to do something like that to temporarily delay global warming. So the pitfalls will be interesting and are they worth the alternatives.
The book "the uninhabitable earth" makes pretty compelling points on why geo engineering is a bad idea. Basically we would poison the atmosphere and lock ourselves into keeping it going for a very long time.
@@Not_Even_Wrong it is a bad idea and if we go down that path we can't go back for decades. But CO2 pollution, planting lots of trees or CCS is also geo engineering very slow though. But if the alternatives are worse? Like flooded metropolises, natural disasters etc. At least research and small experiments should be done.
@@lunde28no... I'd rather have clean air and warm sub singing my face as take coffee outside. Other than bit of dietary use for microbiome in guts I suppose is our only use for it. Often concentrated in brassica vegetable. Match heads, some plants like blueberries may use it to acidity soil. Otherwise Sulfur is low-grade toxic. Acid rain into concrete making roads bridges runways brittle. Dying forests catch on, fire burn the Sulfur aggregation smoke back up to rain again and hurt more plants Grim
CO2 is wildfire fuel. That's LITERALLY what it is. It is THE ONLY wildfire fuel. I doubt that digging up wildfire fuel from 300 million years ago and putting it into the ecosphere now would have any measurable effect on anything such as ... say .. just as a random example .. wildfires.
It's cold here. Has been the whole of July, June was warm, March, April, May cold. Night time temps have been cold all summer. People here have been putting their heating on, I was in a local supermarket this week and the heating was on. Reducing CO2 how exactly? To what ends? What's the goal? What are the figures? What are the ramifications to the people?
good point... the 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai eruption did have an explosivity index of 5 which is just under the 1991 Pinatubo which really cooled climate. Yet it was at 20 degrees south latitude, so not much climate impact in northern hemisphere anyway.
@@JasonBoxClimate maybe ocean temps? It was apparently largest known underwater volcano? New Zealand in particular has had severe Ocean Anomolies, and possibly their biggest ever cyclone with Gabrielle and more. Australia too. Also Antarctic sea ice extent. I am sure at some point you will see the science on it. I believe they are still doing it.
@@JasonBoxClimate Leon Simons sometimes mentions that it caused a huge water vapor injection in the upper atmosphere, which would cause more warming as H2O is a greenhouse gas of course
My little microclimate in Tennessee has been cooling over the last five years. I wonder if all higher elevation communities are experiencing this? This summer has been the coolest I’ve experienced in my lifetime, our high has only been 84 this year.
Don't look at Arizona or the ocean near Florida lol. Or at China. Or at Vermont. Or Greece. Or... Maybe you're little microclimate in Tennessee is the last bastion! Get ready to receive climate refugees in the next 5-10 years!
I live at 7500ft elevation. I am experiencing extreme swings. Last winter we received 2000% of our average annual snow. This summer, we have broken heat records daily. Typically the monsoon season lasts for weeks, and I collect enough water for the year. This year, we got 3 days, and August is supposed to be hot and dry again. Due to the drought that we were in two years ago, pine bark beetles invaded and killed hundreds of my pinion trees. My aunt has land in East Texas. She is now losing trees to the beetles. It's not just temperature changes that are problematic. It is precipitation and ecosystems not being able to adapt to changes. At some point, all ecosystems will be affected.
@@pookahdragon5850 You never stated where on earth you are located. Also, A global atmosphere that warms, absorbs more moisture form a ocean that is warming FAST that will cause more record flooding in low elevation and high snow packs at high elevations.
@@pookahdragon5850 55 million years ago and 242 million years ago earth went though two mass hot house extinctions. Humans are doing it be emitting co2 emissions FAR greater in volume then Volcanic co2.
The biggest contributor to climate change which is usually temporary is from sulphur dioxide emissions. Volcanic eruptions have to be pretty massive and explosive to project the SO2 into the upper atmosphere where it acts as an aerosol reflecting sunlight back into space. The only eruption massive to effect climate in the last 40 years was Mt Pinatubo in 1991 which Dr Box did refer to, but not by name. That eruption ejected tens of thousands of tonnes of SO2 high into the atmosphere that cooled the climate about 1 F for a year. Usually volcanic eruptions have no noticable effect on the weather or climate. The ash however could contribute to thawing of ice in certain areas, but I have no specific details on that.. And the Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha' apai eruption in early 2022 ejected a massive amount of water vapor high into the atmosphere which is thought to have contributed some climate warming. How much or how long I do not know, but it was not much.
People are a little confused about plants/trees. It's actually quite simple. A portion of the mass of a plant is carbon, so as the mass of the plant increases, the amount of carbon locked into that plant increases. So, growing trees, cutting them down, turning them into buildings etc so that more trees can be grown, would be the kind of aim that makes sense. I call it "TWP", that's "Total Wood on Planet". Whether that wood is in trees or buildings etc doesn't really matter, we just need that TWP to be increasing as fast as we can get it to be.
The biomass of the tree itself is a pretty minuscule fraction of carbon sequestration. More of the carbon storage comes from LIVING trees depositing sugars (in the form of exudate) from their root systems and increasing the organic carbon content of soil. A major carbon sequestration force is seagrass which formerly existed in sprawling "meadows" along coasts but has been severely reduced. And algaes do more than any one class of organism. They grow faster and also deposit carbon on the ocean floor where it is stably kept inert.
@@philipm3173good to know more about seagrass. However will need go beyond demonstration. Can you imagine the legal hazard of employing underwater workers for ag level wages? Scuba certificates and gear provided by project funder adds up. Free diving wonder how effective Sharks sea snakes and 20 something aged ppl in swimsuits 🩱 and in sun all day get impulsive. Negligence charges on every bit of that Your choices are adaptation to warmer planet Or maintain rough what you're used to and adaptation to afidifying planet with no sun
It's interesting to hear topics such as aresol masking move from what I considered fringe sources , to more well respected mainstream sources. What a web we have woven
The wheels have started to come off planet Earth. What we face is now clearly coming into view. It’s hard to see a way out of this without huge human suffering.
@@JasonBoxClimate I've come to understand why one group has called itself "Earth First." If we were all able to take that perspective, it would have provided the mindset to prevent this predicament, in the first place. Instead, with humans first, we have unleashed the titanic forces of nature, in chaos.
Undergrowth. This is the mainstay for the cooling of lower regions of our planet, and here in the US, we have less undergrowth present than ever. Everywhere I look we have cleared both trees and especially undergrowth, the plants the grow in the canopy of trees, thick brush and foliage that remains in the shadows of the forests. This is the main cooling force that provides a greater impact on temperatures emitted by forests. this is what drives cool air that we feel as we walk near a dense forest, and it is nearly gone from most of the planet now. it is not just the trees, but what is under the trees that counts too.
But wait, there's more!... multiple positive feedback loops, a more chaotic jet stream, a weakened magnetic field, loss of albedo... it keeps going and going and.....
Well organised and clear presentation. The woods I planted now contain about 600 tons of wood, about 10 times my lifetime carbon emissions, quite low due to being off grid for 30 years.
Total Solar Irradiants increase - such a cute name for the upcoming (micro)nova. I trust Mr. Box to eventually recognize TSI for what it is: the 1st order driver of all this. The weather / climate on ALL planets orbiting Sol has abnormal excursions, but it doesn't reach the general public.
I believe that we have already encountered low TSI periods in recent history that should have had a cooling effect on our planet, but didn't, so couldn't be no1 factor. Sure I remember reading about American scientist who predicted this cooling event, but was proved wrong.
Total solar IRRADIANCE is a thoroughly well documented, studied and well understood factor going back thousands of years at least, and yet there is nothing in all that data to suggest that there is the massively impactful effect that you and other deniers so desperately want it to have on climate. And so, knowing that you have no DATA to use for your defense, you're always going to hide behind the most convenient excuse to maintain your point; the claim that there is a HUGE GLOBAL CONSPIRACY to hide the "truth", which of course you also conveniently cannot prove even in small part. At the end of the day, YOU have nothing but grandiose claims that YOU can't defend.
What is a micronova? Graphs in the video shows TSI is only slightly higher than it was in 2015. TSI was at a low in 2019 - the third warmest year on record.
@@craigtevis1241 It's an Art Bell/Joe Roagan/Alex Jones "sky is falling" yakking point popular with nutcases that bash people that believe in climate change with "omg omg they think the sky is falling!" while simultaneously presenting idiotic yakking points like this that clearly point out that THEY think the sky is falling even harder.
How much of an impact have hfc refrigerants had on warming? Does anyone know? We replaced cfcs to save the ozone layer but started using hfcs instead, which have an enormous greenhouse effect which makes co2 look anemic in comparison.
