scholarly journals How unusual was autumn 2006 in Europe?

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 659-668 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. van Oldenborgh
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Return Time ◽  
The North ◽  
Global Mean Temperature ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
The Alps ◽  
Southern Norway

Abstract. The temperatures in large parts of Europe have been record high during the meteorological autumn of 2006. Compared to 1961–1990, the 2 m temperature was more than three degrees Celsius above normal from the North side of the Alps to southern Norway. This made it by far the warmest autumn on record in the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland, with the records in Central England going back to 1659, in the Netherlands to 1706 and in Denmark to 1768. The deviations were so large that under the obviously false assumption that the climate does not change, the observed temperatures for 2006 would occur with a probability of less than once every 10 000 years in a large part of Europe, given the distribution defined by the temperatures in the autumn 1901–2005. A better description of the temperature distribution is to assume that the mean changes proportional to the global mean temperature, but the shape of the distribution remains the same. This includes to first order the effects of global warming. Even under this assumption the autumn temperatures were very unusual, with estimates of the return time of 200 to 2000 years in this region. The lower bound of the 95% confidence interval is more than 100 to 300 years. Apart from global warming, linear effects of a southerly circulation are found to give the largest contributions, explaining about half of the anomalies. SST anomalies in the North Sea were also important along the coast. Climate models that simulate the current atmospheric circulation well underestimate the observed mean rise in autumn temperatures. They do not simulate a change in the shape of the distribution that would increase the probability of warm events under global warming. This implies that the warm autumn 2006 either was a very rare coincidence, or the local temperature rise is much stronger than modelled, or non-linear physics that is missing from these models increases the probability of warm extremes.

scholarly journals How unusual was autumn 2006 in Europe?

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 811-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. van Oldenborgh
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Anomalous Temperature ◽  
The North ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
The Alps ◽  
Southern Norway ◽  
Current Circulation

Abstract. The temperatures in large parts of Europe have been record high during the meteorological autumn of 2006. Compared to the 1961–1990 normals it was more than three degrees Celsius warmer from the North side of the Alps to southern Norway. This made it by far the warmest autumn on record in the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland, with the records in Central England going back to 1659, in the Netherlands to 1706 and in Denmark to 1768. Also in most of Austria, southern Sweden, southern Norway and parts of Ireland the autumn was the warmest on record. Under the obviously false assumption that the climate does not change, the observed temperatures for 2006 would occur with a probability of less than once every 10 000 years in a large part of Europe, given the distribution defined by the temperatures in the autumn 1901–2005. However, even taking global warming linearly into account the event was still very unusual, with return times of 200 years or more in most of this region using the most conservative extrapolation. Global warming and a southerly circulation were found to give the largest contributions to the anomalous temperature, with minor contributions of more sunshine and SST anomalies in the North Sea. Climate models that simulate the current circulation well do not simulate an increasing probability of warm events in autumn under global warming, implying that it either was a very rare coincidence or some non-linear physics is missing from these models.

V.—Mr. Harkee and Mr. Debley on the Scandinavian Ice-Sheet

1894 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
pp. 496-499
Author(s):  
Henry H. Howorth
Keyword(s):  
Ice Sheet ◽  
Good Effect ◽  
The North ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Glacier Ice ◽  
Inductive Methods ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
Antarctic Continent ◽  
The Alps ◽  
The Difference

Mr. Deeley tells your readers that he has recently been to the summit of Mont Blanc, and has been studying the difference between névé and glacier ice. This is interesting; but we thought that a great many people had done the same thing during the last hundred years, and we thought that one of them, Forbes, had studied the famous Mountain and the phenomenoninquestion to good effect, not in a casual visit to the Alps, but in the course of many years of patient labour. Among other things we also thought he had shown that in a viscous body like ice, the slope of the upper surface necessary to make it begin to move is the same as the slope which, would be required to induce motion in the ice if its bed were inclined at an angle. He further collected considerable evidence to show what the least angle is upon which ice will begin to move. This is the slope, the least slope, available. It is nothing less than astounding to me that anyone should venture to postulate a Scand in avian ice-sheet in the North Sea until he had considered this necessary factor, and how it would operate.The Scand in avian ice-sheet was, I believe, the invention of Croll, who, sittinginhis arm-chair and endowed with a brilliant imagination, imposed upon sober science this extraordinary postulate. He did not dream of testing it by an examination of the coasts of Norway, or even of Britain, but put it forward apparently as a magnificent deduction. All deductions untested by experiment are dangerous. Thus it came about that the great monster which is said to have come from Norway, goodness knows by what mechanical process, speedily dissolved away on the application of inductive methods. Of course it still maintained its hold upon that section, of geologists who dogmatiseinprint a great deal about the Glacial period before they have ever seen a glacier at work at all; but I am speaking of those who have studied the problem inductively. First Mr. James Geikie, a disciple of Croll, was obliged to confess that this ice-sheet, which is actually said to have advanced as far as the hundred-fathom line in the Atlantic, and there presented a cliff of ice like the Antarctic continent, never can have reached the Faroes, which had an ice-sheet of their own. Next Messrs. Peach and Home were constrained to admit that no traces of it of any kind occur in the Orkneys, or in Eastern Scotland. They still maintained its presence in the Shetlands; however, this was upon evidence which is somewhat extraordinary. I do not mean the evidence as to the direction of the striation, which was so roughly handled by Mr. Milne-Home, but I mean the evidence they adduce that the boulders found on the islands are apparently all local ones, and that, contrary to the deposits of glaciers, they diminish in number as we recede from the matrix whence they were derived.

