Impactul schimbărilor climatice

asupra geochimiei mediului

Universitatea „Al. I. Cuza”
Facultatea de geografie-geologie
Semestrul 7 (2010-2011)
 CLIMATE
CHANGE

TORN BETWEEN
MYTH AND FACT
The topic of global climate change
illustrates both the scientific
complexities and uncertainties, and
the difficulties that people and
nations have in formulating rational
policies addressing the many of
facets of a changing climate on
Earth.
 This course is, among many
other things, about uncertainty,
either ordinary or scientific:

Uncertainty is always with us and can never be fully

eliminated from our lives, either individually or collectively
as a society. Our understanding of the past and our
anticipation of the future will always be obscured by
uncertainty.
Because uncertainty never disappears, decisions
about the future, big and small, must always be made
in the absence of certainty. Waiting until uncertainty
is eliminated before making decisions is an implicit
endorsement of the status quo, and often an excuse
for maintaining it.

Predicting the long-term future is a perilous

business, and seldom the predictions fall very close
to reality.

Uncertainty, far from being a barrier to progress, is

actually a strong stimulus for, and an important
ingredient of, creativity.
Uncertainty pervades scientific predictions about the
future performance of global and regional climates. And
uncertainties multiply when considering all the
consequences that might follow form an incomplete
understanding of how the physical climate works:

• the effects of atmospheric aerosols on clouds

• the role of deep ocean in altering surface heat
exchange
• innate unpredictability of large, complex, and chaotic
systems such as the global atmosphere and ocean
• consequence of humans being part of the future being
predicted
There are three limits to science that we must recognize:

1. Scientific knowledge about climate change will

always be incomplete, and it will always be
uncertain. We must recognize that uncertainty and
humility should always be essential features of any
public policy debate which involves science, not least
climate change.
2. We must recognize that beyond such ‘normal’
scientific uncertainty, knowledge as a public
commodity will always have been shaped to some
degree by the processes by which it emerges into the
social world and through which it subsequently
circulates. The separation of knowledge about
climate change from the politics of climate change –
a process that has been described as ‘purification’ – is
no longer possible. The more wider this is recognized
the better.
3. We must be more honest and transparent about what
science can tell us and what it can’t. We should not
hide behind science when difficult ethical choices are
called for. We must not always defer to ‘science’ or
to the ‘voices of scientist’ when we need to make
decisions about what to do. These are decisions that
in relation to climate change will always entail
judgments beyond the reach of science.
Science thrives on disagreement.
Science can only function through questioning
and challenge. It needs the oxygen of
skepticism and dispute in order to flourish.
If we are to understand climate change and if
we are to use climate change constructively
in our politics, we must first hear and
understand the discordant voices, those
multifarious human beliefs, values,
attitudes, aspirations, and behaviors. And,
especially, we must understand what
climate change signifies for these important
dimensions of human living and human
character.
• Let’s take a look at four contemporary and
contrasting ways (framings) of narrating the
significance of climate change – just some
of the more salient discourses currently in
circulation.
1. Climate change as a battleground between
different philosophies and practices of science,
between different ways of knowing.
‘Climate change as scientific controversy’ is a
compelling discourse to which the media and
other social actors are readily attracted. Although
the controversy is allegedly about science, very
often scientific disputes about climate change
end up being used as a proxy for much deeper
conflicts between alternative visions of the future
and competing centers of authority in society.
2. Climate change as justification for the
commodification of the atmosphere and,
especially, for the commodification of the gas,
carbon dioxide (CO2).
In this frame, climate change is viewed as the latest
rationale for converting a public common into a
privatized asset – in this case, the global
atmosphere. ‘Owner rights’ to emit CO2 are
allocated or auctioned between entities, alongside
the attendant machinery of the market which
prices and regulates the commodity.
3. Climate change as the inspiration for a global
network of new, or reinvigorated, social
movements. Seeing climate change as a
manifestation of the nefarious practices of
globalization, this framing warrants the emergence
of new forms of activism, both elite and popular,
to challenge these practices and to catalyze change
in political, social and economic behavior.
4. Climate change as a threat to ethnic, national, and
global security. The rhetoric associated with this
framing compares climate change (unfavorably)
with the threats posed by international terrorism,
warranting a new form of geo-diplomacy at the
highest levels of government. This framing led in
April 2007 to the first debate about climate change
to be held at the United Nations Security Council.
Four important themes can be linked to climate:
1. Climate has both physical and cultural meaning.
Indeed, the idea of climate can only be fully
understood if one allows these physical and
cultural dimensions to interact and mutually shape
each other. Treating climate purely as a physical
entity, accessible solely through natural science
or, conversely, allowing the cultural symbolism of
climate to be detached from any physical anchors,
denies something essential about the idea of
climate.
2. Climate as ideology is used to carry and convey a
variety of ideological assumptions and
projections. This ideological baggage may not
always be obvious at the first sight. But the
literature contains many examples showing how
climate has been used to support, inter alia, the
ideologies of racism, the human mastery of
Nature, the sanctity of a pristine Nature, and the
preference for stability over change.
3. Climate changes over time – both the physical
climates of places, but also the ideologies with
which climate is associated.

Climate may change because its physical attributes

change or because its cultural symbolism changes,
or both.
4. The story of climate change and human
civilization has also changed over time. The
dominant trope in this story has been one of
climate change as threat, and yet dissenting voices
have emerged which emphasize the creative
potential for societies that can be found through
changes in climate. We cannot detach the stories
we tell about climate from the stories we tell about
societies. Disagreements about climate change are
as likely to reveal conflicts within and between
societies about the ideologies that we carry and
promote, as they are to be rooted in contrary
readings of the scientific evidence that humans are
implicated in physical climate change.
 The Scientific Method
• Dogma is a principle, belief, or statement of
idea or opinion authoritatively considered to
be absolute truth.
• The essence of science is the observation of
nature.
• Scientific observations must be repeatable.
Repeatability tends to make science self-
corrective.
• A hypothesis is an explanation for a
scientific observation.
• According to Karl Popper’s doctrine of
falsifiability, it is impossible to prove that a
hypothesis is true (Popper, 1959).
• Therefore, science advances by disproving
hypotheses, and the most valuable type of
scientific evidence is that which tends to
falsify hypotheses.
• As a simple example, consider the following
hypothesis: all swans are white.
• You cannot prove this hypothesis by observing
white swans. Even if you study swans for twenty
years and see a thousand white swans, this does
not prove that a single black swan does not exist
somewhere.
• In order to arrive at a unique conclusion, one must
therefore disprove all alternative hypotheses, not
prove a favored hypothesis.
• Science operates by disproving hypotheses.
• A corollary to Popper’s Doctrine of
falsifiability is that if a hypothesis is
incapable of falsification, it is not a
scientific hypothesis.
• Consider the contentious debate of
creationism vs. evolution. There are at
least three possible hypotheses:
• 1. The earth is young (few thousands
of years)
• 2. The Earth is young, but was created
by God to look old.
• 3. The Earth is old (billions of years)
• Both hypotheses 1 and 3 are capable of
being tested and potentially disproved.
Therefore, they are both scientific
hypotheses.
• But, hypothesis number 2 cannot be
disproved, even theoretically. An
omnipotent Being cannot be outsmarted.
• Therefore, hypothesis #2 is not a scientific
hypothesis. It is a dogma.
 PART I. Framework of Climate
Science
• What are the components of Earth’s climate
system?
• How does climate change differ from day-to-day
weather change?
• What factors drive changes in Earth’s climate?
• How do the many parts of Earth’s climate system
react to these driving forces and interact?
• How do scientists study past climates and project
changes that lie in our future?
 Ch. 1
Overview of Climate Science

This chapter surveys the factors that cause Earth’s

climate to change. It also reviews how the field of
climate science came into being, how scientists
study climate, and how an understanding of the
history of climate change helps to inform us about
changes looming in our near future.
Scientists use the Celsius
and the Kelvin
temperature scales to
measure climate changes.
Temperatures at Earth’s
surface vary mainly within
a small range of -50oC to
+30oC, just below and
above the freezing point
of water. Average is 150C
(590F)
(Unless otherwise noted,
the figures and captions
are taken form Ruddiman,
2001)
 Weather and Climate
• Weather: is what is happening to the atmosphere at any
given time. It is characterized by the temperature, wind,
precipitation, clouds, and other weather elements.
• Climate: is what would be expected to occur at any given
time of the year based on statistics built up over many
years. Climate varies from place to place, depending on
latitude, distance to the sea, vegetation, presence or
absence of mountains or other geographical factors.