Flash floods also occur when the soil holding back a body of water becomes dry. So that the precursory events leading towards "solubility" take place and the earthen bar holding the water does give way.
The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) was a warm period that occurred in the interval roughly 9,500 to 5,500 years ago BP, with a thermal maximum around 8000 years BP. The HCO consisted of increases of up to 4 °C near the North Pole (in one study, winter warming of 3 to 9 °C and summer of 2 to 6 °C in northern central Siberia). Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2-3 °C warmer than now. Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now. A comparison of the delta profiles at Byrd Station, West Antarctica (2164 m ice core recovered, 1968), and Camp Century, Northwest Greenland, shows the post-glacial climatic optimum. Points of correlation indicate that in both locations, the Holocene climatic optimum (post-glacial climatic optimum) probably occurred at the same time. A similar comparison is evident between the Dye 3 1979 and the Camp Century 1963 cores regarding this period. The Hans Tausen Ice Cap, in Peary Land (northern Greenland), was drilled in 1977, with a new deep drill to 325 m. The ice core contained distinct melt layers all the way to the bedrock. That indicates that Hans Tausen Iskappe contains no ice from the last glaciation and so the world's northernmost ice cap melted away during the post-glacial climatic optimum and was rebuilt when the climate cooled some 4000 years ago. The effect would have had the maximum heating of the Northern Hemisphere 9,000 years ago, when the axial tilt was 24° and the nearest approach to the Sun (perihelion) was during the Northern Hemisphere's summer. The calculated Milankovitch Forcing would have provided 0.2% more solar radiation (+40 W/m2) to the Northern Hemisphere in summer, which tended to cause more heating. There seems to have been the predicted southward shift in the global band of thunderstorms, the Intertropical Convergence Zone.
A graph for the reflectivity of clouds please? Note that cloud cover at the equator will have significantly different impact than the same cloud over Norway or the North Pole due to the angles involved.
The red dashed line at 1:06 is very smooth. Is it a quadratic best fit? It would be nice to know the coefficients and exponents, regardless of the type of fit used.
It would indeed. I did that for a living in 1968 when I worked for the Evil Empire P.D. Oman (sort of). Can't remember sod all about it now. Here's future GMST based on past performance 0.18/decade + 0.06/decade**2. Not sure where it's pinned though. Also, Past Performance Is Not Indicative of Future Returns.
Past performance of EEI has a little bit of predictive power for future EEI, and even more productive power for future tide gage readings. Regarding EEI, an important climatological trend now in the 1st half of the 21st Century is the partial shutting of a January hole in atmospheric greenhouse components within the Arctic Circle, as well as the beginnings of an analogous shutting of a July hole within the Antarctic Circle. More CO2 is part of the story. More atmospheric water is another part of the story, especially within the Arctic Circle and close to the Antarctic Circle. Regarding accumulated sea level rise, much of which is the result of ice melt, ice melt sea level rise contribution can be thought of as a delayed effect of a fraction of accumulated EEI, with a shrinking delay time now of roughly 60 years. Since EEI is roughly quadratic, and since a roughly quadratic series has a resulting approximately cubic accumulation series, accumulated sea level rise can be expected to follow a superquadratic trend. With sea level rise, the quadratic term in the trinomial (3-term) approximation can be replaced with something like c2 * (year - 1980)^2.4 and have better predictive power during the next 100 years than a strictly quadratic term for the overall sea level rise trend. It can be expected that for some fairly brief geological time in the future, the accumulated sea level rise trend will be supercubic, before declining to sub-cubic due to much less ice sheet mass existing, meaning much less ice sheet mass being available to melt. Assuming an RCP 8.5 world in the the year 2100, thermal expansion of seawater combined with sediment erosion into the sea could ultimately add to sea level rise to about 200 meters higher than 20th Century sea level, in a process taking about 120,000 years. Ice melt is the fast part of the process, with thermal expansion of sea water taking longer, and sediment deposition taking the longest. The Persian Gulf would have a very much different look on a map with a 200 meter higher sea level, but hardly anyone cares about a world some 120,000 years into the future.
I've never heard about the closing atmospheric window (that allows the earth's heat radiation to escape to space by gaseous "pressure broadening" of various absorption bands in the atmosphere's absorption spectrum) before in any other video about climate change, and I watch a lot of them. Why? Also, this concept is worth giving some additional explanation to, since I don't think most viewers will immediately be able to grasp this concept.
Why you have such low subscribers? Most of YT videos are commercial, low depth simpleton in nature. I believe greater number of people should know the minute details. Maybe you should put clickbait 'World will end in 10 years' title.
@@JasonBoxClimate I don't know but this videos deserve more views than doomsday, earth-ending click bait ones. Collaborate with few YTbers, they might agree to promote this especially now when majority of humans are suffering one way or another. It is not a niche topic anymore. People should know that it is becoming increasingly risky to live between 40N & S latitudes.
@@JasonBoxClimate it's by sharing which we will do for you on Facebook. However, even though climate change is in the news and channels are getting more views, it's still not a palatable subject for so many. Especially low information voters in the United States. It's a shame because they are going to be caught, unprepared and unaware.
@@JasonBoxClimate you need more media time by ABC, NBC and other national and international media outlets. Have you stated in the past that global over population which is resulting in over consumption of Fossil fuels and since 1970, half the forest of the world is having severe impacts heating effect on the global atmosphere?
I live near Berlin, Germany. The weather in the last two weeks (July/August 2023) has been dreadful, raining nearly every day and temperatures well below average for this time of year. I've been heating for the last two days. I'm sick of hearing this paranoid climate nonsense. It's all about fear and control, just like the "pandemic"
What portion of the Greenhouse gas effect is attributed to water vapour? I have heard figures of 90% or more bandied around, is that correct? What effect would increasing water vapour by 5% have? As reportedly happened recently when the underwater volcano in Tonga blew up.
Brilliant synopsis and thanks for being one of the best (top 5) climate communicators around. You'll never hear "Mann' explain any of this. I won't anyhow, he blocked me lol. 😂
Off the top of my head as a lay person, I'd expect at least some of the carbon released by wild fires to be part of the natural carbon cycle, with the anomaly to be significant. Considering reports from the Dark Snow project, I'd expect soot/ash deposits on places like Greenland to be important as well.
I read an article that said Hunga Tonga eruption contributed to a huge amount of water vapour being ejected into the atmosphere. This apparently acts as a green house gas as well. Any thoughts on this? greenhouse gas
La Niña /El Niño is not declared by the BOM in Australia, we are reported to be in El Niño watch, could you expand on this observation please ? I’m a farmer in North Queensland and i’ve definitely experienced effects of La Niña in the last couple of years
In your pie chart I did not see the heat produced by powerplants, factories, cars, space launces, home appliances, airplanes, elevators, and trains, human bodies, cow, pig, horse, and other domesticated animal bodies. Concrete holds heat far better than plants so heat builds up on freeways and in cities.
One of the big drivers of acid rain in the '80s came from diesel trucks 18 wheelers. So the lower than anticipated warming that occurred in the '90s was a direct result of curbing sulfur content of truck fuel. Those emissions don't go anywhere near the stratosphere typically. So whatever aerosol shading effect they might have is very short-lived. However, the acidification of water lasts a lot longer. Just saying.
I agree overall. Troubling to see people rehabilitating Smog of all things. What they really want is SAI but until then forest fire soot and Smog is nest can do Math-brained people just solving a puzzle and controlling other variables like water health. You 80s crop of activists did more than ppl think Whales made it, no nukes used though not dismantled ofc, PCB and Sulfur Rain and Ozone. Apartheid did have it destroyed and at time seems fair to assume correct. However reducing Sulfur in 80s would have added to 90s heat so the counter forcing due to something else
Dr. Box, thank you for the simple but thorough explanation of the interplay between climate factors. While I'm not a climatologist, I do read some of the IPCC reports when they come out to get a sense of what the science is saying about climate change, and have told my friends and online social contacts that this year, both man made and natural causes are to blame, but I don't think most of them understand that human activities exacerbate natural cycles, like how much of the TSI is captured in the atmosphere and especially in the oceans, only to be re-released into the atmosphere. I think what's really telling is the fact that even when we're in a El Niño period, temps and CO2 concentrations continue to rise, but when multiple factors like an increase in TSI, El Niño, decreased sulfur emissions, and ocean heat content release are combined, the total effect is dramatically increased.
Can you help me understand. For a doubling of co2 we get 1% abuot 3Wm2. 1.97 Wm2 from the 140 ppm increase in co2 makes sense. If 90% of warming has entered the ocean the total is about 20Wm2 - where did this enegy come from ? And by what mechanism/process does it enter the ocean ? Thanks for giving actual numbers but im a bit confused.
