2020 officially saw a record number of $1 billion weather and climate disasters.

Pa ElGrande · 22-02-2021 9:09pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

. . .
Green energy is not causing droughts, heatwaves or freezing conditions that is climate change.

By that logic neither are fossil fuels. How are the raw materials that make up the wind turbines mined and extracted and produced into the final product (Steel, Concrete, plastic, fibreglass, Aluminium, Copper, rare earth metals). When all the assembly and maintenance is taken into account what is the energy returned on energy invested (EROEI) and likewise what is the process for Solar panels. The fibreglass blades have a lifespan anywhere between 10 to 30 years depending on the design and environment they operate in and they have to be disposed of eventually. Some of these products tend to go off-line in the evening when electricity demand peaks and only operate reliably in fair weather conditions, and must be backed up by 100% fossil fuel reserve, that requires capital expenditure and maintenance when they are not producing anything. They are not good for grid inertia and cannot be enabled on demand, the cost of their being intermittent is borne by the fossil fuel operators who pass the costs onto the consumer and then we get onto the subject of burning timber . . . this is classified as renewable. Michael Moore and co. covered that last year. Hydro electricity works (most of the time), however it's killed way more people to date than nuclear energy.

Gaoth Laidir · 22-02-2021 9:41pm

I managed to find something relating to questions asked of authorities for spreading AquaSalina (refined brine water from below oil fields, not related to fracking) as deicer in limited extreme cold weather events in Ohio but the fears of the environmentalists are grossly unfounded, it seems. The actual exposure to the public was found to be about 0.6 millirem per year, which is negligible. It's the same as eating 60 bananas in a year. Typical human exposure from natural background radiation is around 620 mrem/year.

https://local12.com/news/investigates/serious-questions-about-radioactive-element-in-highway-de-icer

Just for comparison and perspective, 1 millirem is the equivalent of

- Three days of living in Atlanta
- Two days of living in Denver
- About seven hours in some spots in the Espirito Santo State of Brazil.

- an average year of TV watching
- a year of wearing a luminous dial watch
- a coast-to-coast airline flight
- a year living next door to a normally operating nuclear power plant

The loss in life-expectancy from a 1-mrem exposure is about 1.2 minutes, equivalent to:

- crossing the street three times
- three puffs on a cigarette
- 10 extra Calories for an overweight person

So Banana Republic, I would ease off the scaremongering a bit and try to look at these things in perspective a bit before posting a claim like that. As you say, do your research. Now that the facts have changed, maybe you'll change your mind...

Banana Republic 1 · 22-02-2021 10:03pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

By that logic neither are fossil fuels. How are the raw materials that make up the wind turbines mined and extracted and produced into the final product (Steel, Concrete, plastic, fibreglass, Aluminium, Copper, rare earth metals). When all the assembly and maintenance is taken into account what is the energy returned on energy invested (EROEI) and likewise what is the process for Solar panels. The fibreglass blades have a lifespan anywhere between 10 to 30 years depending on the design and environment they operate in and they have to be disposed of eventually. Some of these products tend to go off-line in the evening when electricity demand peaks and only operate reliably in fair weather conditions, and must be backed up by 100% fossil fuel reserve, that requires capital expenditure and maintenance when they are not producing anything. They are not good for grid inertia and cannot be enabled on demand, the cost of their being intermittent is borne by the fossil fuel operators who pass the costs onto the consumer and then we get onto the subject of burning timber . . . this is classified as renewable. Michael Moore and co. covered that last year. Hydro electricity works (most of the time), however it's killed way more people to date than nuclear energy.

Well for one fossil fuels totally are!

Nuclear power is part of the solution I’ve not argued against it. I would have reservations about it being in Ireland, power plants that is, purely because the state has given us the luas that didn’t join up, the dail printer and the fiasco of the children’s hospital.

Hydro works and could really utilise wind power but Ireland would need about 30 turlough hill installations. They are studying/building a hydro station in Japan utilising sea water, although you’d imagine the maintenance of such a thing would be never ending.

There are plans put forward to have massive solar farms in North Africa connected to Europe via DC current cables either through Spain or under the med.

