Archives - August 2009 See
how a professor of communication takes down a couple of fear-mongering journos We have covered the breathless and fact-challenged campaign against BPA and the
bravura work done by STATS.org to expose it. The STATS report took no
prisoners in its attack on BPA doom profiteer scientist Fred vom Saal, along with the clueless journos—Susanne Rust and Meg Kissinger—who used Freddie as essentially
their sole source in their 30,000 word screed against the compound. The STATS report, along with BPA getting essentially a clean bill of health from the State of California and the Canadian government drove Susanne and Meg into full damage
control mode. They embarked on an investigation of STATS and report author Trevor Butterworth,
publishing their findings on August 22. The publishing of their findings betrays a rather interesting twist. Nothing is mentioned in the August 22nd article that would contradict a single thing stated in the
STATS report. Thus, after expending 30,000 words of precious journalistic real estate on an attack on BPA, Kissinger and Rust choose to spend NONE in defending their work.
Instead, they resort to foolish ad hominem attacks. However, they picked on the wrong group. Please read STATS' reply, written by Bob Lichter,
Professor of Communication at George Mason University, and Director of STATS. I can further add that Meg and Susanne even tried to investigate me, and in a series of e-mails reflected not only petulance, but real ignorance on BPA, beyond what they
were fed by Freddie. I was encouraged, though, when Meg said she would "look into" Steven Arnold's scientific fraud (discussed
here). Surely, the duo should have examined other sources, but they could have been overwhelmed by vom Saal's relentless cheerleading for his own pathetic scientific
work—behavior that is not particularly common in academia. Sadly, typical of the endocrine disruptor gang, though, he is absolutely shameless. I suspect that many in the ED gang are fully aware how bad their science is, but justify it since their cause is so righteous (in their eyes at least). And with so
many journals looking for stuff to publish...Let's just say that Cell is about the only good one left. Perhaps the STATS efforts will shine much needed light on this matter. (Shaw's Eco-Logic) Dorothy Parker Meets The Marlboro Man: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s
BPA Conspiracy Theory It’s not clear which part of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's article on STATS needs the most improvement – the reporting, the ethics, or the logic. It’s practically
a seminar on how to use rhetorical devices to mask holes in an argument, including ad hominem, red herrings, straw men, begging the question, poisoning the well, selective
quotation, false context, and even a faulty syllogism! What is it that makes thespians think they actually know something beyond playacting? Meryl
Streep interview for Julie and Julia Julia Child may have been revered as the woman who taught America to cook. But Meryl Streep, who now portrays the pioneering chef in Julie and Julia, has decidedly mixed
feelings about her. On the one hand, she is full of admiration for Child’s indefatigable enthusiasm, determination and love of life. But in her own dealings with Child, who
died in 2004 aged 92, she found her to be stubborn and dismissive and was disappointed to discover she was a pawn of big business. (Daily Telegraph) If Streep merely sought some controversy for publicity then she has likely achieved it. To me she has simply reinforced the stereotype of ignorant
left-wing dipstick... Response from Liz Whelan: Julia Child vs. Meryl Streep In a recent, totally outrageous interview published in the UK paper The Telegraph, actress Meryl Streep, star of Julie & Julia, maligns and misrepresents the real-life
version of the character she plays, famed chef Julia Child. WHO warns of severe form of swine flu WASHINGTON - Doctors are reporting a severe form of swine flu that goes straight to the lungs, causing severe illness in otherwise healthy young people and requiring
expensive hospital treatment, the World Health Organization said on Friday. Health experts warn Europe of feared swine flu surge LONDON - Health authorities across Europe are bracing for a third of their populations to become infected with the new swine flu virus this autumn, but do not plan to
close schools or take other drastic measures to stop it. Strained by Katrina, a Hospital Faced
Deadly Choices The smell of death was overpowering the moment a relief worker cracked open one of the hospital chapel’s wooden doors. Inside, more than a dozen bodies lay motionless on
low cots and on the ground, shrouded in white sheets. Here, a wisp of gray hair peeked out. There, a knee was flung akimbo. A pallid hand reached across a blue gown. In serious debt? You're also more likely obese NEW YORK - People who are heavily in debt are more likely to be heavy themselves, too, according to new research from Germany. Obesity adds to risk of death after stroke NEW YORK - Obesity increases the risk of death after stroke in younger stroke patients, according to a new study. How does healthcare reform fit with your values and ethics? The healthcare reform debate has become so discordant, it’s even been said to be a sign of a larger, irreconcilable ideological abyss growing in our country. In this
environment, it can be hard to sort out the endless reports all claiming to debunk the myths surrounding healthcare reform proposals. There is one simple way to tell the
difference between reports that are written to support an ideology from those giving us the facts. And increasing numbers of people are figuring out how: Go to the original
source and read the healthcare reform legislation being proposed for themselves. It’s a lot harder to convince people that it doesn’t really say what is says when
they’ve actually read it. (Junkfood Science) The Business Consequences
of Challenging Obama's Statist Policies The politics of business is getting perilous for CEOs trying to traverse the ideological battle between capitalism and socialism. This was originally titled "What’s Next, a Breathing Surcharge?": What’s
Next, Sidewalk Tolls? Kelsey Graham and his wife were on their way to Lincoln Center when they decided that à la carte government had gone too far. Perhaps The Crone changed the headline since that is exactly what Cap & Tax and the EPA's absurd CO2 endangerment finding amount
to. All human activity from organic gardening to sex involves carbon dioxide emissions and your government wants to tax it multiple times (concept, manufacture, consumption
and disposal all involve energy, which government wants to tax at every stage along the way). Viv Forbes Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others. And no one can find a safe way out for himself if
society is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone
hang on the result. Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the great historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us. - Ludwig von Mises Socialism. The above passage was written by the great economist and political philosopher, Ludwig von Mises, in German, in 1922. His massive book “Socialism” demolishes the whole
idea that centrally planned economies can ever produce prosperity or freedom. Read more. [PDF, 53KB] (Carbon Sense Coalition) Being out scammed? Hijacked by climate change? As the UN climate summit in Copenhagen approaches, exhortations that "we must get a deal" and warnings that climate change is "the greatest challenge we
face as a species" are to be heard in virtually every political forum. EPA Considers Closing NCEE - Dr. Alan Carlin’s Unit The EPA whistleblower saga took a new turn this week with a report that EPA was considering shutting down the agency unit in which Dr. Alan Carlin works. Dr. Carlin is the
senior EPA analyst who authored a 100-page study last March, which severely criticized the scientific basis for the agency’s position on global warming. CEI broke the story
in late June, when it unveiled a series of emails to Dr. Carlin from his boss, stating that his study would not be disclosed, and that Dr. Carlin was to stop working on
global warming issues, because criticizing EPA’s position would only cause trouble. One teency problem...Scientists design
spacecraft to save Earth A spacecraft capable of saving the world from a catastrophic asteroid collision has been designed by British space scientists. ... we never see the rotten things until they've gone past. There is certainly a miniscule chance humanity will be clobbered by a major impact (happens
every few hundred million years and maybe every few tens of millions but who's counting?). Is it worth worrying about? Nope. Is it even worth looking for? Again, nope. The
chances of our seeing a "sneaky one" in time are roughly nil and our chances of doing anything about it even less. If you are worried about dying there are plenty