What part of the 'Little Ice Age' was caused by humans replacing dark forest with light green farmland? Are there any studies conducted on reverse Albedo effect of large scale farming?
WIlliam Ruddiman makes the case that human influence on climate is well before the industrial era... press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691173214/plows-plagues-and-petroleum
@@JasonBoxClimate There is a theory that also when the Spaniards had invaded the Americas, they had gone to war with Aboriginal tribes killing a large amount of the tribes and also, spreading disease among the rest of the population. The theory is that thousands of previously tendered farms went wild, new forest had absorbed co2, and the global climate cooled.
Or you might be interested in observing e.g. Zermatt, Switzerland, where the average temperature has risen ca. 2.5°C over the last 30 years, causing the glaciers and the permafrost to melt at an unprecedented speed.
Satellite data have recently revealed that between 2002 and 2019, the mesosphere and lower thermosphere cooled by 3.1 degrees F (1.7 degrees C ). Mlynczak estimates that the doubling of CO2 levels thought likely by later this century will cause a cooling in these zones of around 13.5 degrees F (7.5 degrees C), which is between two and three times faster than the average warming expected at ground level.
Thanks so much for this "layman's" presentation. I'm assuming the increase in methane release/methane bubbles from permafrost melt would be included in the "land warming and ice melt" stat of 8%, is that correct? Similarly, effects from the slowing down of AMOC (Gulf Stream) would be given consideration within the 91% ocean/water stat?
@@lorimason2288 Aah--I see. News articles that I've been reading, including The Guardian and Axios, have been using the names interchangeably. But, I now see that the Gulf Stream is a surface current--caused by wind patterns and the Earth's rotation. Thanks for the clarification.
@@tinarhoades3178 "Gulf Stream is a surface current--caused by wind patterns and the Earth's rotation" Still wrong, as per ~everybody certainly not just you. Here you go stud: 17 Sv AMOC surface returning leg (water running down hill) 16 Sv Gyre ---- 33 Sv Gulf Stream across a line about half way NewfieLand-IreLand (south edges of them).
"slowing down of AMOC (Gulf Stream) would be given consideration within the 91% ocean/water stat?" No. Unrelated. There's no such thing as "given consideration". The 91% (except its actually 93% more recently, it keeps increasing of course because it's aiming for 96.7% where it's topped off assuming ice melt stays in relation) is SIMPLY DIRECTLY MEASURED by the 3,950 Argo floats with likely a small adjustment by GO-SHIP line interpolation & comparing gravity change with altimetry. When something is DIRECTLY MEASURED it's just a certain, simple plain fact and it makes no sense to be "given consideration" to anything other than if it's measured in enough places and are the thermometers good enough or the Wal Mart ones that Yong Zhong uses for his (ahem) "climate science".
@@grindupBaker Thanks for attempting to throw me a lifeline, as I'm, obviously, out of my depth. I subscribed to seek a better understanding of our climate crisis--but, clearly, should have started with a basic science channel. :). Although not my field, I've always been interested in the environment/climate change and outraged that world leaders have done very little to reverse course.
It may have been useful when explaining the additional 2.1 watts per m2 of energy reaching earth to mention that on average one square meter of the earth receives about one kilowatt of solar energy.
Meaning that the 2.1 watts of irradiance added by the current solar maximum is still minimal in effect relative to the normal amount of irradiance the earth normally receives.
He's done a great job of explaining but here's my take. When the Magnetosphere starts breaking down and grows weaker, the global temperature goes up. The weakening magnetosphere will also cause more volcanism to occur around the planet there by increasing CO2. C.M.E., Plasma Storms, and X-Fares increase the amount of Ultraviolet Radiation on Earth, making the air temperature feel even warmer.
Wow... VERY interesting. Do you think you are missing a piece of the puzzle? I work with data all day, everyday and seeing this, I feel that 2023 is such an outlier... looks like a highly sensitive equilibrium. 90 days into 2023 and world sea temperature started diverging. Great video, thanks!!
we need more experts like you on UA-cam to combat the misinformation, some deliberate, some just uneducated
Paul Beckwith, Climate Systems Scientist out of Ottawa, Ontario is also excellent. As a former research scientist, I’m delighted to see we have two trustworthy experts trying to reach out & explain to people what’s happening, through social media.
Brainwashed numbskulls. It is not co2, magnetosphere loss, solar forcing, and you will not be prepared for the ride up and coming if you keep listening to that nonsense, but maybe it will be a Darwin moment..nevermind...please continue
What misinformation, like that Covid came out of the lab?
hes not an expert. hes just a youtuber
@@captrodgers4273 do you know how to use Google?
As a Texas resident for 23 years ,I have never witnessed a summer this hot.
The summer of 1980 in Texas was very hot. Temperatures did not dip below 100 degrees for more than 50 straight days
Hi, I’m a former research biologist. I’m not an expert on the climate, but there is crossover between the fields. As a result, I’ve been following what’s been happening from ever increasing average global temperatures.
I wish the government & fossil fuel industry had not done such a good job in convincing everyone things are fine.
At my age, the last thing I want to experience is these regularly occurring natural disasters, destruction & upheaval we’re beginning to finally pay attention to, bc it’s become so obvious here in the States, & around the globe.
This is bc we’ve reached a tipping point of sorts, in which ave global temperatures have risen enough to cause other systems to start adding to our now climate “crises.”
Systems would include warming and melting of glaciers & ice sheets of course, but also melting of permafrost.. which stores methane, as long as it doesn’t thaw. Also frozen lakes warming and releasing methane. There’s so many tipping points, I won’t mention them all here. What I will say is, those systems will now trigger further tipping points… like the super warming of the Atlantic ocean we’re seeing. I wish I could say it’s going to stop or slow down, but I can’t bc no serious measures are being taken immediately. Point of fact, it could already be too late to stop us from reaching an ave increase of 2C or more. Frankly, I’d rather not have to be around when that happens. The implications are enormous
@@dshepherd107you need too study the graph in the middle of the video (kobashi 2013). We’ve lived in a 200 year pause of volcanism. One good volcano, and we’ll wish we still had .5 C of warming.
@@jwatson2939 I think you need to look at the graph again. Notice that the slope of the temperature graph when it goes up is the same every time there is a slight pause in volcanoes. This is true from the 1300 through to the current warming. This suggests that the vast majority of the warming we are experiencing is due to a lack of volcanoes, not “greenhouse gases”. They will return, that seems guaranteed, so it’s not a question of “relying” on them, it’s a question of expecting and preparing for them. Also, not many gases in the atmosphere could be considered “permanent.” Even SO2 cycles out through acid rain as you mentioned. Hopefully you know what the carbon cycle is.
Seattle (and N Tier States) is having the nicest coolest Summer in 50 years after the longest COLDEST snowiest Winter in a CENTURY.
*Magic CO2!* 😂🎉
@@dshepherd107Your poor grasp on geophysical science has conflated clathrates, deep buried methane ice beyond the reach of surface temperatures, with surface permafrost, made up of frozen mineral soil and ice with a thin layer of detritus, that melts and refreezes every Summer. You need to issue a retraction, an apology _and then stay in your lane!_
*Magic CO2!* 😂🎉
Pure objectivity. What a rare quality you have there, Jason. You gather all the facts, and sugarcoat nothing.
That's how science channels are
@@faikerdogan2802 Or are supposed to be. But scientists are only human, with jobs to protect, and death threats to avoid, so there have been a substantial number of times I've noticed they were pulling their punches.
Understandably so.
Truth supported with excellent visuals - these are the reasons folks will stop by and listen. 😮
@@mrrecluse7002I've been deep into climate science since 2012, the year of the low sea ice surface record. I like to understand the Physics of stuff, from airplanes to black holes.
Anyhoo, I don't feel I have the right to tell anyone there is no hope, I never believed in hope to begin with because I do what I can with what I have.
So yeah, I had a really deep look into the environment, aka 'planetary boundaries'.
The worse is we do not have the economic system to get us out of here.
We are ran by junkies, "profit junkies". They don't give a damm about people.
'The top ten jobs that attract psychopaths'. Article is easy to find.
And keep fighting ✊
@@mrrecluse7002Well and they want to have hope and give everyone else hope that we can save ourselves
At time 6:00, Jason claims that "the most recent major volcanic eruption was 32 years ago". What about the 2022 eruption just off Tonga which Wikipedia describes as "the largest atmospheric explosion ever recorded by instrumentation"? This volcano should have been mentioned in that a large amount of it occurred under water. It injected 45 million metric tonnes of water vapour (which is responsible for approximately half of the global greenhouse gas effect). This increased the water vapour content of the upper atmosphere by 5%. There are a number of serious scientific papers which point out that this volcano has the potential to increase global temperatures for up to five years. Of course this effect is in addition to the other factors mentioned in the video.
