Climbing The Hill Of Development (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)
Last week I found topics being addressed independently from each other by members of my network at LinkedIn which I find to be related.
What once could have been the “normal” has become the “precious” rare.
Patricie Polakova shared a picture of a very nice location in “Čertovo” (Devil) Lake – Šumava mountains, Czech Republic.
I made a comment with which I wanted to represent the connection of many environmental issues in one:
It puts in perspective the whole lot of meaning behind the power that the decision of one single person can have to change such a beautiful scenario. Lets hope “development” changes its meaning before we change everything following the actual meaning of “development“.
Big Challenges require one big effort or many small ones
Few days ago I posted in this blog an entrance aimed to acknowledge the effort put by small groups adopting hand-on strategies to confront environmental issues derived from the fast paced rate of human development, like the impact of litter in the health state of natural environments. In that particular case, plastics in the Ocean.
There is a lot of “behind the curtains” work and people which does not take the credit they deserve. And because they do not make the tabloids they don´t get the attention and support that would increase their potential to have a bigger impact. Some innocuous papers can get more attention than the work carried out by these initiatives and people. Thanks to their persistence and passion, little by little, thinks are being done without mainstream media noticing.
The Development of “Mainstream Social Science”
The impact of public debates over environmental issues present in mainstream social media is another question which has taken my attention.
One of those reads which came across my path, but I can not recall its exact location, pointed out the problem generated with the excess of information available. And it made particular reference to the difficulty of filtering the good from the bad or misleading information. This subject has been touched by more people and it is generating an increasing demand of attention, as well as opinions.
Some people choose only peer review articles as a source of valid information. Some others question such attitude since we live in a world dominated by Political agendas and corporative interests where scientific publishing and research funding is being dominated and manipulated through economical pressures as much as any other sectors.
Some people have supported the value behind the contribution given by blogs hold by people with a scientific background. However, with the increasing access to information, an increasing number of individuals claim to hold the right training. So many people are willing to judge scientific postures, some people offer constructive discussion, less people take the risk of building up their own scientific alternative assessment and almost none of those judging others would take the responsibility of being the ones answering questions. All that activity is included under the umbrella of social fictitious science, drowning in the mud the already deteriorated public image of the scientific community.
My take on this issue is part of a repeating “mantra” which I have tried to highlight in this blog. The relevance of the answers we get are defined by the meaningfulness of the questions formulated. In scientific research, answers have to be objective. So the questions justifying its relevance can not come just from passionated rants. Being a scientist is not about having answers for everything. It is about building with knowledge the capacity to separate passion from objectivity. A perspective from where we can observe the world understanding which are our limitations to address the questions yet to be answered and identify the right sequence in priority for those to invest our energy.
So the first question everybody has to understand is why our thoughts are similar or different from those shared by others. Is it because we share similar training and education? social background? political views? are we applying similar methodology? do we give similar priority to the repercussion of different factors involved?
If you find the appropriate question, and don´t loose track of it while looking for answers, it is easier to find the right information telling you which is the state of knowledge for this particular matter.
In the issue of climatic drifts and their links with human activities, we have to remember, why did it came the question into place?
The Earth has had many climatic changes through its existence. And, through many of those, the conditions were so rough that we, as specie, would have straggled to survive. So, even considering the paleoclimate of our planet being in constant change, there is a component which makes a difference when we compare those previous changes. This component is time. In one hand is the time rate at which changes take place. How abrupt are those changes. In other hand it is space, how many factors coexist in location at the same time.
The changes that we are seeing in the conditions associated with temperature in our planet are happening at a fast pace so when we look at which forces interacting with our climate are changing in magnitude at similar fast paced rate the question raised:
- If the time rate that we see for atmospheric changes to happen is due to a factor speeding the process, which factor is different from previous paleoclimatic records? And the most rapid developing factor in contact with our changing planet is Human Development.
So the question in itself represents a situation of change which, it might not be new to the planet in its nature, but it is in its shape. It is the shape of our environment what it is changing and we have realised that we are still trying to understand the role that we play as specie.