The answer for Ireland is wind and solar backed by battery and hydro storage with the interconnection to the European grid.

Oneiric 3 · 23-02-2021 12:42am

Nabber wrote: »

It's dirty to make, it's really bad for the local environment and if a resident objects to the eye sores then they are surely Right Wing Nazis. I like green energy, I really dislike the people who champion it as squeaky clean.
Imagine if it was sold on it's merits alone.

That doc I posted on here last year really reveal just how environmentally destructive 'clean energy' is. People who champion wind farms / solar etc don't seem to consider where the materials come from (and which depend totally on fossil fuels to extract) to produce them in the first place, but instead, as you say, just call those who say 'hey, wait a minute...' every name under the sun. Thankfully, society is slowly but surely waking up to these frauds.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-02-2021 12:55am

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Well for one fossil fuels totally are!

Nuclear power is part of the solution I’ve not argued against it. I would have reservations about it being in Ireland, power plants that is, purely because the state has given us the luas that didn’t join up, the dail printer and the fiasco of the children’s hospital.

Hydro works and could really utilise wind power but Ireland would need about 30 turlough hill installations. They are studying/building a hydro station in Japan utilising sea water, although you’d imagine the maintenance of such a thing would be never ending.

There are plans put forward to have massive solar farms in North Africa connected to Europe via DC current cables either through Spain or under the med.

The answer for Ireland is wind and solar backed by battery and hydro storage with the interconnection to the European grid.

Do you have a source for the 30 Turlough Hill installations? Can't take anything you say seriously without a proper source.

Banana Republic 1 · 23-02-2021 1:29am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Do you have a source for the 30 Turlough Hill installations? Can't take anything you say seriously without a proper source.

Yes I have a source.

Pa ElGrande · 23-02-2021 7:28am

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

. . .
The answer for Ireland is wind and solar backed by battery and hydro storage with the interconnection to the European grid.

The physical, regulatory, diplomatic and security infrastructure to support and maintain that has to be paid for by the end consumer and fundamentally production and availability of supply are tied to fair weather conditions. I would not like to be the people on an island at the end of the distribution supply chain during a month of severe winter weather that affects much of Europe.

Banana Republic 1 · 23-02-2021 8:45am

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

The physical, regulatory, diplomatic and security infrastructure to support and maintain that has to be paid for by the end consumer and fundamentally production and availability of supply are tied to fair weather conditions. I would not like to be the people on an island at the end of the distribution supply chain during a month of severe winter weather that affects much of Europe.

You’d best move then as the future is coming. “Fossil fuel inc get €5 trillion in subsidies annually”.

Pa ElGrande · 23-02-2021 9:20am

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

You’d best move then as the future is coming. “Fossil fuel inc get €5 trillion in subsidies annually”.

Fantasy make believe accounting by the IMF. I'm not kidding, they count fixing pot holes as a subsidy to the fossil fuel industry.

Broader externalities associated with the use of road fuels in vehicles, such as traffic congestion and accidents (most important) and road damage (less important). Although motorists may take into account (“internalize”) some of these costs in their driving decisions (for example, the average amount of congestion on the road, the risk of injuring themselves in single-vehicle collisions), they do not take into account other costs such as their own contribution to congestion and slower travel speeds, injury risks to pedestrians and cyclists and occupants of other vehicles, and the burden on third parties of property damage and medical costs (van Bentham 2015).

source

[Deleted User] · 23-02-2021 4:50pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Well for one fossil fuels totally are!

Nuclear power is part of the solution I’ve not argued against it. I would have reservations about it being in Ireland, power plants that is, purely because the state has given us the luas that didn’t join up, the dail printer and the fiasco of the children’s hospital.

Hydro works and could really utilise wind power but Ireland would need about 30 turlough hill installations. They are studying/building a hydro station in Japan utilising sea water, although you’d imagine the maintenance of such a thing would be never ending.

There are plans put forward to have massive solar farms in North Africa connected to Europe via DC current cables either through Spain or under the med.

The answer for Ireland is wind and solar backed by battery and hydro storage with the interconnection to the European grid.

