Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Climate: Unraveling the borehole riddle

Expand Messages
  • Patrick Neuman
    Climate: Unraveling the borehole riddle By Dan Whipple Boulder (UPI) April 12, 2004 Progress in the genuine understanding of climate change, as with all
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 13, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Climate: Unraveling the borehole riddle

      By Dan Whipple
      Boulder (UPI) April 12, 2004
      Progress in the genuine understanding of climate change, as with all
      science, is achieved through the accumulation of detail and, in some
      cases, excruciating detail.
      Case in point: geologic boreholes.

      In order to understand whether the modern climate warming is
      exceptional, scientists must learn how the planet's atmosphere
      behaved in the past. This is a complex task. Few temperature records
      go back more than two centuries or so, and most of what does exist
      tends to be concentrated in particular regions. For instance, there
      are thermometer measurements for the 19th century for North America
      and Europe, but virtually none for anywhere in the Southern
      Hemisphere.

      The problem of determining a global average temperature, even today --
      never mind past millennia -- is further complicated by the fact that
      two-thirds of the Earth is covered by oceans, which until very
      recently had no current thermometry records and few ways of obtaining
      historical data.

      Scientists from various disciplines have devised clever ways to
      overcome this lack of data. They have relied on so-called proxy
      records, which can provide a great deal of information, albeit
      indirectly. As a result, each one, by definition, has limitations and
      each one has generated a controversy about its interpretation.

      To reconstruct Earth's climate, scientists have looked at a number of
      proxy records, such as tree rings. They contain potential temperature
      and precipitation data that can be preserved in fossilized remnants
      as well as living trees.

      Climate researchers also have examined coral reefs, whose growth
      varies with water temperature. They have studied ocean sediments,
      from which oxygen isotope contents can infer temperature. They have
      extracted ice cores, which trap oxygen and hydrogen and can provide a
      proxy for temperature records. They have calculated glacier
      movements, which advance and retreat depending on temperature.

      They also have drilled boreholes -- core samples extracted from soil
      and rock instead of ice -- to attempt to determine how climatic
      processes have transferred surface heat to the underground
      environment.

      Although all of these proxy records have drawn reactions ranging from
      differing interpretations to outright disagreement, a recent exchange
      over boreholes demonstrates how the details of climate science can
      affect very large conclusions about the warming Earth.

      Gavin Schmidt, of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and
      Climate Systems Research at Columbia University in New York, and
      Michael Mann, of the Department of Environmental Sciences at
      University of Virginia in Charlottesville, published a paper recently
      in the journal Geophysical Research Letters that argued snow cover
      affected and perhaps skewed the borehole record.

      "Our paper wasn't that fundamental," Schmidt told United Press
      International. "I'm not going to claim that it was groundbreaking
      work. Changes in snow cover can affect the temperatures that get
      transmitted to deep boreholes. You're not going to find anybody who
      is going to disagree with that."

      As it turns out, some geologists are taking exception, including
      David Chapman, Marshall Bartlett and Robert Harris, all of the
      Department of Geology and Geophysics at the University of Utah in
      Salt Lake City.

      In a comment published in GRL, Chapman and the others argued: "We
      have been working on the same question as Mann and Schmidt -- the
      fidelity of ground surface temperature and surface air tracking, in
      particular the effect of seasonal snow cover ... But our analysis,
      based not on model simulation but analysis of measurements of GST and
      SAT at observatories ... leads us to very different conclusions."

      The most important point, Bartlett told UPI, "is that there is a
      difference between the inferred amount of warming that has occurred.
      We have confidence that the physics is really well understood. Any
      change in the surface temperature gets conducted to the solid rock."

      The interpretation resulting from these differences could be
      substantial. Bartlett said the borehole records show warming to be
      about twice as large since the advent of the industrial age as other
      estimates. He also noted the trio's results "indicate that the
      warming induced by industrialization since 1750 is more than we see
      in the proxy records and agrees with the surface air temperature
      records."

      This seemingly technical matter attracted the attention of Harvard
      University astrophysicist Willie Soon, a controversial figure among
      climate scientists, who argues that modern warming is not exceptional
      in the historic period and the so-called medieval warm period -- from
      about 800 to 1300 A.D. -- was warmer than today. Soon is also a
      senior scientist at the George Marshall Institute in Washington,
      D.C., one of the leading skeptical think tanks on climate.

      Soon e-mailed the analyses by Schmidt and Mann and by Chapman,
      Bartlett and Harris to journalists with a brief note: "Just in case
      it is of interest." What apparently attracted his attention was not
      the technical arguments so much as the fact Mann was one of the co-
      authors. Mann's work on modern temperature increases was cited by the
      Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2001 assessment on global
      warming.

      "Michael Mann has become a lightning rod for everybody and their
      dog," Schmidt said. "It's a ridiculous tactic. Obviously, you know
      why they do it. Mike has been getting the same thing ever since that
      assessment report. He's a combative guy. He likes to carry ball to
      the opposition.

      "I work in a modeling group," Schmidt added. "I don't have any
      particular axes to grind. General climate model experiments give you
      a laboratory to test different things. You make things change with
      respect to solar forcing, to greenhouse gases. To what extent does
      this model reflect the real world?"

      Schmidt explained that because snow cover in Eurasia actually has
      increased over the last few decades.

      "It's a very complicated story and involves four dynamics of climate.
      There isn't going to be a 'gotcha' moment, when everything is going
      to be clear, where you get the temperature for the middle of the
      Little Ice Age," he said.

      --

      http://www.spacedaily.com/upi/20040412-14293400.html

      Dan Whipple covers the environment for UPI Science News. E-mail
      sciencemail@...

      All rights reserved. Copyright 2004 by United Press International.
      Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches,
      photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights
      owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not
      copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way
      commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the
      prior written consent of by United Press International.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.