of more immediate threats to occupy your mind and you can leave this one on the shelf. So much for declining grain stocks: ANALYSIS-Cheap wheat to help meet EU fuel demand LONDON, Aug 28 - A sharp decline in wheat prices driven by a supply glut is set to lead to more of the grain being turned into motor fuel in the European Union. Oh boy... ‘Non-GMO’ Seal Identifies Foods Mostly
Biotech-Free Alarmed that genetically engineered crops may be finding their way into organic and natural foods, an industry group has begun a campaign to test products and label those
that are largely free of biotech ingredients. The question is why anyone tries to differentiate according to how these crops and/or foodstuffs were developed. It's not as though they
differentiate according to whether plants were modified by forced mutation by irradiation or application of toxins, for example, so why have they a bee in their collective
bonnet over the more precise and definitely safer technique of direct manipulation? There's been a lot of talk and media recently about feedbacks and climate amplifiers, what's it all about? On the one hand you'll hear people saying it is of little relevance in the great climate shouting match while others say it highlights the diminishing role available for
carbon dioxide emissions. so, who's right? Surprisingly, this time just about everyone. Let's begin by looking at a couple of announcements for one of the modeling studies: Small Fluctuations In Solar Activity, Large Influence On Climate Sun's Cycle Alters Earth's Climate Weather patterns across the globe are partly affected by connections between the 11-year solar cycle of activity, Earth's stratosphere and the tropical Pacific Ocean, a
new study finds. So that's it, right, even NCAR's PlayStation®
Climatologists have now demonstrated that solar influences are much greater than the slight changes in simple solar irradience? Actually, you need your beer goggles on to come to such a conclusion -- here's the precipitation observation versus model output that has caused such excitement: Granted, this is an improvement on the previous models (which get, oh, about nothing right) since it does have some overlap with reality, albeit not much. To us this
generated output demonstrates woefully inadequate solar sensitivity and the Pacific Basin shows enormous contrast in reality (roughly 4 feet/year annualized rainfall
difference between the Coral Sea and Central Pacific during these events) while there's limited sensitivity demonstrated in the model output. Bottom line: it's good to see modelers actually recognize that bright shining thing we orbit has something to do with local temperatures but they have one heck of a long
way to go before process models even vaguely resemble prognosticators. Not a big advance but definitely an advance. Meanwhile, the empiricists (sometimes known as climate realists) are correct in pointing out this sheds a little more light on the interaction of sun and climate, further
opening useful lines of investigation into the complicated relationship of this planet with its nearest star. Furthermore, as more mechanisms are exposed and examined there is less and less room for enhanced greenhouse to play a significant role in the estimated change in global
mean temperature over the last 250 years. With ever increasing confidence [intervals] the IPCC claim anthropogenic climate forcing potential up to +2.4W/m2 but
with error bars for negative forcing from direct and indirect aerosol and land use change of minus 3.3W/m2 (-3.3), for a potential net change of minus
0.9W/m2 (-0.9). Consequently, given the Low Levels of Scientific Understanding (LLOSU) of a number of very important effects we still do not know whether humans
have a net positive or negative forcing effect on global mean temperatures. Are our emissions warming the planet? Maybe, a little, or not... One thing is certain, there's absolutely no value in spending a dime on carbon dioxide emission reductions when we have no clear idea on whether we are warming or cooling
the planet and absolutely everyone who bothers to calculate the potential difference we can make to global mean temperature over the next century by constraining carbon
emissions concludes we couldn't actually measure such a trivial difference. Carbon constraint is an example of target fixation and views just one side of Earth's energy balance equation. It is a losing strategy no matter how you view it and should
be scrapped forthwith. <chuckle> Eoin apparently can't read, either: Are
climate change deniers like creationists? Looks like it’s time to bring back Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan: The US Chamber of Commerce wants to subject the science of climate change to a “Scopes
monkey trial.” Talk about misunderstood and out of context abstraction: Steven Milloy, a prominent climate change denier and “junk science” contributor to Fox News, told the Cato Institute in 2007 that “[e]xplanations of human
evolution are not likely to move beyond the stage of hypothesis or conjecture.” So, does Milloy "deny evolution"? Let's look at the rest of the response
to a posed question: There is no scientific way - i.e., no experiment or other means of reliable study - for explaining how humans developed. Without a valid scientific method for proving
a hypothesis, no indisputable explanation can exist. Looks a little different than the impression Eoin would like to give, doesn't it? Similarly, Milloy categorically does not "deny" climate
change but he is most assuredly skeptical of the catastrophic global warming hysteria and hyperbole. Political scientists and scientific politicians Thomas Jefferson once said that, "Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error." And so, with that quote in mind, and the understanding
that scientific theories must be falsifiable, the Freedom Society is hosting 'Climate Week', a five-day event from the 26th to 30th October at the University of York. This nonsense is getting a lot more attention than it deserves: Climate
change 'to cost more than £300 billion' The world will have to spend £300 billion, three times as much as previously thought, adapting to the effects of climate change, scientists have said. Leading scientific body? The IIED is another sustainable development/social justice group. Martin Parry was a co-author of their report. http://www.iied.org/pubs/search.php?a=Martin
Parry. The Cost of Adapting to Climate Change The costs of adaptation to climate change have been grossly underestimated, the authors of a new study suggest. A High Cost to Deal With Climate Shift NEW YORK — The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has described the notion of “adaptation” as those initiatives designed “to reduce the vulnerability of
natural and human systems against actual or expected climate change effects.” The multi-billion-dollar gorebull warming industry, with the media in their pocket, are outgunned? Right... Environmentalists
Slow to Adjust in Climate Debate - Opponents Seize Initiative as Senate Bill Nears ATHENS, Ohio -- The oil lobby was sponsoring rallies with free lunches, free concerts and speeches warning that a climate-change bill could ravage the U.S. economy. McCain, Udall agree, but they’re still wrong -
LUNDBERG: Believing HUMANs CREATE climate change doesn't make it true The hearing Sen. Mark Udall and Sen. John McCain conducted in Estes Park concerning climate change, Rocky Mountain National Park, and our other national parks was reported
by some as a “proof” for global warming. Senators Spend
Recess Fine-Tuning Messages on Cap and Trade While a handful of Senate staffers spent the August recess sequestered on Capitol Hill writing a giant energy and climate bill, senators who will debate the legislation
were speaking at town halls and in the media in efforts to strengthen support -- or opposition -- to the sweeping package. The yawning gulf between the talk and the walk: Moving forward with carbon
capture plans The world's largest carbon capture project launched by a coal-fired power plant broke ground in July in Shanghai. 1 ppmv CO2 = 7.81 billion metric tons and only about 40% of human emissions persist in the atmosphere (the rest being utilized by plants or
absorbed in terrestrial and oceanic sinks). Thus 7.81 / 0.4 = 19.525 billion tons of human emissions make up 1 ppmv of the atmosphere. So just 195,250 such schemes could
stop 1 ppmv increase per year and a mere 315,000 of them could handle humanity's emissions at 2008 rates... of course there's the trivial difficulty of increasing energy
requirements by 30% in order to drive the capture and sequestration, plus the cost of the extra drilling of injection wells and pipelines for this stupid enterprise -- and
all to deny green plants a little sustenance. As always, Lomborg is partly right: Technology
Can Fight Global Warming - Marine cloud whitening, and other ideas. We have precious little to show for nearly 20 years of efforts to prevent global warming. Promises in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 to cut carbon emissions went unfulfilled.
