Deconstruction climate narrative a Power point slide

Set of powerpoint slide by Dr. Joachim Dengler about changes in sunlight in Germany past 70 years not related to climate change. Looks at Co2 levels in the atmosphere, cloud cover

1. Deconstructingthe
Climate Narrative
Dr. Joachim Dengler
Tom Nelson‘sPodcast
23.7.2023

2. Biographicremarks
•PhD in Physics at Heidelberg University
•Postdoc in Image Analysis, partlyat theAI Lab ofMIT
•Habilitation Thesis „Foundations ofoptimal Model Building“
•CooperationwithHarvard Medical School: „Brain Matcher“
•2 Patents in Fingerprint analysis
•IT Consulting for25 years
•Climate Research since5 years
•2 peerreviewedpaperson therelationbetweenEmissionsand
Concentration.
•Blog https://klima-fakten.net /?lang=en

3. HowdoestheClimate Narrative operate?
•Take a correctobservationora correctlawofphysics
•Extrapolateitovertime
•Exaggerateortwistit
•Resultsarelocatedin thefutureand hardtoverify
•Whenin doubt, pointin directiontowardscatastrophy
WhatdoesScience say?
This presentationstayswithinnoncontroversial, acceptedscience.
And: „Don‘tjudgesomeonebeforeyou‘vewalkeda milein their
shoes.“

4. Science and climatenarrative elements
1.Anthropogenicemissionsarerising-exponentially
2.AtmosphericCO
2concentrationiscontinuallyrising–
ifemissionsarenot reducedtoZero
3.CO
2concentrationgrowthcauses–dramatic–riseoftemperature
4.Therearepositive Feedbacks –eventippingpointsofnoreturn,
leadingtocatastrophicconsequences.
5.This togetherisso terrible thatall totalitarianpoliciesarejustified
totrytopreventthisbycuttingworldwideemissionstoZero.

5. 1. Anthropogenicemissionsarerising–
exponentially
•Emissionsand relative emissiongrowth
The Truth: There has been a 30 year phase of exponential growth,
1945-1975, 4.5% growth rate
But then there was a Reduction in 3 waves:
1980 recession, 1990 collapse of communism, since 2003 planned reduction
We have reached zero emission growth
The climate models still pretend growing future emissions.

6. Since 2011 anthropogenic emissions are flat
Published by:
Zeke Hausfather, 2021,
CarbonBrief
Global CO2 emissions have
been flat for a decade,
new data reveals.

7. Confirmed by measurement
of concentration growth
New research confirms this:
Growth of atmospheric CO
2
concentration has peaked in 2013
(J. Dengler, Improvements and
Extension of the Linear Carbon
Sink Model)

8. Horror emission scenarios are irrelevant
Therefore the two IPCC scenarios with still growing emissions
•RPC8.5 („avoid at all costs“)
•RPC6.2 („dangerous“)
are irrelevant for evaluating the future.

Goal 1 of Paris Climate Agreement is reached:
„Countries should reach maximum emissions as soon as possible“
IEA admits: „Peak Emissions are likely to be reached in 2023“
Even if you believe the rest of the climate narrative,
these easy to check facts give strong reasons to change the disussion:
„Worst case“ in the future are constant emissions of 37 GtCO
2/year.

9. 2. Atmospheric CO
2 concentration is continually
rising - if emissions are not reduced to Zero
•Fundamental question:
How is concentration in the atmosphere related to CO
2 emissions?
•It is known that not all CO
2remains in the atmosphere:
While emissions increased, an increasing part
of the atmospheric CO
2 is absorbed by Plants
and Oceans.
The Twist: Natural sink effects are related to
emissions: „Appximately half the emissions are
absorbed“.

10. Emissions versus Concentration growth
Important observations:
•Not all emissions (blue)
contribute to concentration growth (orange)
•Their difference is the sink effect (green),
where oceans and plants are absorbing part
of the added CO
2
•But: These sinks are not only absorbing
anthropogenic emissions, anthropogenic CO
2
is the same as natural CO
2
•The carbon cycle is a complicated system of
•Natural emissions,
•Natural absorptions,
•Anthropogenic emissions

11. How much remains in the atmosphere?
Airborne Fraction: 50%
•When you assume a constant
„airborne fraction“ of 50% CO
2
remaining in the atmosphere,
CO
2 concentration keeps rising
until to reduce emissions fully
to zero.
But the assumption of constant
airborne fraction only holds for
exponential emission growth,
otherwise it does not hold.
•The concept of airborne fraction
obscures physical and biological
laws.