• Weather is what you get, climate is what you expect.

 Climate Variability and Climate
Change
• Over the period of measurements of a
parameter (temp., rainfall, etc.), the average
value remains effectively constant (the
series is said to be stationary) but fluctuates
from observation to observation;
• The combination of climate variability with
a trend (e. g, cooling, warming, etc.)
produces a climate change. (Fig. 1)
• Fig. 1. a) climate variability w/out any climate change; b) the same w/ a linear decline in
temperature; c) climate variability w/ periodic variation of temp. of 3 oC; d) climate
variability w/ a sudden drop in temp. of 4oC. (from Burroughs, 2001)
 Time scales of climate change

(A) the last 300 million years, (B) the last 3 million years,
(C) the last 50,000 thousand years, and (D) the last 1,000
years. Here progressively smaller changes in climate at
successively shorter time scales are magnified out from
the larger changes at longer time scales.
 The Climate System
• It is an interactive system consisting of:
– the atmosphere;
– the hydrosphere;
– the cryosphere;
– the land surface;
– the biosphere.
Earth’s climate system and interactions of its
components
 Climate forcings
1. Tectonic processes generated by Earth’s internal
heat. They are part of the theory of plate
tectonics (ex. the movements of continents
across the globe, the uplift of mountain ranges,
and the opening and closing of ocean basins.
2. Earth-orbital changes result from variations in
Earth’s orbit around the Sun. These orbital
changes alter the amount of solar radiation
received on Earth by season and by latitude.
3. Changes in the strength of the Sun also affect the
amount of solar radiation arriving on Earth.
4. Anthropogenic forcing means the effect of
humans on climate.
 Projected increase in continental runoff due to plant
responses to increasing carbon dioxide

Richard A. Betts et al. , Nature 448, 1037-1041 (30 August 2007)

In addition to influencing climatic conditions directly through radiative forcing, increasing carbon
dioxide concentration influences the climate system through its effects on plant physiology. Plant
stomata generally open less widely under increased carbon dioxide concentration, which reduces
transpiration and thus leaves more water at the land surface. This driver of change in the climate
system, which we term 'physiological forcing', has been detected in observational records of
increasing average continental runoff over the twentieth century. Here we use an ensemble of
experiments with a global climate model that includes a vegetation component to assess the
contribution of physiological forcing to future changes in continental runoff, in the context of
uncertainties in future precipitation. We find that the physiological effect of doubled carbon dioxide
concentrations on plant transpiration increases simulated global mean runoff by 6 per cent relative
to pre-industrial levels; an increase that is comparable to that simulated in response to radiatively
forced climate change (11 ±  6 %). Assessments of the effect of increasing carbon dioxide
concentrations on the hydrological cycle that only consider radiative forcing will therefore tend to
underestimate future increases in runoff and overestimate decreases. This suggests that freshwater
resources may be less limited than previously assumed under scenarios of future global warming,
although there is still an increased risk of drought. Moreover, our results highlight that the practice
of assessing the climate-forcing potential of all greenhouse gases in terms of their radiative forcing
potential relative to carbon dioxide does not accurately reflect the relative effects of different
greenhouse gases on freshwater resources.
Climate System Internal Responses
 Rates of Forcing versus Response

Climate responses depend on the relative rate of changes in climate forcing versus the response
time of the climate system (A) fast response times permit the climate system to fully track slow
forcing. (B) slow response times allow little climate response to fast changes in forcing. (C, D)
Roughly equal time scales of forcing and response allow varying degrees of response of the
climate system to the forcing.
Cycles of forcing and response
Many kinds of climate forcing
vary in a cyclical way and
produce cyclic climate
responses. The amplitude of
climate responses is related to
the time allowed to attain
equilibrium. (A) Climate
changes are larger when the
climate system has ample time
to respond. (B) The same
amplitude of forcing produces
smaller climate changes if the
climate system has less time to
respond.
Variations in response time. An abrupt change in climate forcing
will produce climate responses ranging from slow to fast within different
components of the climate system, depending on their inherent response
times.
Variations in cycles of response. If climate forcing occurs in
cycles, it will produce different cyclic responses in climate
system, with the fast responses tracking right along with the
forcing cycles while the slower cycles responses lag well behind.
 Feedback Processes
• Essential to explaining and predicting climate change;
• Positive feedback: the original effect is reinforced by change of the
initial variable (ex: warming leads to a reduction in snow cover in
winter; this, in turn, could lead to more sunlight being absorbed at the
surface and yet more warming, an so on);
• Negative feedback: the original effect is dumped down by change of
the initial variable (ex: warming leads to more water vapor in the
atmosphere, which produces more clouds. These reflect more sunlight
into space thereby reducing the amount of heating of the surface and
so end to cancel out the initial warming).
 Climate feedbacks
(A) Positive feedbacks
within the climate
system amplify changes
initially caused by
external factors.

(B) Negative feedbacks

mute or suppress the
initial changes
 Most common feedback processes
implied in climate change
• Ever-changing motions of the atmosphere
• Variations in land surface (vegetation type,
soil moisture levels, snow-cover)
• Sea-Surface Temperatures (SSTs)
• Extent of pack-ice in polar regions
• Stately motions of the deep-ocean currents
which may take over a thousand years to
complete a single cycle
Modern Climate
The
electromagnetic
spectrum

Average solar
radiation on a
disk and a
sphere
 Earth’s radiation budget

Solar radiation arriving at the top of Earth’s atmosphere averages 342 Wm -2, indicating here as 100%
(upper left). About 30% of the incoming radiation is reflected and scattered back to space, and the
other 240 Wm-2 (70%) enters the climate system. Some of this entering radiation warms Earth’s
surface and causes it to radiate heat upward (right). The greenhouse effect (lower right) retains
95%of the heat radiated back from Earth’s heated surface and warms by Earth by 31 oC.
Atmospheric Energy Balance
 The Earth’s Energy Balance
• In order to understand the Earth’s climate
driving processes, we must consider the
following:
i. the properties of solar radiation and also how the
Earth re-radiates energy to space;
ii. how the Earth’s atmosphere and surface absorb or
reflect solar energy and also re-radiates energy to
space; and
iii. how all these parameters change throughout the year
and on longer timescales.
 The Earth’s Energy Balance (contd)
• The radiative balance of the Earth can be defined
as:
• Over time the amount of solar radiation absorbed by the
atmosphere and the surface beneath it is equal to the amount
of heat radiation emitted by the Earth to space.
• A body which absorbs all the radiation and, which
at any temperature, emits the maximum possible
amount of radiant energy is known as a black
body.
The Earth’s Energy Balance (contd)
• The temperature at the Sun’s surface is
about 6,000 K (about 5,276oC or 10,340oF).
If the Earth were a black body, the average
Earth’s surface temperature would be about
270 K (-3oC or 26oF). The observed average
value is 287 K (14oC or 57oF). The
difference is due to the Greenhouse Effect.
The Atmosphere
• is the most unstable
and rapidly changing
part of the system;
• N2 (78.1%);
O2(20.9%); Ar(0.93%)
• Trace gases (CO2,
CH4, N2O, O3) =
greenhouse gases, less
than 0.1%
• Water vapor (H2O),
1%, is also a GHG.
Clouds influence

Albedo: the amount of solar radiation

reflected
or scattered into space.
The mean global value is ~30%. It varies
between 5 – 90% (Table 2.1).
Clouds’ albedo varies between 40 - 90%.