I should have mentioned Tonga. It is as southern hemisphere, so should have a low northern hemisphere temperature flextime as there is very little water vapor and sulfur aerial exchange across the equatorial region. I should check if Tonga had strong southern hemisphere climate perturbations.
@@JasonBoxClimate It had severe regional consequences following the eruption. Australia had record floods on the eastern seaboard, likely influenced by the eruption and ejection of water vapour into the atmosphere.
Thanks Jason. "The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha‘apai (HTHH) erupted in January 2022. The underwater caldera shot 146 metric megatons of water into the stratosphere, potentially contributing to atmospheric warming over the next 5 years, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change." Can you remember what happened with the crazy global weather after that? It is still happening.
"The model [in your source] calculated ... that water vapor [from the eruption] could increase the average global temperature by up to 0.035°C over the next 5 years. "
@@craigtevis1241my wife is always raising the thermostat by 0.0035C. It annoys me so much!
Australia experienced major flooding events after the Toga volcano last year. So much moisture in the atmosphere. Under water eruption would have put huge amount of heat into the ocean system.
@@craigtevis1241 Of course you have paid for and read the article or you subscribe to the journal ?
How about the fact that underw volcanos are all over the in the oceans and we know of maybe a fraction of them. Warming oceans releases CO2 at a higher rate. This is just one example of many that shows that what we don't know about global climate can just about fill the Grand Canyon! It's so complex and complicated! Some people in the science community say we know more about our solar system than what is going on under the surface of our oceans! Food for thought.
Thank you, Dr. Box. This is clear and concise, short enough to send around to people that don't understand what's happening at all. Or people that are stuck in the "everything's fine" cycle of BS. I appreciate what you're doing. I also appreciate your mentioning of Leon, because he is awesome. I am grateful to be in a small group with him on Twitter, where just a few of us converse, and I've learned so much behind the scenes. Thank you again.
The warming planet has the potential to turn a regional famine crisis to a continent-wide famine crisis to a global famine crisis.!
Why aren’t you telling everyone that this is cyclical and there’s not one damn thing we can do about it
@@138Syzygy Because it isn't and there is (if you live in the real world).
Like what ?
It not likely to exceed 7° in temp rise , is that good news or not so much ! 💝
👋🏼from 🇨🇦 and THANK YOU, for sharing all your research, thoughts, feelings, observations, best guesses and just everything. Hoping more people will find you, follow and pay attention bc there's nothing better than 'truth' from a trusted source.
There was a large volcanic eruption last year. The undersea volcano was deep enough that most of the global cooling gases were absorbed by the sea but shallow enough that the steam added 10% more water vapor to the atmosphere, according to NASA.
Since water vapor makes up 95% of all GHG, I believe that that one eruption had more of an effect than the 0.28% of the GHG that are man-made.
There are over 300,000 known undersea volcanoes, many in the Pacific, each adding heat to the water.
Are they or their effects new phenomena or have their contributions been there all along? Are those effects studied? Do we have historical data? Can't meaningfully measure effects without enough data.
@@wmanadeau7860 The short answer to most of your questions is I don't know and it is somewhat unknowable.
There are over 300,000 known undersea volcanoes and the Pacific is The Ring of Fire. There are always active volcanoes but if they are deep, the only sign is the heat. If they are shallow, there is ash and gasses that emerge and they have a cooling effect. I don't know the frequency of the ones that emit steam. The likelihood of spotting one prior to the launch of satellites in 1978 is virtually impossible and since little ash was emitted there would be no record in soil or ice. We know more about the surface of Mars than we know about the bottom of the ocean.
To me, it stands to reason that the volcanoes that made Hawaii were to deep for a period, the right depth for a period, and are now in the period where they are above sea level, which is to say they have happened many times before.
Our planet goes through many cycles, ranging from 11 years to 100,000 years. We are in a spiral galaxy and as we travel around the center, sometimes we are above or below the galactic disk and we receive more cosmic rays, which influences cloud formation. We know a lot about some cycles and not so much about others. All the different cycles tug and pull on our planet. Sometimes the forces amplify each other and sometimes they cancel each other out.
I don't know enough to say I where we are at in the cycles but I have seen some charts that indicate a possibility of the beginning of a cooling trend in 2050. I heard some chatter that the Yellowstone cauldera is becoming more active but it could just be rumblings. The fact that it is hard to predict the volcanoes we can see and measure leads me to believe that something could be increasing undersea but it could be a thousand years before another volcano breaches the surface. I really don't know. We don't know what we don't know.
The volcano last year seems like a major influence to our climate to me.
@@douglasjacobs882 Steam as you say, would have a warming effect as higher humidity in the atmosphere has a greenhouse effect, but it take a tremendous amount of steam to have an impact. Volcanoes are far more famous for their ash and gas emissions which have a cooling aerosol effect. I highly doubt that any one volcano in existence can hold a candle to the amount of atmospheric humidity that an El Nino is capable of increasing.
I think a major contributing factor to the amplification of El Nino / La Nina effects is the warming of the atmosphere itself. For every 1 degree C rise in atmospheric temps, the atmosphere can hold 7% more humidity. This helps to explain why flash floods like what we saw in Pakistan last year and Libya this year are more common, or the increasing intensity of heavy rains from hurricanes, typhoons and tropical depressions like Doksuri raining 28 inches on the second largest city in China over 5 days.
On Sept 23rd, global 2m atmospheric temps (60 N to 60 S) were .62C higher than the previous Sept 23rd record. This is a record in itself, since a .62C increase over any record previous daily temp is a record in itself. I'm not sure if the planet has ever warmed so quickly from one daily record to the next, certainly over the last 44 years but we could educatedly guess that it hasn't happened in 200,000 years or more, since the age of modern man. A greater than .62C drop is not so hard to imagine but a greater than .62C increase is more difficult.
I bring this up because we are seeing things in climate that are man made and far out of the norm. The atmosphere of 3 days ago was capable of holding 4% more humidity than last year which was in and of itself, a record. Couple this with our current El Nino pumping humidity into the atmosphere and, well, hopefully you see my point.
@@Lorne.Mccuaig
"but it take a tremendous amount of steam to have an impact"
The volcano I referenced added 10% to global water vapor, if that is not a tremendous amount, what would it take for it to be tremendous? Water vapor is 95% of GHG and is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. The percentage of manmade CO2 is 3% of the total 0.04% CO2 in the atmosphere. Is that a tremendous amount? Does an El Nino increase water vapor by 10%, like the 2-day volcano event I specifically mentioned?
The volcano was deep enough that most ash and other gasses didn't make it to the surface but shallow enough to create (a tremendous amount) of steam. All the heat from the volcano did not get converted to steam, some of it dissipated into the surrounding water. Deeper volcanos, of which there are 300,000 known undersea volcanos, transfer all of their heat to surrounding water. The Pacific Ocean is called the ring of fire, a vast number of undersea volcanos that are monitored but assumed to be consistent. If you assume undersea volcanos are consistent, the only source of ocean heat is from the surface. We don't know if the volcanos are consistent.
"The atmosphere of 3 days ago was capable of holding 4% more humidity than last year which was in and of itself, a record. "
If 4% more compared to a year ago is a record, a tremendous amount, why would you not consider 10% more over a 2-day period a tremendous amount?
The 28" over 5-days rain event in China increased from what it was 20 years ago but it is a lower rain event then what happened 70 years ago. A couple years ago, a storm dumped 54" of rain in one day, it was a large storm but not a record, which was set over a 100 years ago. How do you determine a large rain event is due to AGW, and not just an infrequent natural event?
@@douglasjacobs882 The Tonga volcano you are referring to is theorized to warm the planet as much as .06C. As far as volcanoes "steaming into the atmosphere, there really isn't much else out there of note to my knowledge and to put .06C into perspective, Sept 23rd was warmer than the previous 2022, a record high world atmospheric temp by .62C.
This by the way, is the widest known variation from previous daily records going back 44 years.
Why is this variation of .62C from a previous daily record so wide? Ever higher man made GHG's. El Nino. Warming oceans. Higher solar radiation forcing. Lower aerosols (sulphates).
Check out Jason Box's video from a month ago on YT, he gives 5 reasons and touches briefly on Tonga, but disputes the .06C conclusion from the data, saying it's more like .02 to .03 if I remember correctly. He's a climatologist, you should check him out, he's good.
The overall complexity of climate science is just one of the reasons why the earth's masses will never comprehend the urgency of our predicament.
Wettest July on record in UK and Ireland and it's still raining. We had our heatwave in June, after the latest, coldest spring in memory.
