I'm see frequent claims by scientists that Colorado Marshall fire can be attributed to human-caused climate change but little data/analysis

I'm looking at actual data to try to understand such claims

Here is Dec precip in Boulder 1893 to 2021
No long-term trend, increase >1990
Grasses, such as those of the Marshall Mesa open space are what are called "one hour fuels" meaning that "Fuel moisture in these fuels can change within one hour according to factors such as temperature, rain, humidity and shade"
noble.org/news/publicati…
To attribute fire in Boulder to human-caused climate change requires
(a) establishing trend in conditions of "one-hour fuels" leading to greater flammability on climate time scales (>30yrs)
(b) attributing that trend to human-caused CC

I've seen neither (but welcome pointers)
In contrast, literature on grass fires points to antecedent wet conditions (leading to grass growth), invasive species, human ignitions as factors more important than decadal climate trends, see, eg

➡️link.springer.com/article/10.100…
➡️doi.org/10.1002/fee.24…
➡️iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…
Human-caused climate change is real and important, as I have said for 25+ years

At the same time, uninformed or groupthink claims of attribution are not particularly helpful in thinking through fire policies that will make a difference to fire outcomes
I welcome hearing other perspectives, especially those that are based on data and analysis and especially from those experts who are making strong attribution claims

PSA: Disrespectful or rude comments get an immediate mute here, no warnings 🙏
From IPCC WG1 AR6:

"low confidence in the emergence of drought frequency in observations, for any type of drought, in all regions"

"fire weather indices have already emerged in several regions (the Amazon basin, Med, C America, W and S Africa) (low confidence, low evidence)"
It is eye-opening to see colleagues who have never studied fire, disasters or attribution making confident claims of attribution in the media
Wash Post making stuff up in this lede

Hwy 93 runs from Golden to Boulder
The Table Mesa King Soopers (where the shooting occurred) is not near where Superior/Louisville resident would grocery shop

Disappointing
washingtonpost.com/national/color…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Roger Pielke Jr.

Roger Pielke Jr. Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RogerPielkeJr

23 Dec 21
And here are my 5 least read columns of 2021

5⃣Science Diplomacy and The Pandemic Treaty
Here are five important science-related issues to include in any future global pandemic treaty
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/science-dipl…
4⃣The Covid Vaccine and Learning to Love the Technological Fix
Our best hope for moving beyond the pandemic is vaccination, but not all problems can be addressed through technology
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-covid-va…
3⃣Emerging Secrets of the Coronavirus Task Force
A Look at Remarkable Interviews with Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/emerging-sec…
Read 5 tweets
23 Dec 21
Here are my five most read columns of 2021

5⃣ A Remarkable Decline in Landfalling Hurricanes
Since 1945, the number of hurricanes that make landfall has declined by about a third
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/a-remarkable…
4⃣The Global Population Crisis that Never Was
Apocalyptic visions of over-population have always been grounded more in politics than science
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-global-p…
3⃣How to Understand the New IPCC Report: Part 2, Extreme Events
Contrary to what you've been reading, the massive new IPCC report offers grounds for optimism on climate science and policy
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-to-under…
Read 5 tweets
21 Dec 21
This would be a massive science integrity scandal under a R administration

Sitting White House official edits a paper for PNAS
Paper is used by that official to advocate policy b4 Congress
Paper later retracted due to errors & COI (was written by her mates & bro in law)

Wow
Read 6 tweets
21 Dec 21
🧵On net-zero emissions
Let's talk about the 🐘 in the room

The very thorough paper linked below on net-zero emissions is missing some important words: coal, natural gas, petroleum

So too is much of climate policy

Net-zero emissions means near-zero fossil fuels
CO2 emissions are an output from the burning of fossil fuels

To achieve net-zero CO2 requires that the burning of fossil fuels goes to near-zero (I say near because there might be some CDR possibilities)

Emissions are one step away from what we really need to focus on
Climate policy (focused on CO2) cannot succeed until it encompasses targets and timetables for the phase-out of coal, natural gas and petroleum

Period

rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/a-coal-exit-…
Read 5 tweets
19 Dec 21
🧵
Look under the hood & what do you find?
Extreme, implausible scenarios

Climate Change an ‘Emerging Threat’ to U.S. Financial Stability, Regulators Say nytimes.com/2021/12/17/us/…
For some background on the outdated & misleading climate research being used in financial regulation

Read this thread


And my recent FT op-ed
How do we know that climate change threatens financial stability?
Well first, billion-dollar disasters

Yesterday, I discussed some of the many issues with that “dataset”


TL;DR Don’t ever use this “data” to make policy
Read 6 tweets
18 Dec 21
This is a really important number & I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere

FEMA estimates that in 2021 we should expect $141B is catastrophe losses in the US, based on current exposure, historical event frequency & loss ratios
The FEMA loss estimation CANNOT be compared to the spectacularly awful NOAA billion dollar losses

For weather losses, FEMA uses data processed by ASU/SHELDUS off of NOAA Storm Data, as below

NOAA Storm Data uses a bespoke special sauce to gin up losses (read on...)
NOAA's billion $ loss database mixes together direct and indirect losses (like business interruption & commodity markets) as well as non-event costs (e.g., "disaster restoration and wildfire restoration")

They also "scale up" insured loss data, which guarantees double counting
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(