Most clouds are bright reflectors of the

solar radiation and tend to cool
the climate system.
This phenomenon is called global
dimming.
Sun angle controls
heat absorption.
Earth’s tilt and seasonal
radiation
(A) The tilt of the Earth’s
axis in its annual
orbit around the Sun
causes the northern
and southern
hemispheres to lean
directly toward the
Sun and then away
from the Sun at
different times of the
year

(B) This change in

relative position
causes seasonal shifts
between the
hemispheres in the
amount of solar
radiation received at
Earth’s surface.
Albedo-temperature
feedback.
When climate cools,
the increased extent
of reflective snow
and ice increases the
albedo of Earth’s
surface in high-
latitude regions,
causing further
cooling by positive
feedback. The same
feedback process
amplifies climate
warming.
Difference in heating
between land and ocean.

During the seasonal cycle

of solar radiation (top),
ocean surfaces heat and
cool slowly and only by
small amounts because
temperature changes are
mixed through a layer 100
m thick (lower left). In
contrast, land surfaces
heat and cool quickly and
strongly because of their
low capacity to conduct
and store heat (lower
right). (thermal inertia)
Water vapor feedback. When climate warms, the atmosphere is able to hold
more water vapor (the major greenhouse gas in the atmosphere), and the
increase in water vapor leads to further warming by means of a positive
feedback. This feedback works in reverse during cooling.
Sun – Earth Relationship
Global Atmospheric Circulation Model (GACM)
Seasonal Pressure and Precipitation Patterns
General circulation of the atmosphere. (Left) Heated air rises in the
tropics at the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) and sinks in the subtropics
as part of the large-scale Hadley cell flow, which transports heat away from the
equator. Additional poleward heat transfer occurs along moving weather systems
at middle and higher latitudes, with warm air rising and moving poleward and
cold air sinking and moving equatorward. (Right) Evaporation vs. precipitation
as controlled by latitude and general circulation of the atmosphere.
Monsoonal circulation at large-scale
Surface ocean circulation. The surface flow of the oceans is organized into
strong wind-driven currents. Currents moving out of the tropics carry heat
poleward, while currents moving away from the poles carry cold water
equatorward.
Sinking of surface water. Warm salty water flowing northward in
the North Atlantic Ocean chills and sinks north of Iceland and in the
Labrador sea. This cold deep water flows south of the Atlantic at
depths of 2 to 4 km. This processes is called the Great Ocean
Conveyor Belt.
Deep-ocean Circulation
The permanent
thermocline (100
-1000 m) separates
cold deep water from
shallower layers
affected by changes in
Earth’s surface
temperature. Shallow
seasonal thermocline
(0-100 m) varies in
response to seasonal
solar heating of the
upper ocean layers.

Water filling the

North Atlantic Basin
comes from sources in
the high-latitude
North Atlantic, the
Southern Ocean near
Antarctica, and (at
shallow depths) the
Mediterranean Sea.
The Carbon Cycle

The major carbon reservoirs on

Earth vary widely in size (A)
and exchange carbon at
different rates (B). Larger
reservoirs (rocks, the deep
ocean) exchange carbon much
slower than smaller reservoirs
(air, vegetation, the surface
ocean)
 Photosynthesis

On land In the ocean

 Vegetation-Climate Feedbacks

Vegetation-albedo feedback. Vegetation-precipitation feedback. When

When high-latitude climate cools,
replacement of spruce forest by
tundra raises the albedo of the land
in winter and causes additional
cooling (+ feedback).
climate becomes warmer, replacement of
grasslands by trees increases the release of
water vapor back to the atmosphere and
causes increases in local rainfall (+
feedback).
Recent increases in
CO2 and CH4.
There is an annual oscillation
(small drop in April-May and a
similar rise in the following
Sept.-Oct. The second trend in
the CO2 curve is its gradual
increase (burning of fossil-fuel,
deforestation).

The recent increase in CH4

concentration is likely due to
human activities.
CLIMATOLOGY
The Current Debate on the Linkage Between Global Warming and
Hurricanes
By J. Marshall Shepherd and Thomas Knutson, University of Georgia and NOAA
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (December 2006)

Following Hurricane Katrina and the parade of storms that affected the
conterminous United States in 2004–2005, the apparent recent increase in
intense hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin, and the reported increases in
recent decades in some hurricane intensity and duration measures in several
basins have received considerable attention. An important ongoing avenue of
investigation in the climate and meteorology research communities is to
determine the relative roles of anthropogenic forcing (i.e., global warming)
and natural variability in producing the observed recent increases in hurricane
frequency in the Atlantic, as well as the reported increases of tropical cyclone
activity measures in several other ocean basins. A survey of the existing
literature shows that many types of data have been used to describe hurricane
intensity, and not all records are of sufficient length to reliably identify
historical trends. Additionally, there are concerns among researchers about
possible effects of data inhomogeneities on the reported trends. Much of the
current debate has focused on the relative roles of sea-surface temperatures or
large-scale potential intensity versus the role of other environmental factors
such as vertical wind shear in causing observed changes in hurricane statistics.
Significantly more research – from observations, theory, and modeling – is
needed to resolve the current debate around global warming and hurricanes.
 • Japanese Patent "Beano" for Cows to Cut Methane Emissions
• by H.R. Downs - Jan 31st, 2008

