More on Global Dimming

[JavaScriptDonkey]

A BBC piece concerning recent research on recent global dimming.

For those that don't remember, global dimming was/is caused by particulate and sulphide emissions due to (mostly) the combustion of coal. The effect is to optically 'thicken' the atmosphere, reducing the amount of light that hits the surface. This has a cooling effect and also impacts water evaporation leading to less rain fall.

A similar effect involving vapour trails from aircraft was investigated in the flight ban just after 9/11.

The phenomena is being used here through statistical models to explain the lack of an global warming since 1998.

As usual, I suspect the real reasons may be found to be a combination of many complex factors although that won't stop people blaming MMGW for both excess and insufficient rain fall at the same time.

[DominicJ]

Remember, when its cold, its weather, when its hot, its global warming.

[UndercoverElephant]

Onward denialist strawmen, marching as to war
With the Cross of Capitalism marching on before...

[clv101]

Final paragraphs of Black's article:

But Robert Kaufmann is in no doubt that temperatures will pick up if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise.

"People can choose not to believe in [man-made] climate change - but the correct term here is 'belief' - believing is an act of faith, whereas science is a testing of hypotheses and seeing whether they hold up against real world data.

"Even before this paper there wasn't much scientific evidence for denying climate change, and now I don't see any credible scientific contradiction - if people don't believe it, it'll be because they choose not to believe it."

[DominicJ]

"Even before this paper there wasn't much scientific evidence for denying climate change

Yes clv, on an unrelated note, could I see your control groups....

[2 As and a B]

Deleted

[An Inspector Calls]

Wasn't the story supposed to be that up until the mid 70s coal stations were not fitted with electrostatic filters on their smoke stacks so all the nasty particulates went into the atmosphere.

After that time there was no significant cutback in coal burn until the 90s (when we moved somewhat towards gas), but we were removing the particulates using electrostatic precipitators.

So is he saying the those nasty Chinese chappies are burning coal AND not fitting electrostatic precipitators? Seems a bit far-fetched: the precipitators are piss-cheap to fit, consume damn all power, and last an age, so who wouldn't?

[Ludwig]

Remember, when its cold, its weather, when its hot, its global warming.

Contrast with the global warming denalists' motto: "When it's hot, it's weather; when it's cold, it's climate."

Either the yearly global temperature statistics are made up, and nothing to worry about; or they're telling us something about climate. Let us know which you think is the case, Dom.