Canadian Climate Survey 2: Warming Trend Obvious in the High Arctic
Last week, I kicked off my Canadian Climate Survey with a look at “global” warming going on in the capital city of Ottawa, based on Environment Canada weather records from Ottawa International Airport. I’m happy to report that the Climate Survey now has its very own special page, which will be regularly updated with new posts in this series. Readers who are curious about their own cities are invited to volunteer by putting together a list of annual temperature averages and sending them to me. Their own cities can then be added to the study in due course. What I want to have is a list which people can visit to see long-term trends in their own area, and which I can use as a club over the heads of National Post columnists who continue to insist that global warming is a big socialist hoax.
For the second post, I thought it would be useful to visit a place almost nobody lives: the high Arctic. The prevailing theory predicts that warming will be experienced first, fastest, and hardest in the polar regions. As a result, I felt that the second post in the Canadian Climate Survey should be a whirlwind tour of the high Arctic weather stations.
Environment Canada’s list of active weather stations — a list which is shrinking drastically over time, I might add, as the government scales us back to 19th-century levels of knowledge of our own territory — shows about a dozen active weather stations on islands above 74 degrees North, including several on Ellesmere Island (including Alert, Eureka, and Grise Fiord) as well as Ellef Ringnes Island, Prince Patrick Island, Melville Island, and Cornwallis Island (Resolute). (Baffin Island has many stations too, and will be a separate future post.) If climate theorists are correct that the Arctic will feel the warming trend first, these stations will be the first we should pay attention to. And to get us started, here’s how the temperatures are changing at the (almost) top of the world, at Eureka on Ellesmere Island:
Alert is interesting. A couple of years ago, conservative blogger Adrian MacNair plugged in the numbers from Alert and concluded on the basis of this data set that the data didn’t show the high Arctic wasn’t experiencing global warming, so much as a temporary mild period unremarkable in the context of the temperature records. It’s true that Alert bucks the trend seen elsewhere, although the last few years have seen what might or might be the start of a warming trend similar to those seen elsewhere. Not being a climate scientist, I have no explanation for this. All I can say is that it’s clear that in some respects Alert is the exception rather than the norm in the high Arctic:
The Canadian Climate Survey welcomes contributions from interested readers. What I want are compiled lists of average annual temperatures for towns and cities across the country. Essentially, I want visitors who are curious about whether climate change is already perceptible in their region to be able to look at a long-term record of temperatures and judge for themselves. I can be reached at SixthEstateCanada@gmail.com.
Tweet
kootcoot
I find more significant and impossible to deny, the fact that extreme weather events occur more frequently worldwide, wild fire season in North America gets earlier (and goes later) year after year, tornado season used to be in the summer, but now seems to be working on year round status and then there are dem dere hurricanes – fortunately though North Carolina and some other enlightened jurisdictions are legislating the sea, so that should minimize the damage future hurricanes cause to their shores.
I am curious as to how North Carolina will sanction the Atlantic Ocean if it has the temerity to rise more than the law allows!
jrkrideau
I posted this in your first Canadian Climate Survey post but for readers who may may not read it again:Homogenized data for over 300 weather stationd in Canada is available at http://ec.gc.ca/dccha-ahccd/default.asp?lang=en&n=1EEECD01-1
Sixth Estate
Thanks again, jrkrideau.
sagesource
Isn’t that dip in the Eureka record between about 1968 to 1988 due to the effect of dust pollution in the atmosphere? I seem to recall someone saying that this was what had prevented the rise from being steady over the 20th century. When the particulate pollution problem was addressed, the warming trend it had been partially masking showed up more clearly.
youtubingCANUCK
“a club over the heads of National Post columnists who continue to insist that global warming is a big socialist hoax.”
Man you want a club over the head of the NP columnists… do Winnipeg… thats a big name in this
topic & compare wininipeg to Moscow over the last 10 years. Winnipeg & Moscow traditionally are considered
2 of the most coldest Major citiies, both capitols, in the world. (except maybe the capitols in Sweeden, finland, Iceland & Norway).