• Unless you live in a city or a big town, you see them everywhere, cows—
Holsteins, Brahmas, Guernseys, Beefmasters, Limusins, or, if you happen to
live in Ethiopia, the aptly named Barka. Why aptly named? Because
climatologists estimate that cattle bark out an astounding amount of
greenhouse gas, from both ends. You might call it the wind herd 'round the
world.
• But cow flatulence is old news. Here's a sample of news from UN:
• . . .livestock . . . accounts for 9 per cent of CO2 deriving from human-related
activities, but produces a much larger share of even more harmful greenhouse
gases. It generates 65 per cent of human-related nitrous oxide, which has 296
times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO2. Most of this comes from
manure.
And it accounts for respectively 37 per cent of all human-induced methane (23
times as warming as CO2), which is largely produced by the digestive system
of ruminants, and 64 per cent of ammonia, which contributes significantly to
acid rain.
• Earth is home to at least a billion and a half head of cattle. That’s more than all
the people living in India. And, the cattle population is growing in lock step
with rising incomes, progress and development. The same U.N. report
predicts:
• Global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million
tonnes in 1999/2001 to 465 million tonnes in 2050, while milk output is set to
climb from 580 to 1043 million tonnes. . .
• So what are we going to do with a billion and a half, 1,000 pound
creatures belching and crepitating us into global warming?
• Beano© for cows?
• Junichi Takahashi, Ph.D., a Japanese scientist at Obihiro University of
Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine in Hokkaido, Japan may have the
answer, or at least part of the answer. Dr. Takahashi and friends have
developed a food additive that, they say, reduces bovine global
warming intestinal gas to negligible levels.
• The Takahashi team discovered this remedy quite by accident. They
noticed that pasture grass heavily fertilized with nitrates (not to be
confused with nitrites) triggered a marked reduction in methane
generation in cattle; methane exacerbates global warming 20 times
more than CO2.
• Then, in the course of treating a mass poisoning in a herd of cattle, the
veterinary team at Obihiro U. discovered that a combination of nitrates
and the amino acid cysteine not only reversed the poisoning but also
cut methane gas in the herd to trivial levels. Happily, this novel feed
cut gases from both ends. No word on whether nitrous oxide levels are
reduced by the additive but N2O is not emitted by the cow herself but
rather from the ordure she so carefully places on the ground…
NY Times, February 8, 2008
Studies Deem Biofuels a Greenhouse Threat
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Almost all biofuels used today cause more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels if the full
emissions costs of producing these “green” fuels are taken into account, two studies being published
Thursday have concluded.
The benefits of biofuels have come under increasing attack in recent months, as scientists took a closer look
at the global environmental cost of their production. These latest studies, published in the prestigious
journal Science, are likely to add to the controversy.
These studies for the first time take a detailed, comprehensive look at the emissions effects of the huge
amount of natural land that is being converted to cropland globally to support biofuels development.
The destruction of natural ecosystems — whether rain forest in the tropics or grasslands in South America —
not only releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere when they are burned and plowed, but also
deprives the planet of natural sponges to absorb carbon emissions. Cropland also absorbs far less carbon
than the rain forests or even scrubland that it replaces.
Together the two studies offer sweeping conclusions: It does not matter if it is rain forest or scrubland that is
cleared, the greenhouse gas contribution is significant. More important, they discovered that, taken
globally, the production of almost all biofuels resulted, directly or indirectly, intentionally or not, in new
lands being cleared, either for food or fuel. “When you take this into account, most of the biofuel that
people are using or planning to use would probably increase greenhouse gasses substantially,” said
Timothy Searchinger, lead author of one of the studies and a researcher in environment and economics
at Princeton University. “Previously there’s been an accounting error: land use change has been left out
of prior analysis.”
These plant-based fuels were originally billed as better than fossil fuels because the carbon released when
they were burned was balanced by the carbon absorbed when the plants grew. But even that equation
proved overly simplistic because the process of turning plants into fuels causes its own emissions — for
refining and transport, for example.
The clearance of grassland releases 93 times the amount of greenhouse gas that would be saved by the fuel
made annually on that land, said Joseph Fargione, lead author of the second paper, and a scientist at the
Nature Conservancy. “So for the next 93 years you’re making climate change worse, just at the time
when we need to be bringing down carbon emissions.”
The Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change has said that the world has to reverse the increase of
greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 to avert disastrous environment consequences.
In the wake of the new studies, a group of 10 of the United States’s most eminent ecologists and
environmental biologists today sent a letter to President Bush and the speaker of the House, Nancy
Pelosi, urging a reform of biofuels policies. “We write to call your attention to recent research
indicating that many anticipated biofuels will actually exacerbate global warming,” the letter said.
The European Union and a number of European countries have recently tried to address the land use
issue with proposals stipulating that imported biofuels cannot come from land that was previously
rain forest. But even with such restrictions in place, Dr. Searchinger’s study shows, the purchase of
biofuels in Europe and the United States leads indirectly to the destruction of natural habitats far
afield.
For instance, if vegetable oil prices go up globally, as they have because of increased demand for biofuel
crops, more new land is inevitably cleared as farmers in developing countries try to get in on the
profits. So crops from old plantations go to Europe for biofuels, while new fields are cleared to feed
people at home.
Likewise, Dr. Fargione said that the dedication of so much cropland in the United States to growing corn
for bioethanol had caused indirect land use changes far away. Previously, Midwestern farmers had
alternated corn with soy in their fields, one year to the next. Now many grow only corn, meaning
that soy has to be grown elsewhere. Increasingly, that elsewhere, Dr. Fargione said, is Brazil, on
land that was previously forest or savanna. “Brazilian farmers are planting more of the world’s
soybeans — and they’re deforesting the Amazon to do it,” he said.
International environmental groups, including the United Nations, responded cautiously to the studies,
saying that biofuels could still be useful. “We don’t want a total public backlash that would prevent
us from getting the potential benefits,” said Nicholas Nuttall, spokesman for the United National
Energy Program, who said the United Nations had recently created a new panel to study the
evidence.
“There was an unfortunate effort to dress up biofuels as the silver bullet of climate change,” he said.
“We fully believe that if biofuels are to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, there
urgently needs to be better sustainability criterion.”
The European Union has set a target that countries use 5.75 percent biofuel for transport by the end of
2008. Proposals in the United States energy package would require that 15 percent of all transport
fuels be made from biofuel by 2022. To reach these goals, biofuels production is heavily
subsidized at many levels on both continents, supporting a burgeoning global industry.
Syngenta, the Swiss agricultural giant, announced Thursday that its annual profits had risen 75 percent
in the last year, in part because of rising demand for biofuels. Industry groups, like the Renewable
Fuels Association, immediately attacked the new studies as “simplistic,” failing “to put the issue
into context.”
“While it is important to analyze the climate change consequences of differing energy strategies, we
must all remember where we are today, how world demand for liquid fuels is growing, and what
the realistic alternatives are to meet those growing demands,” said Bob Dineen, the group’s
director, in a statement following the Science reports’ release. “Biofuels like ethanol are the only
tool readily available that can begin to address the challenges of energy security and
environmental protection,” he said.
The European Biodiesel Board says that biodiesel reduces greenhouse gasses by 50 to 95 percent
compared to conventional fuel, and has other advantages as well, like providing new income for
farmers and energy security for Europe in the face of rising global oil prices and shrinking supply.
But the papers published Thursday suggested that, if land use is taken into account, biofuels may not
provide all the benefits once anticipated. Dr. Searchinger said the only possible exception he could
see for now was sugar cane grown in Brazil, which take relatively little energy to grow and is
readily refined into fuel. He added that governments should quickly turn their attention to
developing biofuels that did not require cropping, such as those from agricultural waste products.
“This land use problem is not just a secondary effect — it was often just a footnote in prior papers,”.
“It is major. The comparison with fossil fuels is going to be adverse for virtually all biofuels on
cropland.”
 Ch. 2
Climate Archives, Data, and Models
Climate scientists use a wide range of techniques to
extract, reconstruct, and interpret the history of Earth’s
climate. Much of this history is recorded in four archives:
sediments, ice, corals, and trees.

