Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday December 27 2016, @09:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the elves-working-overtime dept.

SoylentNews had a story last month about temperatures in the Arctic that were 20°C (36°F) warmer than usual. That was just a warm up.

Richard James, who holds a doctorate in meteorology, found November produced the most anomalously warm Arctic temperatures of any month on record after analyzing data from 19 weather stations.

In the middle of the month, the temperature averaged over the entire Arctic north of 80 degrees latitude spiked to 36 degrees [Fahrenheit] above normal.

Chicago Tribune

Now, storm activity around Greenland has caused a warm spell in the vicinity of the North Pole, with temperatures 50°F (28°C) higher than usual.

As of the morning of Thursday, December 22 (3 a.m. EST), the International Arctic Buoy Programme (IABP), operated out of the University of Washington, recorded temperatures from these buoy[s] up to 0°C or slightly higher.

The Weather Network

There was a similar pattern of unusually warm weather in the Arctic in November and December of 2015.

The warm spell [...] marks the second straight December of freakish warmth spreading across the Arctic due to weird weather patterns.

USA Today

additional coverage:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday December 28 2016, @02:13PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 28 2016, @02:13PM (#446686)

    One problem is most of those figures will be fake or bent and I'm not sure anyone could create unbiased figures.

    Famously WRT money "given" to energy producers by .gov, when you research it, its stuff like the IRS depreciation curve for a drill bit is faster than for a laser printer so by allowing energy companies to write off things that wear out faster, the government has "given" them a tax break equivalent to $X and similar such forms of nonsense.

    Likewise WRT money "given" to green energy, a classic is the EPA gives coal burning power plants a bunch of expensive trouble about burnt sulfur emissions but lets solar panel plants off the hook (because solar plants not burning sulfurous coal means they emit no sulfur dioxide thus needing no scrubbers or monitoring) therefore the other side loves to declare every penny spent on sulfur dioxide scrubbers and monitoring as a financial break the .gov gives to solar plants, as if solar plants should have to install sulfur dioxide monitoring stations to test for and regulate their non-existent coal burning emissions.

    For better or mostly worse, we like in a soviet style centrally controlled economy. We're just a little more hands off than the Russians were, but only a little. The overwhelming impact of total government control makes it nearly impossible to sensibly discuss policy.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2