I traveled around the world for 5 years in late 1990′s
upto Sept. 2001. 1 week after 9/11. I returned home to Winnipeg & STOPED traveling. This had a litle to do with 9/11 because i lost my job in the tourism industry
in Banff, AB wher Ii ended up after 5 years of being out of the country. I was in Banff for 5 months & learned about the increasingly receding glaciers there & was fascinated by it & naturally it struck me… is global warming true?
That was a theory talked about way back before I was ever even in high school but I rembered doing projects
on it, acid rain concerned me most then. I didn’t want my hair turning green when i traveled the world you know. Ii never considered global warming at all until i saw the research & the glaciers up around Ccolumbia Ice Fields & Mt. Wilson in Banff near The Crossing.After much meditation & communing with nature I decided I was convinced global warming, & the greenhouse effect was true & couldn’t imagine anyone would even denying it.
Aafter returning home to Winnipeg, where i am still 10 years later having not budged even for a vacation, I determined to pay great attention to the weather &
remember it year by year. I grew up here, i only skipped
5 of my 40 years as a Winnipeger.
In the last 10 years i can tell you that Winnipeg has had outrageously Warmer winters for 7 of those 10 years since i returned. Winter was showing up ever increasingly late, WAY TO LATE sometinmes. Janurary would be warmer than usual. & 3 of those 7 years of warmer than usual winters the Ice on the Red River
would melt too fast. Last year that helped caues us serious flooding problems because it messed up our ability to use the floodway we spent millions on & built to alleviate the Mississipi/Red River basin flooding problems. This was then followed by a drouoght…
2 natural disasaters in a row after a decade of outrageously warm winters…
Tell those National Post columnists that I as a Winnipeger who has grown up here & has traveled the world some think they are nuts if they dare deny Global warming, absolutely nuts & shamfull. What is their true agenda I would ask?
For me global warming is not deniable, the real dilemma is not if it’s true but what is really causing it?
what is the cause? I’ve heard a lot of theories over
the last 10 years that I’ve been watching this subject.
I’ve narrowed it down to just a few & include some
fairytailish senarios too because i just want to hit home the idea that we know what the problems is
but we’re having problems knowing what the cause
of the problem realy is so, possible causes:
#1) God or the Devil (yeah I know stupid assertion but)
#2) pollution & overpopulation
#3) The sun, escalating solar flares (see machio kaku)
#4) some other outerspace/cosmic phenomenon
#5) Aliens ( heh heh heh)
#6) the earths core is expanding
#7) a combination of all of the above
#8) a combination of some of the above
(eg, #1, #3, #5 or #2, #4, #6)
i do not presume to know which of the above it is
but i’m pretty sure those are the Main theories &
what i’d like to know is if anyone has narrowed it
down to a favorite with convincing evidence. I see
people argue over this all the time & I’m undecided on those senarios mostly but i laugh at people who deny global warming. i think they’re ignorant.
I was stunned to learn over the last 10 years that
there are people who actually try to deny this, it
majkes me fraking laugh… ha ha ha!
Cheers!
Sixth Estate
Hi — youtubingCanuck. Thanks for the request. I’ll work on the Winnipeg region next.
Regarding causes — I think if you review the scientific literature you’ll find that there really is only one established and supported theory about causes, which is that certain gases in the atmosphere trap a great deal of heat from the sun and that the levels of these gases (carbon dioxide and methane, especially) in the atmosphere have been rising over time. The Earth’s core isn’t heating up and there’s no real evidence for the Sun being the primary culprit.
This is then overlaid on top of natural climate variation, which is to say that the Earth’s climate naturally would vary over time anyways, but that most of what is happening right now is happening because of the increases in carbon dioxide and methane which can ultimately be traced back to human activities, mostly use of oil, coal, and gas energy sources.
youtubingCANUCK
Yeah thanks.
& i agree with your scientific review but that’s not
necessarily explaining global warming as it is today but the “green house effect” which is global warming as it was in the past. Today we’re dealing with excelerated warming compared to the known past.
We’re also observing holes in the aozine groing much larger.