Same in northern France
And I might add that we have had the coolest and wettest July and August That I have experienced in 45 years of farming. There is something wrong if you have to wear a jacket on certain days in the hottest months of summer.
Your use of excellent visuals combined with your reading of carefully edited text makes for compelling content. I am a 72 years old and spent my career collecting global climate data in a variety of forms for a major research institute. Your products are accurate, thoughtful, and not at all hysterical. As humans we are clearly maladapted to this challenge. See "Don't look up".
Hunga Tunga had a huge eruption in desember 22. I think that is influencing our weather this year too.
I thought the same. I wonder how much water was vaporized in that eruption and if it would contribute significantly.
@@chaotic.interference.processor
Yes, maybe all this hail storms comes from that vaporizing of water ?
When it comes from Jason I know I can trust the information. I'm extremely grateful for the accurate big picture. You're explaining what's behind the jump and spike in temperatures globally. Something that hovers in the back of my mind is tipping points. Surely this is going to play a role in accelerating the rise in the future what do you think?
I believe natural methane feedback loops were the first feedback loop to be bridged that we are only starting to become aware of, and it's just the first domino...
@@Mike80528 I was just talking about positive feedback loops within nature the other day and how they are fairly rare. It's scary to think of a positive feedback loop the entire planet is waiting to hit a certain level to do... something. Best of luck to us all if this happens
@@Mike80528 "just the first domino..."
And it's such a big one.
The sources are many. The potential volumes are huge. The warming effects, though shorter lived than CO2, are so much greater.
With the increased temperatures that will release that methane now baked into the system it really doesn't look very promising does it?
But is it hotter where you live?
@@bunsw2070to answer you question last year yes this year no. But that because of the increasingly wavier jet stream. So your question is the wrong question to ascertain whether the global is heating is increasing. Global average temperatures are at record highs as has been widely reported.
Doesn't thenwarming impact of El Nino only fully develop after it reached its peak ?
Great video! Thank you
just as soon as sea surface temperatures rise, as they do during El Nino, so will the atmosphere gain some of that heat
@@JasonBoxClimate so I understand the Walker Cycle and ENSO, how does the ocean give up some of its heat energy back to the atmosphere? Did ENSO also release more heat energy in 2012 then previous ElNino Cycles? also, the Marine heat wave off the coast of Vermont and Pensivania associated with the deadly flash flooding in those states?
Evaporation is a cooling process
@@JasonBoxClimate We are in a mini ice age now, soon it will get hotter!
ua-cam.com/video/eB3DJtQZVsw/v-deo.html
An easy way to consider it is that the area heated by the El Nino effect is absorbing less heat from the atmosphere as soon as it starts. The heat no longer being absorbed in that area has to accumulate and be absorbed someplace else. Although nothing on a global scale occurs that quickly.
I feel like we just got a million-dollar consultation, holy shit. Thanks, Dr.!
Thank you for this vital public work Jason.
Jason, a truly excellent video. One to be shared far and wide.
Excellent summary, thank you! Some people have raised the injection of water vapor into the stratosphere -- very unusual -- by the 2022 Hunga-Tonga Hunga volcanic eruption. Someone at JPL was studying this, IIRC. Is it possible that this has also added to the goosing of 2023 temperatures? I also wonder whether the energy used in phase changes -- ice melt and evaporation -- is already included in the pie chart at 2:30, or if that's an additional sink.
I don't think so. If the eruption had a significant impact the atmospheric scientists would know about it. Also I don't think eruptions eject water vapour into the stratosphere, and the bit about "phase changes" does not sound right either.
I'm also surprised that Jason did not mention the Tonga eruption, if only to show that it's effect is negligible. From what I've read it emitted little sulphur but injected a huge amount of water vapour into the stratosphere where it will stay for some time.
@@jitteryjet7525 My understanding is most of the water vapour from the Tonga eruption has already rained out.
The Tonga eruption was so powerful it injected water vapour into the stratosphere. First time that had happened since the instruments were on line to measure stratospheric water vapour.
"The underwater caldera shot 146 metric megatons of water into the stratosphere, potentially contributing to atmospheric warming over the next 5 years, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change."
@@ekakijsn Very interesting. Do you have a link or title of the article?
Oh man...... we're going to cook here in South Africa this coming summer. El niño ussually causes severe drought conditions in the Western, northern and southern parts of the country, and crazy flash foods in the East.
Farmers should take note now already and safeguard against financial loss and loss of livestock. Remember the 7-year drought that decimated the Western and Northern Cape a few years back? Well, we're in for another round of suffering. Take care everyone..😢
At the current rate of burning, it can't be long before the whole lot collapses, unfortunately.
Beginning of democracy only men voted, now most voters are women. Men have lost their rights to put their subjects down and control the population. Hence we are doomed, and other civilizations that become feminised, ancient rome and greece, the same thing happened.
Maybe, the way we play at geopolitics on this planet, we'll get a nuclear winter first!
@@chrisyarnold6205 Even that is too late to save us. Thanks to women voting, and they dont want to die, there is over a billion grandmas preaching human rights. This overpopulation will kill us all.
Awesome video dr. Box. Thank you very much. I hope it finds it's way to mainstream media.
Thanks. We and everyone needs these explanations for now and posterity.
I miss when i was unaware of the true scale of the issues ahead and how off track our current political and economic systems are in dealing with it.
Great job with this Jason! Much appreciated!
Thank you so much for your work, looking forward to your next videos. We need them.
Sulfur aerosols are hardly talked about by IPCC, appreciate you giving some attention to the issue. Leon is a great shout-out. Hopefully more work is done in that space. There's far too much we don't understand
In the late 1970s, Scientist had published a brief press release that stated the earth was cooling. They never did state that it was caused by a coming ice age. The media at the time, took the report WAY out of context and published reports that Earth was going into another ice age. To my understanding, scientist had no previous knowledge that sulfur would block the sunlight. Sulfur has a stronger ability to block photons from the sun then the co2 emitted by the fuel industry. The EPA made a law that mandated the removal of most sulfer from coal and fuel and that resulted in the Earth heating again.
Yep. They made us pay a trillion dollars to take the sulfur out of gasoline, diesel, and coal burning power stations, and now they want to start spraying burning sulfur in the atmosphere. 🙃
If your trying to imply "ah aerosols" the IPCC is wrong then you are incorrect. IPCC just analyzes 1000s of science papers and aerosols are one of the 3 main drivers of global warming. The sun and co2 being the other two.
@@JFB1111 The Sun changes are relatively minor, almost negligible and getting negligiblererer with each passing decade now. Earth will not be getting 150 million years worth of increasing solar output over the next couple centuries.
What is there to say about aerosol?
At last, a detailed and informative production in simple language appealing to the intelligence, and steering clear from the extremes (the dreadful armageddon or the illusive commercially biassed “wind electricity and EVs will save us all”).
Before claiming a problem can or can’t be solved, or that some specific is a solution, it’s best to develop a better understanding of the problem, and of the orders of magnitude in presence. When the problem is both multifactorial and dynamic, not only transients but also steady states become… call it “complicated”. Adding bilateral effects (like oceans with respect to CO2 and heat - both intake & ‘out-spew’) further complicates the illusion prone soup that is simmering in the cauldron your mind.
To make sense with what is happening is an essential part of disinformation avoidance.
Thank you for this contribution, Prof. Box.
Very informative and clear explanation with also clear call for action. Thank you. Incidentally when this video finished I had an ad for BP and other video list had BP ad, interesting algorithm.
Thank you very, very much!
We need that kind of information and commitment. Badly.
Please keep it up! We have to start acting now!
Otherwise we're gonna go extinct on stupidity, ignorance and greed.
And we'll be the first species to know about it before.
Highly informative and objective analysis. Thank you for sharing.
I want to thank you for your work. And I am looking forward to your future videos.
Hunga Tonga eruption in January 2022 increased atmospheric water vapor by 13%, that is a major volcanic event which you missed.
I speak very plainly on my channel too.
There will be a massive termination shock if humans were to ever approach net zero and another one when civilization collapses due to agriculture collapse caused by climate collapse.
What? Carbon dioxide has a lifetime in the atmosphere of something like 300-1000 years according to NASA.
www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/news/2915/the-atmosphere-getting-a-handle-on-carbon-dioxide.amp
Then another shock as the reactors at the world's 400+ nuclear power plants begin to melt down, one by one, as it becomes no longer possible to keep them safely maintained.
Global heatwave? This has been one of the coldest and rainiest summers in Europe...
Thanks. Very comprehensive. Even mentioned the aerosol masking effect.
Thank you. Concise information presented professionally. I have a much better understanding of this subject now.
