Around Russia

About global warming

January 22, 2010 Igor Larin

In connection with the publication in the “HED” article by Yulia Latinina about global warming, I would like to imagine the point of view of specialists professionally engaged in climate.

The most important moments of modern ideas about climate and the reasons for its change are the following. Since 1860, i.e. From the beginning of the industrial era, the release of anthropogenic greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) into the atmosphere, nitrogen oxide (N2O)) continuously increased, as a result of which the planet became 0.75 degrees warmer than it was 150 years ago. This assessment is based on dozens of high -quality prolonged observations using thermometers - around the world, including land and ocean, and, as shown in Fig. 1, warming occurred at almost all points of the globe.

Rice. 1. Temperature trend, expressed in degrees for 100 years, calculated for the period from 1901 to 2005. Source: Report of the intergovernmental group of experts on climate change (MGEIK or IPCC ) 2007, I working group.

According to the theory of greenhouse effect, the most vivid climate changes should manifest in countries located in the depths of the continents and in high latitudes. Russia refers just to such countries and, as can be seen from the data in Fig. 2 (as well as in Fig. 1), the growth of the squamous temperature in the Russian Federation over the past 100 years has been noticeably higher than in the northern hemisphere and on the globe and amounted to 1.290 ° C. Running ahead somewhat, as well as in connection with the discussion of Latynina of remarkable benefits for Russia from warming, I note that its continuation in Russia is fraught with mercantis of permafrost and the destruction of industrial and other infrastructure on two -thirds of the Russian territory. Moreover, it is the eternal permafrost of Russia that can play a fatal role in the fate of the entire planet and its own-due to huge reserves of methane frozen in the ice (Clastrates of methane), which will be thrown into the atmosphere when merciful melting. The consequences of this development of events will be much worse than the most pessimistic forecasts.

Rice. 2. Temporary ranks of spatially equipped anomalies (i.e., deviations from the average for the period under consideration) of the average annual temperature of the squirrel air for the territory of the Russian Federation, the northern hemisphere and the globe. Source: Results of climate changes for strategies for sustainable development of the Russian Federation. Roshydromet, 2005

In the past, the climate of the Earth has repeatedly changed for natural reasons, and it could be assumed that today it changes under the influence of natural factors. In fact, today's situation is fundamentally different from what has happened over the past 600 thousand years. Its features are shown in Fig. 3 and are as follows. Firstly, the concentration of CO2 has never been as high as today. And secondly, on this scale of time it grew instantly. It is clear that a higher concentration of CO2 should lead to a higher temperature. But the concentration growth rate is also of great importance, since the high growth rate of concentration also means a high temperature growth rate. As a result, today we have not only the highest CO2 content, but also the highest over the last 600 thousand years. The latter circumstance may have catastrophic consequences for the flora and fauna of many land area: weakened as a result of the anthropogenic deterioration of the environmental situation and, having no time to adapt to the rapid changes of the climate, they will inevitably disappear from the face of the earth.

Rice. 3. A change in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in millions of shares from the total number of air molecules over the past 600 thousand years. Source: Report of the intergovernmental group of experts on climate change (MGEIK or IPCC ) 2007, I working group.

All minimums of CO2 in Fig. 3 - these are simultaneously temperature minimums, and maximums are interglacial periods. However, CO2 does not cause climatic changes. They are explained by the theory of Milankovich, which connects climatic changes with the change in the earth's orbit and the precessions of the earth's axis, which changes the amount of heat received by the earth from the sun. Changes in CO2 were the result of temperature changes-due to changes in the metabolism of carbon dioxide between the ocean and the atmosphere, due to a change in the velocity of the photosynthesis of glazed trees and other causes.