Pity you can't harvest the energy of damp.

Banana Republic 1 · 23-02-2021 6:33pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I managed to find something relating to questions asked of authorities for spreading AquaSalina (refined brine water from below oil fields, not related to fracking) as deicer in limited extreme cold weather events in Ohio but the fears of the environmentalists are grossly unfounded, it seems. The actual exposure to the public was found to be about 0.6 millirem per year, which is negligible. It's the same as eating 60 bananas in a year. Typical human exposure from natural background radiation is around 620 mrem/year.

https://local12.com/news/investigates/serious-questions-about-radioactive-element-in-highway-de-icer

Just for comparison and perspective, 1 millirem is the equivalent of

The loss in life-expectancy from a 1-mrem exposure is about 1.2 minutes, equivalent to:

So Banana Republic, I would ease off the scaremongering a bit and try to look at these things in perspective a bit before posting a claim like that. As you say, do your research. Now that the facts have changed, maybe you'll change your mind...

Fracking Definition: the injection of a fluid at high pressure into an underground rock formation in order to open fissures and allow trapped gas or crude oil to flow through a pipe to a wellhead at the surface.

According to the EPA in the US, The geologic formations that contain oil and gas deposits also contain naturally-occurring radionuclides, which are referred to as Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM):

1, Uranium and its decay products.
2, Thorium and decay products.
3, Radium and decay products.
4, Potassium-40.
5, Lead-210/Polonium-210.

Much of the petroleum and natural gas developed in the U.S. was created in the earth's crust at the site of ancient seas by the decay of sea life. As a result, these deposits often occur in aquifers containing brine (salt water). Radionuclides, along with other minerals that are dissolved in the brine, separate and settle out, forming various wastes at the surface.

The extraction process concentrates the naturally occurring radionuclides and exposes them to the surface environment and human contact, these wastes are classified as Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (TENORM).

Exposure risks as cited by the US EPA
TENORM contaminated wastes in oil and gas production operations were not properly recognized in the past, disposal of these wastes may have resulted in environmental contamination in and around production and disposal facilities. Surface disposal of radioactive sludge/scale, and produced water may lead to ground and surface water contamination.

What are these fracking companies doing with this waste brine and what the brine is actually used for can be found in the article below.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/oil-gas-fracking-radioactive-investigation-937389/

Nabber · 23-02-2021 7:45pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

What are these fracking companies doing with this waste brine and what the brine is actually used for can be found in the article below.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/oil-gas-fracking-radioactive-investigation-937389/

I tried reading it but couldn't get past the first paragraph

In 2014, a muscular, middle-aged Ohio man named Peter took a job trucking waste for the oil-and-gas industry. The hours were long — he was out the door by 3 a.m. every morning and not home until well after dark — but the steady $16-an-hour pay was appealing, says Peter, who asked to use a pseudonym. “This is a poverty area,” he says of his home in the state’s rural southeast corner. “Throw a little money at us and by God we’ll jump and take it.”

For an Ivy league educated scholar, you surely must have cringed reading this?

Banana Republic 1 · 23-02-2021 8:29pm

Nabber wrote: »

I tried reading it but couldn't get past the first paragraph

For an Ivy league educated scholar, you surely must have cringed reading this?

Ya it’s long, I suppose they guy wanted to humanise the story as per rolling stone magazine. There are other articles and podcasts which summaries it. Overall it tells the story of these drivers who are drawing this radioactive stuff unknown to themselves. Much like the users Monsanto’s roundup.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-02-2021 8:55pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Ya it’s long, I suppose they guy wanted to humanise the story as per rolling stone magazine. There are other articles and podcasts which summaries it. Overall it tells the story of these drivers who are drawing this radioactive stuff unknown to themselves. Much like the users Monsanto’s roundup.

Oh here we go, Monsanto has been mentioned. I assume you meant to write the "users of Monsanto's Roundup". You do know that Roundup's been found to be safe to use and not a carcinogen, don't you?

I'm not sure what your whole point is with this fracking. You copied and pasted that definition above from here (without acknowledgment) as if it's some rebuttal of my post that found your previous comment on deicer radioactivity was completely wrong.