And the methodology which we, as a collective force of scientific thought, are applying is proving to be far more complicated than everybody would expect at first. Some people even question that human expansion and its capabilities to transform its surroundings could have any significant impact in our climatic regimes, ever.
What I see as a major conflict in scientific evolution is the debate created around the mere fact of having to justify which questions are worthy to be addressed? That is an attitude which involves assuming a huge amount of responsibility. Like if we can afford to move forward with only one eye open and the other one blindfolded.
Science nowadays it is showing to be, at least, as “independent” as it is justice from political views, and political decisions from economic powers.
There is a ministry of education in every country and yet there is no ministry of science. What we need to manage is not only how we teach knowledge but how we produce it. It seems that science, like many other establishments, is loosing the trust and recognition required to generate an independent body of knowledge which would be applied on making assessments and policies, manage their implementation and justify the educational contents being taught.
Justice, Political Ideals, Scientific Knowledge and Sustainable Economy walk hand by hand driving the path chosen for humanity. All those challenges which society face today in all aspects of live are not new in our history. Racism, Religion and Political confrontation, economic deterioration, and lost of trust in management are like the challenges faced by science, not new in history but new in shape.
Times have changed, our surroundings have changed so the reactions triggered against old similar problems have different repercussions. From local disruptions with local impacts we have moved to generate synergistic links which connect us globally. We have moved from identifying previous organic climatic drifts confronted by a functionally resilient and equilibrated environment in the past to ask ourselves how much tampering can our land, air and water systems tolerate, under a continuously increasing and extensive pressure, before they embark on a one-way path towards a new equilibrium less beneficial for our development? The mere existence of a reality which justifies such question makes all the difference. Without all the changes that our planetary systems have being accumulating through time due to human activities (atmospheric composition, water cycles displacements, land cover and biotic composition) we would not have reached the state of considering our development enough to generate a reasonable doubt.
Some answers are offered to calm down expectations but those answers scape to analyse the meaningfulness of addressing any relevant question. One example comes from a recent article: “3 developments that could help the world stay below a dangerous global warming threshold”. (http://uk.businessinsider.com/)
- Green energy is getting cheaper
- Carbon dioxide emissions have stopped rising
- Green jobs are good for the economy
1- The industry of “green” energy is getting cheaper.
Lets hope that “cheaper” has a meaning which does not replicate what happened with the increasingly cheaper “digital” industry and the increasingly amount of digital waste produced. Once more, it seems that solutions and problems can be geolocated. The solutions for some societies are part of the problem for others. So, in “average”, we might not move far from where we are. (see related article at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/)
2- Carbon dioxide emissions have stopped rising
Emissions or concentration? Both are very different things.
Less CO2 being emitted is related with production. Concentration measured is related with the volume of the atmosphere accommodating the CO2 emitted.
When we see applied the reasoning of “Emissions not raise”, this is a concept which implies that they keep being emitted at the same rate as previously. It is like saying that your house is getting under water but the water flow rate has stopped increasing. Now that the “emissions” from the leaks of water into your house do not “raise”, they just keep flooding your house but at a steady rate. Which is not good, at all.
If you stop “increasing” the heat in your oven that will not avoid your food from getting burned.
The concentration of CO2 might not raise. And even the temperature might fluctuate. But all of that comes from measuring averages in an atmosphere with a volume which is compartmentalised in altitude and latitude (Mid-Latitudes and Polar Circulation). Based on my research I would expect that as the mixing ratio between the masses of air contained in those “compartments” increases (more discussion at ref1, ref2, ref3, ref4, and ref5) the measurements of temperature and concentrations will fluctuate, thanks partly to stratospheric warmings and a wobbly Jet Stream opening the Arctic circulation to mid-latitudes.
3-Green jobs are good for the economy
Meanwhile developed countries rely on economic consumption, underdeveloped countries on strengthening their economies. Everybody needs production and resources. Western countries sell technology for eastern cheap production and labour. Meanwhile, everybody waste resources. We waste more than we consume, energy efficiency is not profitable, nothing is built to last any more and food is thrown away just to control the prices in the markets.