Stronger pledges in Kyoto five years later failed to keep emissions in check. The only possible lesson is that agreements to reduce carbon emissions are costly, politically
arduous and ultimately ineffective. And, as always, he goes right off the deep end believing gorebull warming is a crisis with which we must effectively deal. Oops: Greenland threatens to join G-77 in Copenhagen The country’s Home Rule Government does not feel adequately represented by Denmark in the climate change negotiations and considers turning its back on the host country
of December’s UN conference. (CoP15) Barnaby is now the real leader of the Opposition. A Statement by Mr Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition, Australia. Viv Forbes In a lifetime of observing and participating in politics, the world wide campaign by the international green movement (aided by the power-seeking UN bureaucracy) to
monitor, control and tax every food, energy and transport business in the world is the most dangerous development I have ever seen. It has the potential to blight the lives
and investments of the majority of Australians who are unable to find a safe place for themselves on the government payroll or in the protected Climate Change Industry. Full article. [PDF, 87KB] (Carbon Sense Coalition) Oil refiner says CO2 bill to cost it $7 billion a year NEW YORK - The U.S. climate bill would cost Valero, the country's largest oil refiner, more annually than it has ever made in a year, forcing it to warn consumers at
filling stations that fuel prices will rise, the company's top government affairs official said. And carbon dioxide is not even an atmospheric pollutant... Small reality check for a deluded dill? A
Sometimes Lonely Trek for Global Warming Awareness On Route 11 north of Tuscaloosa, Ala., last April, a pickup truck pulled up next to Greta Browne, and a young man began lecturing her about global warming. So, the masses didn't join her walk for warming (like no one has anything better to do than waste time). Wonder if she noticed on her little trek that
day to day, even hour to hour? Did she give any thought to the fact that no one could tell there has been any change at all if not for long-term record keeping and a lot of
high-powered number crunching to discern a completely contrived and totally meaningless change in a statistical mean? Benny & the virtual worlds: Climate models confirm more moisture in
atmosphere attributed to humans LIVERMORE, Calif. - When it comes to using climate models to assess the causes of the increased amount of moisture in the atmosphere, it doesn't much matter if one model
is better than the other. This twaddle is getting recycled, probably due to this.
Benny doesn't think model quality matters -- that figures. Here's another little snippet Benny obviously hasn't thought about: oceans are believed to have warmed since the
cooling phase 1950s through 1970s and warmer oceans are expected to exhibit [drum roll, please]... increased evaporation [ta da!]. So class, what do we expect with
increased evaporation? Right, more atmospheric moisture. And this says what, exactly, about the cause of the oceans' temperature change? Take an early minute if you said
"Nothing", bonus two minutes if you realized there is no indicator of humanity in any of this, in make-believe worlds or elsewhere. Another recycled scare: Climate trouble may be bubbling
up in far north MACKENZIE RIVER DELTA, Northwest Territories — Only a squawk from a sandhill crane broke the Arctic silence — and a low gurgle of bubbles, a watery whisper of trouble
repeated in countless spots around the polar world. Hmm... brave short-term (and hence testable) prognostications: How will Earth's surface
temperature change in future decades? Reliable forecasts of climate change in the immediate future are difficult, especially on regional scales, where natural climate variations may amplify or mitigate
anthropogenic warming in ways that numerical models capture poorly. By decomposing recent observed surface temperatures into components associated with ENSO, volcanic and
solar activity, and anthropogenic influences, we anticipate global and regional changes in the next two decades. From 2009 to 2014, projected rises in anthropogenic
influences and solar irradiance will increase global surface temperature 0.15 ± 0.03°C, at a rate 50% greater than predicted by IPCC. But as a result of declining solar
activity in the subsequent five years, average temperature in 2019 is only 0.03 ± 0.01°C warmer than in 2014. This lack of overall warming is analogous to the period from
2002 to 2008 when decreasing solar irradiance also countered much of the anthropogenic warming. We further illustrate how a major volcanic eruption and a super ENSO would
modify our global and regional temperature projections. (GRL) Failed Predictions of Solar
Cycle 24 – #1 Dikpati and Hathaway 2006 Looking back into the archives, there are many many predictions of the start and size of solar cycle 24 given on the highest possible scientific authority that turned out
to be flat out wrong. March 10, 2006: It’s official: Solar minimum has arrived. Sunspots have all but vanished. Solar flares are nonexistent. The sun is utterly quiet. Like the quiet before a storm. This week researchers announced that a storm is coming–the most intense solar maximum in fifty years. The prediction comes from a team led by Mausumi Dikpati of the
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “The next sunspot cycle will be 30% to 50% stronger than the previous one,” she says. If correct, the years ahead could
produce a burst of solar activity second only to the historic Solar Max of 1958. This is important. The solar minimum began around March 2006 and today August 30, 2009 the Sun is still in that minimum with no sign of it ending. The failed predictor: The Solar Conveyor Belt Theory Dikpati’s prediction is unprecedented. In nearly-two centuries since the 11-year sunspot cycle was discovered, scientists have struggled to predict the size of future
maxima—and failed. Solar maxima can be intense, as in 1958, or barely detectable, as in 1805, obeying no obvious pattern. The key to the mystery, Dikpati realized years ago, is a conveyor belt on the sun. I try to remove some of the waffle here because the article talks about the Earth’s ocean conveyor belt as an analogue but frankly its not relevant, nor useful. The sun’s conveyor belt is a current, not of water, but of electrically-conducting gas. It flows in a loop from the sun’s equator to the poles and back again. Just
as the Great Ocean Conveyor Belt controls weather on Earth, this solar conveyor belt controls weather on the sun. Specifically, it controls the sunspot cycle. Solar physicist David Hathaway of the National Space Science & Technology Center (NSSTC) explains: “First, remember what sunspots are–tangled knots of magnetism