Banana Republic 1 · 23-02-2021 9:01pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Oh here we go, Monsanto has been mentioned. I assume you meant to write the "users of Monsanto's Roundup". You do know that Roundup's been found to be safe to use and not a carcinogen, don't you?

I'm not sure what your whole point is with this fracking. You copied and pasted that definition above from here (without acknowledgment) as if it's some rebuttal of my post that found your previous comment on deicer radioactivity was completely wrong.

According to you.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-02-2021 9:05pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

According to you.

What according to me?

Banana Republic 1 · 25-02-2021 7:49pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Random energy generation needs fair weather conditions to operate. Their key problem was their entire infrastructure is not designed for the weather conditions they experienced nor the surge in demand (1,2). Many of the states also experienced blackouts, Texas was the largest. If their grid had been tied into the other grids (which struggled as well) is it not beyond possibility that this event would have pulled down a much larger grid area and affected a lot more people than it did.

Weeks to Restart Damaged Texas Refineries

The market regulation in Texas makes random energy sources like wind and solar much more competitive that it would otherwise be in different circumstances. The combined cycle gas plants have enough peaking gas power to cover any shortfall, not much good though when the pipes are frozen and demand for electricity surges. What the author of the article below is saying is that ERCOT is an energy only market — meaning that there is no compensation for reserve power, hence the sky high bills for Texans on variable plans. Something they might have to rethink in future.

Other factors to consider in Texas are population growth, (25.2 million to 29.3 million between 2010 and 2020), almost all of it in or near major urban centres. Another big issue in the region are ground water aquifers depleting, you may have already heard of the Ogallala Aquifer..

The Texas power failure had nothing to do with the green new deal because that hasn't been in acted yet. The blame can be laid to rest on some good old boys and there political friends who just grind out a few bucks more.

Former Texas governor Rick Perry claims Texans would rather endure blackouts than a federally regulated power grid"

"Perry also exaggerated the role of renewable energy sources in the blackouts"

Electric Reliability Council of Texas > (ERCOT)
"ERCOT has acknowledged that the blackouts have largely stemmed from failures to winterize natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy systems"
During the winter wind turbines account for around 25% of the energy produced in Texas.

"Because Texas operates its own grid, the state isn’t subject to federal oversight by FERC, which can investigate power outages but can’t mandate reforms. Many energy experts say the very nature of the state’s deregulated electric market is perhaps most to blame for power crisis."

Lawmakers and regulators, including the PUC and the industry-friendly Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the oil and gas industry, have repeatedly ignored, dismissed or watered down efforts to address weaknesses in the state’s sprawling electric grid, which is isolated from the rest of the country."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-texas-governor-rick-perry-031325077.html
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/25/texas-winter-storm-cost-budget/

Banana Republic 1 · 25-02-2021 10:26pm

Gulf Stream weaker now then it has been for 1000 years.

Thelonious Monk · 25-02-2021 10:27pm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/25/atlantic-ocean-circulation-at-weakest-in-a-millennium-say-scientists

Nabber · 26-02-2021 2:37am

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/25/atlantic-ocean-circulation-at-weakest-in-a-millennium-say-scientists

The auld bet hedging again. If it gets warmer AGW.. but if it gets colder AGW.

We know the answer is AGW, we just need to find out how. The settled science I guess.

The Atlantic cycle has only been measured since the early 2000s, not a whole lot of data. The rest probably defaults back to ice cores and sea shells.

M.T. Cranium · 26-02-2021 2:41am

Here is a complete list of things that would categorically disprove the theory of climate change:

If any of those happen, you'll know it's not true.

Banana Republic 1 · 26-02-2021 2:31pm

M.T. Cranium wrote: »

Here is a complete list of things that would categorically disprove the theory of climate change:

If any of those happen, you'll know it's not true.

One could interpret that statement in two ways, watch the Thanks list !

