Greenhouse gases make high temps hotter in China (Update)

Apr 12, 2013 by Seth Borenstein
A vendor rides his tricycle near a coal-fired power plant in Beijing on Friday, April 12, 2013. China, the world's largest producer of carbon dioxide, is directly feeling the man-made heat of global warming, scientists conclude in the first study to link the burning of fossil fuels to one country's rise in its daily temperature spikes. (AP Photo/Andy Wong)

China, the world's largest producer of carbon dioxide, is directly feeling the man-made heat of global warming, scientists conclude in the first study to link the burning of fossil fuels to one country's rise in its daily temperature spikes.

China emits more of the greenhouse gas than the next two biggest carbon polluters—the U.S. and India—combined. And its emissions keep soaring by about 10 percent per year.

While other studies have linked averaged-out temperature increases in China and other countries to greenhouse gases, this research is the first to link the warmer daily hottest and coldest readings, or spikes.

Those spikes, which often occur in late afternoon and the early morning, are what scientists say most affect people's health, plants and animals. People don't notice changes in averages, but they feel it when the daily high is hotter or when it doesn't cool off at night to let them recover from a sweltering day.

The study by Chinese and Canadian researchers found that just because of greenhouse gases, daytime highs rose 0.9 degree Celsius (1.7 degrees Fahrenheit) in the 46 years up to 2007. At night it was even worse: Because of greenhouse gases, the daily lows went up about 1.7 degrees Celsius (3 degrees Fahrenheit).

China is the world's biggest producer and consumer of coal, which is the largest source of man-made carbon dioxide emissions. While the country has made huge investments in alternative energy such as wind, solar and nuclear in recent years, its heavy reliance on coal is unlikely to change any time soon.

About 90 percent of the temperature rise seen by the researchers could be traced directly to man-made greenhouse gases, the study said. Man-made greenhouse gases also include methane and nitrous oxide, but carbon dioxide is considered by far the biggest factor.

The study appeared online in late March in the peer-reviewed journal Geophysical Research Letters.

Smoke is emitted from chimneys of a cement plant in Binzhou city, in eastern China's Shandong province on Thursday, Jan. 17, 2013. China, the world's largest producer of carbon dioxide, is directly feeling the man-made heat of global warming, scientists conclude in the first study to link the burning of fossil fuels to one country's rise in its daily temperature spikes. The study appeared online in late March 2013 in the peer reviewed journal Geophysical Research Letters. (AP Photo)

The study uses the accepted and traditional method that climate scientists employ to attribute a specific trend to man-made global warming or to rule it out as a cause.

Researchers ran computer simulations trying to replicate the observed increase in daily and nighttime high temperatures in China between 1961 and 2007. They first plugged in only natural forces—including solar variation—to try to get the heat increase. That didn't produce it.

The only way the computer simulations came up with the increase in daily high and low temperatures that occurred was when the actual amounts of atmospheric heat-trapping greenhouse gases were included.

"It is way above what you would expect from normal fluctuations of climate," study author Xuebin Zhang of the climate research division of Canada's environmental agency said in a telephone interview. "It is quite clear and can be attributed to greenhouse gases."

China did not become the largest emitter of greenhouse gases until 2007; for much of the period studied, it had a smaller economy. Because carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for about a century, China and its defenders maintain that the U.S. and other developed nations bear more responsibility for climate change.

Outside experts praised the research as using proper methods and making sense. An earlier study didn't formally blame the proliferation of U.S. heat records to a rise in greenhouse gases but noted that they were increasing substantially with carbon dioxide pollution.

"The study is important because it formalizes what many scientists have been sensing as a gut instinct: that the increase in extreme heat that we've witnessed in recent decades, and especially in recent years, really cannot be dismissed as the vagaries of weather," said Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann.

China has rapidly grown from a nation of subsistence farmers at the end of the 1970s into the world's second-largest economy behind the U.S., and the environmental costs of such change are often visible.

Beijing is no longer dominated by bicycles but by cars, and the skyline is barely visible at times because of thick pollution. More people are living in cities, buying air conditioners and other energy-hungry home electronics and consuming more energy for transportation and heating.

