The Lacey Family pond, ready to host a swimming party on Christmas
I just got back from visiting family in New Hampshire for the holidays, narrowly missing the rush of hot air spewed by presidential candidates as they move eastward for the state’s upcoming primaries after tomorrow’s Iowa caucuses.
Or maybe they’d been visiting the state too much already.
Because when I got home, instead of our usual Christmas hockey game, we joked about taking a swim together after brunch. The water had barely iced over, and after a day of strong rain, it disappeared altogether. On a few days, it was warm enough to wear a t-shirt.
One short bout of warm weather doesn’t make the case for climate change, which in any case is supported by “overwhelming evidence,” as NH scientists explain below. But it turns out, the data shows a substantial warming trend in New Hampshire, particularly on the east coast of the state, that is changing our winters:
Detailed analysis of data collected at four meteorological stations (Durham and Concord NH; Lawrence, MA; and Portland, ME) in and around the Piscataqua/Great Bay region show that since 1970, mean annual temperatures have warmed 1.3 to 1.7 degrees F, with the greatest warming occurring in winter (2.7 to 4.2 degrees F). Average minimum and maximum temperatures have also increased over the same time period, with minimum temperatures warming faster than mean temperatures.
Across the state, sap for syrup is getting tapped earlier, ice is receding faster, snow is on the ground less frequently, and state planners are getting ready for more extreme weather events.
However, despite the body of scientific evidence in the Northeastern U.S. and all around the country, the crop of Republican presidential hopefuls touring New Hampshire have made climate denial a central piece of their political ideology.
Even when challenged by a New Hampshire Republican about the issue over the summer, Texas Governor Rick Perry (who’s state is the middle of an epic, economically disastrous drought) dug in his heels on this issue, claiming “almost weekly and daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.”
Not long after making that statement, Richard Muller, a prominent climate skeptic who received funding from the Koch Brothers to study land-surface temperatures, released a study he said showed “we’re getting very steep warming” because “we are dumping enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that we’re working in a dangerous realm, I realm where I think, we may really have trouble in the next coming decades.”
Further isolating the bizarre views on climate from Republican presidential candidates, a group of 50 New Hampshire scientists just sent an open, non-partisan letter to “all candidates,” including presidential hopefuls, encouraging them “to acknowledge the overwhelming balance of evidence for the underlying causes of climate change”:
New Hampshire’s climate has experienced substantial changes over the past half century. Over this period, the northeastern United States has experienced a region-wide winter warming trend of almost 4 degrees F. The number of days with snow on the ground has decreased an average of one week. Pond hockey and ice fishing have taken a hit as ice breaks up on our lakes more than a week earlier than it used to. Peak snowmelt runoff in the spring now occurs 7–10 days earlier in northern New England rivers. Increasing extreme rainfall events and flooding, rising seas, and an influx of pests (Lyme-disease-bearing ticks at the top of the list) have emerged as the latest and potentially most serious challenges to our health and our quality of life.
A similar letter written by 31 scientists in Iowa was sent to candidates in November.
When presidential hopefuls stop campaigning in Iowa and move over to New Hampshire in the coming days, they’ll be greeted by a cold snap that will hit the Northeast this week. If the candidates start cracking jokes about Al Gore and global cooling, I’m sure plenty of families would be happy to offer them a swim to clear their heads.
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
I’m glad the New Hampshire scientists put that letter together, but the Republican candidates will ignore it, of course. Koch, Boyce, and Tillerson are their daddies.
Instead of throwing up their hands in exasperation, the scientists need to use that non response to their advantage. By appearing at campaign events with signs, press releases, and hostile questions (in the rare cases that the candidates take them), they could really accomplish something.
Last year at this time, the Sierra Snowpack was over 200%; this year it is at 35% after the 2nd driest December on record.
I guess that, on the average, we are OK here.
I agree with you! I live in Eastern Massachusetts and how quickly some forget that we had one of our worst winters in years last year (for snow and cold)!
You can’t just say “it was warm at Christmas” in New Hampshire this year and say it’s proof of Global Warming.
Huh, that is strange. It was quite snowy in Vermont, but not especially cold. Are you really that far away? Anyway, what we can say (and Jim Hansen has been saying for more than 20 years) is that global warming loads the dice for warmer, wetter weather (or in other words, exactly what we have been experiencing.
January in central eastern Connecticut last year saw a record 57″ of snow- yet the temperatures where around ‘normal.
A series of low pressure systems- one right after another caused many problems- roof cave ins, water damage etc.
The extra energy/warmth in the system of around 5% compared to 30 yrs ago- added an additional 25-30% more precipitation, in this case mostly snow.
Per recent trends, California will most likely have water shortages not to mention an early start to the wild fire season with La Nina, a very strong Eastern Pacific Oscillation and anthropogenic effects exacerbating this, it should be one hell of a wild fire season. Water could be fought over this summer, and the Food Basket of the central Valley seeing excessively dry weather alla Oklahoma and Texas in such a populated state will put this front and center.
The D.C. Storm shelter is still said to the best and even improved. The entrance exams and requirements are very stringent.
But, given that some wealthy ones who believed that storms will just be a myth might want shelter too how are the examined and required ones going to maintain their exclusive domain to the best storm shelter when they also say that others won’t need one?
It’s such a logic conundrum.
I would tend to believe that they think storms are going to be common events, except that they don’t seem to be promoting buildings with storm structures, excepting some improvements to schools with the lotto monies.
Nope, guess not, they have proven themselves smarter than me on multiple occasions and the new evidences of such are the homes of grandeur.
So, having already accepted such, I think the most cost effective tornado shelter would be under the slab of the common slab home. And building something could be simply one story and one room.
It’t sad that the storm or root cellar was dismissed so quickly here in Fla. Might just see a rebirth of the old ways…
Speaking of scientists and GOP presidential candidates, it turns out that Mitt Romney’s residence is about an hour’s walk from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.
Should the primary go as pundits predict and Romney wins the nomination, then perhaps a massive UCSD/Scripps student/faculty march and rally in front of Mitt’s La Jolla beach house might be in order (maybe the weekend before the general election, to maximize political impact).
UCSD and Scripps (Scripps is actually part of UCSD) together now have nearly 30,000 undergraduate and graduate students along with an army of world-class scientific talent.
So how hard would it be to mobilize several thousand students and faculty to march from UCSD/Scripps and “occupy” Mitt’s neighborhood for a while?
The walk from UCSD/Scripps to Mitt’s place isn’t that long (less than 5 miles from the center of the UCSD campus, about 3 miles from Scripps proper), and it takes you right through one of the world’s most beautiful/prestigious beachfront resort communities — I couldn’t imagine a more pleasant place to organize a march.
Naomi Oreskes is at UCSD, she just might be up for something like this. Likewise, I’ll bet some other *very* prominent scientists would be happy to participate.
A massive “March to Mitt’s place” to demand action on climate change, fronted by high-powered UCSD/Scripps scientists — Could it be done?
If something like this can be pulled off, I’ll be there, even if I have to walk all the way from my place.
Just to clarify — that should be “Mitt Romney’s **La Jolla** residence”.
Didn’t want to imply that Mitt is anything like the rest of us, who own *one* residence at the most.
This highlights what’s wrong with talking about global averages. There is no place named average — the closer you get to the poles the higher the temperature increase. Thus, the projected max of 6 C ( nearly 11 F) on average, includes temperature increases of nearly 9 C (16 F) in the Arctic.
This magnitude of change is drastic, and beyond anything a global average would suggest.
One more thought re averages: the boreal forests are the largest terrestrial carbon sink in the world, yet they are located where the highest temperature increases are expected. It’s only a matter of time until this sink turns into a source — indeed, it’s started already as pine and spruce bark beetles ravage them.
You’re right, John, and I wish people (including climate blogs) would talk about the boreal more often. Part of the problem is that its southern reaches have been heavily logged, causing hot microclimates and increased vulnerability to fires and pests.
Much of the boreal will die or burn anyway, but their best chance is to leave them alone, allowing natural selection to restore sinks. It won’t happen with fiber farms, since we need diverse, resilient forests. And logging releases far more carbon than either fire or death from beetles.
The timber industry is very strong in DC and Ottawa, and won’t accept these changes, but they are critical to our future.
The Republican party has become the antithesis of what JFK and his generation aspired to be in the early 1960s. The idea that Science would pave the way to a better future for Americans and Humankind.
Republicans in 2012 believe the way to a brighter future is roasting the planets environment and climate while creating human/ecological catastrophe.
The cold weather in New England will last 2-3 days. By Friday temperatures will begin to moderate into the mid to upper 40s in Southern New England- and above normal in NH.
You would be more likely to induce Flat Eather’s to recognize the spherical nature of their existence.
Yes, if 50 PhDs/MD’s can’t get you to at least consider anthropogenic climate change, your brain is completely calcified.
Unabashed certainty of an unproven idea has been the bane of humanity throughout history.
Great news to hear that NH scientists are pushing climate change reality.
All the time people, politicians, companies, local and national governments describe their great plans, problems, efforts, etc. for the future without mentioning climate change and the extreme weather events virtually all over the country increasing in frequency.
In NYC the Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer had a huge conference at CUNY on transportation last year with nothing on this world changing transition; even though the subway system was within one foot from being entirely flooded by Hurricane Irene and out of commission for about a month and would have cost many $billions in lost revenue for NYC.
More than ever this is a good time for confrontation on how the wonderful plans, efforts, and political agendas address climate change.
And, those that don’t are pretty much worthless.
Even if it won’t change any minds, generates controversy, it’s worth keeping the issue in the news. More evidence presented. Highlights GOP stance against science. (The other side would like nothing better than for climate change to disappear into obscurity.)
How about this going on in the back ground -
Last year started out bitterly cold but turned into the warmest and wettest year in Norway since weather statistics started being recorded 111 years ago. State meteorologists could confirm the wild weather trends when 2011 ended with a hurricane.
November 26, 2011
Christmas weekend -
http://coloradobob1.newsvine.com/_news/2012/01/02/9896903-hurricane-hammered-the-holidays-norway?threadId=3309986&commentId=61191605#c61191605
“Berit” hit Norway’s northwest coast with 98 foot waves. On Thanksgiving weekend
November 29, 2011
Christmas weekend -
Dagmar hit with 120 mph winds
New Years weekend -
Massive Landslide in Trondheim, Norway 2012-01-01 – YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeH9nXRnE6U
Scotland this fall saw a wind gust to 160mph, and another storm had 90 mph winds, the highest wave ever recorded in Irish waters , just to the South cabbages in Britain are 2 months early.
According to the Met Office, winds in
Published on Thursday 29 December 2011
Scotland reached a high hourly mean speed of 136mph yesterday, a figure recorded at the Cairngorms summit. Speeds of 109mph were recorded at the top of Aonach Mor and 87mph in Glen Ogle.
On lower ground, gusts reached 76mph on Loch Glascarnock, 70mph on Tiree, 67mph in Oban, 60mph in Glasgow, and 53mph in Edinburgh.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/edinburgh-east-fife/land_sea_and_air_travel_left_reeling_by_scotland_s_storms_1_2028445
Storm blows £100m hole in Scotland’s economy
While the winds eased off in most of the country, the North-east and the Northern Isles were still suffering. Winds of up to 138.5mph continued to batter Orkney. The Met Office warned of snow, blizzards and ice on roads across Orkney, Shetland, the Highlands and Grampian.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/edinburgh-east-fife/storm_blows_100m_hole_in_scotland_s_economy_1_2001554
Hell comes to breakfast.
Here is New Hampshire’s Winter temperature trend since 1895:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/time-series/index.php?parameter=tmp&month=2&year=2011&filter=3&state=27&div=0
And New Hampshire’s December temperature trend (2011 data is not available yet):
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/time-series/index.php?parameter=tmp&month=12&year=2010&filter=1&state=27&div=0
The New Hampshire scientists likely have less influence on the politics than senior Republicans. It has been a disappointment that ex-governor and former White House chief-of-staff John Sununu, who is an MIT trained engineer and former Tufts engineering professor, has chosen to affiliate himself with the individuals that portray climate modeling as a political exercise. In his words at the 2009 Heartland Institute:
“The global warming crisis is just the latest surrogate for an over-arching agenda of anti-growth and anti-development. This agenda grew and gathered support in the years following World War II.
…
Their basic method of attack may be the same, but they have certainly refilled their operations. They learned from the “Club of Rome” episode. Since basic hard science is more difficult to bias, they would resort again to modeling. And since critics will take the time to examine their assumptions, they make the models big, obscure, and full of complex feedback structures much too abstract to debate in a public forum.”
To Sununu, empirical evidence of global warming is immaterial because:
“Nature will eventually do what nature has always done. It will respond in a self-stabilizing manner over the long term with moderate variability over multi-decade periods and with occasional significant variability over the short term.”