Regurgitating crap is still crap. None of you have a understanding, just a agenda leech filled regurgitated mess. AH BUT THE FILTER OF TIME WILL WEED THESE CO2 NUMBSKULLS THROUGH THE DARWIN MOMENT UP IN COMING FOR PLANET EARTH.
A clear and compelling analysis. Thank you!
He is, and there are many climate scientists who say similar things. However in our universal suffrage democracy, where women dominate voting, he is not allowed to talk about over population. Old ladies want to survive, and keep the status quo of them dominating the ballot box. None of his solutions will work, only population control will, but that should have happened a century ago.
The reply was rmoved.
God I wish YT content was just as well summarized and to the point as this
Videos by tony heller are an excellent source of information. He explains climate and weather events in a way that everyone can understand. He uses graph’s and historical data.
Thanks for this presentation. Can you comment or make other videos addressing my questions below? How is total solar irradiance measured or calculated? Why does the daily TSI chart seem to show so much less scatter in recent years, while also showing much lower peaks than the 1970's/80's? It would seem that higher averages would typically go with higher peaks, When that doesn't happen an explanation as to why the distribution has changed would be in order. The absorption chart seems to show 100% absorption for both CO2 and H2O in the 2 to 3 micron range. This doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain please?
Very informative , thankyou .
One thing I notice is the motte and bailey argument. Warmers point to the hottest temperatures yet. Deniers point out that there have been hotter events in the past. The Deniers are then accused of cherry picking even though the warmers are happy to declare every weather event as evidence.
Could the eruption in Tonga last year actually contribute to the higher temperatures we’re seeing?
Will look forward to the next video. Because if affecting the global temperature is as simple as adding or removing sulphur to ships fuels then it should be easy to do something like that to temporarily delay global warming. So the pitfalls will be interesting and are they worth the alternatives.
The book "the uninhabitable earth" makes pretty compelling points on why geo engineering is a bad idea.
Basically we would poison the atmosphere and lock ourselves into keeping it going for a very long time.
@@Not_Even_Wrong it is a bad idea and if we go down that path we can't go back for decades. But CO2 pollution, planting lots of trees or CCS is also geo engineering very slow though. But if the alternatives are worse? Like flooded metropolises, natural disasters etc. At least research and small experiments should be done.
@@lunde28no... I'd rather have clean air and warm sub singing my face as take coffee outside.
Other than bit of dietary use for microbiome in guts I suppose is our only use for it. Often concentrated in brassica vegetable.
Match heads, some plants like blueberries may use it to acidity soil.
Otherwise Sulfur is low-grade toxic. Acid rain into concrete making roads bridges runways brittle. Dying forests catch on, fire burn the Sulfur aggregation smoke back up to rain again and hurt more plants
Grim
Your highly objective analysis is very appreciated! Just found your channel. Will subscribe and like.
While tree planting is helpful, considering the wildfires risks it might be even better to plant kelp forests in the sea. Just a thought.
CO2 is wildfire fuel. That's LITERALLY what it is. It is THE ONLY wildfire fuel. I doubt that digging up wildfire fuel from 300 million years ago and putting it into the ecosphere now would have any measurable effect on anything such as ... say .. just as a random example .. wildfires.
Mossy Earth have been experimenting with planting kelp, they have some good video updates about their projects if you haven't seen them already
It's cold here. Has been the whole of July, June was warm, March, April, May cold. Night time temps have been cold all summer. People here have been putting their heating on, I was in a local supermarket this week and the heating was on.
Reducing CO2 how exactly? To what ends? What's the goal? What are the figures? What are the ramifications to the people?
where is "here"? Do you not know the difference between weather and climate?
Thanks, Jason.
Is the Hunga Tonga volacano eruption not be included ?
good point... the 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai eruption did have an explosivity index of 5 which is just under the 1991 Pinatubo which really cooled climate. Yet it was at 20 degrees south latitude, so not much climate impact in northern hemisphere anyway.
@@JasonBoxClimate maybe ocean temps? It was apparently largest known underwater volcano? New Zealand in particular has had severe Ocean Anomolies, and possibly their biggest ever cyclone with Gabrielle and more. Australia too.
Also Antarctic sea ice extent. I am sure at some point you will see the science on it. I believe they are still doing it.
@@JasonBoxClimate Leon Simons sometimes mentions that it caused a huge water vapor injection in the upper atmosphere, which would cause more warming as H2O is a greenhouse gas of course
Great content, presentation, and video production.
The repetitions of charts was SUPER, very much appreciated.
This will be a very helpful series. Thanks..
I’m glad you are young enough to see what is about to happen. You’ll look back on this video in great dismay.
Great presentation with lots of information that I really did not know from other sources and channels. So thank you.
My little microclimate in Tennessee has been cooling over the last five years. I wonder if all higher elevation communities are experiencing this? This summer has been the coolest I’ve experienced in my lifetime, our high has only been 84 this year.
Don't look at Arizona or the ocean near Florida lol. Or at China. Or at Vermont. Or Greece. Or... Maybe you're little microclimate in Tennessee is the last bastion! Get ready to receive climate refugees in the next 5-10 years!
I live at 7500ft elevation. I am experiencing extreme swings. Last winter we received 2000% of our average annual snow. This summer, we have broken heat records daily. Typically the monsoon season lasts for weeks, and I collect enough water for the year. This year, we got 3 days, and August is supposed to be hot and dry again. Due to the drought that we were in two years ago, pine bark beetles invaded and killed hundreds of my pinion trees. My aunt has land in East Texas. She is now losing trees to the beetles. It's not just temperature changes that are problematic. It is precipitation and ecosystems not being able to adapt to changes. At some point, all ecosystems will be affected.
@@maybeapacifist it has been happening in the last 5-10 years. I should have stayed in Canada!! Washington is turning into a climate refuge state.
@@pookahdragon5850 You never stated where on earth you are located. Also, A global atmosphere that warms, absorbs more moisture form a ocean that is warming FAST that will cause more record flooding in low elevation and high snow packs at high elevations.
@@pookahdragon5850 55 million years ago and 242 million years ago earth went though two mass hot house extinctions. Humans are doing it be emitting co2 emissions FAR greater in volume then Volcanic co2.
Hi thanks for all this great info. How are volcanic eruptions measured? I was thinking about the Icelandic Eyjafjallajökull eruption 2010?
The biggest contributor to climate change which is usually temporary is from sulphur dioxide emissions. Volcanic eruptions have to be pretty massive and explosive to project the SO2 into the upper atmosphere where it acts as an aerosol reflecting sunlight back into space. The only eruption massive to effect climate in the last 40 years was Mt Pinatubo in 1991 which Dr Box did refer to, but not by name. That eruption ejected tens of thousands of tonnes of SO2 high into the atmosphere that cooled the climate about 1 F for a year. Usually volcanic eruptions have no noticable effect on the weather or climate.
The ash however could contribute to thawing of ice in certain areas, but I have no specific details on that..
And the Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha' apai eruption in early 2022 ejected a massive amount of water vapor high into the atmosphere which is thought to have contributed some climate warming. How much or how long I do not know, but it was not much.
People are a little confused about plants/trees. It's actually quite simple. A portion of the mass of a plant is carbon, so as the mass of the plant increases, the amount of carbon locked into that plant increases. So, growing trees, cutting them down, turning them into buildings etc so that more trees can be grown, would be the kind of aim that makes sense. I call it "TWP", that's "Total Wood on Planet". Whether that wood is in trees or buildings etc doesn't really matter, we just need that TWP to be increasing as fast as we can get it to be.
The biomass of the tree itself is a pretty minuscule fraction of carbon sequestration. More of the carbon storage comes from LIVING trees depositing sugars (in the form of exudate) from their root systems and increasing the organic carbon content of soil. A major carbon sequestration force is seagrass which formerly existed in sprawling "meadows" along coasts but has been severely reduced. And algaes do more than any one class of organism. They grow faster and also deposit carbon on the ocean floor where it is stably kept inert.
@@philipm3173good to know more about seagrass. However will need go beyond demonstration.
Can you imagine the legal hazard of employing underwater workers for ag level wages? Scuba certificates and gear provided by project funder adds up. Free diving wonder how effective
Sharks sea snakes and 20 something aged ppl in swimsuits 🩱 and in sun all day get impulsive.
Negligence charges on every bit of that
Your choices are adaptation to warmer planet
Or maintain rough what you're used to and adaptation to afidifying planet with no sun
It's interesting to hear topics such as aresol masking move from what I considered fringe sources , to more well respected mainstream sources.
What a web we have woven
The wheels have started to come off planet Earth. What we face is now clearly coming into view. It’s hard to see a way out of this without huge human suffering.
and animal/plant suffering
@@JasonBoxClimate let's hope fungi, bacteria and archea thrive in this weird future. :)
@@JasonBoxClimate It's heartbreaking.