China passed the United States as the No. 1 carbon dioxide emitter about six years ago and "the gap is widening, it's huge," said Appalachian State University professor Gregg Marland, who helps track worldwide emissions for the U.S. Energy Department.

When developed countries around the world in 1997 agreed to limit their greenhouse gas emissions, developing countries, including China, were exempted.

U.S. Energy Department statistics say that China gets 70 percent of its energy from coal, compared with 20 percent in the United States. China is also a world leader in the production of cement, a process that also causes greenhouse emissions.

Explore further: Eco-pottery product from water treatment sludge

Journal reference: Geophysical Research Letters search and more info website

4.7 /5 (14 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Biggest jump ever seen in global warming gases

Nov 03, 2011

(AP) -- The global output of heat-trapping carbon dioxide jumped by the biggest amount on record, the U.S. Department of Energy calculated, a sign of how feeble the world's efforts are at slowing man-made ...

Greenhouse gases rise to record high in 2010: UN

Nov 21, 2011

The amount of global warming-causing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere rose to a new high in 2010, and the rate of increase has accelerated, the UN weather agency said on Monday.

China to call for Kyoto extension at climate talks

Nov 22, 2011

China, the world's top greenhouse gas emitter, said Tuesday it will push at next week's climate talks for an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, which requires rich nations to reduce their emissions.

CO2 emissions booming, shifting east, researchers report

Sep 24, 2008

Despite widespread concern about climate change, annual carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels and manufacturing cement have grown 38 percent since 1992, from 6.1 billion tons of carbon to 8.5 billion tons in ...

Recommended for you

Eco-pottery product from water treatment sludge

44 minutes ago

Sludge is a by-product of water treatment. Sludge is produced during the clarification and filtration process in the water treatment system. It is also produced from the accumulated solids removed from sedimentation ...

Agricultural trade appears unaffected by BC carbon tax

54 minutes ago

British Columbia's carbon tax does not appear to have had a measurable impact on international agricultural trade, despite concerns it would greatly reduce the BC industry's competitiveness, according to new analysis commissioned ...

New water balance calculation for the Dead Sea

20 hours ago

The drinking water resources on the eastern, Jordanian side of the Dead Sea could decline severe as a result of climate change than those on the western, Israeli and Palestinian side. This is the conclusion ...

User comments : 51

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

ScooterG
1.3 / 5 (24) Apr 12, 2013
"carbon polluter"

Calling CO2 pollution is a misnomer based on subjective and very questionable science as well as a definite political agenda.

Calling the US a "polluter" is insulting. May I suggest the AGW zealots read "How To Win Friends And Influence People"?
gregor1
1.2 / 5 (24) Apr 12, 2013
More propaganda from Seth Borenstein. Rather sad really.
http://wattsupwit...stincts/
Howhot
4.2 / 5 (15) Apr 12, 2013
Its amazing how the zombie brain deads appear whenever the mention of CO2 appears in the title of an article. Congratulations ScooterG and Gregor1 for being in the top 10 of most brain washed moron anti environment zombies for rightwing propaganda munchies. Everyone know that the wattsup is an established nutcase factory (a propoganda site funded by rightwing dark money).

Anyway, more to the point;
The study by Chinese and Canadian researchers found that just because of greenhouse gases, daytime highs rose 0.9 degree Celsius (1.7 degrees Fahrenheit) in the 46 years...


That says it all. Roughly 2F average temp increase. How does that effect crops, food, life? How does it effect coal mining?

antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (23) Apr 12, 2013
Its amazing how the zombie brain deads appear whenever the mention of CO2 appears in the title of an article. Congratulations ScooterG and Gregor1 for being in the top 10 of most brain washed moron anti environment zombies for rightwing propaganda munchies. Everyone know that the wattsup is an established nutcase factory (a propoganda site funded by rightwing dark money).