The interpretation of climate data is aided by the use of

climate models to test hypotheses of climate change in a
quantitative way. In this chapter we describe physical
models that simulate the circulation of Earth’s atmosphere
and ocean and then examine the concept behind models
used to track mass movements of chemical tracers through
the climate system.
 Types of archives
• Sediments (cores, moraines, windblown loess)
Lake cores. Hundreds of cores have been taken from
small lakes and analyzed for records of changes in
pollen (vegetation) and lake level over the last several
thousand years.
Windblown loess. Strong
winds have deposited thick
layers of silt-size grains in
southeast China during the
last 3 million years. The
total thickness of these
loess deposits can each
several hundred meters. In
many regions people have
created homes in the loess
cliffs.
Ocean drilling. Hundreds of ocean sediment cores are archives of past
climatic changes. The longest cores have been retrieved by drilling
operation on the JOIDES Resolution, run by the International Ocean
Drilling Program (IODP) at Texas A&M University.
 Ice Archives

Ice cores retrieve climate records extending back thousands

of years in small mountain glaciers (A) to as much as
hundreds of thousands of years in continent-sized ice-
sheets.
 Other Climate Archives
• Layers of limestone in caves;
• Trees;
• Corals;
• Historical archives of climate-related
phenomena
• Instrumental records (only in last 100 to
200 years).
Annual layering
 Climate Data (Climate Proxies)

Past vegetation. For older Plankton: a proxy indicator Pollen: a proxy indicator of
of climate in the ocean. CaCO3 climate on land. For younger time
geologic intervals, climate on the
shells of foraminifera (upper intervals, climate on land can be
continents can be inferred from
left) and coccoliths (lower reconstructed from changes in the
distinctive vegetation. The remains
left); SiO2 shells of diatoms relative abundance of distinctive
of trees similar to modern palms are
(upper right) and radiolaria types of pollen.
found in rocks from Wyoming
dating 45 millions years ago. Today (lower right)
frigid winters in Wyoming would
kill palm trees.
Chemical weathering, transport, and deposition. Chemical weathering
slowly attacks rocks on land and sends dissolved ions into rivers for transport to the ocean.
Ocean plankton incorporate some of the dissolved ions in their shells, which fall to the seafloor
and form part of the geologic record. Some dissolved ions are also deposited in shallow
evaporating pools on continental margins where the climate dry.
 Climate Models
Physical Climate Models

Models of Earth’s climate are constructed to simulate present-day circulation. Then

changes based on Earth’s history (different CO 2 levels, ice sheet sizes, or mountain
elevations) are inserted into the model, and simulations of past climates are run. The
climate output is compared with independent geologic data to test the performance of the
model.
3-D General Circulation Models
(GCMs)
GCMs incorporate the
basic physical laws and
equations that govern the
circulation of Earth’s
atmosphere: the fluid
motion of air;
conservation of mass,
energy, and other
properties; and gas laws
covering the expansion
and contraction of air.
 Control-case simulations

• GCMs are developed by

testing how well they
reproduce modern-day
climate (temperature,
precipitation, and winds)
based on present boundary
conditions (CO2,
mountains, and land-sea
distribution).
• (A) observed January
surface temperatures
• (B) model-simulated
values.
 Geochemical Models
Geochemical models are used to follow the movements of Earth’s materials
(called geochemical tracers) through the climate system.
Unlike physical circulation models, most geochemical models do not
reproduce the physical processes that govern the flow of air and water.
Instead, the models trace the sources, rates of transfer, and ultimate
depositional fate of two major components: sediment particles that result
from physical weathering (wind, water, and ice) , and dissolved ions
produced by chemical weathering (dissolution or hydrolysis).
Movements of tracers can be evaluated if they are not created or destroyed
by radioactive decay along the way.
Geochemical models can also trace exchanges of biogeochemical materials
such as carbon or oxygen isotopes that cycle back and forth among the
atmosphere, ocean, ice, and vegetation.
 One-Way Transfer Models
• The most basic kind of model tracks transfers of
material form its source or sources to the ultimate
sites of deposition, such as debris eroded from the
land and deposited in ocean sediments.
• If the material deposited has distinctive geochemical
characteristics, it can be analyzed and its abundance
quantified in term of a flux rate –its rate of burial in
that sedimentary archive.
One-Way Transfer. Geologists and geochemists often
need to distinguish the separate contributions of several
sources (usually linked to weathering of continental
rocks) to a single depositional archive (such as ocean
sediments).
• Scientists can quantify the rate of influx of ice-
rafted debris to high-latitude polar oceans by
extracting all sediment that is sand-size or larger
and separating the mineral grains from the shells
of fossil plankton.
• This analysis quantifies a process –changes in
the production and low of icebergs – that is
related to climate.
• The analysis can be carried a step further by
counting the ice-rafted debris under a
microscope to separate it into different types of
grains (such as volcanic debris, quartz, and
limestone)
• The composition of these grains can provide a
general idea of source regions (for example, in
the North Atlantic, volcanic debris that came
form Iceland, and quartz and limestone that
came from Europe and North America).
• This level of analysis might tell climate
scientists which region within a particular
continent was the source of some of the grains.
• A more complicated situation arises if the
material examined is fine-grained and has
been derived form multiple sources.
• For example, fine silt and clay deposited in
the North Atlantic Ocean could have been
ice-rafted from North America or Europe,
blown in from North Africa by dust storms, or
carried in deep currents from other sources.
• Chemical Reservoirs
• A different modeling approach is used for
geochemical tracers that are transported in
dissolved forms.
• Mass balance models divide Earth’s systems
into reservoirs, including the atmosphere,
ocean, ice, vegetation, and sediments.
• The ocean is the most important reservoirs: it
receives almost all erosional products from the
continents, it interacts with all of the other
reservoirs, and it deposits tracers in well-
preserved sedimentary archives.
• Geochemical reservoirs
and fluxes
• Geochemical reservoirs are
like bathtubs with the
faucet and drain both left
partly open. The faucet
delivers the input flux, the
drain takes away the output
flux, and the balance
between the input and the
output determines the
water level in the tub
(reservoir). At steady state,
input and output are in
balance and the water level
in the tub remains constant.
• The residence time is the time it takes for a
geochemical tracer to pass through a reservoir.
In the tub analogy, the residence time is the
time the average molecule of water takes to
pass from the faucet to the drain.
• For a reservoir at steady state (a tub with an
unchanging water level), the residence time is
• residence time= reservoir size/flux rate in/out
 Reservoir-Exchange Models
• The methods discussed to this point have
been based on one-way mass transfers in
which geochemical tracers leave the
interactive climate system by being buried in
seafloor sediments and isolated out of touch
with other reservoirs for millennia.
• Another important exchange is the movement
of a geochemical tracer back and forth
between two (or more) reservoirs.
• Reservoir exchange
models. Some
geochemical models are
designed to track
reversible exchanges of
important components
such as water and carbon
as they cycle between
smaller reservoirs such as
ice sheets and vegetation
and the larger ocean
reservoir.
• One example is the transfer of water between
the ocean and ice sheets on orbital time
scales.
• Exchanges of water between the relatively
small reservoir stored in ice sheets on land
and the much larger reservoir left behind in
the ocean can be tracked by using the fact
that the isotopic composition of oxygen in
the H2O molecules in ice sheets is different
from the average composition of the ocean in
shells of plankton provide a way to estimate
past changes in the volume of ice stored on
land.
• Another useful application of reservoir-exchange
analysis examines fluxes of carbon among its many
reservoirs.
• Fluxes of carbon between the relatively small
reservoir of carbon stored in land vegetation and the
much larger carbon reservoir in the ocean can be
tracked using the fact that terrestrial carbon has a
carbon isotope ration distinctively different form that
of marine carbon.
• Net transfers of terrestrial carbon from land to sea can
be detected by examining the average carbon isotope
composition of the ocean recorded in the shells of
calcite organism buried in ocean sediments.
 Other types of models
• Reservoir-Exchange Models track a single geochemical
tracer as it moves back in forth between two or more
reservoirs (ex., transfer of water between the ocean and ice
sheets on orbital time scales).
• Ocean GCMs are similar in construction to atmospheric
GCMs.
• Ice-sheet Models
• Vegetation Models
• Time-Dependent Models
 Part II. Tectonic-Scale Climate
Change
• Why has Earth remained habitable throughout its entire
recorded history?
• What explains the changes in Earth’s climate over the last
several hundred million years?
• Why was Earth ice-free even at the poles 100 Myr ago?
• What are the causes and climatic effects of changes in sea
level through time?
• How did the apocalyptic asteroid impact 65 Myr ago affect
climate?
• What causes Earth’s climate to cool over the last 55 Myr?
 Ch. 3
CO2 and Long-Term Climate
• Why is Earth habitable? Because
– Our Sun is just the right distance from Earth
– GHG warm Earth’s climate by 31oC
• Why Earth has remained habitable for most of its
4.55 billion years of existence, even though our
Sun was much weaker at the beginning? Because
– Our planet had/has a kind of natural thermostat
controlling the greenhouse eras as well as icehouse
eras.
 Why is Venus hot?