12. How much remains in the atmosphere?
Bern model: 20%
•Basic idea is correct: Carbon boxes
are finite, Carbon moves from one
box to another:
•Atmosphere,
•Land plants
•Mixed layer of ocean
•Deep ocean
•Bern Box-Diffusion Model:
20% of all emissions will remain in
the atmosphere for at least 1000
years.
Bern Model transport process is too slow, because it ignores marine biota.
They transport carbon into the deep ocean by gravition, not only by diffusion.

13. How much remains in the atmosphere?
Relate Sink effect to Concentration: 0%
•The natural sinks are related to
concentration, not to emissions.
•Absorption is 2% of concentration,
compensating
•All natural emissions
•And currently 50% of anthrop. Emissions
•When concentration grows, more emissions
are compensated
•Net Zero, when emissions match absorptions
With current anthropogenic emissions (37 Gt/year), the Net Zero equilibrium is reached,
when CO
2 concentration is 520 ppm.

14. Concentration prediction with „Stated Policies“
- most likely future IEA scenario
Stated Policies: Projection of currently
implemented policies,
Constant emissions until 2040, then slight
decrease 0.3%/year
Concentration will peak at 475 ppm in 2080
Before 2020:
410 ppm – 280 ppm = 130 ppm
After 2020:
475 ppm – 410 ppm = 65 ppm

15. Conclusions of emissions/concentration relation
•With current policies Goal 2 of the Paris climate agreement,
– the equilibrium between emissions and absorptions –
will be automatically fulfilled. No need for zero emissions.
•The future CO
2 concentration will stay under 500 ppm
If we accept that CO
2 fully controls temperature:
•The 130 ppm rise caused 1°C of warming
•We can expect from another 65 ppm 0.5°C of warming
This means, that from a CO
2 point of view also the 1.5°C goal of the
Paris agreement will be automatically fulfilled before 2100.

16. 3. CO
2 concentration growth cause – dramatic –
rise of temperature
Radiative Transfer is well
established in Physics:
Reduced flow of Energy to Space
by additional CO
2
Energy flow to Space is
measured from satellites
Modelleled with radiative
transport equations in public
program MODTRAN

17. Mainstream Simulation (IPCC):
Only CO
2, full solar insolation, no Albedo
Preindustrial: 280 ppm, 340 W/m
2
Doubling CO
2,
560 ppm, -3,77 W/ m
2
Compensation by 0,8°
temperature rise

18. Simulations of the Greenhouse Effect:
Doubling of CO
2 under different conditions:
Scenario Albedo
Insolation
(W/m
2
)
CO
2
before
doubling (ppm)
Temperature
(°C)
CO
2
after
doubling (ppm)
Forcing
(W/m
2
)
Temperature rise
for equilibrium (°C)
Mainstream – preindustrial,
Only CO2, no clouds, no water
vapor. 0 340 280 13,7 560 -3,77 0,8
No Greenhouse gases,
no clouds (not doubling CO2,
but rise from 0 to 280 ppm) 0,125 297,5 0 -2 280 -27 7
Only CO
2
in the atmosphere, no
clouds, no water vapor 0,125 270 280 5 560 -3,2 0,7
Predindustrial
Standard atmosphere,
Doubling CO
2
0,3 240 280 15 560 -2 0,5
Predindustrial Standard
atmosphere, CO
2
today 0,3 240 280 15 420 -1,1 0,3

19. Correcting the Mainstream Sensitivity Narrative
Sensitivity measurement must be done with realistic conditions:
•Consideration of Albedo: 30% of solar insolation are reflected back directly
to space, not relevant for warming
•Therefore the greenhouse effect is reduced from -3,7 W/m
2
to -2 W/m
2

when doubling CO2 concentration. This corresponds with 0.52° warming.
•The real values are approximately half the values reported by IPCC.
•During the last 40 years with large CO
2-increase there were 0.14 W/m
2
per
decade, according to mainstream literature 0.2 W/m
2
per decade
=> Rise is 0.17±0,3 W/m
2
per decade
•0.3°C temperature rise caused by CO
2 since the begin of industrialization