Curiously enough, the kind of economy claiming to improve “green jobs” do not accommodate science as a sector in which the conditions are improving, and that is settled science for some.
Scientists have been put on the spot. Some enjoy it, others feel under pressure, in front of an audience looking for whom to blame from the result of political decisions. The image of “an united effort” should not only be political, it also should have a botanist, an edaphologist, a physicist, a chemist, an oceanographer, a climatologist, … and the outcome from such meeting, I am sure, it would not bring such a cheerful picture as from PARIS2015. There is nothing to celebrate when you identify a problem and moreover, if you feel the pressure from having to take the responsibility of dealing with it. It is like celebrating that there is consensus on that the roof of your own house needs to be replaced, you have to do the work and not only to not loose money but furthermore, generate profits.
The 18th of May (2016) I attended to a speech given by the sub-director of the Spanish Office of Climate Change. He started his speech acknowledging the efforts behind the Paris meeting and used the majority of his more than an hour of talking describing the complex process of being a politician gathering different sides together to address issues on the GHGs agenda. What surprised me the most was the ending of his speech. In the last 15 minutes he explained that the real deal and responsibility lies in the hands of the population and their daily decisions. At the Q&A time I presented my arguments to perform a question:
Despite the fact that industry has a far bigger impact than urban populations, we both industry and population, are obliged to follow the laws and directives designed by Politicians. We are free to choose, but only between the options given by the policies and laws dictated by our governments. One example, in Spain, we can not have a house with an autonomous supply of electric energy. If you produce electricity you have to pay for it, even if it comes from your own solar panels. Consumption facilities have to pay a fee for each kilowatt-hour of energy self-consumed instantaneously. There is also another charge (fixed charge) to be paid in respect of all facilities including those using batteries. (article related here. European Commission posture here).
Since the industry of a country and its population is ruled by the policies dictated by the governments I asked: “what was the relationship between the beginning of his speech giving so much credit to the efforts behind the Paris meeting and, his final assessment putting the responsibility of mitigating the impact from human activities over the global ecosystem over the shoulders of the population?. (I felt that there was a gap missing the link between those two. And I promise that I paid attention)
The answer was… an elaborated improvisation of self preservation. I am aware of that the organisers made a sound recording of this speech but I haven´t found it in the internet.
Climbing The Hill of Development
The reason behind the title for this article is that in all aspects of climate research it feels like we are climbing a hill in too many senses. The effort that it takes to move in scientific agreement and the measurements being monitored. And we have become so used to see numbers climbing that it seems like a relief when we are told that the deterioration of our environment has stopped from increasing regardless the implications from keep happening at an steady continuous pace.
800,000-year Ice-Core Records of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Over the last 800,000 years atmospheric CO2 levels as indicated by the ice-core data have fluctuated between 170 and 300 parts per million by volume (ppmv), corresponding with conditions of glacial and interglacial periods. The Vostok core indicates very similar trends. Prior to about 450,000 years before present time (BP) atmospheric CO2 levels were always at or below 260 ppmv and reached lowest values, approaching 170 ppmv, between 660,000 and 670,000 years ago. The highest pre-industrial value recorded in 800,000 years of ice-core record was 298.6 ppmv, in the Vostok core, around 330,000 years ago.
Atmospheric CO2 levels have increased markedly in industrial times:
CDIAC: 50-year moving averages of spline-function values of CH4, CO2, N2O
Measurements in year 2010 at Cape Grim Tasmania and the South Pole both indicated values of 386 ppmv, and are currently increasing at about 2 ppmv/year. (Source)
Monthly mean atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii
The carbon dioxide data (red curve), measured as the mole fraction in dry air, on Mauna Loa constitute the longest record of direct measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere. They were started by C. David Keeling of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in March of 1958 at a facility of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Keeling, 1976]. NOAA started its own CO2 measurements in May of 1974, and they have run in parallel with those made by Scripps since then [Thoning, 1989]. The black curve represents the seasonally corrected data.