@@JasonBoxClimate I've come to understand why one group has called itself "Earth First." If we were all able to take that perspective, it would have provided the mindset to prevent this predicament, in the first place. Instead, with humans first, we have unleashed the titanic forces of nature, in chaos.
@@mrrecluse7002Very good points. Thanks.
Undergrowth. This is the mainstay for the cooling of lower regions of our planet, and here in the US, we have less undergrowth present than ever. Everywhere I look we have cleared both trees and especially undergrowth, the plants the grow in the canopy of trees, thick brush and foliage that remains in the shadows of the forests. This is the main cooling force that provides a greater impact on temperatures emitted by forests. this is what drives cool air that we feel as we walk near a dense forest, and it is nearly gone from most of the planet now. it is not just the trees, but what is under the trees that counts too.
But wait, there's more!... multiple positive feedback loops, a more chaotic jet stream, a weakened magnetic field, loss of albedo... it keeps going and going and.....
Well organised and clear presentation. The woods I planted now contain about 600 tons of wood, about 10 times my lifetime carbon emissions, quite low due to being off grid for 30 years.
Congratulations!
Total Solar Irradiants increase - such a cute name for the upcoming (micro)nova. I trust Mr. Box to eventually recognize TSI for what it is: the 1st order driver of all this. The weather / climate on ALL planets orbiting Sol has abnormal excursions, but it doesn't reach the general public.
I believe that we have already encountered low TSI periods in recent history that should have had a cooling effect on our planet, but didn't, so couldn't be no1 factor. Sure I remember reading about American scientist who predicted this cooling event, but was proved wrong.
Total solar IRRADIANCE is a thoroughly well documented, studied and well understood factor going back thousands of years at least, and yet there is nothing in all that data to suggest that there is the massively impactful effect that you and other deniers so desperately want it to have on climate. And so, knowing that you have no DATA to use for your defense, you're always going to hide behind the most convenient excuse to maintain your point; the claim that there is a HUGE GLOBAL CONSPIRACY to hide the "truth", which of course you also conveniently cannot prove even in small part. At the end of the day, YOU have nothing but grandiose claims that YOU can't defend.
What is a micronova? Graphs in the video shows TSI is only slightly higher than it was in 2015. TSI was at a low in 2019 - the third warmest year on record.
@@craigtevis1241 It's an Art Bell/Joe Roagan/Alex Jones "sky is falling" yakking point popular with nutcases that bash people that believe in climate change with "omg omg they think the sky is falling!" while simultaneously presenting idiotic yakking points like this that clearly point out that THEY think the sky is falling even harder.
How much of an impact have hfc refrigerants had on warming? Does anyone know? We replaced cfcs to save the ozone layer but started using hfcs instead, which have an enormous greenhouse effect which makes co2 look anemic in comparison.
Flash floods also occur when the soil holding back a body of water becomes dry. So that the precursory events leading towards "solubility" take place and the earthen bar holding the water does give way.
The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) was a warm period that occurred in the interval roughly 9,500 to 5,500 years ago BP, with a thermal maximum around 8000 years BP. The HCO consisted of increases of up to 4 °C near the North Pole (in one study, winter warming of 3 to 9 °C and summer of 2 to 6 °C in northern central Siberia). Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2-3 °C warmer than now. Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now. A comparison of the delta profiles at Byrd Station, West Antarctica (2164 m ice core recovered, 1968), and Camp Century, Northwest Greenland, shows the post-glacial climatic optimum. Points of correlation indicate that in both locations, the Holocene climatic optimum (post-glacial climatic optimum) probably occurred at the same time. A similar comparison is evident between the Dye 3 1979 and the Camp Century 1963 cores regarding this period. The Hans Tausen Ice Cap, in Peary Land (northern Greenland), was drilled in 1977, with a new deep drill to 325 m. The ice core contained distinct melt layers all the way to the bedrock. That indicates that Hans Tausen Iskappe contains no ice from the last glaciation and so the world's northernmost ice cap melted away during the post-glacial climatic optimum and was rebuilt when the climate cooled some 4000 years ago. The effect would have had the maximum heating of the Northern Hemisphere 9,000 years ago, when the axial tilt was 24° and the nearest approach to the Sun (perihelion) was during the Northern Hemisphere's summer. The calculated Milankovitch Forcing would have provided 0.2% more solar radiation (+40 W/m2) to the Northern Hemisphere in summer, which tended to cause more heating. There seems to have been the predicted southward shift in the global band of thunderstorms, the Intertropical Convergence Zone.
You posted this on the wrong video? Professor Box is not talking about the HCO.
All these climate activists should do the honorable thing and step out of life. Permanent removal of EVIL emissions.
A graph for the reflectivity of clouds please?
Note that cloud cover at the equator will have significantly different impact than the same cloud over Norway or the North Pole due to the angles involved.
The red dashed line at 1:06 is very smooth.
Is it a quadratic best fit?
It would be nice to know the coefficients and exponents, regardless of the type of fit used.
It would indeed. I did that for a living in 1968 when I worked for the Evil Empire P.D. Oman (sort of). Can't remember sod all about it now. Here's future GMST based on past performance 0.18/decade + 0.06/decade**2. Not sure where it's pinned though. Also, Past Performance Is Not Indicative of Future Returns.
Past performance of EEI has a little bit of predictive power for future EEI, and even more productive power for future tide gage readings.
Regarding EEI, an important climatological trend now in the 1st half of the 21st Century is the partial shutting of a January hole in atmospheric greenhouse components within the Arctic Circle, as well as the beginnings of an analogous shutting of a July hole within the Antarctic Circle. More CO2 is part of the story. More atmospheric water is another part of the story, especially within the Arctic Circle and close to the Antarctic Circle.
Regarding accumulated sea level rise, much of which is the result of ice melt, ice melt sea level rise contribution can be thought of as a delayed effect of a fraction of accumulated EEI, with a shrinking delay time now of roughly 60 years. Since EEI is roughly quadratic, and since a roughly quadratic series has a resulting approximately cubic accumulation series, accumulated sea level rise can be expected to follow a superquadratic trend. With sea level rise, the quadratic term in the trinomial (3-term) approximation can be replaced with something like
c2 * (year - 1980)^2.4
and have better predictive power during the next 100 years than a strictly quadratic term for the overall sea level rise trend.
It can be expected that for some fairly brief geological time in the future, the accumulated sea level rise trend will be supercubic, before declining to sub-cubic due to much less ice sheet mass existing, meaning much less ice sheet mass being available to melt.
Assuming an RCP 8.5 world in the the year 2100, thermal expansion of seawater combined with sediment erosion into the sea could ultimately add to sea level rise to about 200 meters higher than 20th Century sea level, in a process taking about 120,000 years. Ice melt is the fast part of the process, with thermal expansion of sea water taking longer, and sediment deposition taking the longest. The Persian Gulf would have a very much different look on a map with a 200 meter higher sea level, but hardly anyone cares about a world some 120,000 years into the future.
I've never heard about the closing atmospheric window (that allows the earth's heat radiation to escape to space by gaseous "pressure broadening" of various absorption bands in the atmosphere's absorption spectrum) before in any other video about climate change, and I watch a lot of them. Why? Also, this concept is worth giving some additional explanation to, since I don't think most viewers will immediately be able to grasp this concept.
I suspect lack of good sound bites for MSM to use.
Best analysis...ever. Thank you.
Awesome, crystalline video. Thanks.
Thanks for this Prof Box. Wonder if you can comment on the least harmful mitigation proposals?
Why you have such low subscribers? Most of YT videos are commercial, low depth simpleton in nature. I believe greater number of people should know the minute details. Maybe you should put clickbait 'World will end in 10 years' title.
my recent videos are getting a lot more views, still not so many subscribers. How to get more?
@@JasonBoxClimate I don't know but this videos deserve more views than doomsday, earth-ending click bait ones. Collaborate with few YTbers, they might agree to promote this especially now when majority of humans are suffering one way or another. It is not a niche topic anymore. People should know that it is becoming increasingly risky to live between 40N & S latitudes.
@@JasonBoxClimate it's by sharing which we will do for you on Facebook. However, even though climate change is in the news and channels are getting more views, it's still not a palatable subject for so many. Especially low information voters in the United States. It's a shame because they are going to be caught, unprepared and unaware.
@@JasonBoxClimatedo collaborations.
@@JasonBoxClimate you need more media time by ABC, NBC and other national and international media outlets. Have you stated in the past that global over population which is resulting in over consumption of Fossil fuels and since 1970, half the forest of the world is having severe impacts heating effect on the global atmosphere?
