Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #331
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project
THIS WEEK: By Ken Haapala, President
General Comment: Three major events occurred this week for evaluating the effectiveness of the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its subordinate organization, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in issuing reports on the causes of climate change, a process that has been ongoing for hundreds of millions of years. The major events were: one, a speech by MIT Professor emeritus, Richard Lindzen; two, an independent evaluation of the surface data set established by the Hadley Center and the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University; and three, the publication of the first of three special reports by the IPCC for its parent organization, the UNFCCC.
Lindzen’s Speech: A participant in the IPCC, who resigned, atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT. He is noted for his work in dynamic meteorology, atmospheric tides, ozone photochemistry, quasi-biennial oscillation, and the Iris hypothesis. Lindzen is certainly qualified to talk about the physics of the atmosphere, where the greenhouse effect occurs. Several key points of the talk are summarized below.
Lindzen uses a quote from C.P. Snow (an English physical chemist who became a novelist) to differentiate between those familiar with science and those who are not. Then Lindzen states:
“While some might maintain that ignorance of physics does not impact political ability, it most certainly impacts the ability of non-scientific politicians to deal with nominally science-based issues. The gap in understanding is also an invitation to malicious exploitation. Given the democratic necessity for non-scientists to take positions on scientific problems, belief and faith inevitably replace understanding, though trivially oversimplified false narratives serve to reassure the non-scientists that they are not totally without scientific ‘understanding.’ The issue of global warming offers numerous examples of all of this.”
Lindzen gives a description of the earth’s climate system as circulation of two turbulent fluids (atmosphere and oceans) interacting with each other and the land, made turbulent by the rotation of the globe – exposing the fluids and the land to uneven heating by the sun. (The energy flow from the sun is not stable.) As such,
“The fact that these circulations carry heat to and from the surface means that the surface itself is never in equilibrium with space. There is never an exact balance between incoming heat from the sun and outgoing radiation generated by the Earth. This is because heat is always being stored in (and released from) the oceans. Therefore, surface temperature is always varying somewhat.” [Punctuation slightly changed.]
To discuss “earth in balance” is a foolish simplification.
When air-flows interact with the uneven topography of the land, they become distorted.
“Topography therefore plays a major role in modifying regional climate. These distorted air-flows even generate fluid waves that can alter climate at distant locations. Computer simulations of the climate generally fail to adequately describe these effects.”
“A vital constituent of the atmospheric component is water in the liquid, solid and vapor phases, and the changes in phase have vast impacts on energy flows. Each component also has important radiative impacts.”
After discussing the substantial energy transformations from the phase changes of water, Lindzen brings up the greenhouse effect and states:
“…that the two most important greenhouse substances by far are water vapor and clouds. Clouds are also important reflectors of sunlight.
“The unit for describing energy flows is watts per square meter. The energy budget of this system involves the absorption and reemission of about 200 watts per square meter. Doubling CO2 involves a 2% perturbation to this budget. So do minor changes in clouds and other features, and such changes are common….” [Boldface is italics in the original.]
Lindzen concludes the section by discussing “unforced” natural variation that may take 1,000 years to appear:
“Nature has numerous examples of autonomous variability, including the approximately 11-year sunspot cycle and the reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field every couple of hundred thousand years or so. In this respect, the climate system is no different from other natural systems.
“Of course, such systems also do respond to external forcing, but such forcing is not needed for them to exhibit variability. While the above is totally uncontroversial, please think about it for a moment. Consider the massive heterogeneity and complexity of the system, and the variety of mechanisms of variability as we consider the current narrative that is commonly presented as ‘settled science.”
Under the section “The popular narrative and its political origins,” Lindzen begins with:
“Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance.
“This is an extraordinary pair of claims based on reasoning that borders on magical thinking. It is, however, the narrative that has been widely accepted, even among many sceptics. This acceptance is a strong indicator of the problem Snow identified.
“Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable. And although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small — compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere — they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control CO2 levels.” [Punctuation slightly changed.]
Lindzen discusses the role several actors have played in developing this “magical” thinking, including the ideologically motivated UNFCCC.
In discussing the “evidence” Lindzen asserts:
“First, for something to be evidence, it must have been unambiguously predicted. (This is a necessary, but far from sufficient condition.) Figure 1 shows the IPCC model forecasts for the summer minimum in Arctic sea ice in the year 2100 relative to the period 1980–2000. As you can see, there is a model for any outcome. It is a little like the formula for being an expert marksman: shoot first and declare whatever you hit to be the target.” [Boldface added]
Lindzen similarly demonstrates the inadequacy of claims of “hottest year ever,” sea level rise, etc. He states:
“At the heart of this nonsense is the failure to distinguish weather from climate. Thus, global warming refers to the welcome increase in temperature of about 1ºC since the end of the Little Ice Age about 200 years ago. On the other hand, weather extremes involve temperature changes of the order of 20ºC. Such large changes have a profoundly different origin from global warming. Crudely speaking, they result from winds carrying warm and cold air from distant regions that are very warm or very cold. These winds are in the form of waves. The strength of these waves depends on the temperature difference between the tropics and the Arctic (with larger differences leading to stronger waves). Now, the models used to project global warming all predict that this temperature difference will decrease rather than increase. Thus, the increase in temperature extremes would best support the idea of global cooling rather than global warming. However, scientifically illiterate people seem incapable of distinguishing global warming of climate from temperature extremes due to weather. In fact, as has already been noted, there doesn’t really seem to be any discernible trend in weather extremes.”