Data are reported as a dry mole fraction defined as the number of molecules of carbon dioxide divided by the number of molecules of dry air multiplied by one million (ppm).
Are GHGs all we should care about?
The image which I used to open this article is what we could expect to see almost everywhere in the paleoclimatic records. A healthy ecosystem in a clean environment. Even under the influence of a natural warming period, there is a big difference in the amount of radiation required to explain the increase of temperature the way it happens nowadays if our atmosphere did not contain GHGs and aerosols at the present concentration and the soils were protected under a dense healthy biotic cover and accessible water.
In 1969 Eugene P. Odum wrote an article titled “The Strategy of Ecosystem Development.” An understanding of ecological succession provides a basis for resolving man’s conflict with nature. Athens (Georgia, US), 1969. (First published in Science, volume 164, number 3877, pages 262-270.)
When we compare the actual state of our environment and the assessments in this publication from 47 years ago, this article can help to put in perspective the cumulative bias which under my point of view is obviated when focusing exclusively on GHGs assessing the state of change in a global system, driven by synergistic interactions, and under constant pressure throughout time. A bias which is generating new publications giving the impression of identifying new challenges when, in fact, are just part of a long ongoing process.
In some of the previous publications in this blog I have addressed the relevance of understanding the impact from human management over synergistic relationships between biotic and none biotic components in our environment in relation with climatic developments:
- Debating Climate, Environment and Planetary evolution. Define your position. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 2 October 2014
- SOILS. The Skeleton Holding The Muscle On Our Ecosystems (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Posted 09 December 2015
- Biological Productivity, Amazonia and Atmospheric Circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 22 December 2014
- Biological Productivity and its Influence on Cloud Formation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 26 June 2014
- Plant an Idea and Then a Tree… But Which Ones? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Posted 22 April 2016
- Plant growth, CO2, Soil and Nutrients. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Posted 31 March 2016
- Inland sanctuaries of water vapour for atmospheric circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 06 August 2014
- Forecasts For Ecosystems (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) 25 Feb 2016
- “Effects of air pollution on european Ecosystems” European Environment Agency technical report. Press release (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 7 July 2014
- Effects of ecosystem’s degradation and the EEA report. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) 12 July 2014
- Domesticating Nature. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted 7 May 2015
I can not expect from you to read them, but there is a line of continuum progression in the assessments that I publish in this blog that makes all previous publications to be interconnected and related with the publication from Eugene P. Odum (1969).
The abstract of the paper reads as follow:
“The principles of ecological succession bear importantly on the relationships between man and nature. The framework of successional theory needs to be examined as a basis for resolving man’s present environmental crisis. Most ideas pertaining to the development of ecological systems are based on descriptive data obtained by observing changes in biotic communities over long periods, or on highly theoretical assumptions; very few of the generally accepted hypotheses have been tested experimentally. Some of the confusion, vagueness, and lack of experimental work in this area stems from the tendency of ecologists to regard succession as a single straightforward idea; in actual fact, it entails an interacting complex of processes, some of which counteract one another.
As viewed here, ecological succession involves the development of ecosystems; it has many parallels in the developmental biology of organisms, and also in the development of human society. The ecosystem, or ecological system, is considered to be a unit of biological organization made up of all of the organisms in a given area (that is, community) interacting with the physical environment so that a flow of energy leads to characteristic trophic structure and material cycles within the system. It is the purpose of this article to summarize, in the form of a tabular model, components and stages of development at the ecosystem level as a means of emphasizing those aspects of ecological succession that can be accepted on the basis of present knowledge, those that require more study, and those that have special relevance to human ecology.”
From the body of the publication I would like to highlight:
“The basic problem facing organized society today boils down to determining in some objective manner when we are getting too much of a good thing.