generated by the sun’s inner dynamo. A typical sunspot exists for just a few weeks. Then it decays, leaving behind a ‘corpse’ of weak magnetic fields.” Enter the conveyor belt. “The top of the conveyor belt skims the surface of the sun, sweeping up the magnetic fields of old, dead sunspots. The ‘corpses’ are dragged down at the poles to a
depth of 200,000 km where the sun’s magnetic dynamo can amplify them. Once the corpses (magnetic knots) are reincarnated (amplified), they become buoyant and float back
to the surface.” Presto—new sunspots! Presto! No, it didn’t this time. This time the belt moved to the critical latitude of 22 degrees and we got a single sunspot and that’s it. All this happens with massive slowness. “It takes about 40 years for the belt to complete one loop,” says Hathaway. The speed varies “anywhere from a 50-year pace
(slow) to a 30-year pace (fast).” When the belt is turning “fast,” it means that lots of magnetic fields are being swept up, and that a future sunspot cycle is going to be intense. This is a basis
for forecasting: “The belt was turning fast in 1986-1996,” says Hathaway. “Old magnetic fields swept up then should re-appear as big sunspots in 2010-2011.” There’s the prediction from 2006. We’ve yet to reach 2010 but Hathaway was talking about 2010-2011 as the time of the SC24 maximum when we haven’t yet reached the
end of the minimum in August 2009. Here’s where the claim of scientific authority is made. This isn’t just any old joe making a prediction, this is expertise: Like most experts in the field, Hathaway has confidence in the conveyor belt model and agrees with Dikpati that the next solar maximum should be
a doozy. But he disagrees with one point. Dikpati’s forecast puts Solar Max at 2012. Hathaway believes it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011. “History shows that big sunspot cycles ‘ramp up’ faster than small ones,” he says. “I expect to see the first sunspots of the next cycle appear in late 2006 or
2007—and Solar Max to be underway by 2010 or 2011.” Wrong. An expert strikes out. Who’s right? Time will tell. Either way, a storm is coming. It turns out that neither was right. The extended solar minimum caught some of NASA’s brightest experts with their predictive pants down. (Solar Science) On Anthony Watts’ blog, he’s testing his apparent paranormal power to cause the
Sun to break out into sunspots by writing about how blank the Sun is. On this blog, I don’t believe in the paranormal, and it looks like the Sun is still slumbering, with no end in sight. Here is the stereo view looking behind the Sun to the surface that has yet to come into view: Nothing to report other than a coronal hole. Looks like
Anthony’s got no more powers than I have. Here’s the solar cycle progression to July 2009. With August 2009 expected to be zero, that red line prediction is looking more and more optimistic. (Solar Science) Remarkable
Admission By James Annan On The Klotzbach Et Al (2009) Paper
There is a remarkable presentation of viewpoints on our Klotzbach et al (2009) paper by Michael Tobis (see)
and James Annan (see). On Roger Pielke Jr.’s Blog, he has already posted
effectively in response to Michael Tobis’s admission of his lack of expertise on the topic of our paper (see).
From the comment below that James Annan made on his weblog, it is clear he does not understand boundary layer physics either. He wrote “For the record, I agree that land use cover change may impact on the climate. But unless Roger Pielke can find some way of arguing that this has changed the net
average surface flux by the order of 1Wm-2at night, his whole theory is still a bust. And even if he did, it would not rescue his erroneous claims that the trends
in temperature due to GHG or the other most significant forcings induce a significant change in the lapse rate in the boundary layer.” His challenge to document a change in the net surface flux by 1Wm-2 due to landscape change is a
clear demonstration that he is poorly informed about boundary layer dynamics. As one example of many, for urban areas relative to residential areas (which illustrate how the fluxes change as urbanization occurs), the paper Soushi, K. and Y. Yamaguchi, 2007: Estimation of storage heat flux in an urban area using ASTER
data. Remote sensing of environment ISSN 0034-4257 summarizes their study in the abstract “The urban heat island phenomenon occurs as a result of the mixed effects of anthropogenic heat discharge, increased use of artificial impervious surface materials,
and decreased vegetation cover. These factors modify the heat balance at the land surface and eventually raise the atmospheric temperature. It is important to quantify the
surface heat balance in order to estimate the contributions of these factors. The present authors propose the use of storage heat flux to represent the heat flux between the
land surface and the inside of the canopy for the heat balance analysis based on satellite remote sensing data. Surface heat fluxes were estimated around the city of Nagoya,
Japan using Terra ASTER data and meteorological data. Seasonal and day-night differences in heat balance were compared using ASTER data acquired in the daytime on July 10,
2000, and January 2, 2004 and in the nighttime on September 26, 2003. In the central business and commercial districts, the storage heat flux was higher than those in the
surrounding residential areas. In particular, in winter, the storage heat flux in the central urban area was 240 to 290 W m-2, which was much larger than the storage heat
fluxes in residential areas, which ranged from 180 to 220 W m-2. Moreover, the negative storage heat flux in the central urban area was greater at night. This tendency
implies that the urban surface stores heat during the daytime and discharges it at night. Extremely large negative storage heat flux occurred primarily in the industrial
areas for both daytime and nighttime as a result of the enormous energy consumption by factories.” These values are much larger than the 1Wm-2 threshold that James presented in his weblog. On his statement rejecting ”that the trends in temperature due to GHG or the other most significant forcings induce a significant change in the lapse rate in
the boundary layer“, as just one example (and there are many), the paper Sun, J-L et al, 2003: Heat balance in the nocturnal boundary layer during CASES-99 J.
Appl. Meterologogy. 42, 1649-1666 reported a “[A] radiative flux difference of more than 10 W m-2 over 46 m of height was observed under weak-wind and clear-sky conditions after hot days.” The abstract reads “A unique set of nocturnal longwave radiative and sensible heat flux divergences was obtained during the 1999 Cooperative Atmosphere-Surface Exchange Study
(CASES-99). These divergences are based on upward and downward longwave radiation measurements at two levels and turbulent eddy correlation measurements at eight levels. In
contrast to previous radiation divergence measurements obtained within 10 m above the ground, radiative flux divergence was measured within a deeper layer-between 2 and 48 m.