“There is at least one positive aspect to the present situation. None of the proposed policies will have much impact on greenhouse gases. Thus we will continue to benefit from the one thing that can be clearly attributed to elevated carbon dioxide: namely, its effective role as a plant fertilizer, and reducer of the drought vulnerability of plants. Meanwhile, the IPCC is claiming that we need to prevent another 0.5ºC of warming, although the 1ºC that has occurred so far has been accompanied by the greatest increase in human welfare in history. As we used to say in my childhood home of the Bronx: ‘Go figure’”
The entire speech is much needed and worth reading. TWTW urges all readers to read and evaluate it. Lindzen clearly illustrates the value of Feynman’s comment in the Quote of the Week. Simply because the IPCC names its process as science, does not make it science. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
Quote of the Week “I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.”― Richard P. Feynman
Number of the Week: 2%
Poor Data Coverage: The reports of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) have questioned the poor coverage of the earth surface by the instruments used to measure temperatures. For example, page 8 and 9 of the 2008 NIPCC report discusses the inadequacy of the coverage of the 2,592 feasible 5º X 5º boxes. Prior to World War II, there were less than 600 boxes covered with “mean value” (23%) with about 200 covered with a “max-min” value (8%).
Building on his doctoral thesis from James Cook University, Australian researcher John McLean investigated (audited) the surface data set known as HadCRUT4, which is highly cited and is used to adjust many global climate models. As one might expect, he found the coverage to be extremely sparse, particularly in the early part of the record. Also, McLean found improbable data, and systematic adjustment errors, large gaps with no data, location errors, and other glaring mistakes. Jo Nova states that McLean’s main points include:
“Almost no quality control checks have been done: outliers that are obvious mistakes have not been corrected – one town in Columbia [sic]spent three months in 1978 at an average daily temperature of over 80 degrees C. One town in Romania stepped out from summer in 1953 straight into a month of Spring at minus 46°C. These are supposedly “average” temperatures for a full month at a time. St Kitts, a Caribbean island, was recorded at 0°C for a whole month, and twice!
“Temperatures for the entire Southern Hemisphere in 1850 and for the next three years are calculated from just one site in Indonesia and some random ships.
“Sea surface temperatures represent 70% of the Earth’s surface, but some measurements come from ships which are logged at locations 100km inland. Others are in harbors which are hardly representative of the open ocean.
“When a thermometer is relocated to a new site, the adjustment assumes that the old site was always built up and “heated” by concrete and buildings. In reality, the artificial warming probably crept in slowly. By correcting for buildings that likely didn’t exist in 1880, old records are artificially cooled. Adjustments for a few site changes can create a whole century of artificial warming trends.”
One of the most extreme errors reported:
“For April, June and July of 1978 Apto Uto (Colombia, ID:800890) had an average monthly temperature of 81.5°C, 83.4°C and 83.4°C respectively.”
A quick conversion shows that 81.5C is 178.7F and 83.4C is 182.2F. These data are shown to one-tenth of a degree C. Is this type of precision important when the units are totally wrong? One can guess that the numbers were intended to be Fahrenheit not Celsius, but it would not be proper to make such a conversion.
McLean’s effort shows that the HadCRUT4 data set is not reliable. As mentioned in last week’s TWTW, thanks to frequent adjustments, called homogenization, NOAA’s Global Historical Climatology Network Monthly Temperature Dataset produced by National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) is not reliable. Consequently, any conclusions of temperature trends based on these data sets are suspect.
To TWTW, there is little question that the globe has warmed since the Little Ice Age. But trying to attribute this warming to carbon dioxide requires assumptions on the quality of the data that are not justified. Further, the poor coverage of the Arctic in earlier data prompts strong questions about claims that the recent warming of the Arctic is unusual. We simply do not know. Reports from the Arctic in the early 1920s cited a warming, so Arctic warming may be part of natural variation that is not well-understood. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy – Data.*************
IPCC Special Report: The IPCC has released the first of three special reports at the request of the UNFCCC. The report is called by others SR1.5 and the press release states:
Limiting global warming to 1.5ºC would require rapid, far – reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the IPCC said in a new assessment. With clear benefits to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5ºC compared to 2ºC could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said on Monday.” [Boldface added.]
The rational for the Special Report is given later in the press release:
“As part of the decision to adopt the Paris Agreement, the IPCC was invited to produce, in 2018, a Special Report on global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. The IPCC accepted the invitation, adding that the Special Report would look at these issues in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Global Warming of 1.5ºC is the first in a series of Special Reports to be produced in the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Cycle. Next year the IPCC will release the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, and Climate Change and Land, which looks at how climate change affects land [and ?] us.” [Boldface was italics in the original.]
The press release shows that the IPCC is a political body acting on behalf of the UNFCCC. Given the above discussion on the poor quality of the surface data sets the distinction between 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and 2°C is absurd. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, Defending the Orthodoxy, and Questioning the Orthodoxy.
Indian Hunters: As discussed in the past two TWTWs, the first IPCC Chairman, Bert Bolin (about 2001) claimed that carbon dioxide (CO2) warming was articulated by Svante Arrhenius in 1896. Bolin ignored the later 1906 paper in which Arrhenius revised his estimates of warming to about one-half of his earlier estimate of 5°C–6°C claimed by Bolin. Not discussed by Bolin was that Arrhenius was attempting to estimate what causes ice ages to end, well before Milutin Milankovitch developed his widely accepted cycles.
Also, not discussed by Bolin were the experiments by laboratories on the energy absorption properties of atmospheric gases starting in the 1920s. These clearly refute the high estimates of the influence of CO2 on temperatures written by Bolin. The UNFCCC and the IPCC ignore research and scientific papers that bring doubt to their work.
When evaluated as a whole, the entire UNFCCC and IPCC process is reminiscent of the way in which groups of plains Indians drove herds of plains bison (American buffalo) to their deaths by their using natural instincts against them and taking advantage of natural weaknesses. As described at Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump in southern Alberta, Canada, during migration periods the Indians would return to well-used areas that had a cliff that bison could not see well in advance (about 10 to 15 meters, or 30 to 45 feet). But a fall over the cliff would kill or cripple the bison when they went over.
To prepare for the drive, the hunters prepared a wall of cut saplings that appeared as woodlands to the bison having poor eyesight. These driving lanes were well marked by stone cairns and tapered like a long funnel. Generally, cow-calf herds were targeted.
To get the herds to move from their grazing areas to the killing grounds, the hunters would send young men (dressed bison-calf robes) making noises like bison calves so that the herds would move to “protect their calves.” Mature men dressed in wolf robes would make noises at the rear of the herd to prompt them to move from danger.
The process may take days, all the while increasing the speed at which the herd moved into the funnel. At the right time many hunters would emerge from the “woods” making loud noises to panic the herd to stampede towards safety – actually over the cliff. Once they went over, all were killed by the hunters to ensure no survivor would warn other bison.
The steady exaggeration of the influence of CO2, and the sudden dire predictions of SR1.5 appear to be intended to cause the herd to stampede. It appears that Mr. Trump is not inclined to join the herd. No wonder many supporters of the IPCC are so angry at him. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy and Other Scientific News.
Number of the Week: 2% Richard Lindzen estimate to total influence on the globe’s energy budget from a doubling of CO2 is only 2%, or less. Not particularly noticeable given natural variability of up to 20ºC. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
PAGES2K (2017) – South America Revisited
By Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit, Oct 7, 2018
Link to paper: A global multiproxy database for temperature reconstructions of the Common Era
By PAGES2K Consortium, Nature, July 2017
[SEPP Comment: Continuing to search for Mr. Mann’s hockey-stick.]
Google is “the good censor” protecting civility by censoring conservative badthink
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 11, 2018
Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science
Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2013
Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2014
Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming
The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus
By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, NIPCC, Nov 23, 2015
Download with no charge
Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate
S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, Draft Summary for Policymakers, NIPCC, Oct 3, 2018
The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it.
By John Dale Dunn and Joseph Bast, American Thinker, Oct 8, 2018
Toward a Fossil-fueled, Prosperous Future (new NIPCC report released)
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Oct 8, 2018
Richard Lindzen Lecture at GWPF: ‘Global Warming for the Two Cultures’
By Dr. Richard Lindzen, WUWT, Oct 9, 2018
Link to pdf: Global Warming for the Two Cultures
By Richard Lindzen, GWPF, 2018
Must Read Lecture: top Physics Prof Nails the ‘Global Warming’ Myth
By James Delingpole, Breitbart, Oct 9, 2018
Lindzen on why the educated elites are so vulnerable to being fooled
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 11, 2018
Richard Lindzen Verbally Demolishes the Climate Change Scam
By Alan Carlin, Carlin Economics and Science, Oct 12, 2018
Top scientist shoots the climate-change alarmists down in flames
By Harry Wilkinson, The Conservative Woman, Oct 10, 2018
#DataGate! First ever audit of global temperature data finds freezing tropical islands, boiling towns, boats on land
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 7, 2018
Link to paper ($8): An Audit of the Creation and Content of the HadCRUT4 Temperature Dataset
By John McLean, Robert Boyle Publishing, October 2018
The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time — Part XIX
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Oct 7, 2018
UPDATE – BOMBSHELL: audit of global warming data finds it riddled with errors
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Oct 11, 2018
IPCC’s fake global warming
By Geoff Brown, The Australian Climate Sceptics Blog, Oct 8, 2018
Climate Bombshell: Global Warming Scare Is Based on ‘Careless and Amateur’ Date, Finds Audit.
By James Delingpole, Breitbart, Oct 7, 2018
Challenging the Orthodoxy – IPCC SR1.5
The IPCC’s Special Report, Global Warming of 1.5ºC
By John Constable, GWPF, Oct 10, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Addressing some of the problems in the report.]
The IPCC Special Report – mountain or molehill?
By Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, Oct 11, 2018
UN Calls For $2.4 Trillion A Year To Be Spent To Save Us From Global Warming
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 9, 2018
No one listens to the IPCC fearmongering anymore
The boys have cried wolf too many times
By Luboš Motl, The Reference Frame, Oct 9, 2018
Defending the Orthodoxy
Press Release, IPCC, Oct 8, 2018
UNFCCC Secretariat Welcomes IPCC’s Global Warming of 1.5°C Report
Press Release, UNFCCC, Oct 8, 2018
The World Was Just Issued 12-Year Ultimatum On Climate Change
Leading climate scientists paint dire portrait of years to come if we maintain carbon-emission status quo
By Katherine J. Wu, Smithsonian.com, Oct 8, 2018
Final call to save the world from ‘climate catastrophe’
By Matt McGrath, BBC, Oct 8, 2018
Disastrous Effects Of Climate Change Are Happening Now, Report Says
By Host Noel King, NPR, Oct 8, 2018
Climate Crisis Spurs UN Call for $2.4 Trillion Fossil Fuel Shift
By Reed Landberg , Chisaki Watanabe , and Heesu Lee, Bloomberg, Oct 8, 2018
Climate Countdown 2040
Multiple Authors and Multiple Dates, Project Syndicate,
What the new report on climate change expects from you
By Eliza Mackintosh, CNN, Oct 8, 2018
Al Gore warns: UN climate change report shows ‘we have a global emergency
By Justin Wise, The Hill, Oct 12, 2018
A major new climate report slams the door on wishful thinking
The IPCC says that even the most optimistic scenario for climate change is dire.