This is a completely new challenge to mankind because, up until now, he has had to be concerned largely with too little rather than too much. Thus, concrete is a good thing, but not if half the world is covered with it. Insecticides are good things, but not when used, as they now are, in an indiscriminate and wholesale manner. Likewise, water impoundments have proved to be very useful man-made additions to the landscape, but obviously we don’t want the whole country inundated! Vast man-made lakes solve some problems, at least temporarily, but yield comparative little food or fiber, and, because of high evaporative losses, they may not even be the best device for storing water; it might better be stored in the watershed or underground in aquifers. Also, the cost of building large dams is a drain on already overtaxed avenues. Although as individuals we can have too many dams or other large-scale environmental changes, governments are so fragmented and lacking in systems-analysis capabilities that there is no effective mechanism whereby negative feedback signals can be received and acted on before there has been a serious overshoot. Thus, today there are governmental agencies, spurred on by popular and political enthusiasm for dams, that are putting on the drawing boards plans for damming every river and stream in North America!
Society needs, and must find as quickly as possible, a way to deal with the landscape as a whole, so that manipulative skills (that is, technology) will not run too far ahead of our understanding of the impact of change.”
Back in May 2015 I wrote in this blog an entrance titled Steering climate´s course (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla). As part of this publication I wrote:
“Arctic Amplification has introduced feedback effects associated with temperature, water vapour and clouds. Changes in the surface albedo feedback—the increase in surface absorption of solar radiation when snow and ice retreat— are the ones often cited as the main contributor. What I am researching about are the mechanisms provoking those changes in albedo. I am looking at the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” increases in water vapour due to atm CO2, triggering; early snowfalls in central Asia, Arctic ice cover meltdown and oceanic increases in salinity and ultimately, the origin of atmospheric blocking patterns and possibly, the pause in T raise.
Arctic and Antarctic circulations behave in a very different way due to its particular asymmetries as consequence of their land/ocean thermal contrasts and Ocean circulation.
All the oscillations considered in atmospheric circulation, PDO, OA, AMO, Solar activity… move around pivoting points. These pivoting points make the impact from those oscillations close to neutral in a long time scale.
We can see that by looking at the gene pool in the evolution of the biological environment which we see today. An environment which has evolved closely thanks to environmental resilience absorbing perturbations originated from those oscillations.
Without resilience, the severity of the variations associated with the oscillations would have not allowed genetic evolution to grow in such a close divergence as we have seen. The climate through latitudes has suffered variations but the global climate has allowed species to develop closely instead of perishing without time for adaptation inducing the generation of new branches of genetic divergence.
Two major components are working side by side in our planet. Passive mechanisms driven by thermodynamic forces transferring energy between components of the ecosystem and, Active processes absorbing, transforming and storing energy throughout biochemical processes.
Consequently, two postures rise in the debate from these two mechanisms:
Are thermodynamics defining the state which allow life to evolve in a changing climate? or, Are biotic systems the ones which develop against thermodynamic fluctuations taming the weather?
Foreseeable Atmospheric Dynamics and Climatic Developments
In September 2015 I wrote an article (ref3) describing the progression in the development of atmospheric dynamics following the theoretical approach published in 2014 (ref1 and ref2) which describes the implications of facing the atmosphere accommodating increasing amounts of water vapour as the carrier of energy being spread throughout the atmosphere in altitude and latitude due to the positive feedback originated from higher concentrations of GHGs and aerosols.
In particular for the present publication in time, 27 July 2016, it is worthy to mention the conditions being observed over the whole globe. In the North Hemisphere heat waves have begun to take place moving northward in India, then Europe and EEUU. Those heat displacements follow continental basins, the same surface where the management of emissions and land cover can make a difference.
Last week, in the South Hemispheric winter, heat displacements moved into Antarctic latitudes, and the location for those seem to be in alignment with continental proximity. I discussed such scenario in a post.
Following the mechanisms described in the post A Climate “Between Waters” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla), any volume of air coming inside a compartmentalized space displace another volume of air moving out. And that is what it seems to have just happened over the South Polar altitudes.
Record breaking rainfall and cold weather grips South Africa. Met Office Source)
Posted on 26 July, 2016 by Met Office Press Office.
