And if we look only at North Atlantic and Western Pacific, combined landfall record can be taken back to 1945, representing about 70% of total landfalls.
🧵New Science paper on tropical cyclones confirms our landfall analyses
"To date, there has been no firm evidence of global trends of the frequency of tropical cyclones with maximum wind speed above the hurricane-force wind (64 knots) at landfall"
Also: "No detectable trend of U.S. landfall hurricane frequency has emerged"
Let me state the obvious:
If there are not more hurricanes making landfall around the world or in the US, then more hurricanes cannot be responsible for increased damage of hurricanes
Biden will name Dr. Eric Lander to serve as his top science adviser and will be elevating Lander's position as director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to a Cabinet rank position for the first time. nbcnews.com/politics/meet-…
So this is interesting
I'm perusing the "Plum Book" and it turns out that Kelvin Droegemeier is NOT actually the president's science advisor.
He carries only the title of OSTP director
And 9/14 positions are vacant
Actually, there is no such title as "science advisor"
Since establishment of OTSP in 1976 most "science advisors" have held the title of "special assistant to the president" but not under Bush or Trump fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R…
I think it almost certain that President Biden's "science advisor" will have the title of "special assistant to the president"
It matters: " The difference between an individual being the OSTP Director and the APST is more than semantic"
🧵
NYT article on US Nat’l Climate Assessment/Trump is right & wrong
“Trying to politicize or dismiss climate science is one thing when the warnings come from Democrats or academics. But this report comes from his administration’s very own agencies.”
🧵Another new paper shows implausibility of most commonly used climate scenarios - Liddicoat et al 2020 in JOC doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D…
Assuming constant 2019 CO2 emissions to 2100 (10 GtC via @gcarbonproject) gives cumulative of 1200 GtC 1850-2100, about SSP2-4.5 in Table 5⤵️
Assume net zero CO2 by 2100 give cumulative 800 GtC 1850-2100, or ~10% more than SSP1-2.6 in Table 5
Assume net zero CO2 by 2060 gives cumulative 600 GtC 1850-2100, or ~15% more than SSP1-1.9 in Table 5
Contrast:
SSP5-8.5 has 2580 GtC 1850-2100
SSP3-7.0 has 1909 GtC 1850-2100
So:
To consider SSP5-8.5 plausible requires believing that from now until 2100 the world will _average_ annual FF emissions from CO2 of about 30 GtC, or 3x that of 2019, meaning no peak until >2080 at ~50 GtC/yr