Hmmmm... like Mann, this must have come from your gut, because it's a real "gem". Now, descend back, into your cesspool of ignorance before the heat gets you.
gregor1
1.3 / 5 (23) Apr 13, 2013
Have you read the climategate emails Howhot. Borenstein and Mann are old buddies when it comes to cooking up a scam. This is obviously a scam because, with regards to climate models, nobody knows yet what the natural forcings are? As freeman Dyson says the effects of clouds , aerosols etc are just fudged to get any result you're looking for. http://http://wattsupwit...bout-it/
http://wattsupwit...d-fudge/
peter09
4.7 / 5 (15) Apr 13, 2013
Please please keep your conspiracy theories out of it - otherwise we might as well start discussing whether the US ever got to the moon.
runrig
4.4 / 5 (13) Apr 13, 2013
Have you read the climategate emails Howhot. Borenstein and Mann are old buddies when it comes to cooking up a scam. This is obviously a scam because, with regards to climate models, nobody knows yet what the natural forcings are? As freeman Dyson says the effects of clouds , aerosols etc are just fudged to get any result you're looking for. http://http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/12/aps-seth-borenstein-is-just-too-damn-cozy-with-the-people-he-covers-time-for-ap-to-do-somethig-about-it/


"Just because you're paranoid don't mean they're not after you."

VendicarE
4.4 / 5 (14) Apr 13, 2013
Odd how none of the dozen or so investigations into those emails substantiated your accusation.

"Borenstein and Mann are old buddies when it comes to cooking up a scam." - GregorTard

From the results of those investigations and from reading the Emails myself, I am forced to conclude that you are a chronic liar.

And unsurprisingly you are a conservative as well.
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (11) Apr 13, 2013
Ya. Conservative low lifes used to say the same thing about putting shit in people's drinking water.

"Calling CO2 pollution is a misnomer based on subjective and very questionable science as well as a definite political agenda."
antigoracle
1.2 / 5 (19) Apr 13, 2013
I'm sure all the Chinese would like to know, according to the AGW Alarmist Cult, they are living in an oven, because the reality is far different. http://www.washin...log.html
But, then the AGW models also says AGW cause freezing too.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (20) Apr 13, 2013
Odd how none of the dozen or so investigations into those emails substantiated your accusation.

"Borenstein and Mann are old buddies when it comes to cooking up a scam." - GregorTard

From the results of those investigations and from reading the Emails myself, I am forced to conclude that you are a chronic liar.

And unsurprisingly you are a conservative as well.
- VendicarETurd
Hmmm... someone can read. Perhaps, you'll learn to comprehend, someday. But, then again, not.
gregor1
1.2 / 5 (21) Apr 13, 2013
There is nothing unprecedented about the warming in China
http://hockeyscht...han.html
deepsand
3.1 / 5 (21) Apr 13, 2013
There is nothing unprecedented about the warming in China
http://hockeyscht...han.html

So what?
deepsand
3.1 / 5 (23) Apr 13, 2013
More propaganda from Seth Borenstein. Rather sad really.
http://wattsupwit...stincts/

Says the former TV weather reporter with no academic credentials.
gregor1
1.4 / 5 (21) Apr 14, 2013
All you can do is smear? Deepsand . Get a grip.
deepsand
3.2 / 5 (24) Apr 14, 2013
Falsehoods and those who propagate them deserve to be held up to public scorn and ridicule.
gregor1
1.4 / 5 (21) Apr 14, 2013
The pot calling the kettle black. If you have a problem with the science as presented on Watts' blog you are more than welcome to comment there. Cyber bullying, name calling and personal smears are not tolerated though which probably counts you out. With over 140,000,000 hits you'll get a much greater hearing than you'll get here. Physorg clearly believes in science by press release and doesn't have a bs detector to sort out science from journalistic spin.
deepsand
3.2 / 5 (25) Apr 14, 2013
Watts and his ilk have been thoroughly discredited. Cite him and his at your own risk.
gregor1
1.2 / 5 (22) Apr 14, 2013
And Mann and his buddy Borenstein? You must remember the famous hockey stick debacle? Luckily there are non climate scientists who have a thorough grasp of statistics and can spot confirmation bias a mile away. The fact that the climate science community does not have this capacity is a travesty and a source of entertainment and hilarity for the rest of us. Bring on open source science I say.
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (23) Apr 14, 2013
The hockey stick is real. Deal with it.
runrig
4.4 / 5 (13) Apr 14, 2013
And Mann and his buddy Borenstein? You must remember the famous hockey stick debacle? Luckily there are non climate scientists who have a thorough grasp of statistics and can spot confirmation bias a mile away. The fact that the climate science community does not have this capacity is a travesty and a source of entertainment and hilarity for the rest of us. Bring on open source science I say.