Gaoth Laidir · 26-02-2021 3:26pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/25/atlantic-ocean-circulation-at-weakest-in-a-millennium-say-scientists

Rather than posting a Guardian link, which is full of hyperbole and inaccuracies, it's best to link the original paper instead so that a more measured assessment can take place.

https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/gulf-stream-system-at-its-weakest-in-over-a-millennium

EDIT: Of course, the Nature link given in this link is behind a paywall, so no actual assessment can be made. We just have to take their word for it.

Thelonious Monk · 26-02-2021 4:18pm

You know things are bad when even RTE are reporting this!

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1365020069026226177

Gaoth Laidir · 26-02-2021 5:13pm

Interesting that the Potsdam Institute makes the random claim storms could be "possibly" more intense, without actually backing it up. Why should they be more intense? Mechanism? Because we were also told that warmer oceans would also intensify storms. If the North Atlantic is that bit colder then the thermal gradient is reduced. More hedging (to borrow the phrase)?

The consequences of the AMOC slowdown could be manifold for people living on both sides of the Atlantic as Levke Caesar explains: “The northward surface flow of the AMOC leads to a deflection of water masses to the right, away from the US east coast. This is due to Earth’s rotation that diverts moving objects such as currents to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere. As the current slows down, this effect weakens and more water can pile up at the US east coast, leading to an enhanced sea level rise.” In Europe, a further slowdown of the AMOC could imply more extreme weather events like a change of the winter storm track coming off the Atlantic, possibly intensifying them. Other studies found possible consequences being extreme heat waves or a decrease in summer rainfall. Exactly what the further consequences are is the subject of current research; scientists also aim to resolve which components and pathways of the AMOC have changed how and for what reasons.

Pa ElGrande · 27-02-2021 11:46am

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

You know things are bad when even RTE are reporting this!
. .
[/url]

Here is the transcript.

Scene: Tranquil countryside with sun shining after rain shower, spliced with sheep grazing peacefully in the distance.

[RTE - Colman O'Sullivan] Though we may grumble about the weather Ireland has for now a very benign climate. Much of that is due to the gulf stream, but scientists have established that it is weakening and that has accelerated in recent decades.

Cue: Researcher from ICARUS Climate Research Center, Maynooth University.

[Dr. Levke Caesar] We compared actually a lot of different data that are all related to the gulf stream system, and found that together these data provide a consistent picture of the gulf stream showing that over the last part of the, ah, last couple of decades it's been weaker than ever before in the last 1,600 years.

Scene: Overcast, gale force winds with water crashing over sea walls at high tide.

[CO'S] Our climate is already changing, stronger winter storms may be one of the future consequences of a weakened gulf stream.

Scene: Man filling bucket of water from tank that says boil before use.

[CO'S] So too might droughts as precipitation patterns change

Scene: Fire in the distance in a forested area, spliced with aeroplane from another country dropping water from above.

[CO'S] They say is is hard to predict exactly what weather it will bring, but are certain that the more we heat the planet the further the gulf stream will weaken.

Scene: Wrapup. Back to researcher who hails from Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany.

[LC] So we know that we cause global warming and global warming has all these factors that come into plan that decrease the gulf stream system because of this freshening of the sub-polar North Atlantic where the main driver of the gulf stream system, the deep water formation takes place.

Scene: Closing statement

[CO'S] The scientists warn that if we do limit carbon emissions to limit global heating we may reach a point where we can no longer influence the weakening of the gulf stream, and that could have catastrophic consequences for us here in Ireland. Colman O'Sullivan, RTE News.

O'Sullivan uses global heating which is Guardian newspaper sensational alarmism, we see this re-branding every few years, as the propaganda wears off on the public. Research recently found it makes no difference.

Googling 1,600 years gulf stream turns up a Guardian article from 2018 which leads to this; Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation, authored by L. Caesar, S. Rahmstorf, A. Robinson, G. Feulner & V. Saba, If you want to read it you can find it using libgen.

This is RTE recycling the Guardian and giving it local colour. Having followed this for a long time I have very low trust of reporting on climate from sources that promote one outcome: RTE, Maynooth university , The Guardian, Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK) and Stefan Rahmstorf.

If RTE did not have an agenda, they might have discovered there is no real evidence for a diminishing trend of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, you can also find it on libgen and would not have presented a fake news story on climate.