Within the layer, the radiative flux divergence is, on average. comparable to or smaller than the sensible heat flux divergence. The horizontal and vertical temperature
advection, derived as the residual in the heat balance using observed sensible heat and radiative fluxes, are found to be significant terms in the heat balance at night. The
observations also indicate that the radiative flux divergence between 2 and 48 m was typically largest in the early evening. Its magnitude depends on how fast the ground
cools and on how large the vertical temperature gradient is within the layer. A radiative flux difference of more than 10 W m-2 over 46 m of height was observed under
weak-wind and clear-sky conditions after hot days. Wind speed variation can change not only the sensible heat transfer but also the surface longwave radiation because of
variations of the area exposure of the warmer grass stems and soil surfaces versus the cooler grass blade tips. leading to fluctuations of the radiative flux divergence
throughout the night.” As the authors write “Its magnitude depends on how fast the ground cools and on how large the vertical temperature gradient is within the layer…..Wind speed
variation can change not only the sensible heat transfer but also the surface longwave radiation because of variations of the area exposure of the warmer grass stems and soil
surfaces versus the cooler grass blade tips. leading to fluctuations of the radiative flux divergence throughout the night.” All of us should be disappointed that both James Annan and Michael Tobis have elected not to engage in a proper scientific discussion of our findings. We look for
a dialog with colleagues who do undertand boundary layer dynamics. Our paper Fall, S., D. Niyogi, A. Gluhovsky, R. A. Pielke Sr., E. Kalnay, and G. Rochon, 2009: Impacts
of land use land cover on temperature trends over the continental United States: Assessment using the North American Regional Reanalysis. Int. J. Climatol.,
10.1002/joc.1996 is now published. We report in our paper “As most of the warming trends that we identify can be explained on the basis of LULC changes, we suggest that in addition to considering the greenhouse
gases-driven radiative forcings, multi-decadal and longer climate models simulations must further include LULC changes.” The abstract reads “We investigate the sensitivity of surface temperature trends to land use land cover change (LULC) over the conterminous United States (CONUS) using the observation
minus reanalysis (OMR) approach. We estimated the OMR trends for the 1979-2003 period from the US Historical Climate Network (USHCN), and the NCEP-NCAR North American
Regional Reanalysis (NARR). We used a new mean square differences (MSDs)-based assessment for the comparisons between temperature anomalies from observations and interpolated
reanalysis data. Trends of monthly mean temperature anomalies show a strong agreement, especially between adjusted USHCN and NARR (r = 0.9 on average) and demonstrate that
NARR captures the climate variability at different time scales. OMR trend results suggest that, unlike findings from studies based on the global reanalysis (NCEP/NCAR
reanalysis), NARR often has a larger warming trend than adjusted observations (on average, 0.28 and 0.27 °C/decade respectively). OMR trends were found to be sensitive to land cover types. We analysed decadal OMR trends as a function of land types using the Advanced Very High Resolution
Radiometer (AVHRR) and new National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 1992-2001 Retrofit Land Cover Change. The magnitude of OMR trends obtained from the NLDC is larger than the one
derived from the static AVHRR. Moreover, land use conversion often results in more warming than cooling. Overall, our results confirm the robustness of the OMR method for detecting non-climatic changes at the station level, evaluating the impacts of adjustments performed
on raw observations, and most importantly, providing a quantitative estimate of additional warming trends associated with LULC changes at local and regional scales. As most
of the warming trends that we identify can be explained on the basis of LULC changes, we suggest that in addition to considering the greenhouse gases-driven radiative
forcings, multi-decadal and longer climate models simulations must further include LULC changes.” Comments
On A New Post By James Annan titled “A Bizarre Rewriting Of History” James Annan has written a new post entitled “A bizarre rewriting of history”. In response, my son and I have e-mailed to James and have reproduced the communications below. If he responds, I will post as an update. E-Mail from Pielke Jr. James- E-mail from Pielke Sr. James I agree with Roger Jr. He has expressed the papers accurately. I also agree; why are you so contemptuous in your tone? You may be reaffirming others on your viewpoint, but you are turning off As to your statement “For the record, I agree that land use cover change may impact on the climate. But unless Roger Pielke can find some way of arguing that this has changed the net
average surface flux by the order of 1Wm-2 at night, his whole theory is still a bust”. Do you really mean this? Changing just the value of z0 [the aerodynamic roughness] at the surface has this effect and more. Clouds and higher water vapor (and
CO2) also alter the surface flux by values larger than 1 Watt per meter squared. I agree that added CO2 is less important in this regard as a direct radiative effect than
clouds and water vapor, as we reported in the Eastman et al paper, but as we also showed in that paper, the effect of the biogeochemical effect of added CO2 on plant
transpiration during daylight on subsequent nighttime water vapor concentrations (and thus its effect on the radiative flux) is significant. The P&M paper just looked at the issue as to whether if there was less loss of heat at night out of the top of the boundary layer, even if the loss was the
same, would the vertical distribution of the heat loss be uniform between strong and windy nights? It is not, and this effect is seen in the minimum surface air temperatures.
In the real world, it is even more different as the loss of heat from the boundary layer is not the same on windy and light wind nights. Regards Roger Sr. In 2000 Ben Santer and colleagues published the paper [and thanks to Dick McNider for alerting us to it!] B. D. Santer, T. M. L. Wigley, D. J. Gaffen, L. Bengtsson, C. Doutriaux, J. S. Boyle, M. Esch, J. J. Hnilo, P. D. Jones, G. A. Meehl, E. Roeckner, K. E. Taylor, and M. F.