gregor1 ... I shall continue to highlight this paper until those of your persuasion tell me it is either right or wrong.

http://berkeleyea...summary/
Jimee
4.6 / 5 (11) Apr 14, 2013
Denial is denial, blind and ignorant. It's like talking to someone who believes the earth is only 5,000 years old. Pathetic, but extremely informative.
Howhot
4.7 / 5 (12) Apr 14, 2013
@gregor1; See deepsand's reply. The hockey stick is real. If you can't accept that, you need to have your gullibility gauge checked because you have be had by the same dark money funded propaganda crap your trying to push here. You should know by now the so called "climategate" was just the most trumped up trashy slander the Watts crew of hackers could dig up and it didn't amount to a hill of beans in the end. Your so called "climategate" amounts to nothing but a joke that makes you deniers look even more stupid than your already are.

gregor1
1 / 5 (18) Apr 15, 2013
So you guys are Medieval warm period deniers then? http://www.americ...fes.html
gregor1
1.2 / 5 (18) Apr 15, 2013
Runrig. There is nothing wrong with your reference. It merely shows the planet warming as it moves out of the little ice age. It's the Medieval Warm period before then that shows the present warming is in no way unprecedented. Warm periods are cyclical. They happen roughly every 900 years.
thermodynamics
5 / 5 (8) Apr 15, 2013
Runrig. There is nothing wrong with your reference. It merely shows the planet warming as it moves out of the little ice age. It's the Medieval Warm period before then that shows the present warming is in no way unprecedented. Warm periods are cyclical. They happen roughly every 900 years.


Would you please give us a reference for your assertion that we have warm periods every 900 years? Please enlighten us.
Howhot
4.6 / 5 (9) Apr 15, 2013
The only thing Medieval is your thinking @Gregor1. The recent ice cores from the tropics has shown a near perfect correlation between between Temp and atmospheric CO2 levels. See Runig's reference, which isn't some made up BS created to satisfy the ego of some 0.00 one-percent-er that lines his pockets on the backs of the feeble minded.

gregor1
1 / 5 (14) Apr 15, 2013
runrig
5 / 5 (7) Apr 15, 2013
http://www.greenw...iods.jpg

Could you point me to the source of this please. I cant find any attribution.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (16) Apr 15, 2013
The recent ice cores from the tropics has shown a near perfect correlation between between Temp and atmospheric CO2 levels.

Of course they do and everyone also affirms CO2 lags temperature.
runrig
4.6 / 5 (10) Apr 15, 2013
The recent ice cores from the tropics has shown a near perfect correlation between between Temp and atmospheric CO2 levels.

Of course they do and everyone also affirms CO2 lags temperature.


Which is, of course, how it should be before man started pumping it into the atmosphere.
Water_Prophet
1.3 / 5 (10) Apr 15, 2013
They say the foul Element of Air, CO2, but if their sky is blackened
the skyline is barely visible at times because of thick pollution.
Earth Elelments forced accursedly into Air are much better even than the blessed Element Water at creating warming.
gregor1
1 / 5 (14) Apr 15, 2013
Howhot
4.5 / 5 (8) Apr 15, 2013
The mighty @gregor1 says look at this data and then flips this slightly interpreted image of 5000 years of data. He sites this as somehow important, but all I see is a graph that for all essential purposes is flat. It varies less than 1.0 for 5000 years (value could be temp or CO2, it's not specified) Worst it has no notable legend so you can't tell what is measured; in other words; more BS from a denier! It does say that there there is some periodicity to some random up-ticks but I don't see any periodicity at all.

Take a look for youself. Here is gregor1's graph he offers as proof... http://www.appins...e031.jpg

It just goes to show the deniers are just nutty as fruit cakes when it comes to even interpreting scientific data.