(A) Venus receives almost twice as much as solar radiation as (B) Earth, but its
dense cloud cover permits less radiation to penetrate to its surface. Yet Venus is
much hotter than Earth because of its CO2-enriched atmosphere creates a much
stronger greenhouse effect that traps much more heat.
The Faint Young Sun Paradox
• Models indicate that the
young Sun shone 25% to
30% more faintly than
today;
• In such conditions, an
early Earth would have
remained completely
frozen for the first 3 Byr.
• Primitive life-forms date
back to at least 3.5 Byr
ago.
 Climate Debate
A Snowball Earth?

Evidence of several glaciations (2 - 4 icehouse episodes) between 850 and

550 Myr ago is found on Earth’s modern-day continents. If these
glaciated regions were located at or near the polar regions, climate may
have been little different from what it is today. But if they were located
in the tropics, a snowball Earth may have existed.
 The Earth’s Thermostat
• Warmed the Earth very early when
otherwise our planet would have frozen
under a weak young Sun
• Cooled the Earth when Sun became hotter.
• WHO/WHAT DID IT? …
… maybe GHG, if they were more
abundant earlier in Earth’s history
and subsequently decreased in
abundance?

• But HOW?
Carbon Exchanges between Rocks
and the Atmosphere
• (A) The largest reservoir
of carbon on Earth lies in
its rocks.
• (B) Over intervals of
million of years, slow
exchanges among the rock
and ocean/vegetation/soil/
/atmosphere reservoirs can
cause large changes in
atmospheric CO2 levels.
CO2 enters Earth’s atmosphere from deep in its interior
through release of gases in volcanoes and at hot springs
such as those found today at Yellowstone National Park in
Wyoming.
Removal of CO2 from the Atmosphere by Chemical
Weathering
 Hydrolysis
is the main mechanism for removing CO 2 from
the atmosphere;
Three main ingredients in the process are:
1. The minerals that make up typical continental
rocks;
2. Water derived from rain;
3. CO2 derived from the atmosphere.
Chemical weathering of silica-rich rocks on the continents
removes CO2 from the atmosphere, and part of the carbon
is later stored in the shells of marine plankton and buried
in ocean sediments.
Dissolution

• It is important to distinguish weathering of

silicates by hydrolysis from dissolution.
• Dissolution is the familiar process that eats
away limestone in caves.
Climate controls on chemical
weathering
Temperature (A) and
precipitation (B) both
show a general trend from
high values in warmer low
latitudes to low values in
colder high latitudes. The
total amount of vegetation
produced per year increase
with temperature (C), as
well as with precipitation
Is Chemical Weathering Earth’s
Thermostat?
Negative feedback from
chemical weathering
Chemical weathering acts
as a negative climate
feedback by reducing the
intensity of both (A)
imposed climate
warming and (B)
imposed climate cooling.
Earth’s Thermostat?
(A) The most plausible
explanation of the faint
young Sun paradox is
that the weakness of
the early Sun was
compensated for by a
stronger carbon
greenhouse in the
atmosphere.
(B) When the Sun later
strengthened, increased
chemical weathering
deposited the excess
greenhouse carbon in
rocks, and the
greenhouse effect
weakened enough to
keep Earth’s
temperature moderate.
Water vapor feedback
When climate warms, the
atmosphere is able to hold
more water vapor, which is
the major greenhouse gas in
the atmosphere. The
increase in water vapor
leads to further warming by
means of positive feedback.
This feedback works in the
same way (but opposite
direction) during cooling.
Looking Deeper into Climate Science
The Organic Carbon Subcycle
About 20% of the carbon that
moves between Earth’s surface
reservoirs (air, water, and
vegetation) and its deep rock
reservoirs does so in the
organic carbon cycle.
Photosynthesis on land and in
the surface ocean turns
inorganic carbon into organic
carbon, most of which is
quickly returned to the
atmosphere or surface ocean. A
small fraction of the organic
carbon is buried in continental
and oceanic sediments that
slowly turn into rock. This
carbon is eventually returned to
the atmosphere as CO2, either
by erosion of continental rocks
or by melting and volcanic
emissions.
 Is Life the Ultimate Control on Earth’s
Thermostat?
The Gaia Hypothesis
• Proposed by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the 1980s
• It states that “All evolution on Earth has occurred for the greater good
of the planet such that it achieves the succession of life-forms needed
to keep the planet habitable”.
• Pros: chemical weathering thermostat concept directly involve the
action of life-forms. Over time, life-forms gradually developed in
complexity and played a progressively greater role in chemical
weathering and its control of Earth’s climate.
• Cons: life-forms that had previously existed on land for over 90% of
Earth’s history were too primitive to have had much effect on
chemical weathering or to have played a role in driving Earth’s
thermostat.
Gaia hypothesis
Over time, life-forms
gradually developed in
complexity and played a
progressively greater
role in chemical
weathering and its
control of Earth’s
climate. In the extreme
form of the Gaia
hypothesis, life evolved
for the purpose of
regulating Earth’s
climate.
Supporters vs. critics of Gaia hypothesis
Chemical weathering
thermostat directly
involves the action of life-
forms:
(1)carbon is the basis of the
CO2 cycle;
(2)Photosynthesis;
(3) role of shell-bearing
plankton in extracting CO2
from the ocean and store it
in their CaCO3 shells.
Many of the active roles
played by organisms in
the biosphere today are a
relatively recent
developments in Earth’s
history and the role of
life in the distant past
was probably negligible;
The very late appearance of
shell-bearing oceanic
organisms near 540 Myr
ago means that life had
no played obvious role in
chemical weathering.
 The Revenge of Gaia – Earth’s Climate
in Crisis and the Fate of Humanity
• This is the last book published by Dr. James E. Lovelock in July 2006.
• James Lovelock- father of climate studies and originator of the influential
Gaia theory which views the entire earth as a living meta-organism-provides a
definitive look at our imminent global crisis. In this disturbing new book,
Lovelock guides us toward a hard reality: soon, we may not be able to alter the
oncoming climate crisis. Lovelock’s influential Gaia theory, one of the
building blocks of modern climate science, conceives of the Earth, including
the atmosphere, oceans, biosphere and upper layers of rock, as a single living
super-organism, regulating its internal environment much as an animal
regulates its body temperature and chemical balance. But now, says Lovelock,
that organism is sick. It is running a fever born of the combination of a sun
whose intensity is slowly growing over millions of years, and an atmosphere
whose greenhouse gases have recently spiked due to human activity. Earth will
adjust to these stresses, but on time scales measured in the hundreds of
millennia. It is already too late, Lovelock says, to prevent the global climate
from "flipping" into an entirely new equilibrium state that will leave the
tropics uninhabitable, and force migration to the poles. The Revenge of Gaia
explains the stress the planetary system is under and how humans are
contributing to it, what the consequences will be, and what humanity must do
to rescue itself.
 Ch. 4 Plate Tectonics and Long-
Term Climate
The last 550 Myr of Earth’s history are far better known than the first 4
billion years (the locations of continents and the shapes of the ocean
basins are clearer; better-preserved sedimentary rock archives; better
studied fluctuations between icehouse intervals and greenhouse
intervals).
First we examine how plate tectonics work. Next we explore the
possibility that icehouse intervals occur because plate tectonics motion
cause continents to drift across cold polar regions. Then we climate
models to investigate the range of factors that controlled climate 200
Myr ago. These investigations reveal that changes in atmospheric CO2
levels are needed to explain the sequence of changes from icehouse to
greenhouse conditions over the last 550 Myr. Finally, we evaluate two
hypotheses that link changes in plate tectonic processes to changes in
CO2 levels.
Increasingly well
preserved sedimentary
rock archives hold
abundant evidence of
past climates,
including a sequence
of alternations
between icehouse
intervals and
greenhouse intervals
Earth’s structure
Earth’s outer layers can be
subdivided in two ways.
The basalts of the ocean
crust and the granites in
continental crust differ from
each other and from the
underlying mantle in
chemical composition. As
physical behavior, the
lithosphere that forms the
tectonic plates is hard, rigid
unit, whereas the underlying
asthenosphere is softer and
capable of flowing slowly.
 Tectonic plates