By Umair Irfan, Vox, Oct 7, 2018
UN report: ‘Unprecedented changes’ needed to protect Earth from global warming
By Doyle Rice, USA Today, Oct 7, 2018
Questioning the Orthodoxy
Manhattan Contrarian Quiz — Climate Tipping Points Edition
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Oct 11, 2018
BBC – The World’s Top Climate Scientists, who are they? (Answer: activists)
By Dennis Ambler, WUWT, Oct 11, 2018
The Last Chance Climate Saloon
November 2000 and December 2009 were both supposed to be our last, best chance to save the planet from climate disaster.
By Donna Laframboise, Big Picture News, Oct 10, 2018
The IPCC’s 1.5 Degree Target Is Utopian
By Daniel Wetzel , Die Welt, Trans. GWPF, Oct 9, 2018
UN’s New Report Shows There’s ‘Little Basis’ for a Favorite Claim of Climate Activists
By Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, Oct 8, 2018
German Climate Scientist Accuses IPCC Of Alarmism: “In The Red Rev Range Of Ideology And Reality Loss”
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Oct 10, 2018
Hothouse Earth: Are You Afraid Yet?
By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Oct 9, 2018
IPCC Pretends the Scientific Publishing Crisis Doesn’t Exist
By Donna Laframboise, Big Picture News, Oct 8, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Ms. Laframboise’s logic does not necessarily apply, but there is good reason to be highly skeptical about IPCC reports.]
For 200 years pessimists have predicted we’d ruin the planet. They’re still wrong
Opinion: We mark the 50th anniversary of The Population Bomb by explaining why predictions, well, bombed
By Pierre Desrochers and Joanna Szurmak, Financial Post, Can., Oct 12, 2018
The Warmists Are Starting to Sweat
Here’s a prediction you can take to the bank: the ABC and Fairfax [Australian companies] will be running even more inane climate-scare stories than usual. Why might that be? Because the US has taken its money and departed Paris, threatening climate careerists with the unsettling prospect of finding honest work
By Alan Moran, Quadrant, Oct 7, 2018
“If Australia fully abandons the Paris Agreement and the subsidies and regulatory restraints that it encompasses, this would staunch the flow of Australian investment to the US and encourage investment from other countries to these shores. Perhaps of more importance as an electoral play, abandoning all subsidies to all renewables will allow Australia to reclaim the position of the world’s cheapest household electricity supply – a position we held 15 years ago before the renewable energy poison pushed us into becoming the world’s dearest.”
Change in US Administrations
Pruitt’s Gone, But Wheeler Carries on Agenda
By Myron Ebell, CEI, Oct 9, 2018
Senate confirms climate skeptic to head DOJ environment office
By Timothy Cama, The Hill, Oct 11, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Sixteen months after he was nominated.]
The Trump administration has entered Stage 5 climate denial
If we’re already doomed to disastrous climate change, then there’s no reason to cut carbon pollution, argues the Trump administration
By Dana Nuccitelli, The Guardian, Oct 8, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Written by one of the pollsters who, after the fact, grouped those answering a poll as one of the 97% of scientists supporting his view of climate change or others.]
Problems in the Orthodoxy
Christopher Booker: The Truth About China’s & India’s Coal Boom
By Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, Via GWPF, Oct 7, 2018
Australia Rejects IPCC Report’s Anti-Coal stance
By Staff Writers, The Australian, Via GWPF, Oct 9, 2018
Poland Hopes EU Election Will Soften Bloc’s Climate Rules
By Maciej Martewicz, Bloomberg, Oct 9, 2018
Seeking a Common Ground
By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Oct 8, 2018
[Using Berkeley Land Data:] “Over land, we have already blown through the 1.5C threshold if measured since 1890. Temperatures around 1820 were more than 2C cooler. There has been a great deal natural variability in temperatures prior to 1975 when human caused global warming kicked in any meaningful way.”
Science, Policy, and Evidence
Climate uncertainty monster: What’s the worst case?
By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Oct 11, 2018
[SEPP Comment: A great deal of the uncertainty is created by the IPCC by using models demonstrated to fail to describe the atmosphere, false probability estimates, and false assumptions, including stating previous investigations incorrectly.]
Review of Recent Scientific Articles by CO2 Science
A Half-Millennial Record of Rainfall and Runoff in Northwest Australia
Verdon-Kidd, D., Hancock, G.R. and Lowry, J.B. 2017. A 507-year rainfall and runoff reconstruction for the Monsoonal North West, Australia derived from remote paleoclimate archives. Global and Planetary Change 158: 21-35. Oct 12, 2018
Interactive Effects of Elevated CO2 and Salinity Stress on Two Halophyte Species
Jothiramshekar, S., Benjamin, J.J., Krishnasamy, R., Pal, A.K., George, S., Swaminathan, R. and Parida, A.K. 2018. Responses of selected C3 and C4 halophytes to elevated CO2 concentration under salinity. Current Science 115: 129-135. Oct 11, 2018
“Soil salinity is a major stress that affects the growth and productivity of plants. Approximately 7 percent of the total global land area is affected by saline soils, while some 20-50 percent of global irrigated farmland operates under such conditions.”