Nabber · 27-02-2021 1:54pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

If RTE did not have an agenda, they might have discovered there is no real evidence for a diminishing trend of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, you can also find it on libgen and would not have presented a fake news story on climate.

There is so much confirmation bias in climate studies. It's more alarming than the hyperbole from MSM and political 'scientists'.

We see it in this thread and the ones previously, where the outcome is 'settled', and studies start with that underlying acceptance that the cause is AGW with all weather extremes. We have seen scientific fields employ this in the past.

The most frustrating part of the whole field of climatology is that we know very little about the complex relationships of all climate influences. Our computer modelling is not sophisticated enough to handle such variables accurately, let alone the fact that there is a substantial set of unknown unknowns.
But hey it's settled, if your city freezes AGW, if your city bakes AGW, if your city floods AGW, if your city blows away AGW... if that all happened in the past, well now that is the one in a [insert time length that extends beyond climate historical data].

A field of science that never says 'we don't know' should always be a point of skepticism.

Gaoth Laidir · 27-02-2021 2:34pm

Nabber wrote: »

There is so much confirmation bias in climate studies. It's more alarming than the hyperbole from MSM and political 'scientists'.

We see it in this thread and the ones previously, where the outcome is 'settled', and studies start with that underlying acceptance that the cause is AGW with all weather extremes. We have seen scientific fields employ this in the past.

The most frustrating part of the whole field of climatology is that we know very little about the complex relationships of all climate influences. Our computer modelling is not sophisticated enough to handle such variables accurately, let alone the fact that there is a substantial set of unknown unknowns.
But hey it's settled, if your city freezes AGW, if your city bakes AGW, if your city floods AGW, if your city blows away AGW... if that all happened in the past, well now that is the one in a [insert time length that extends beyond climate historical data].

A field of science that never says 'we don't know' should always be a point of skepticism.

I'm still waiting on Akrasia to come up with his proof that the recent cold outbreak in the US was "caused by an almost ice-free Arctic (as stated categorically by a TV meteorologist on the ground there during it)" in that thread. Or indeed also that "something" that he said was probably responsible for the similar 1895 outbreak but not this time. Maybe he's just busy.

Oneiric 3 · 27-02-2021 2:48pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Here is the transcript.

O'Sullivan uses global heating which is Guardian newspaper sensational alarmism, we see this re-branding every few years, as the propaganda wears off on the public. Research recently found it makes no difference.

Googling 1,600 years gulf stream turns up a Guardian article from 2018 which leads to this; Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation, authored by L. Caesar, S. Rahmstorf, A. Robinson, G. Feulner & V. Saba, If you want to read it you can find it using libgen.

This is RTE recycling the Guardian and giving it local colour. Having followed this for a long time I have very low trust of reporting on climate from sources that promote one outcome: RTE, Maynooth university , The Guardian, Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK) and Stefan Rahmstorf.

If RTE did not have an agenda, they might have discovered there is no real evidence for a diminishing trend of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, you can also find it on libgen and would not have presented a fake news story on climate.

From what I remember reading a few years ago, the so-called 'AMO' is expected to enter into a gradual cooler/negative phase over the course of this coming decade.

A cooler/negative AMO results in:
1. Stronger storms for Ireland (as relatively recent history has shown)
2. increased chances of summer drought/heatwaves in Europe.
3. Harder winters in Europe.

Sound familiar?

Oneiric 3 · 27-02-2021 3:02pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Because we were also told that warmer oceans would also intensify storms. If the North Atlantic is that bit colder then the thermal gradient is reduced.

The stats and personal experience prove otherwise. The warmer phase of the N Atlantic has greatly reduced the raw ferocity of storms hitting this country.

A colder Arctic would help maintain or even increase thermal gradient even if the Atlantic is in a cooler phase. I posted some data that I put together a good while back that showed that the AMO is not as clear cut as (most certainly I) first thought, as it it seemed that a negative AMO tends to follow on from a cooling Arctic / increased sea ice, rather than the other way round.

2020 officially saw a record number of $1 billion weather and climate disasters.

Comments