Skip to main content

Tim Woollings - Four Way Interview

Tim Woollings is an Associate Professor in Physical Climate Science at the University of Oxford, leading a team of researchers in the Atmospheric Dynamics group. He obtained his PhD in Meteorology in 2005 and since then has worked on a variety of topics spanning weather prediction, atmospheric dynamics and circulation, and the effects of climate change. He has studied how the jet stream varies over weeks, years, and decades, and how we can better predict these changes. He was a contributing author on three chapters of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Tim worked at the University of Reading as a postdoc, research fellow and then lecturer before moving to the University of Oxford in 2013. He is now the Oxford Joint Chair of the Met Office Academic Partnership. His new book is Jet Stream.

Why climate?

It has never been more important to learn about how our climate system works, and how we are affecting it. You certainly get a lot of satisfaction when your work touches on hugely important and timely issues. But even putting these aspects aside, climate science is a wonderful area to work in because it's so varied, with projects often involving a mix of observations, theory and computer modelling. And the forecasting aspect really makes the subject special - every year we get to test all our theories in real time, for example by trying to predict what the coming winter might have in store for us. 

Why this book?

Any student who has taken an atmospheric circulation class will know how strongly regional climate patterns are shaped by the motion of the atmosphere, but there have been very few books which touch on this for a general audience. The more I researched, the more I realised that there are incredible stories to be told of how weather and climate patterns work and how they have influenced us. For me, it's all about understanding different parts of the world, so I structured the book as a travelogue, following the jet stream around the world and telling some of these stories as we go. 

What's next?

Most of my own work has focused on the northern hemisphere, particularly the North Atlantic / European region. Writing the book made me broaden my horizons and learn about lots of other places, but it is still largely about the north. Next, I really want to learn more about the southern hemisphere - what shapes its jet stream and how this impacts the human stories of the south. 

What's exciting you at the moment?

Now is an exciting time, as climate modelling centres around the world are releasing simulations from their latest computer models to contribute to the next report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. So scientists have a lot of new, more detailed simulations to look at, and we are starting to see interesting new results from groups around the world. This set of models looks likely to have a better simulation of the jet streams than ever before, which is great news. More worryingly, several of the new models warm more strongly in response to greenhouse gases than the older models, suggesting the risk of dangerous climate change could be even more serious than we thought. 


Popular posts from this blog

On the Fringe - Michael Gordin *****

This little book is a pleasant surprise. That word 'little', by the way, is not intended as an insult, but a compliment. Kudos to OUP for realising that a book doesn't have to be three inches thick to be interesting. It's just 101 pages before you get to the notes - and that's plenty. The topic is fringe science or pseudoscience: it could be heavy going in a condensed form, but in fact Michael Gordin keeps the tone light and readable. In some ways, the most interesting bit is when Gordin plunges into just what pseudoscience actually is. As he points out, there are elements of subjectivity to this. For example, some would say that string theory is pseudoscience, even though many real scientists have dedicated their careers to it. Gordin also points out that, outside of denial (more on this a moment), many supporters of what most of us label pseudoscience do use the scientific method and see themselves as doing actual science. Gordin breaks pseudoscience down into a n

A (Very) Short History of Life on Earth - Henry Gee *****

In writing this book, Henry Gee had a lot to live up to. His earlier title  The Accidental Species was a superbly readable and fascinating description of the evolutionary process leading to Homo sapiens . It seemed hard to beat - but he has succeeded with what is inevitably going to be described as a tour-de-force. As is promised on the cover, we are taken through nearly 4.6 billion years of life on Earth (actually rather more, as I'll cover below). It's a mark of Gee's skill that what could have ended up feeling like an interminable list of different organisms comes across instead as something of a pager turner. This is helped by the structuring - within those promised twelve chapters everything is divided up into handy bite-sized chunks. And although there certainly are very many species mentioned as we pass through the years, rather than feeling overwhelming, Gee's friendly prose and careful timing made the approach come across as natural and organic.  There was a w

Michael D. Gordin - Four Way Interview

Michael D. Gordin is a historian of modern science and a professor at Princeton University, with particular interests in the physical sciences and in science in Russia and the Soviet Union. He is the author of six books, ranging from the periodic table to early nuclear weapons to the history of scientific languages. His most recent book is On the Fringe: Where Science Meets Pseudoscience (Oxford University Press). Why history of science? The history of science grabbed me long before I knew that there were actual historians of science out there. I entered college committed to becoming a physicist, drawn in by the deep intellectual puzzles of entropy, quantum theory, and relativity. When I started taking courses, I came to understand that what really interested me about those puzzles were not so much their solutions — still replete with paradoxes — but rather the rich debates and even the dead-ends that scientists had taken to trying to resolve them. At first, I thought this fell under