Earth’s lithosphere is divided into a dozen major tectonic

plates and several smaller plates, which move as rigid units in
relation to one another, as the arrows indicate.
Plate Tectonics and Glaciations:
The Polar Position Hypothesis

The long-term changes are due to

latitudinal position controlling the
glaciations on continents.

After 450 Myr ago, plate tectonics activity

carried the southern continent of Gondwana
across the South Pole on a path headed
toward continents scattered across the
northern hemisphere. Subsequent collisions
formed the giant continent Pangaea.

Changes in the position of the south magnetic

pole in relation to the Gondwana continent
were caused by the slow movement if
Gondwana across a stable pole. Glaciations
occurred in the northern Sahara about 430
Myr ago as well as in S. Africa, Antarctica, S.
America, and Australia
 Polar Position Hypothesis
• It made two key predictions that can be
tested over the younger part of the Earth’s
history:
(1) ice sheets should appear on continents that were
located at polar or near-polar latitudes, but
(2) no ice should appear if the continents were located
outside polar regions
 Evaluation of the Polar Position Hypothesis of
Glaciation
Time (Myr ago) Ice sheets Continents in Hypothesis
present? polar position? supported?
440 Yes Yes Yes
425-325 No Yes No
325-240 Yes Yes Yes
240-125 No No Yes
125-35 No Yes No
35-0 Yes Yes Yes
 Glaciations -Examples
Northern Africa (440 Myr ago)

Central Park, NYC

 Tectonic Control of CO2 Input:
The BLAG Spreading Rate Hypothesis (R. Berner,
A. Lasaga, R. Garrels, 1983)
• The climate changes during the last several
million years have been driven mainly by
changes in the rate of CO2 input to the
atmosphere (and ocean) by plate tectonics
processes.

• CO2 is transferred from rocks in Earth’s

interior to the atmosphere-ocean system
mainly at two kinds of plate margins: ocean
ridges (top left) and subduction zones (top
and bottom right). A small input of CO2
occurs when volcanoes erupt at hot spots in
the middle of plates (bottom left)

• The BLAG spreading hypothesis asserts that

atmospheric CO2 and global climate are
driven by the global mean rate of sea floor
spreading, which controls the global rate of
CO2 input at ocean ridge crests and
subduction zones.
Convergent Margins: India-Asia
Collision
Breakup of Pangaea
Seafloor Spreading and Plate
Boundaries
The BLAG hypothesis
invokes chemical weathering
as a negative feedback that
partially counters the changes
in atmospheric CO2 and
global climate driven by
changes in rates of seafloor
spreading.

In the BLAG hypothesis,

carbon cycles continuously
between rock reservoir and
the atmosphere: CO2 is
removed from the
atmosphere by chemical
weathering on land,
deposited in the ocean,
subducted, and returned to
the atmosphere by volcanic
activity.
 Tectonic Control of CO2 Removal:
The Uplift Weathering Hypothesis
• Developed by Maureen Raimo and her colleagues in the late 1980s.
• They consider the chemical weathering as the active driver of climate change,
rather than a negative feedback that moderates climate changes.
• The BLAG hypothesis views chemical as responding to three climate-related
factors: temperature, precipitation, and vegetation.
• The uplift weathering hypothesis asserts that the global mean rate of chemical
weathering is heavily affected by the availability of fresh rock and mineral
exposure that the weathering process can attack, and that this exposure effect
can override the combined effects of the three climate-related factors both in
some regions and globally.
• Examples: The Wind River Basin of Wyoming; The Amazon River Basin
• The uplift is caused by two kinds of tectonic processes: a. subduction of ocean
crust underneath continental margins, and b. the collision of continents (ex.,
the Tibetan Plateau, 55 Myr ago)
 Ch. 5 Greenhouse Climate
• Evidence shows that 100 Myr ago the Earth was warm
enough at the poles to keep ice sheets from forming – this
was a real greenhouse world!
• Do climate models simulate the warmth of this greenhouse
climate?
• And if so, did a high level of atmospheric CO2 cause it?
• What lessons this past greenhouse world holds for our
future climate?
• Why sea level 100 Myr ago was some 200 m higher than it
is today?
• What happened 65 Myr ago to change the climate and
environment?
 What Explains the Warmth 100 Myr Ago?

The world 100 Myr ago. By 100 Myr ago, plate tectonic
processes had broken the supercontinent Pangea into separate
smaller continents that were flooded by shallow seas.
Evidence of greenhouse warmth 100 Myr ago
Vegetation and animals
that appear to have been
warm-adapted lived in
both polar regions 100
Myr ago:

(A) fossils of breadfruit

trees like those that live
today in the tropics;

(B) Dinosaurs, many of

which lived poleward of
the Arctic and Antarctic
circles.
Cretaceous target signal. Climate scientists have
used geologic data (faunal, floral, and geochemical)
to compile an estimate of temperatures 100 Myr ago.
Temperature were warmer than they are today at all
latitude, especially in polar regions.
What Explains Greenhouse Warmth 100 Myr ago?
Climate Model Simulation
What Explains the Data-Model
Mismatch?
Possible Problems with the Data
a. fossil organisms may be different
from their modern counterparts.
b. fossil under-representation
c. postdepositional alteration of
materials in the geologic record.
Possible Problems with the Model
a. the treatment of ocean
circulation is still very crude.
b. the effects of clouds on climate
is not fully understood.
The Cretaceous ocean could have
operated in a fundamentally
different way from the present-day
ocean (ocean heat transport
hypothesis).
 What Explains Greenhouse Warmth 100 Myr ago? (contd.)
Sea Level Changes (Eustatic Changes)

• Transgression (rise of the sea level) –may cause warm climates by moderating the harsh
winters
• vs.
• Regression (fall of the sea level) – may cause cold climates of continental conditions.
Causes of Tectonic-Scale changes in
Sea Level
• Reading assignment: p. 86-92
 Asteroid Impacts or
Why Did the Dinosaurs disappeared 65 Myr ago?

A. Ocean sediments
containing a layer enriched
in the element iridium are
evidence of a large asteroid
impact 65 Myr ago.
B. Sediments deposited in
Montana 65 Myr ago
contain grains of quartz
crisscrossed by multiple
lineations produced by high-
pressure shock waves from
an asteroid impact.
 Asteroid Impacts or
Why Did the Dinosaurs disappeared 65 Myr ago?
• Mexico’s Yucatán
Peninsula has a circular
area more than 200 km in
diameter that is a good
candidate for the site of
the asteroid impact 65
Myr ago. The pattern
shown is a result of
measurements of Earth’s
gravity that can detect
low-density pulverized
rock (in blue) and higher-
density rock (in green and
yellow).
 Asteroid Impacts or
Why Did the Dinosaurs disappeared 65 Myr ago?