One of the most important issues of the problem of modern climate is the question of the reasons for the changes observed today, and forecasting possible changes in the future. The main question is how observed changes are associated with natural and how much - with anthropogenic factors. With the harsh connection of the life of people with the climate, it is easy to understand that the answer to this question determines the strategy of people's actions today and in the future. Today, the answer to this question can only be obtained with the help of mathematical models of the atmosphere, taking into account, as far as possible, all the factors that determine the climate, and all, again, as far as possible, feedback in the climatic system. There is no other way to understand the behavior of the earth's climate today. Fortunately, such models are created, but they are transit (three or four dozen), and all human life goes to create these unique tools. These, and only these scientists-the creators of modern climate models-can definitely explain in any way why the climate is changing today and how it can change in the future. Therefore, after receiving a “model” answer, other opinions and doubts (even if scientists, but not specialists, I don’t talk about journalists at all), begin to weigh very little, almost nothing, from a scientific point of view. The answer to the question of the causes of modern climatic changes is shown in Fig. 4.

Rice. 4. Anomalies of the average global temperature of the squamous air (0C) according to observations and calculations taking into account anthropogenic and natural external influences (a) and only natural influences (b). Natural influences include changes in the atmosphere of solar radiation that comes to the upper boundary and the influence of volcanic activity on the aerosol composition of the atmosphere, and to the antropogenic - changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosol. Anomalies are designed for the average for 1901-1950. Figure A presents the results of 58 calculations on 14 models of general circulation of the atmosphere and ocean (Mozao). Figure B - results 19 calculations for 5 models. The calculations are shown into thin blue and yellow lines, and the middle in the ensemble with fat and red lines. Gray lines marked the time of the most significant eruptions in volcanoes.
Source: Report of the intergovernmental group of experts on climate change (MGEIK or IPCC ) 2007, I working group.

I think that now readers can independently answer the question posed.

According to models that consent to the calculations with observation data, you can predict a possible sensitive climate change. Such a forecast for the next 300 years is presented in Fig. 5.

Rice. 5. Predictable change in the surface temperature in 2000 - 2300. For different scenarios of the development of the world: A2 - without restriction of emissions CO2; A1B, B1 - with the adoption of some measures to limit emissions; Constant Composition Commitment - constant concentrations of greenhouse gases after 2000. With multi -colored numbers, the number of models by which the calculation was made is indicated.
Source: Report of the intergovernmental group of experts on climate change (MGEIK or IPCC ) 2007, I working group.

However, the most impressive, in my opinion, are the results obtained in 2009 by the leading climatologist of the world Susan Solomon (see Fig. 6). In the upper part of the figure, it is shown how the concentration of CO2 will change if, after reaching the peak value (numbers to the left of the curve), the emission will be discontinued. Further, the CO2 concentration will begin to decrease, but this reduction will occur extremely slowly. The middle part shows a temperature change for each option indicated above. It can be seen that the temperature (for any option with CO2) over the next 1000 years will practically not change (!), Remaining at the level reached with the peak value of CO2. S. Solomon called this phenomenon an irreversible (at least for the next 1000 years) climate change. The lower part shows a change in the ocean level - in the worst case, after 1000 years it can increase by almost 2 meters.

Rice. 6. A prognosis of a change in the concentration of CO2 (upper Fig.), Squirrel temperature (middle) and the level of the ocean (lower) for the next 1000 years (see text).
Source: Solomon S.​ et Al . PNAS 2009; 106: 1704-1709.

In short, that's all. More detailed information about the climate can be found on the website “Ozone layer and climate of the Earth”, where two dozen opuses similar to Latininsky, as well as the film of the first channel “History of one deception, or global warming” are dismantled.

As for the article by Yu. Latinina, her meaning is as follows: the goal of scientists is not to study nature, but to earn money, and if they pay, they are ready to lie to the right and left. The best is paid for fear. So they invented global warming as the most paid horror story, although it is clear to everyone that this is a complete lies.

In my opinion, it was not possible to prove this situation by Yu. Latinina.

Author-Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Chairman of the Commission on the Chemistry of the Interdepartmental Geophysical Committee under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences