Glossary
If you don’t find the term that you are looking for here, please leave a comment so that I can update the list.
Anthropogenic: Originating in human activity.
El Niño: An upwelling of warm water over large parts of the Pacific Ocean which effects temperatures in the atmosphere. This can lead to dramatic warming over a large parts of the earths surface. Some authorities claim that new scientific capabilities will allow these oscillations to be predicted, others state that the causes are still not sufficiently well understood. La Niña is a similar phenomenon that has the opposite effect, causing cooling of the climate. Both these events are part of the natural variability of the earth’s climate and occur periodically at irregular intervals.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: this very influential body was set up in 1988 by two United Nations agencies: UNEP (United Nations Environment Program) and WMO (World Meteorological Organisation). The IPCC undertakes no research itself, but makes assessments of the scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming based on research published in peer reviewed journals. It publishes an assessment report roughly every six years. The two most recent reports (2001 and 2007) have had enormous influence on both public policy and public opinion. Although the IPCC process is usually represented as being objective, authoritative and transparent, there is also deep and well informed concern that this organisation is in fact partisan, secretive and highly politicised. This uncertainty about the IPCC’s objectivity makes it difficult to form judgements about the validity of its pronouncements. It is probably fair to say that the assessment reports make the strongest possible case for anthropogenic global warming that scientific evidence can support.
IPCC: see Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
La Niña: see El Niño.
Palaeoclimatology: the study and reconstruction of past climates, particularly those preceding instrumental records. Until the early 1990s, historical, archaeological, geological, zoological, botanic and other similar evidence was used for this purpose. More recently, data obtained from tree rings, ice cores, lake and ocean sediments, and even the shells of marine creatures have been used. These types of proxy data (see below) can only be interpreted as evidence of past global climate by means of complex statistical analysis and considerable concern has been expressed about some of the methods that are used. The ‘Hockey Stick Graph’, which formed the centrepiece of the 2001 IPCC report, is an example of this kind of reconstruction.
Peer Review: the process by which research papers that are submitted to academic journals are scrutinised by independent specialists before being accepted for publication. The intention is to prevent bad science being published and has served the scientific community well for centuries, but recently there has been increasing concern about its effectiveness. As scientific research becomes increasingly specialised, it is difficult for editors to find reviewers who are at the same time sufficiently removed from the field of research to be objective and also qualified to form an opinion. This can lead to sound research that challenges orthodox opinion being rejected at the review stage while less robust findings that confirm the opinions of the majority are published.
Proxy data: data that can be used to yield other data which may not be obtainable by other means. For example, the width and density of the annular tree rings provide evidence of growing conditions, particularly temperature and precipitation, in corresponding years where instrumental data are not available.
Sceptic: This word has many definitions, but here it is used in the sense of one who questions orthodox views rather than simply accepting them. Elsewhere it is used as a term of abuse by militant advocates of anthropogenic climate change.
Summary for Policy Makers: because the IPCC’s assessment reports are of great length and complexity – typically over a thousand pages of highly specialised scientific argument – brief summaries of the findings are produced for those without the expertise or time to study the complete documents. Politicians, administrators and the media rely on these to determine what conclusions the IPCC has reached. In the past there have been suggestions that these documents may not adequately reflected the degree of uncertainty that is expressed in the main reports and that they are drafted in a way that maximises their impact.
Warmist: Anyone who accepts or promotes the idea that humans are causing climate change. On this blog it has no defamatory connotations. It simply saves typing terms like ‘ proponent of anthropogenic climate change’ over and over again.
The effects of Global Warming is getting much stronger these days. We should concentrate more on alternative energy to reduce carbon emissions.
Joshua
What sort of alternative sources do you propose-it needs to be used as a substitute for a highly effective and portable source of power-fossil fuel
Tonyb
TonyB
To address the concerns of Joshua Brown:
For centuries more idyllic, non-industrialized regions of India have used “bullock-power” to drive water pumps, etc.
Sadly, this is coming to an end, as the central government is forcing a “carbon-economy” (and the related affluence based on rampant consumerism) on its otherwise happy citizens.
It will be next to impossible to influence the Indian government to abandon its foolhardy policy (things were so much simpler during the raj), but maybe we could re-introduce “bullock power” back to parts of the UK (after commissioning a taxpayer-funded study by UAE on the risks of enhanced AGW attributable to increased atmospheric methane from “bullock degassing”).
What do you think?
Max
Max
That all sounds like a MUCH more sensible energy policy than the UK has at present :)
On shore wind power is a side issue, off shore is years distant, nuclear is kept at arms length, wave energy is very much in the ‘trial’ stage. Large scale solar is impractical.
There is somerhing to be said for micro generation but it needs huge subsidies.
Energy conservation is a desirable goal-we have very many poorly insulated homes and business premises.
However, in the next 20 years our energy needs will rise exponentially (electric vehicles etc) whilst our energy production will fall in the sanme manner (coal and existing nuclear power stations will go off line)
There is a thirty year energy gap looming which renewables can’t fill.
If you have some spare money Max, invest it in the UK Micro renewables business selling to households and small businesses but it has to be offered at a far more sensible price than at present.
Can you expedite my order of 20 bullocks please?
tonyb
TonyB
I have terrible news.
Your order for “20 bullocks” was duly placed with our Indian export firm, but there was apparently a small typo in the order.
We just received confirmation that “20 bollocks” (i.e. 10 pairs, separately packaged) were air shipped today from Mumbai, and should arrive at your address shortly. For easy identification purposes, your parcel should be marked “A load of bollocks”.
Sorry for the mix-up.
Max
P.S.
I am taking your tip and shifting my portfolio to “UK Micro renewables”. Where should I apply for an obscenely generous government grant?
Max #5
It apears that your organisational skills have let you down again as you will remember the debacle with the Harmless Sky ski party to Switzerland in 2008/9, an event for which I am still being pursued by the unfortunately large group of lawyers who had booked…
As for the govt grant, you can apply to any of the three main political parties here, all of whom seem to be contesting for the ‘we are greener than you’ vote.
In all seriousness, the looming energy gap is potentially catastrophic-we are a big economy with 65 million people. The idea we can change to a virtualy carbon free carbon energy policy in the time outlined is quite absurd.
We need coal, nuclear AND oil for at least the next 20 years (probably much longer) but none of the political parties will sign up for these.
A modest micro generation scheme for a modest house will cost £10,000 to £15000 and even with the generous feed in tariff it is not cost effective. The main reason for this excessive cost is that domestic renewables are being sold in the same way as double glazing, so there are lots of commissions to be paid, making the end product highly expensive.
It is a shame that Green Peace or Friends of the Earth can’t do something constructive for a change and take on the task of selling domestic renewables at a (virtually) profit free price. That would give an enormous boost to the industry.
tonyb