A CO2-Induced Stimulation of Shallow Lake Ecosystems
Hamdan, M., Byström, P., Hotchkiss, E.R., Al-Haidarey, M., Ask, J. and Karlsson, J. 2018. Carbon dioxide stimulates lake primary production. Scientific Reports 8: 10878, DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-29166-3. Oct 10, 2018
The Declining Gulf of Maine Cod Stock is Not Driven by Global Warming
Brander, K.M. 2018. Climate change not to blame for cod population decline. Nature Sustainability 1: 262-264. Oct 8, 2018
Models v. Observations
New Paper: Extreme Sea Level Rise Is A ‘Non-Existent Threat’ Based On ‘Never Validated’ Models
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Oct 11, 2018
“Extreme sea level rise warnings based on predictions by never validated models, or speculations, that are defocusing coastal management from every other relevant situation, should be discharged.” — Parker, 2018
Measurement Issues — Surface
Reliable? CRU, NASA, BEST, NOAA Land Temp Data Conflict By Up To 90% (0.8°C), Spawning ‘Large Uncertainty’
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Oct 8, 2018
Land Surface Air Temperature Data Are Considerably Different Among BEST‐LAND, CRU‐TEM4v, NASA‐GISS, and NOAA‐NCEI
By Yuhan Rao Shunlin Liang Yunyue Yu, Journal of Geophysical Research, May 28, 2018
From the abstract: “The mean LSAT anomalies are remarkably different because of the data coverage differences, with the magnitude nearly 0.4°C for the global and Northern Hemisphere and 0.6°C for the Southern Hemisphere. This study additionally finds that on the regional scale, northern high latitudes, southern middle‐to‐high latitudes, and the equator show the largest differences nearly 0.8°C.”
Ocean Temperatures Have Been Rising Since 19thC
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 12, 2018
Link to article: New comparison of ocean temperatures reveals rise over the last century
Press Release, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, Apr 1, 2012
Link to paper: 135 years of global ocean warming between the Challenger expedition and the Argo Programme
By Dean Roemmich, W. John Gould & John Gilson, Nature Climate Change: Apr 1, 2012
[SEPP Comment: How does one calibrate the new methods of Argo diving instruments with the old methods of buckets over the side of ships?]
Yes, the Ocean Has Warmed; No, It’s Not ‘Global Warming’
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 10, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Referencing a 2000 article by Robert Stevenson, in 21st Century Science & Technology Magazine.]
Florida Major Hurricane Strikes: Still No Trend
By Roy Spencer, His Blog, Oct 11, 2018
[SEPP Comment: 1941-50 was the peak decade for Cat 3 or above making US landfall.]
Experiencing extreme weather is not enough to convince climate change skeptics
By Staff Writers, University of Exeter, EurekAlert, Oct 1, 2018 [H/t Toshio Fujita]
Link to paper: Enduring Extremes? Polar Vortex, Drought, and Climate Change Beliefs
By Benjamin A. Lyons , Ariel Hasell & Natalie Jomini Stroud, Environmental Communication, Sep 24, 2018
Costs from hurricane damage to rise alongside frequency, intensity
By Miranda Green, The Hill, Oct 13, 2018
Study: climate was more variable during the last inter-glacial period
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Oct 12, 2018
Link to paper: Enhanced climate instability in the North Atlantic and southern Europe during the Last Interglacial
By P. C. Tzedakis, et al., Nature Communications, Oct 12, 2018
Scotland 800-Year Reconstruction Shows Temperatures Were As Warm Or Warmer In The Past!
Scotland climate over past 800 years: Pre-industrial warm phases provide answers
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt (German text translated/edited by P Gosselin), No tricks Zone, Oct 7, 2018
IPCC Coral-apocalypse: 243,000 km² of Great Barrier Reef corals to die in only 20 years
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 8, 2018
Sea Level Shock…Satellite Imagery Shows Coral Islands Expanding! …”Results Challenge Existing Narratives Of Island Loss”
Despite sea level rise, Tuvalu Islands surface area have grown 3% over the past decades
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt (German text translated/edited by P Gosselin), No tricks Zone, Oct 12, 2018
Link to paper: Patterns of island change and persistence offer alternate adaptation pathways for atoll nations
By Paul Kench, Murry Ford and Susan Owen, Nature Communicatiojns, Feb 9, 2018
Great Barrier Reef is ‘not at risk from climate change’ says professor – as he claims global warming ENDED 20 years ago
Warming of any significance ceased about 20 years ago, renewables a ‘bubble’
Man-made global warming ‘does not appear to be a serious problem’
Landscape will be degraded by rusting wind farms, decaying solar panel arrays
Australia’s Barrier Reef ‘not in any danger’ and recovers from bleaching events
By Alison Bevege, Daily Mail, Australia, Oct 12, 2018
Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
A close look at the arctic sea ice models that have launched the careers of a thousand polar bears
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 13, 2018
Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine
Some of the Major Myths about Vegetation, Soil, and Climate
Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball, WUWT, Oct 8, 2018
Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?