I live near Berlin, Germany. The weather in the last two weeks (July/August 2023) has been dreadful, raining nearly every day and temperatures well below average for this time of year. I've been heating for the last two days. I'm sick of hearing this paranoid climate nonsense. It's all about fear and control, just like the "pandemic"
Cooler in Atlantic USA all year until fall.
Hi Jason, what is influence of lower wind over ocean and difference in cloud cover?
It's lower again?
This most important informative video should have at least 100 million views.
What portion of the Greenhouse gas effect is attributed to water vapour? I have heard figures of 90% or more bandied around, is that correct? What effect would increasing water vapour by 5% have? As reportedly happened recently when the underwater volcano in Tonga blew up.
Brilliant synopsis and thanks for being one of the best (top 5) climate communicators around. You'll never hear "Mann' explain any of this. I won't anyhow, he blocked me lol. 😂
trewick-which other climate communicators do you like? suggestions appreciated.
Fantastic and comprehensive info! Have there been any studies of the influence of increasing wildfires on global temperature change?
Off the top of my head as a lay person, I'd expect at least some of the carbon released by wild fires to be part of the natural carbon cycle, with the anomaly to be significant. Considering reports from the Dark Snow project, I'd expect soot/ash deposits on places like Greenland to be important as well.
I read an article that said Hunga Tonga eruption contributed to a huge amount of water vapour being ejected into the atmosphere. This apparently acts as a green house gas as well. Any thoughts on this? greenhouse gas
It's 0.15 w/m**2
La Niña /El Niño is not declared by the BOM in Australia, we are reported to be in El Niño watch, could you expand on this observation please ? I’m a farmer in North Queensland and i’ve definitely experienced effects of La Niña in the last couple of years
In your pie chart I did not see the heat produced by powerplants, factories, cars, space launces, home appliances, airplanes, elevators, and trains, human bodies, cow, pig, horse, and other domesticated animal bodies. Concrete holds heat far better than plants so heat builds up on freeways and in cities.
You might want to also take into consideration the loss of polar cap ice that normally reflects sunlight.
AKA: Summer
One of the big drivers of acid rain in the '80s came from diesel trucks 18 wheelers. So the lower than anticipated warming that occurred in the '90s was a direct result of curbing sulfur content of truck fuel. Those emissions don't go anywhere near the stratosphere typically. So whatever aerosol shading effect they might have is very short-lived. However, the acidification of water lasts a lot longer. Just saying.
I agree overall. Troubling to see people rehabilitating Smog of all things. What they really want is SAI but until then forest fire soot and Smog is nest can do
Math-brained people just solving a puzzle and controlling other variables like water health.
You 80s crop of activists did more than ppl think
Whales made it, no nukes used though not dismantled ofc, PCB and Sulfur Rain and Ozone. Apartheid did have it destroyed and at time seems fair to assume correct.
However reducing Sulfur in 80s would have added to 90s heat so the counter forcing due to something else
Loosing so many beautiful plants soon makes me almost cry...
Anyways, thanks for your eye opening research and the collection of so much field data. ❤
What heatwave? This has been one of the coldest summers in recent decades.
Dr. Box, thank you for the simple but thorough explanation of the interplay between climate factors. While I'm not a climatologist, I do read some of the IPCC reports when they come out to get a sense of what the science is saying about climate change, and have told my friends and online social contacts that this year, both man made and natural causes are to blame, but I don't think most of them understand that human activities exacerbate natural cycles, like how much of the TSI is captured in the atmosphere and especially in the oceans, only to be re-released into the atmosphere.
I think what's really telling is the fact that even when we're in a El Niño period, temps and CO2 concentrations continue to rise, but when multiple factors like an increase in TSI, El Niño, decreased sulfur emissions, and ocean heat content release are combined, the total effect is dramatically increased.
Can you help me understand. For a doubling of co2 we get 1% abuot 3Wm2. 1.97 Wm2 from the 140 ppm increase in co2 makes sense. If 90% of warming has entered the ocean the total is about 20Wm2 - where did this enegy come from ? And by what mechanism/process does it enter the ocean ? Thanks for giving actual numbers but im a bit confused.
What part of the 'Little Ice Age' was caused by humans replacing dark forest with light green farmland? Are there any studies conducted on reverse Albedo effect of large scale farming?
WIlliam Ruddiman makes the case that human influence on climate is well before the industrial era... press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691173214/plows-plagues-and-petroleum
@@JasonBoxClimate There is a theory that also when the Spaniards had invaded the Americas, they had gone to war with Aboriginal tribes killing a large amount of the tribes and also, spreading disease among the rest of the population. The theory is that thousands of previously tendered farms went wild, new forest had absorbed co2, and the global climate cooled.
Thank you, Dr. Box👍
As a climatologist, you might be interested in observing Safed, Israel where the weather is consistently perfectly normal.
Or you might be interested in observing e.g. Zermatt, Switzerland, where the average temperature has risen ca. 2.5°C over the last 30 years, causing the glaciers and the permafrost to melt at an unprecedented speed.
It might be worth mentioning particle forcing when the sun is in a more active phase, as well.
Satellite data have recently revealed that between 2002 and 2019, the mesosphere and lower thermosphere cooled by 3.1 degrees F (1.7 degrees C ). Mlynczak estimates that the doubling of CO2 levels thought likely by later this century will cause a cooling in these zones of around 13.5 degrees F (7.5 degrees C), which is between two and three times faster than the average warming expected at ground level.
And yet it's snowing in the Swiss Alps while in Nambia the temperature got down to - (minus) 10º Celsius...
Thanks so much for this "layman's" presentation. I'm assuming the increase in methane release/methane bubbles from permafrost melt would be included in the "land warming and ice melt" stat of 8%, is that correct? Similarly, effects from the slowing down of AMOC (Gulf Stream) would be given consideration within the 91% ocean/water stat?
amoc and gulf stream are not the same things
@@lorimason2288 Aah--I see. News articles that I've been reading, including The Guardian and Axios, have been using the names interchangeably. But, I now see that the Gulf Stream is a surface current--caused by wind patterns and the Earth's rotation. Thanks for the clarification.
@@tinarhoades3178 "Gulf Stream is a surface current--caused by wind patterns and the Earth's rotation" Still wrong, as per ~everybody certainly not just you. Here you go stud:
17 Sv AMOC surface returning leg (water running down hill)
16 Sv Gyre
----
33 Sv Gulf Stream across a line about half way NewfieLand-IreLand (south edges of them).
"slowing down of AMOC (Gulf Stream) would be given consideration within the 91% ocean/water stat?" No. Unrelated. There's no such thing as "given consideration". The 91% (except its actually 93% more recently, it keeps increasing of course because it's aiming for 96.7% where it's topped off assuming ice melt stays in relation) is SIMPLY DIRECTLY MEASURED by the 3,950 Argo floats with likely a small adjustment by GO-SHIP line interpolation & comparing gravity change with altimetry. When something is DIRECTLY MEASURED it's just a certain, simple plain fact and it makes no sense to be "given consideration" to anything other than if it's measured in enough places and are the thermometers good enough or the Wal Mart ones that Yong Zhong uses for his (ahem) "climate science".
@@grindupBaker Thanks for attempting to throw me a lifeline, as I'm, obviously, out of my depth. I subscribed to seek a better understanding of our climate crisis--but, clearly, should have started with a basic science channel. :). Although not my field, I've always been interested in the environment/climate change and outraged that world leaders have done very little to reverse course.
Thankyou I like videos that get quickly to the point and explain simply
It may have been useful when explaining the additional 2.1 watts per m2 of energy reaching earth to mention that on average one square meter of the earth receives about one kilowatt of solar energy.
Meaning that the 2.1 watts of irradiance added by the current solar maximum is still minimal in effect relative to the normal amount of irradiance the earth normally receives.
Yes. Tiny.👌@@michaeldeierhoi4096
I gotta say this video is extremely good. Superb quality work.
Hello. I just have a simple question. What about the "heat wave in 1980?43 years ago. And, that's just it! Waves. Not constant heat. Just waves.
He's done a great job of explaining but here's my take.
When the Magnetosphere starts breaking down and grows weaker, the global temperature goes up. The weakening magnetosphere will also cause more volcanism to occur around the planet there by increasing CO2. C.M.E., Plasma Storms, and X-Fares increase the amount of Ultraviolet Radiation on Earth, making the air temperature feel even warmer.
Wow... VERY interesting. Do you think you are missing a piece of the puzzle? I work with data all day, everyday and seeing this, I feel that 2023 is such an outlier... looks like a highly sensitive equilibrium. 90 days into 2023 and world sea temperature started diverging. Great video, thanks!!