Contributing to making this part of the report a worrying reading is that the natural climate variations are not included in the used climate models. This is depressing, as it is well known that the air temperature around Svalbard is clearly influenced by the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation), which is a natural and periodic variation. This impact is actually mentioned in the report, and this realization ought to have been exploited.
Both the AMO and the air temperature in Longyearbyen have largely covaried since 1898 (see figure). The natural climate variations are thus far from unimportant, and explain better than all CO2-controlled climate models what actually takes place here in Longyearbyen.
AMO is known from measurements since 1856, and geological surveys show that AMO has been in unbroken function for at least the past 8000 years. So it is not likely that AMO will stop in the near future. AMO is currently passing a peak, and will in all likelihood decline over the next 30-35 years. We can all imagine how it will affect the Svalbard temperature. So the natural phenomenon of AMO ought to be included in the report’s assessment of the future climate in Longyearbyen with great emphasis, but does not.