List of Publications Recording the Results of Researches carried out under the Auspices of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom in their Laboratory at Plymouth or on the North Sea Coast from 1886–1900

1900 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-135
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
North Sea ◽  
Biological Association ◽  
The North ◽  
Marine Biological Association ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
Different Parts ◽  
Sea Coast ◽  
North Sea Coast

The following list has been classified, so far as practicable, according to subjects, in order that it may be useful for purposes of reference. The list does not include publications recording the results of observations made on material supplied by the Association to workers in different parts of the country, of which a considerable amount is sent out each year.

scholarly journals Robust increase of Indian monsoon rainfall and its variability under future warming in CMIP-6 models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Katzenberger ◽  
Jacob Schewe ◽  
Julia Pongratz ◽  
Anders Levermann
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Monsoon Rainfall ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Global Mean Temperature ◽  
Almost All

Abstract. The Indian summer monsoon is an integral part of the global climate system. As its seasonal rainfall plays a crucial role in India's agriculture and shapes many other aspects of life, it affects the livelihood of a fifth of the world's population. It is therefore highly relevant to assess its change under potential future climate change. Global climate models within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP-5) indicated a consistent increase in monsoon rainfall and its variability under global warming. Since the range of the results of CMIP-5 was still large and the confidence in the models was limited due to partly poor representation of observed rainfall, the updates within the latest generation of climate models in CMIP-6 are of interest. Here, we analyse 32 models of the latest CMIP-6 exercise with regard to their annual mean monsoon rainfall and its variability. All of these models show a substantial increase in June-to-September (JJAS) mean rainfall under unabated climate change (SSP5-8.5) and most do also for the other three Shared Socioeconomic Pathways analyzed (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0). Moreover, the simulation ensemble indicates a linear dependence of rainfall on global mean temperature with high agreement between the models and independent of the SSP; the multi-model mean for JJAS projects an increase of 0.33 mm/day and 5.3 % per degree of global warming. This is significantly higher than in the CMIP-5 projections. Most models project that the increase will contribute to the precipitation especially in the Himalaya region and to the northeast of the Bay of Bengal, as well as the west coast of India. Interannual variability is found to be increasing in the higher-warming scenarios by almost all models. The CMIP-6 simulations largely confirm the findings from CMIP-5 models, but show an increased robustness across models with reduced uncertainties and updated magnitudes towards a stronger increase in monsoon rainfall.

United Kingdom/Norway

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-164
Author(s):  
Richard Barnes
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Framework Agreement ◽  
The North ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Insight Into

Abstract On 30 September 2020, the United Kingdom and Norway signed the Framework Agreement on Fisheries that will provide the basis for future cooperation in the sustainable management of their fisheries. The Agreement is the first such agreement adopted by the UK following its decision to the leave the European Union. This note provides some background to the Agreement and examines its key features. Whilst the content of the Agreement appears to be rather basic, this is broadly consistent with other framework agreements, and it does provide some insight into the direction and focus of fisheries management in the North Sea, and how cooperation may develop between coastal States and the European Union.

Blame the Barbarians

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-82
Author(s):  
Arika Okrent ◽  
Sean O’Neill
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Old English ◽  
North Sea ◽  
Religious Texts ◽  
The North ◽  
The People ◽  
Latin Language ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
Germanic Languages ◽  
Over Time

This chapter tells the story of how English got to be the weird way it is, which begins with the Germanic languages and the barbarians who spoke them. During the 5th century, an assortment of them poured across the North Sea, from what is today Denmark, the Netherlands, and Northern Germany, and conquered most of England. After about a century of the Germanic tribes taking over and settling in, the Romans returned. This time it was not soldiers but missionaries who arrived. The monks who came to convert the island to Christianity brought their Latin language with them, and they also brought the Latin alphabet. They set about translating religious texts into the language of the people they encountered, a language that by this time had coalesced into something that was Old English. However, there is another group of barbarians to blame: the Vikings. Their language was similar enough to Old English that they could communicate with the Anglo-Saxons without too much difficulty, and over time their own way of speaking mixed into the surrounding language, leaving vocabulary and expressions behind that do not quite fit the rest of the pattern at the old Germanic layer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document