Wehner: Interpreting Differential Temperature Trends at the Surface and in the Lower Troposphere The abstract reads “Estimated global-scale temperature trends at Earth’s surface (as recorded by thermometers) and in the lower troposphere (as monitored by satellites) diverge by up
to 0.14°C per decade over the period 1979 to 1998. Accounting for differences in the spatial coverage of satellite and surface measurements reduces this differential, but
still leaves a statistically significant residual of roughly 0.1°C per decade. Natural internal climate variability alone, as simulated in three state-of-the-art coupled
atmosphere-ocean models, cannot completely explain this residual trend difference. A model forced by a combination of anthropogenic factors and volcanic aerosols yields
surface-troposphere temperature trend differences closest to those observed.” In their paper, they briefly mention the effect of a possible error in the surface temperature data which could explain the discrepancy between the temperature trends in
the troposphere and at the surface. They write “A nonsignificant trend differential would also occur if the surface warming had been overestimated by 0.05°C per decade in the IPCC data … The relative
likelihood of such errors in the MSU and IPCC data is difficult to assess…” The IPCC (2007) Statement for Policymakers wrote “New analyses of balloon-borne and satellite measurements of lower- and mid-tropospheric temperature show warming rates that are similar to those of the surface
temperature record and are consistent within their respective uncertainties, largely reconciling a discrepancy noted in the TAR.” and “Eleven of the last twelve years (1995–2006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature9 (since 1850). The updated
100-year linear trend (1906 to 2005) of 0.74°C [0.56°C to 0.92°C] is therefore larger than the corresponding trend for 1901 to 2000 given in the TAR of 0.6°C [0.4°C to
0.8°C]. The linear warming trend over the last 50 years (0.13°C [0.10°C to 0.16°C] per decade) is nearly twice that for the last 100 years. The total temperature increase
from 1850–1899 to 2001–2005 is 0.76°C [0.57°C to 0.95°C].” Our paper Klotzbach, P.J., R.A. Pielke Sr., R.A. Pielke Jr., J.R. Christy, and R.T. McNider, 2009: An
alternative explanation for differential temperature trends at the surface and in the lower troposphere. J. Geophys. Res., accepted has clearly documented an estimated warm bias of about 30% in the IPCC reported surface temperature trends. This bias also brings into
question the claim that 11 of the 12 years in the period 1995 to 2006 were the warmest on record. Moreover, despite the claim in the IPCC (2007) report, the
tropospheric and surface temperature trends have not NOT reconciled. The lack of news coverage on this documented bias which has appeared in the peer reviewed literature on the Klotzbach et
al (2009) paper is another clear example of the failure of most of the journalism community to cover news that conflicts with the IPCC (2007) perspective. These damn fools are proud of their obstructive nitwittery: Persistence
stops a train—and global warming slowed A massive new rail line planned to move millions of tons of low-grade coal from northeastern Wyoming to the Midwest has been stopped. For more than nine years Sierra Club
and our allies have been battling plans by Dakota Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp. (DM&E) to build this new coal line, and late yesterday DM&E announced the
project is “on hold.” Even at Hansen's most outrageously high estimate of climate sensitivity, the complete cessation of all U.S. coal-fired electricity generations
carbon dioxide emissions can save a mere 0.15 °C warming by the year 2100 (see workings). The
reality is that the war against green plants does nothing beneficial at all. AIR QUALITY: 'Clunkers' benefit debatable - Rebates helped automakers, not environment The pitch for Cash for Clunkers included the environmental benefits of getting less fuel-efficient cars off the road. But whether sidelining clunkers translates to
reducing the haze that sometimes shrouds the Las Vegas Valley remains to be seen. So much for declining grain stocks: ANALYSIS-Cheap wheat to help meet EU fuel demand LONDON, Aug 28 - A sharp decline in wheat prices driven by a supply glut is set to lead to more of the grain being turned into motor fuel in the European Union. Sounding like they've been at the watermelon wine: Watermelon Juice - Next Source of Renewable Energy Hundreds of thousands of tons of watermelons are tossed every year because they aren't good enough for market. A new study finds that the juice from these watermelons
could easily be used to create the biofuel ethanol and other helpful products. August 28, 2009
Younger Americans overexposed to radiation risk CHICAGO - Younger Americans are being exposed to worrisome amounts of radiation from medical scans that increase their risk of cancer, U.S. researchers said on Wednesday. Uh, doc? Just because one person receives say, one-thousandths part of a hazardous dose from an x-ray does not mean that the thousandth person to be
x-rayed gets nailed with a hazardous dose. If the individual risk is trivial then the individual risk is trivial. One in seven young Canadians deficient in vitamin C NEW YORK - The British who traveled to Canada by ship in the 1700s knew the risks of not getting enough vitamin C: scurvy. Today's Canadians may need a reminder about the
vitamin: As many as one in seven young Canadian adults may be vitamin C deficient, which could place them at increased risk for chronic health problems, study findings
suggest. If only people were mice... New fat-fighting drug has anti-diabetes action too WASHINGTON - Researchers searching for a cure for obesity said on Thursday they have developed a drug that not only makes mice lose weight, but reverses diabetes and
lowers their cholesterol, too. Obesity drug fears investigated US authorities are investigating concerns an anti-obesity drug widely available over the counter at chemists may cause liver damage. Can't The Crone afford any fact checking any more? Our
Plastic Legacy Afloat Until recently, the earth had seven continents. To that number, humans have added an eighth — an amorphous, floating mass of waste plastic trapped in a gyre of currents
in the north Pacific, between Hawaii and Japan. Researchers have estimated that this garbage patch may contain as much as 100 million tons of plastic debris and is perhaps
twice the size of Texas, if not larger. The 100,000 marine mammal deaths myth stems from a misread report about hypothetical plastic fishing net mortalities, which activists and the NYT
keep propagating. Totally wrong. When
Governments Are Forced to Compete, the Result Is Better Policy and More Liberty A story in USA Today is a perfect illustration of the
liberalizing power of tax competition. In an effort to attract more jobs and investment, states are competing with each – even taking the aggressive step of advertising in
high-tax states. This does not guarantee that states will always use the best approach since states sometimes try to lure companies with special handouts, but tax competition
generally encourages states to lower tax rates and control fiscal and regulatory burdens. The same process works internationally, which is precisely why international
bureaucracies controlled by high-tax nations are seeking to thwart fiscal competition between nations: Las Vegas is running ads in California warning businesses they can “kiss their assets goodbye” if they stay in the Golden State. In New Hampshire, economic
development officials pick up Massachusetts business owners at the border in a limousine and give them VIP treatment and a pitch about why they should relocate there.