The asteroid impact 65 Myr ago is sought to have had major effects on Earth’s
environment, including the extinction of over two-thirds of the species then alive.
The likely climatic effects vary with the amount of elapsed time after the initial
impact and appear to have been restricted to a few centuries.
 Relevance of Past Greenhouse
Climate to the Future
• CO2 levels varied from 100 ppm to 1,400 ppm.
• The pre-industrial level of CO2 was 280 ppm.
• At low (<200 ppm), CO2 levels, sea ice and snow
advance well past their average limits today and
cover a relatively large fraction of Earth’s high
and middle latitudes.
• At higher (>1,000 ppm) CO2 values, it will reduce
the amount of s snow and ice present at high
latitudes
• CO2 saturation: As CO2 concentrations
rise, the atmosphere gradually reaches the
point at which further CO2 increases have
little effect in trapping additional back
radiation from Earth’s surface.
• Water vapor feedback: A warm
atmosphere with CO2 values of 1,000 ppm
can hold much more water vapor than a
cold atmosphere with values of 100 ppm.
Effect of CO2 on global temperature. Climate model simulations of
the effects of changing atmospheric CO2 levels on global temperature show
greater warmth for higher CO2 concentrations.
Large and abrupt greenhouse episode
near 50 Myr ago

Unusual warmth 55 Myr

ago. A pulse of unusual
warmth that developed near
55 Myr ago and persisted for
tens of thousands of years
warmed the deep ocean by
several degrees Celsius.
Gas hydrate decomposition!
 Ch. 6
Back into the Icehouse – The Last 55 Million Years
 Oxygen Isotope Data
• Both 16O and 18O are stable (nonradioactive)
isotopes of oxygen that occur naturally in Earth’s
water and air.
• The ratio 18O/ 16O » 1/400 or 0.0025.
• Climate scientists who analyze the CaCO3 shells of
foraminifera in the oceans measure small
variations around this average value.
In the modern ocean, typical d18O values vary from 0 to
-2‰ in warm tropical surface waters to as much as +3 to
+4‰ in cold deep ocean waters. In present-day ice sheets,
in contrast, typical d18O values reach -30‰ in Greenland
and -55‰ in Antarctica.
• The isotopic composition of oxygen from ocean water
recorded in foraminifera shells has changed over time,
mainly in response to two important climate-related
factors: (1) the total amount of ice existing on Earth in
continental ice sheets and (2) the local temperature on the
ocean water in which the shells form.
• Planktic foraminifera live mainly in the upper 100 m, and
their shells contain oxygen taken from waters near the
surface.
• Benthic foraminifera live on the ocean floor and within the
upper layers of the ocean sediment, and their shells contain
oxygen taken from deep water.
• For each 4.2oC increase in temperature, the d18O ratio
decreases by 1‰ (that is, 18O becomes less abundant in
relation to 16O).
• Can d18O be used as a thermometer to measure past
temperature by analyzing the d18O values of the shells of
fossil planktic foraminifera? Yes, but the d18O values are
affected also by the atmosphere and the ice sheets.
Cooling in western North America
Temperature trends
estimated from the outline
shapes of fossil leaves.

Measurements of d18O in
benthic foraminifera.
Causes of Brief Tectonic-Scale
Climate Change
Volcanic Aerosols (mainly SO2 and
soot)

Burial of Organic Carbon ( about

13 Myr ago, a major increase in
coastal upwelling, perhaps
driven by stronger winds
caused by long-term climate
cooling, buried enough organic
carbon along the margins of the
Pacific to reduce atmospheric
CO2, cool global climate, and
allow ice to build up on
Antarctica)
 Part III. Orbital-Scale Climate
Change (the last 400,000 years)
Climate cyclic changes caused by subtle shifts in Earth’s orbit:
- the tilt of Earth’s axis
- the shape of its yearly path of revolution around the Sun
- the changing positions of the seasons along the path

Climate responses recorded on Earth have the cyclic changes (from

20,000 to 400,000 years):
- the strength of the low-latitude African and Asian monsoons
- the size of north polar ice sheets
- oscillations of high-latitude climate between cold/dry and warm/wet
conditions
- the circulation pattern of deep ocean
- the concentrations of important GHG (CO2 and CH4)
• How do orbital variations drive the strength of
tropical monsoons?
• How do changes in earth’s orbit affect the size of
northern hemisphere ice sheets?
• What controls orbital-scale fluctuations of
atmospheric greenhouse gases?
• What is the origin of the 41,000-year ice-age cycle
between 2.75 and 0.9 Myr and the variations at
~100,000 years during the last 0.9 Myr?
 Ch. 7
Astronomical Control of Solar
Radiation
• We will examine long-term changes in
Earth’s orbit that influence the climate
system:
• changes in the angle of tilt of Earth’s axis of
rotation
• changes in the shape of its orbit
• changes in the timing of the seasons
Earth-Sun Relations
Earth’s eccentric orbit
Earth’s tilt
Earth’s precession
Earth’s axis wobbles
like that of a spinning
top (axial precession).
Consequently, the axis
points to different
spots in the sky during
a cycle of about
26,000 (25,700) years.
 Long-term changes in tilt and their climatic effects

• Increased tilt amplifies seasonal differences, decreased tilt

reduces them, especially at the poles.
 Long-term changes in eccentricity

• The eccentricity (e) of earth’s orbit varies at periods of

100,000 and 413,000 years. The distance from Earth to the
Sun has varied with time for each of the seasons, and these
changes in distance have produced changes in solar
radiation received on earth.
 Precession of Solstices and
Equinoxes around Earth’s Orbit
Earth’s wobble (axial
precession) and the slow
turning of its elliptical
orbit (precession of the
ellipse) combine to
produce the precession of
the equinoxes. Both the
solstices and equinoxes
move slowly around the
eccentric orbit in cycles
that take 23,000 years.
The precessional index and long-term changes in
precession

The precessional index (esinw) changes mainly at a cycle of 23,000

years. The amplitude of this cycle is modulated at the eccentricity
periods of 100,000 and 413,000 years.
• In summary, changes in eccentricity
magnify or suppress contrasts in Earth-Sun
distance around the orbit at the 23,000-year
precession cycle. These changes in distance
to the Sun in turn alter the amount of solar
radiation received on Earth (more radiation
at the perihelion close-pass position, less at
the distant-pass aphelion position).
• The combined effects of eccentricity and
precession cause the distance from the
Earth to the Sun to vary by season,
primarily at a cycle of 23,000 years.
• Times of high eccentricity produce the
largest contrasts in Earth-Sun distance
within the orbit, and conversely.
• As Earth precesses in its orbit, the changes
in Earth-Sun distance are registered as
seasonal changes in arriving radiation.
Looking for Orbital-Scale Changes in Climate
Records
Complications from
overlapping cycles
If perfect sine wave
cycles with periods of
100,000, 41,000, and
23,000 years are added
together so that they are
superimposed on top of
one another, the original
cycles are almost
impossible to detect by
eye in the combined
signal.
Tectonic-Scale Changes in Earth’s Orbit

Tectonic-scale
orbital changes
Gradual changes in
Earth’s orbit over
long tectonic
periods of the tilt
and precession
cycles.
 This the end of Part I
Good luck at your first midterm exam!