How Hurricane Michael became catastrophically strong overnight
‘It’s a life-altering, society-altering situation.’
By Rachel Becker, The Verge, Oct 10, 2018
[SEPP Comment: WeatherBell Analytics predicted its strengthening well in advance and explained why.]
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
BBC censorship and the man-made global warming scam
By Melanie Phillips, Her Blog, Oct 8, 2018 [H/t Paul Homewood]
BBC Finds Lord Deben Guilty of Misleading Public on Wind farms
By Staff Writers, GWPF, Oct 12, 2018
Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?
Are people really concerned about climate change? What the polls tell us
By Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, Oct 9, 2018
“And public ignorance sometimes reaches extreme levels. An example from France was recently forwarded to me by Energy Matters contributor Hubert Flocard. It comes from a 2017 IPSOS public opinion poll recently reported in Le Monde. The details are summarized in Figure 8. The graphic is in French, but it tells us that 44% of the French public believes that nuclear plants emit much (beaucoup) of the CO2 that contributes to global warming, 34% believes they emit a little (un peu) and only 16% believes they emit none (pas du tout):”
Expanding the Orthodoxy
Colleges Have a Responsibility to Divest From Fossil Fuels
Jennie C. Stephens The Conversation, Oct 1, 2018
“Jennie C. Stephens is the Dean’s professor of sustainability science and policy and director of the School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University.”
Questioning European Green
As The UN Warns Of Climate Catastrophe By 2030, The EU Is Pulling Back Climate Ambition
By Dave Keating, Forbes, Oct 8, 2018
EU business lobby to champion climate status quo – leak
By Claire Stam, EURACTIV.com, Oct 4, 2018
European Commission abandons plans to raise climate ambition
By Claire Stam, EURACTIV.com, Oct 2, 2018 [H/t GWPF]
Wind Energy Won’t Function For Supplying Germany With Power, Experts Say
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Oct 9, 2018
Why ‘Green’ Germany Remains Addicted to Coal
By Melissa, Eddy, New York Times, Oct 10, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Contrary to the article, the reasons are more than coal jobs alone.]
Green Madness: EU Climate Targets Threaten 100,000 Volkswagen Jobs
By Staff Writers, Spiegel Online, Trans. GWPF, Oct 11, 2018
The Political Games Continue
Our climate is not for sale
By Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) and Michael Shank, The Hill, Oct 7, 2018
“Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a member of the Judiciary and Transportation & Infrastructure Committees, is part of the House Safe Climate Caucus and received 100 percent clean-energy and environmental voting record in 2017-18 from Environment Georgia.
“Michael Shank is the communications director for the Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance and the Urban Sustainability Directors Network.”
How Bloomberg Embeds Green Warriors in Blue-State Governments
By Jeff Patch, Real Clear Investigations, Oct 10, 2018
Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Taxes
A $240 Per Gallon Gas Tax to Fight Global Warming? New UN Report Suggests Carbon Pricing
By Michael Bastasch, The Daily Caller, Oct 9, 2018
A new U.N. report suggests a $240 per gallon gas tax equivalent is needed to fight global warming.
The U.N. says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton in the year 2100.
If you think that’s unlikely to ever happen, you’re probably right.
IPCC SR1.5 Carbon Tax Math
Guest seriousness by David Middleton, WUWT, Oct 11, 2018
Exxon Puts $1 Million Into Quest for Carbon Tax and Rebate
By Jennifer A Dlouhy and Christopher Flavelle, Bloomberg, Oct 9, 2018
“Carbon tax would replace an array of environmental regulations.” [Doubtful]
Subsidies and Mandates Forever
When Government Plays Games With Energy Subsidies, Taxpayers Lose
By Katie Tubb, Heritage.org, Oct 10, 2018 [H/t Cooler Heads]
Regulators reject request to review Bloom Energy tariff
By Randall Chase, AP, Oct 9, 2018 [H/t Cooler Heads]
EPA and other Regulators on the March
EPA to kick off comment period for methane pollution rule rollback
By Timothy Cama, The Hill, Oct 12, 2018
How Did MATS Affect U.S. Coal Generation?
By Sonal Patel, Power Mag, Oct 4, 2018
Energy Issues – Non-US
A Spot Coal Shortage in India: Central Planners Overrate Wind
By Vijay Jayaraj, Master Resource, Oct 10, 2018
“Wind energy will not becoming cheap anytime soon. The International Energy Agency forecasts that renewables will still be the most expensive energy source everywhere in 2040.
“Relying on wind energy can make any state or country end up in situations like this. The energy generated from wind factories cannot be used as an exclusive source of electricity for any heavy industry or town.”
Energy Issues – Australia
Australia may have a spine. Pushes back against UN hysterical coal hate
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 9, 2018
“Australia should be coal’s biggest advocate. Most years we are the world’s largest exporter of coal. Australia contributes fully one third of the entire global coal export trade. Coal also makes up 3% of our entire GDP, employs near 50,000 people, is one of our top two exports, and brought in $54 billion dollars last year.”
Both AGL, Origin warn renewables threaten grid, create chaos, drive off baseload, cause higher cost
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 10, 2018
Energy Issues — US
The emerging U.S. energy powerhouse
By Steve Goreham, The Washington Times, Oct 9, 2018
Hello, Michael: Beware The Resiliency Of The U.S. Oil And Gas System
By Jude Clemente, Forbes, Oct 10, 2018
Return of King Coal?