Indiana officials, using billboards at the borders and direct appeals to businesses in neighboring states, are inviting them to ‘Come on IN for lower taxes, business and
housing costs.’ As states struggle to keep jobs in a continuing recession, they are no longer hoping businesses in other states happen to notice their lower taxes,
cheaper office space and less-stringent regulations. They are taking the message directly to them and taking shots at their neighbor’s shortcomings. …No one does it
more unapologetically than the Nevada Development Authority. The agency has picked on California before, but its $1 million campaign, launched this month, ratchets up the
mockery of California’s budget deficits and IOU paychecks. ‘It’s all done tongue-in-cheek. But the underlying deal is, we want this business,’ Nevada Development
Authority President and CEO Somer Hollingsworth said. …’They do mask the nastiness of their message with humor, but this time, their ads are over the top,’ said
[California Assemblyman] Solorio, a Democrat from Santa Ana. (Daniel J. Mitchell, Cato at liberty) Concerns Remain as Europe Changes Bulbs Beginning next week, incandescent light bulbs will gradually be removed from the European Union market and replaced with energy-saving light bulbs — chiefly compact
fluorescent bulbs — that use up to 80 percent less energy and have far longer lifetimes. Just for laughs: No joke: Scientists call for stricter controls on
emissions of laughing gas - Nitrous oxide could soon pose a bigger threat to ozone than CFC chemicals, says atmospheric chemist Scientists have called for stricter controls on emissions of laughing gas, after discovering the common chemical poses a new threat to the recovering ozone layer. The gas,
properly known as nitrous oxide, could soon pose a bigger threat to ozone than CFC chemicals, the use of which has been restricted since the 1980s. (The Guardian) Nothing at all to worry about then. For decades now we have heard how global warming is going to get us, how a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will lead to scary amounts of warming. How's that working
out? First, a couple of boring numbers: The IPCC (alt: IPCC) and
the European Environment Agency both provide the
formula for calculating change in radiative forcing (ΔF) in W/m2. For carbon dioxide (CO2) this formula is given as ΔF = αln(C/Co)
where C and Co are the current and pre-industrial concentrations of CO2, respectively and α = 5.35. Some would immediately argue this
overstates average net forcing from increasing atmospheric CO2 and we'd tend to agree but the inflated value is not important, at least, not yet -- call it an
inbuilt "safety margin," if you like. Atmospheric CO2 is presented in parts per million by volume (ppmv). There is no universal standard for what we mean by a doubling of CO2 and various
numbers are used, most commonly 560 (2x280 -- the common pre-Industrial revolution reference) and 600 (2x300 -- presumably benchmarked from early in the Twentieth Century).
Since most people seem to conceive the situation as two times "natural," which we take to mean immediately pre-Industrial Revolution, we'll be using the former.
From the above formula then, the change in forcing from a doubling of pre-Industrial Revolution atmospheric CO2 = According to the National Academies' Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions
(2001), doubling CO2 (to 600 ppmv) would lead to a forcing of about 4 W/m2, so we guess these figures are close enough for our purposes here. "The sensitivity of the climate system to a forcing is commonly expressed in terms of the global mean temperature change that would be expected after a time
sufficiently long for both the atmosphere and ocean to come to equilibrium with the change in climate forcing. If there were no climate feedbacks, the response of
Earth's mean temperature to a forcing of 4 W/m2 (the forcing for a doubled atmospheric CO2) would be an increase of about 1.2 °C (about 2.2 °F).
However, the total climate change is affected not only by the immediate direct forcing, but also by climate “feedbacks” that come into play in response to the forcing."
"As just mentioned, a doubling of the concentration of carbon dioxide (from the pre-Industrial value of 280 parts per million) in the global atmosphere causes a
forcing of 4 W/m2. The central value of the climate sensitivity to this change is a global average temperature increase of 3 °C (5.4 °F), but with a
range from 1.5 °C to 4.5 °C (2.7 to 8.1 °F) (based on climate system models: see section 4). The central value of 3 °C is an amplification
by a factor of 2.5 over the direct effect of 1.2 °C (2.2 °F). Well-documented climate changes during the history of Earth, especially the changes between
the last major ice age (20,000 years ago) and the current warm period, imply that the climate sensitivity is near the 3 °C value. However, the true climate
sensitivity remains uncertain, in part because it is difficult to model the effect of feedback. In particular, the magnitude and even the sign of the feedback can differ
according to the composition, thickness, and altitude of the clouds, and some studies have suggested a lesser climate sensitivity."
Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions,
pp 6-7, "Climate models calculate outcomes after taking into account the great number of climate variables and the complex interactions inherent in the climate system.
Their purpose is the creation of a synthetic reality that can be compared with the observed reality, subject to appropriate averaging of the measurements. Thus, such
models can be evaluated through comparison with observations, provided that suitable observations exist. Furthermore, model solutions can be diagnosed to assess
contributing causes of particular phenomena. Because climate is uncontrollable (albeit influenceable by humans), the models are the only available experimental
laboratory for climate. They also are the appropriate high-end tool for forecasting hypothetical climates in the years and centuries ahead. However, climate models
are imperfect. Their simulation skill is limited by uncertainties in their formulation, the limited size of their calculations, and the difficulty of interpreting their
answers that exhibit almost as much complexity as in nature."
Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions,
p 15, So, how's that working out in the real world? How could we tell? The Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center provides Recent Greenhouse Gas Concentrations, complete with
increased radiative forcing. Going by the July 2009 update Earth is already experiencing three-fourths of the increased forcing estimated from 2xCO2 (2.99 W/m2)
from greenhouse gas changes alone. Now, observations tell us that Earth responds quite rapidly to forcing changes, for example the range from 12 °C-15.8 °C and back each year as the greater land
mass of the northern hemisphere receives more and less solar forcing with the changing seasons: According to the IPCC's AR4 assessment for policymakers, "The total
temperature increase from 1850 – 1899 to 2001 – 2005 is 0.76 [0.57 to 0.95] °C", so three-fourths of the expected forcing has delivered three-fourths of a
degree warming... Given that black carbon has been "blamed" for a percentage of estimated warming, as has solar activity and lets not forget land use change with only about
one-third of estimated warming due to changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide, the chances of 2xCO2 delivering even 1 degree warming would appear, um... limited,
much less the rather imaginative 3 °C proposed above. And since carbon dioxide increases have so little effect on global mean temperature it should be obvious that spending fortunes restricting carbon dioxide emissions will
also have irrelevantly small effect. The Grand View: 4 Billion Years Of Climate Change Two
of the terms bandied about by global warming alarmists are “unprecedented” and “irreversible.” It is troubling that scientists, who should know better, persist in
using these terms even though the history of our planet clearly shows that neither term is accurate. Proof of this inaccuracy is obvious if we look back over the history of
Earth—the Phanerozoic Eon in particular—taking the “Grand View” of historical climate change. According to Meg Urry, the head of the physics department at Yale University: “Scientists observe nature, then develop theories that describe their
observations. Science is driven by nature itself, and nature gives us no choice. It is what it is.” While some of the dates presented here may change and scientists
continue to argue some of the fine points, here is what science thinks it knows about life, the Universe and everything. Around 13.7 billion years ago the Universe came into existence. Not long afterward the Milky Way galaxy was formed. Stars formed, transmuted elements in
nuclear fire and ended their lives in supernovae explosions. This cycle was repeated many times for many different stars. Then, 4.6 billion years ago our Sun was born out of the ashes of older dead stars. Along with the Sun a large brood of planets was also formed, including
the one we call Earth. A million years after the birth of our sun, the violent explosion of a nearby supernova nearly ended life on Earth before it began. Over the next four
and a half billion years, forces of nature shaped our planet and the life it harbored. Buffeted by supernovae, barely surviving the traumatic birth of the Moon, bombarded by asteroids, the resilient Earth endured. And despite planet-freezing
ice ages, devastating mass extinctions, and ever changing climate life not only survived, it thrived. Even though meteors continued to rain down on the young planet there is
evidence that as long as 4.2 billion years ago liquid water, the prerequisite for life as we know it, was present. The evidence also indicates that life has been present on
our planet for close to 4 billion years, though for most of that time it was relatively simple single celled life. At the start, Earth's atmosphere was a toxic mix of
methane, carbon dioxide and ammonia—oxygen was nearly absent in the atmosphere of early Earth. To humans and most of the world's familiar flora and fauna, this atmosphere
would have been toxic. Asteroid impacts, tremendous volcanic eruptions, and shifting tectonic plates resulted in drastic changes in climate and the emergence of new life forms.