The holes in the ozone are deeply troubling for scientists who’ve been observing them since we’ve put weather satellites up in the air. Even if the Sun
is not solaring flaring any more than usual the holes
will not be able to provide the elctro-magnetic shielding they have been providing in the past &
we then have a pretty good explaination for why the
green house effect is being perturbed the way it is now;
where we’re not only seeing global warming but also global cooling & it varies rapidly from 1 hemisphere & region to another & makes heating & cooling more volatile in the global climate.
Now it presents a serious problem because gradual global warming then becomes the least of our worries since we need our ozone to protect us from the suns
cycle of over powered solar flare blast that occure every 11 years which we are due for one. in the next year. This could not only cause ecological damage & severe climate problems but also the collapse of
civilization because if the magnetic field is not srtong
enough the suns powerfull flare blasts may cause massive EMP destruction, which means civilaztion, possibly all or large portions of it will suffer a power BLACKOUT. That could be devestating & challenge our survival on this planet, rapidly.
Machio Kaku says this & I’ve seen that many other
Quntum physicisists & science degreed ecologists
would agree. It’s the prevailing theory about why
the green house effect is so messed up right now.
However, you’re right in stating that the only thing we
have any real evidence for is the green house effect
but the problem is we ALSO have evidence for some thing beyond the green house effect that is causing climate & ozone problems. What that somthihg is I
think is what i mean is debatable.
The best guess as i see it is pollution messing up
our ozone which in turn exposes us to the suns
various phenomenon & possibly other cosmic phenomenon.
But we can’t be sure just as we can’t be sure that
we’ll be hit by a comet anytime soon. Still it should cause us to pause & consider the envirronmentalists message more routinely.
cheers!
Sixth Estate
Well yes, there are a number of complicated factors, and some of them may be interacting in ways we don’t understand.
The greenhouse effect isn’t just a baseline effect from the past, though. As a result of fossil fuel power sources, primarily, the level of carbon-based compounds in the atmosphere is steadily rising. And so is the temperature. So with respect to carbon emissions, we have both a theory and a body of evidence which supports the belief that carbon emissions are leading to an increased greenhouse effect and hence to increased temperatures.
Michio Kaku notwithstanding, no other hypothesis about climate change enjoys the strength that the one related to carbon emissions and the greenhouse effect does. The problems with the ozone layer are a separate problem with additional (potential) consequences for human health. The two problems may be interrelated: an increased greenhouse effect could lead to more rapid ozone depletion. But on the whole the policy problems here are two separate questions: carbon-containing emissions which increase the greenhouse effect, and CFCs and other chemicals which cause accelerated ozone depletion. The ozone depletion problem was partially solved with the Montreal Protocol. In contrast, no meaningful steps have yet been taken to solve the carbon emission problem.
Now, it is quite possible that there are “other cosmic phenomena” that are having an effect. There are all kinds of factors which go into the Earth’s climate and which, at least for the moment, we have essentially no control over. I don’t disagree with that. But I think we have enough evidence and a robust enough theoretical understanding to say that there are probably some factors we CAN control. And if we don’t control them, then our climate will be worse than what would be the case under “natural” conditions, even if those natural conditions are also taking a temporary turn for the worse. In short, we need to act to control the forces we can control.
We can’t be entirely sure a near-Earth object won’t hit us (comets are somewhat less likely than asteroids), but this is a fairly remote risk compared to climate change or several other urgent ecological problems, like water shortages, shortages of agricultural land, collapses in biodiversity, etc. Moreover our current technology is theoretically advanced enough to foresee and prevent an impact event provided we invest enough resources. It’s a lesser threat for the moment, but we should probably think very seriously about making that sort of investment. Better late than never, and there would be useful economic spinoff benefits to an advanced space travel industry.
The Sixth Estate » Alert, Nunavut Shows Evidence of Warming Due to Local Industrial Development!
[...] Canada homegenized data on Alert, Nunavut, for my ongoing Canadian Climate Survey series. (I wrote about the high Arctic before, but didn’t have the proper numbers; these ones show that Alert is experiencing the same [...]