Another loser says (ALS): @antigonads;
I'm sure all the Chinese would like to know, according to the AGW Alarmist Cult, ...
The only AGW Alarmist Cult is the one in your shrunken brain. GOP lackey
deepsand
3 / 5 (20) Apr 15, 2013
So you guys are Medieval warm period deniers then?

To repeat, neither the MWP nor the LIA were global events.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (19) Apr 15, 2013
The recent ice cores from the tropics has shown a near perfect correlation between between Temp and atmospheric CO2 levels.

Of course they do and everyone also affirms CO2 lags temperature.

Except when a rise in CO2 precedes a rise in temperature or causes a positive feedback loop.
gregor1
1 / 5 (15) Apr 16, 2013
So you are a denier deepsand. There's plenty of evidence both were global. Check this out.
http://pages.scie...iod.html

antigoracle
1 / 5 (18) Apr 16, 2013
So you guys are Medieval warm period deniers then?

To repeat, neither the MWP nor the LIA were global events.

Whatcha talkin bout Willis? I look at Mann's Hockey stick and they don't even exist. Someday you'll see the light.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (17) Apr 16, 2013
The only AGW Alarmist Cult is the one in your shrunken brain. GOP lackey
-- Howhot
OK. Sit down and take a pill, cuz this will be too much for your lone neuron. This is a website that's accessible across the globe, so not everyone here is from the US nor care for your politics.
Watch out! The GOP and global warming gonna getcha!
deepsand
3.2 / 5 (22) Apr 17, 2013
So you are a denier deepsand. There's plenty of evidence both were global. Check this out.
http://pages.scie...iod.html

Guess you missed the fact that the graphs shown there are for different time periods; and, that if combined, fail to show either a MWP or LIA event occurring on a global basis at the same time.

For an unbiased review of the matter, see http://en.wikiped...m_Period .

Also note the part that "globally the Medieval Warm Period was cooler than recent global temperatures."
gregor1
1 / 5 (16) Apr 17, 2013
Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source, or have you not heard of the UK Green activist who used it to disseminate over 5,000 propaganda articles related to climate. http://wattsupwit...kipedia/
Here's one paper that "adds to the peer-reviewed publications of over 1000 scientists showing that the global Medieval Warming Period was warmer than the current warming period. "
http://hockeyscht...iod.html
And here's a data base of work showing it was global
http://www.co2sci...mwpp.php
Howhot
5 / 5 (8) Apr 17, 2013
The @gregormister references a notoriously anti-global propaganda website about some BS thats made up because the toads don't have any science to support the crap they believe. So, as another diversion the weenies from the CO2 loving coal owner petrol make the claim that somehow the medieval warming was unusual and more extensive than present day. Has the gregor dude really flipped? Medieval history? Your wrong Greg... just like you are wrong about everything you argue.

Here is a good image that shows that the in 1900 we passed the Medieval maximum and have been climbing ever since.

http://www.skepti...tick.gif

You and the twit @antigoracle need to find a new hobby besides having your minds sucked out by websites like wattsup.

Howhot
5 / 5 (7) Apr 17, 2013
The only AGW Alarmist Cult is the one in your shrunken brain. GOP lackey
-- Howhot
OK. Sit down and take a pill, cuz this will be too much for your lone neuron. This is a website that's accessible across the globe, so not everyone here is from the US nor care for your politics.
Watch out! The GOP and global warming gonna getcha!

Well it's true isn't it? Your a GOP lackey?
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (21) Apr 17, 2013
Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source, or have you not heard of the UK Green activist who used it to disseminate over 5,000 propaganda articles related to climate. http://wattsupwit...kipedia/

Still citing a former TV weather reporter with no academic credentials as an authority?
deepsand
3 / 5 (18) Apr 17, 2013
Here's one paper that "adds to the peer-reviewed publications of over 1000 scientists showing that the global Medieval Warming Period was warmer than the current warming period. " http://hockeyscht...iod.html

Unsubstantiated claims all.

A list of names with absolutely no information about those named is meaningless.

And, being "peer reviewed" does not mean that a work was found to be worthy.

Most importantly, the causes of the MWP anomalies were different than the causes of the current rise in global temperatures.
runrig
5 / 5 (7) Apr 18, 2013
Here's one paper that "adds to the peer-reviewed publications of over 1000 scientists showing that the global Medieval Warming Period was warmer than the current warming period. " http://hockeyscht...iod.html
Unsubstantiated claims all. A list of names with absolutely no information about those named is meaningless. And, being "peer reviewed" does not mean that a work was found to be worthy. Most importantly, the causes of the MWP anomalies were different than the causes of the current rise in global temperatures.
Indeed. Here is ( most of ) the abstract from a paper explaining ......http://link.sprin...2-1297-0
And another...
http://link.sprin...0-0914-z
runrig
5 / 5 (7) Apr 18, 2013
Cont

"The MCA (roughly 950–1250 AD), has been exceeded only during the most recent decades. To better understand the origin of this warm period, we use model simulations constrained by data assimilation establishing the spatial pattern of temperature changes that is most consistent with forcing estimates, model physics and the empirical information contained in paleoclimate proxy records. These numerical experiments demonstrate that the reconstructed spatial temperature pattern of the MCA can be explained by a simple thermodynamical response of the climate system to relatively weak changes in radiative forcing combined with a modification of the atmospheric circulation, displaying some similarities with the positive phase of the so-called Arctic Oscillation, and with northward shifts in the position of the Gulf Stream and Kuroshio currents. The mechanisms underlying the MCA are thus QUITE DIFFERENT FROM ANTHROPROGENIC MECHANISMS RESPONSIBLE FOR MODERN GLOBAL WARMING."
(my capitals)
gregor1
1 / 5 (14) Apr 19, 2013


"A list of names with absolutely no information about those named is meaningless."

Click the link

"And, being "peer reviewed" does not mean that a work was found to be worthy."
Even with over 1000 papers?

Most importantly, the causes of the MWP anomalies were different than the causes of the current rise in global temperatures.

Really? Where is the evidence for this? Surely we should apply Ockham's razor here?
Runrig
Your second link confirms the MWP was global and the link from which you extensively quoted relies on "forcing estimates" fed into a computer model. As Freeman Dyson recently explained we don't even know the extent of all the forcings on the current climate so this is just an educated guess.
runrig
5 / 5 (6) Apr 19, 2013
Runrig
Your second link confirms the MWP was global and the link from which you extensively quoted relies on "forcing estimates" fed into a computer model. As Freeman Dyson recently explained we don't even know the extent of all the forcings on the current climate so this is just an educated guess.


I don't think anyone is saying the effects were not world wide, just not warm everywhere. You need to get the driver change from somewhere and that will reconfigure global circulation of both atmosphere and ocean. The climate is exquisitely sensitive it seems and small changes can trigger worldwide responses. We know this actually from the ENSO cycle. Look at Europe currently. With cold winters and cool, wet summers. But that is regional. And in my opinion a response to arctic ice depletion, and possibly low solar - this through feedback from the Polar Stratospheric circulation.
deepsand
3 / 5 (18) Apr 19, 2013
""A list of names with absolutely no information about those named is meaningless."

Click the link"

There are no hyperlinks for the listed names.

""And, being "peer reviewed" does not mean that a work was found to be worthy."

Even with over 1000 papers? "

No matter how large the number, unless each and every one passed muster then citing the number is deceptive.

"Most importantly, the causes of the MWP anomalies were different than the causes of the current rise in global temperatures.

Really? Where is the evidence for this? Surely we should apply Ockham's razor here?"

Ockham's razor? Surely you jest.

The simple fact is that the present conditions are quite different from those at the times of the various and disparate MWP anomalies.
Neinsense99
2.5 / 5 (11) May 28, 2013
More propaganda from Seth Borenstein. Rather sad really.
http://wattsupwit...stincts/


The repetitive sounds of the Gregorian Rant are intended to suppress active reasoning and have become popular in some countries for their effectiveness in putting children -- and thinking adults -- to sleep. Zzzzzzzzzzzz.....