2016, the last year

[Suff]

What on Earth could it possibly be?

Well you could go to WattsUpWithThat for an explanation. Unfortunately you will get 10 explanations, 7 of them will totally contradict each other but everyone will agree that they are all correct....

Or, of course, you could wander over to SkepticalScience and it will tell you...

Sadly pretty much only the convinced go to SkepticalScience...

BTW did you read about the Sea Level drop in 2010? Full 6mm global sea level drop.

Oddly loads and loads of floods over the next 18 months but it took about 2.5-3 years before all that water made it's way back into the sea.

To leave global sea level rise still continuing on track, 3.5mm per year increase, decade on decade average....

Not that worrying perhaps, only a foot in the 85 years left of this century. Except. That it was 2mm per year decade on decade in the 1990's. We haven't finished the 2010's yet, so we don't have the comparison, but we do know that ice loss in Greenland and the Antarctica Ice Mass (not sea ice), continues to climb, year on year. We have the wonderful GRACE satellites to tell us that.

Who would have known?????

[Weka]

I agree about democracy, but don't forget China is an aweful polluter with a one child policy and communist.

[Workingman]

There was a piece on the BBC the other day about sea gases such as dimethyl sulfide turning to sulphate to seed clouds. This happens naturally and the tale was interesting, then came the dreaded word "geoengineering".

More clouds equal more sunlight reflection, so "seeding" the atmosphere to create more clouds is a good thing. Right? But when things happen naturally they tend, by and large, to be in balance. However, pumping sulphates into the air will create more acid rain, and that will damage plant life, and, and, and.

Today the United States Geological Survey (USGS) announced a $5.7bn project to undo the damage of a sort of earlier 'geoengineering' project carried out years ago in order to save New Orleans. Building the levees and navigation channels seemed like a good way of saving New Orleans all those years back, but nature had other ideas so it needs saving again.

[Suff]

More clouds equal more sunlight reflection, so "seeding" the atmosphere to create more clouds is a good thing. Right? But when things happen naturally they tend, by and large, to be in balance. However, pumping sulphates into the air will create more acid rain, and that will damage plant life, and, and, and.

Never mind the fact that it is the presence of clouds in the atmosphere which is warming the Arctic in Winter. Nor the fact that we've already seeded the atmosphere. A warmer atmosphere can contain significantly more water. A.K.A more clouds. Job done...

Or not.

The loss of albedo in the Arctic massively offsets the entire global cloud increases. It also does so in a place in the world where sunlight absorption in summer happens 24x7...