Coal Use Rises As Renewables Fall In U.S. Electricity Generation
By Ron Patterson, Oil Price.com, Oct 6, 2018
Oil Spills, Gas Leaks & Consequences
Report cites over pressurization as trigger in deadly Massachusetts gas line explosion
By Miranda Green, The Hill, Oct 11, 2018
Link to preliminary report: Preliminary Report Pipeline: Over-pressure of a Columbia Gas of Massachusetts Low-pressure Natural Gas Distribution System
By Staff Writers, National Transportation Safety Board, No Date
“The cast-iron, low-pressure distribution system was installed in the early 1900s and had been partially improved with both steel and plastic pipe upgrades since the 1950s. The low-pressure distribution system in the affected area relied on 14 regulator stations to control gas at the required pressure into structures serviced by the system, unlike high-pressure gas distribution systems that place an individual regulator to reduce pressure at each customer service.”
Nuclear Energy and Fears
Declining Commercial Nuclear Industry Creates Risk for Navy Carriers, Subs
By Ben Werner, USNI News, Oct 2, 2018
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
Do Wind Turbines Enhance Global Warming? No!
By Cliff Mass, Weather and Climate Blog, Oct 6, 2018
The Wrong Spin on Wind Power
By Thomas Gaulkin, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists October 10, 2018
“Nowhere in either study is there a suggestion that wind turbines cause climate change, increase global temperatures, or diminish the benefit of shifting away from fossil fuels. “’Wind’s overall environmental impacts are surely less than fossil energy,’ the authors wrote.”
Global Health Warning: WHO Guidelines Cast Doubt over Future of Wind Farms
By Staff Writers, The Australian & Daily Mail, Via GWPF, Oct 10, 2018
Virginia approves largest solar power plant east of the Rockies
Virginia regulators have approved construction of the four-part solar power plant, whose output is partially being sold to Microsoft. The 500 MW-AC facility is being developed by sPower.
By John Weaver, PV Magazine, Aug 10, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Microsoft can build its own plant to supply its need, why does it need the grid, paid by all consumers?]
Who’s afraid of Virginia solar power?
The Commonwealth’s 2018 Energy Plan includes 5 GW of utility scale wind+solar, plus 500 MW of rooftop solar power, less than 1 MW in size, over the next decade.
By John Weaver, PV Magazine, Oct 4, 2018
[SEPP Comment: Makes no economic sense for general consumers?]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other
Trump’s ethanol plan: Hype now, legal fights later
By Humeyra Pamuk, Jarrett Renshaw, Reuters, Oct 12, 2018 [H/t Cooler Heads]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
Electric Vehicle Status Report, 9 Months 2018
By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Oct 12, 2018
SAFE: A Sane Approach to US Consumer Vehicle Fuel Efficiency
By Alan Daley & Krisztina Pusok, Real Clear Energy, Oct 11, 2018
Health, Energy, and Climate
Is a little radiation good for you? Controversial theory pops up in Senate hearing on EPA transparency plan
By Kelly Servick, Science, Oct 4, 2018 [H/t Toshio Fujita]
Nobel Prize for the economics of innovation and climate change stirs controversy
By Adrian Cho, Science, Oct 8, 2018
Organization of bison hunting at the Pleistocene/Holocene transition on the Plains of North America
By Kristen Carlson, Leland Bement, Quaternary International, Dec 26, 2012
Other News that May Be of Interest
‘First Man’ Movie Disrespects True Apollo Legacy
By Larry bell, Newsmax, Oct 1, 2018
More than 1,500 Interior employees removed or reprimanded for harassment, misconduct
By Miranda Green, The Hill, Oct 10, 2018
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE:
Saved, but the party’s still over
By Staff Writers, Climate Change Predictions.org, Oct 11, 2018
“According to climate scientist James Hansen, we are never going to see another ice age, ever. When the ice melts it will not be replaced. Ice extent will fluctuate from year to year, and some climate change deniers will selectively point to recovery years, but there is only a downward escalator. Which means, unless dangerous climate change is addressed, for some of us today, and many more tomorrow, the party will definitely be over.” The Conversation, 20 Sep 2013
Struggles of an environmentalist
By Staff Writers, Climate Change Predictions.org, Oct 11, 2018
“”I have been researching and writing about anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) for Truthout for the past year, because I have long been deeply troubled by how fast the planet has been emitting its obvious distress signals.
“’On a nearly daily basis, I’ve sought out the most recent scientific studies, interviewed the top researchers and scientists penning those studies, and connected the dots to give readers as clear a picture as possible about the magnitude of the emergency we are in.
“’This work has emotional consequences: I’ve struggled with depression, anger, and fear.
“’I’ve watched myself shift through some of the five stages of grief proposed by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance I’ve grieved for the planet and all the species who live here, and continue to do so as I work today.’” Heat Is Online – originally Dahr Jamail, Truthout.org. Jan. 25, 2015
1. U.N. Ignores Economics Of Climate
New Nobel laureate William Nordhaus says the costs of proposed CO2 cuts aren’t worth it.
By Bjorn Lomborg, WSJ, Oct 9, 2018
Summary: the president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist” writes:
“The global economy must be transformed immediately to avoid catastrophic climate damage, a new United Nations report declares. Climate economist William Nordhaus has been made a Nobel laureate. The events are being reported as two parts of the same story, but they reveal the contradictions inherent in climate policy—and why economics matters more than ever.
“Limiting temperatures to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above preindustrial levels, as the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change urges, is economically and practically impossible—as Mr. Nordhaus’s work shows. The IPCC report significantly underestimates the costs of getting to zero emissions. Fossil fuels provide cheap, efficient power, whereas green energy remains mostly uncompetitive. Switching to more expensive, less efficient technology slows development. In poor nations that means fewer people lifted out of poverty. In rich ones it means the most vulnerable are hit by higher energy bills.
“The IPCC says carbon emissions need to peak right now and fall rapidly to avert catastrophe. Models actually reveal that to achieve the 2.7-degree goal the world must stop all fossil fuel use in less than four years. Yet the International Energy Agency estimates that in 2040 fossil fuels will still meet three-quarters of world energy needs, even if the Paris agreement is fully implemented. The U.N. body responsible for the accord estimates that if every country fulfills every pledge by 2030, CO2 emissions will be cut by 60 billion tons by 2030. That’s less than 1% of what is needed to keep temperature rises below 2.7 degrees. And achieving even that fraction would be vastly expensive—reducing world-wide growth $1 trillion to $2 trillion each year by 2030.
“The European Union promises to cut emissions 80% by 2050. With realistic assumptions about technology, and the optimistic assumption that the EU’s climate policy is very well designed and coordinated, the average of seven leading peer-reviewed models finds EU annual costs will reach €2.9 trillion ($3.3 trillion), more than twice what EU governments spend today on health, education, recreation, housing, environment, police and defense combined. In reality, it is likely to cost much more because EU climate legislation has been an inefficient patchwork. If that continues, the policy will make the EU 24% poorer in 2050.
“Trying to do more, as the IPCC urges, would be phenomenally expensive. It is important to keep things in perspective, challenging as that is given the hysterical tone of the reaction to the panel’s latest offering. In its latest full report, the IPCC estimated that in 60 years unmitigated global warming would cost the planet between 0.2% and 2% of gross domestic product. That’s simply not the end of the world.
“The new report has no comparison of the costs and benefits of climate targets. Mr. Nordhaus’s most recent estimate, published in August, is that the “optimal” outcome with a moderate carbon tax is a rise of about 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century. Reducing temperature rises by more would result in higher costs than benefits, potentially causing the world a $50 trillion loss.
“It’s past time to stop pushing so hard for carbon cuts before alternative energy sources are ready to take over. Instead the world must focus on resolving the technology deficit that makes switching away from fossil fuels so expensive. Genuine breakthroughs are required to drive down the future price of green energy.
“Copenhagen Consensus analysis shows a ramped-up green-energy research-and-development budget of around $100 billion a year would be the most effective global-warming policy.”
Lomborg argues that this approach is far less costly than the IPCC approach.
2. On Climate, Listen to the Nobel
And not the media’s hysterical and confused response to the latest IPCC report.
By Holman Jenkins, WSJ, Oct 9, 2018
Summary: The journalist writes:
“Journalists have been herniating themselves unnecessarily in covering a new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change finding that global temperature might increase by another 0.9 degree Fahrenheit sometime between 2030 and 2052.
“The truth is, any reporter with a fifth-grade education could have made the same calculation last week, last year or 10 years ago by applying the standard climate-sensitivity estimate (in use since 1979) to the standard emissions forecasts.
“The IPCC foresees heat waves, rainstorms and floods, but heat waves, rainstorms and floods have always happened, and it isn’t clear what the report is really saying. The New York Times notes an estimate that an additional 0.9 degree will cost the global economy $54 trillion but that fails to say over what period. For the record, global gross domestic product is expected to hit $100 trillion in 2020, and virtually all experts see global GDP continuing to grow faster than global climate costs mount up.
“The climate cognoscenti, meanwhile, are understandably more focused on what an important report, due in 2022, will say about the 40-year-old, unsatisfying climate-sensitivity model that underlies so many fuzzy forecasts reported in the media as fact. Today’s IPCC is mum but does specifically acknowledge two studies this year that greatly play down the likelihood of catastrophic climate outcomes, including one described in this column in February.
“Bottom line: The U.S. media once again proves itself largely useless to anyone interested in the climate conundrum. ‘Planet has only until 2030 to stem catastrophic climate change, experts warn,’ went a CNN headline, announcing yet another deadline that is sure to be missed. Unmentioned is the ‘or else’: We’ll have to adapt to some measure of climate change in a climate that is always changing even as the economy evolves toward greener technologies.
“Or take a recent Washington Post piece that hyped a Trump administration estimate that the earth might warm by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century, which was found buried in an environmental statement related to fuel-economy mandates.
“Again, this merely applies the standard climate-sensitivity envelope to previously forecast future emissions, as any reporter could have done. The Trump document, in fact, is no different from Obama documents showing that the pending Obama fuel-mileage rules produce virtually no climate benefit—less than 0.0072 degree Fahrenheit by 2100.
“The Trump analysis also states plainly what the IPCC only muffles: ‘Drastic reductions’ in greenhouse gases are not ‘currently technologically feasible or economically practicable.’”
After discussing political issues, the journalist concludes:
“At a cost of between $1 billion and $10 billion annually the forecast warming could be stopped by injecting reflective particles into the atmosphere. Via magical thinking, the IPCC presumes this technology would be employed only in conjunction with a forced march toward green energy. Right. Here’s something you can take to the bank: A future struggle among nations will concern how this cheap instrument of climate modification is to be used and for whose benefit quite regardless of any debate over climate change and fossil fuels.”
via Watts Up With That? https://ift.tt/1Viafi3