20. 4. There are positive feedbacks – even tipping points
of no return, leading to catastrophic consequences.
•Physically justifiable greenhouse effect, exaggerated:
0.8°C sensitivity for doubling CO
2
•It was recognized early, that this would not worry anyone, e.g.
by James Hansen 1984
•Therefore Feedbacks were introduced, by means of which the
sensitivity could be arbitrarily magnified to e.g. 3°C for doubling CO
2
•Most important: Water vapor feedback

21. How does Water Vapor Feedback work?
Water vaport feedback is a 2 step process:
•When air temperature increases by 1°C, it can take up 6% more water
vapor (7% only above 8km elevation), but does not have to.
•Infrared radiative transport depends on relative moisture in the air:
Additional moisture reduces outgoing Infrared due to the absorption
of water vapor
•How large is the total feedback?

22. Infrared radiation dependence on moisture
Use MODTRAN simulation program:
•Start with Standard Atmosphere
•Adjust to 80% relative moisture
•Adjust clouds to come close to the
real 240 W/m2 total radiation
•Add 6% to relative moisture
•IR radiation goes down 0.7 W/m2
•Increase ground temperatur to
balance total radiation
Result:
0.19° C warming for 6% humidity rise.

23. Total Feedback
When 1°C warming causes 0.19° additional Warming, recursively:
Total feedback factor: 1/(1-0.19) = 1.23
When basic Greenhouse effect is 0.8°C, with Feedback it is
0.8°C *1.23 = 0.984 °C ≈ 1°C
When basic Greenhouse effect is 0.3°C with Feedback it is
0.3°C*1.23 ≈ 0.37°C
The total Greenhouse effect since the beginning of industrialization
hat been less than 0.5°C

24. But there has been warming since 1900!
Augustinus:
„Look what you are looking for, but not where you are looking for it.“
Applies not only for happiness, but also for climate issues.

25. Temperature in Germany
Since 70 years temperature increase
caused by increase of sun hours.
1.5% increase in 10 years.
90% of temperature variability explained
by latitude weighted sun hours.
CO
2 influence below significance
threshhold.

No measurable GHE in Germany

26. Worldwide reduction of cloud cover
Reduction of worldwide
cloud cover in 30 years
Increase of incoming energy by
(2.3±0.1 W/m2 in 30 years)
0.8±0.03 W/m
2
in 10 years
CO
2Forcing 0.2 W/m
2
in 10 years => 80% warming caused by clouds, 20% by CO
2

27. Sources
•Global CO2 emissions: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions
•Global CO2 emissions have been flat for a decade, new data reveals: https://www.carbonbrief.org/global-
co2-emissions-have-been-flat-for-a-decade-new-data-reveals/
•Improvements and Extension of the Linear Carbon Sink Model: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/15/7/743
•Analysis: Global CO2 emissions could peak as soon as 2023, IEA data reveals:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-global-co2-emissions-could-peak-as-soon-as-2023-iea-data-reveals/
•Global Carbon Budget 2022: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/14/4811/2022/
•Emissions and CO
2Concentration—An Evidence Based Approach: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-
4433/14/3/566
•MODTRAN Infrared Light in the Atmosphere: https://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/modtran/
•Observational determination of surface radiative forcing by CO
2from 2000 to 2010:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14240
•Climate Sensitivity: Analysis of Feedback Mechanisms:
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1984/1984_Hansen_ha07600n.pdf
•DWD – Timeseries and trends: https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/zeitreihen/zeitreihen.html
•How large is the Greenhouse effect in Germany? https://klima-fakten.net/?p=10235&lang=en
•A net decrease in the Earth's cloud, aerosol, and surface 340 nm reflectivity during the past 33 yr:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274768295_A_net_decrease_in_the_Earth%27s_cloud_aerosol_
and_surface_340_nm_reflectivity_during_the_past_33_yr_1979-2011