There has been snowfall, heavy rain, and flooding across parts of South Africa as a low pressure system moves slowly along the southern coast.
Flooding and mudslides have been reported in and around Durban with the city recording 150mm of rainfall in 12 hours on Monday, that’s equal to 5 times its average July rainfall. Along the coast in Paddock, 315mm of rain has fallen since Sunday, equivalent to around a third of the rainfall it would expect in a whole year.
Meanwhile inland in the southeastern interior there has been heavy snowfall. The South African Weather Service has issued a number of snow warnings and has highlighted the risk of travel disruption for various passes between the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. There is a further 15-25cm of snow expected in the area over the next few days.
The aim of publishing my work openly is to allow for it to be exposed for an open review. So any constructive feedback is welcome. After a period of time of at least a month from the publishing date on this blog and at LinkedIn, if no comments are found discussing the value of the piece published I then publish it at ResearchGate generating a DOI for posterior references.
In order to protect my intellectual rights, more assessment in depth and the statistical and numerical analyses that I have performed to support my arguments can be discussed at my email: d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com
The performance of my work as independent researcher, with no institutional and economic support, is limited by my lack of access to resources and economic stability. So far what I have published in this blog is what I have been able to offer with those limitations.
If you find that my work is worthy to be acknowledged, share your thoughts openly and publicly because by sharing public acknowledging over the value of my work is what will overcome the limitations of my cv in order to find the attention from those able to allow me access to a job position or resources to increase the functionality of my research.
Since October 2013 I have been studying the behaviour of the Polar Jet Stream and the weather events associated as well as the implications derived into atmospheric dynamics and environmental synergies.
Many of the atmospheric configurations and weather and climate events we see these days are very similar with the progression followed since 2013. Please take a look at posts addressing those events from previous publications in this blog or look at the categories in the top menu. Also at research-gate. Feedback is always welcomed either in this blog or at my email (d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com). All my work is part of my Intellectual Portfolio, registered under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, WordPress.com license and it is being implemented at my profile in researchgate. I will fight for its recognition in case of misuse.
- New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on October 21, 2014. http://wp.me/p403AM-k3
- Why there is no need for the Polar Vortex to break in order to have a wobbling Jet Stream and polar weather? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on November 14, 2014. http://wp.me/p403AM-mt
- State of the Polar Vortex. Broken? From 29 Nov 2014 to 5th Jan 2015 (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla). Posted on November 29, 2014. http://wp.me/p403AM-o7
- Gathering data to make visible the invisible (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on December 22, 2014. http://wp.me/p403AM-pN
- Probability in the atmospheric circulation dictating the Weather (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on January 15, 2015. http://wp.me/p403AM-rm
- Meteorological Outlook Feb 2015 (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on February 7, 2015. http://wp.me/p403AM-sU
- Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla. Posted on February 10, 2015. http://wp.me/p403AM-to
- Drops of Weather. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 7, 2015
- Steering climate´s course (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 27, 2015
- Climate. Looking at the forest for the trees (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 9, 2015
- Matching Features Between Land Surface and Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 23, 2015
- Domesticating Nature. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 7, 2015
- A roller-coaster of temperatures in South Europe. Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 14, 2015
- Talking about climate (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 12, 2015
- News from an Ecosystem (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 20, 2015
- In climate it is becoming Less probable to not have a High probability. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 29, 2015
- Drinking from the source (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 5, 2015
- Communication takes more than just publishing thoughts. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 9, 2015
- Extreme climatic events, implications for projections of species distributions and ecosystem structure (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 18, 2015
- The scope of Environmental Science and scientific thought. From Thought-driven to Data-driven, from Critical Thinking to Data Management. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 26, 2015
- Atmospheric Circulation and Climate Drift. Are we there yet? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)July 2, 2015
- Lateral thinking. From Micro to Macro (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)July 4, 2015
- Something for the curious minds. Climate and Streamlines (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)July 17, 2015
- Solar Activity and Human Activity, Settling Their Environmental Liability. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)July 24, 2015
- Atmospheric composition and thermal conductivity? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)August 6, 2015
- Latitudinal barriers and typhoons (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)August 13, 2015
- The Earth is Ticking (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)August 20, 2015
- What if, the relevant bit lies hidden on identifying the pattern behind similarities instead of trying to match anomalies? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)September 3, 2015
- A Climate “Between Waters” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla).September 8, 2015
- Sensing Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)September 22, 2015
- InFormAtion. The “Act” of “Giving Form” to “Knowledge” (by Diego fdez-Sevilla)September 30, 2015
- Arctic Intake of Water Vapour (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)October 7, 2015
- SST Anomalies and Heat Waves. Are They Not All Just Heat Displacements? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)October 16, 2015
- Discussing Climatic Teleconnections. Follow Up On My Previous Research (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)October 21, 2015
- Follow-up on Arctic circulation 30 Oct 2015 ( by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)October 30, 2015
- There is Ice or Frost In Antarctica? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)November 5, 2015
- Starts Raining Drops of Winter at Mid-Latitudes. The new Autumn? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)November 10, 2015
- Press release. Ask NASA (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)November 12, 2015
- Following the Behaviour of the Jet Stream (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)November 19, 2015
- What Is Wrong With The Concept “Bio”? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)November 26, 2015
- Energy. Looking For Sources of Something We Waste. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)December 3, 2015
- SOILS. The Skeleton Holding The Muscle On Our Ecosystems (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)December 9, 2015
- Could It Be El Niño The New “Wolf” Coming? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)December 11, 2015
- Climate and weather December 2015. Another Polar Vortex another Heat Wave? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)December 18, 2015
- New insides on old concepts (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)December 23, 2015
- Atmospheric Dynamics And Shapes (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)January 13, 2016
- European weather. Old News, Same News? by Diego Fdez-SevillaJanuary 15, 2016
- Observational events on atmospheric dynamics. A follow-up assessment over the theory proposed over Energetic gradients by Diego Fdez-Sevilla.January 29, 2016
- North American Weather. Old News, Same News? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)January 20, 2016
- Observed Atmospheric Dynamics. A follow-up assessment over the theory proposed on Energetic gradients by Diego Fdez-Sevilla.January 29, 2016
- (updated 11-18 Feb2016) Polar Vortex, Old News, Same News? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)February 4, 2016
- Forecasting Past Events. Snow Coming to Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)February 12, 2016
- Do You Believe in the Value of Your Work? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)February 23, 2016
- Forecasts For Ecosystems (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)February 25, 2016
- Seasonality Spring 2016. Continuous follow-up on my previous research assessing atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 3, 2016
- Tangled in Words. Atmospheric Dynamics, Stefan Boltzmann Calculations and Energy Balance (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 10, 2016
- Pacific atmospheric dynamics with and without a positive ENSO (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 22, 2016
- Plant growth, CO2, Soil and Nutrients. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)March 31, 2016
- Atmospheric Dynamics, GHG’s, Thermal Conductivity and Polar Jet Stream (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 6, 2016
- Feedback. Have Your Say. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 14, 2016
- Plant an Idea and Then a Tree… But Which Ones? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 22, 2016
- (updated 28/April/2016) Severe weather warning 27 April 2016 USA (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)April 28, 2016
- Research Update May 2016 (by Diego Fdez-sevilla)May 6, 2016
- Scientifically Challenged (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 12, 2016
- Another roller-coaster of temperatures in South Europe. Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 13, 2015May 13, 2016
- Our Environment. One Vision and Many Thoughts. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 20, 2016
- Atmospheric Circulation and the Mixing Zone. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)May 26, 2016
- When Temperature Becomes Something Else (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 30, 2016
- Settled Science (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 9, 2016
- The Butterfly Effect on Arctic Circulation. (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla)June 10, 2016
- Who has the right and the responsibility to discuss Climate as a topic of debate? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)June 20, 2016
- Snap shot of a day 22 June 2016. Follow-up on previous research over atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)June 22, 2016
- Atmospheric mixing. Indian Basin June 2016 (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)July 1, 2016