Somewhere along the way the simple microorganisms, which were ancient Earth's only inhabitants, developed photosynthesis that created a net gain of oxygen first in the ocean
and later in the atmosphere. Then, 2.3 billion years ago, the world's first ecological disaster occurred when free oxygen established a permanent presence in the atmosphere.
Known as the Great Oxidation or the Oxygen Catastrophe, almost every living thing on Earth died as a result of this massive bacteria-induced climate change. Scientists know this from the minerals present in the rock record. Between 2.5-2.3 billion years ago, during the early Proterozoic Eon, extensive deposits
of pyrite (iron sulfide) and uranite (Uranium oxide) can be found in river sediments. These minerals require low oxygen levels to form. From 2.3 billion years onward iron
rust can be found, an indication of the presence of free oxygen. Even so, the oxygen levels were but a fraction of today's and intense radiation from the Sun sleeted down on
the plant. Eventually, oxygen would solve the radiation problem as well as molecules of ozone (O3) were created in the stratosphere forming the
protective ozone layer. This first example of life radically changing Earth's environment, some times to the detriment of older life forms, was a good thing for our species for
without the change in atmospheric composition we would never have existed at all. According to Thorne
Lay, Professor of Earth Sciences at UC Santa Cruz : “Life itself modified the Earth system. As the system changed, more complex life forms became viable. Eventually
diverse multi-cellular organisms flourished. But not without first being smacked in the face by a few snowballs.” And what snowballs they were! Eight hundred million years ago, during the Neoproterozoic Era, Earth underwent a monstrous ice age. There is evidence of glacial ice in tropical
latitudes, only 15° to 30° north of the equator. In our world, this would mean glaciers as far south as Miami, Florida. Earth would have looked like a different planet,
with almost no open ocean and few areas of exposed rock. Only ice and snow, a world of almost pure white. At that time, most of the land belonged to the super-continent of Rodinia, which formed around 1,100 mya. Rodinia, contained the land that makes up
the modern continents today, but not in a configuration we would recognize. North America was in the middle. South America, Australia and Antarctica were packed around North
America. Rodinia straddled the tropics, leaving a single vast ocean sweeping across the other side of the globe. There was no land at either pole. In 1992, Joseph L. Kirschvink, of the California Institute of
Technology in Pasadena, put forward a theory that our planet had almost completely frozen from pole to pole, with the only open ocean choked with pack ice. He named this
condition “Snowball Earth.” Other researchers have calculated that some of the glacial periods during this time had lasted as long as 10 million years. During these
periods, the ocean may have frozen over completely, blocking all sunlight and killing most ocean life. In fact, scientists now think that there have been ice ages dating back all the way to the middle of the Archean Eon, around 2.8 billion years ago. We
have evidence of this from layers of sediment found in rock formations known to belong to that period. On occasion, these episodes lasted several hundred million years, and
may have rivaled the ice age during the Neoproterozoic in intensity. There may have been several Snowball Earth periods in our planet's past. The next major milestone for life on Earth occurred at the beginning of the Phanerozoic Eon, 542 million years ago, with the Cambrian Explosion. This
event, with new multicellular organisms popping up in great profusion, resulted in an explosion of life. It marked the end of the Proterozoic Eon and the beginning of the
Phanerozoic, Greek for “visible life.” This eon signals the rise of truly complex life, where individual organisms are large enough to be recognized without a microscope. Different
geologic time periods are marked by significant changes in the types of creatures living on Earth. The rock deposited during the Phanerozoic Eon contains evidence of
fossilized hard body parts from living things and it is this fossil record that is used to date rock layers from the three eras. By reading the fossil record, scientists have
constructed an outline of the development of life during the time following the Cambrian Explosion. Note that it is the changing cast of fossils that allows science to map
the past—the history of our planet was written in rock by the fossil remains of uncounted extinct species. So we see that there were mass extinctions, changes to atmospheric gas proportions and even multiple ice ages prior to the beginning of the Phanerozoic.
However, the argument can be made that conditions during the Precambrian (the time prior to 542 million years ago) were not really representative of Earth's climate since
complex life spread across the planet. So let's take a look at the “recent” past of the Phanerozoic. Welcome to the Phanerozoic To closely examine each era and period of the Phanerozoic would take a lot more space than I wish to commit to a single blog post so we concentrate on the
variation in several key environmental factors over that entire time span. These factors are temperature, carbon dioxide levels, ice age conditions, and species extinction
and the impact on diversity. But before reviewing these data I do want to mention one period from the late Paleozoic Era that will give a flavor of the types of variation
seen in the past. In the late Paleozoic Era, during the Carboniferous Period, great forests of primitive plants thrived on land, forming extensive peat-swamps. These huge
masses of plant matter were buried with sediment, eventually forming the great coal deposits found in North America, Europe and around the world. A global drop in sea level
at the end of the Devonian reversed early in the Carboniferous, creating large shallow seas and huge deposits of carbonate minerals. These deposits trapped large quantities
of atmospheric carbon that would later form vast beds of limestone. During the later part of the Carboniferous, the amount of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere was about 35%, much higher than it is today. According to Robert
Berner, levels atmospheric oxygen levels have varied between 15% and 30% over the past 550 million years (see “Atmospheric
oxygen over Phanerozoic time” in PNAS September 28, 1999). At the same time, global CO2 went below 300 parts per million—a level which is
now associated with glacial periods. The abundance of O2 led to the existence of the largest insects ever seen on Earth. Hawk-sized dragonflies,
with 29 inch (75 cm) wing spans, spiders the size of house plants, 5 foot (1.5 m) long centipedes and soup bowl-sized crawling bugs.iii It was truly a time
when insects ruled the planet. Perhaps it's a good thing the atmospheric oxygen level is only 21% today. Carboniferous plants resembled the plants that live in tropical and mildly temperate areas today. From fossils, we know that many of them lacked growth
rings, suggesting a uniform climate. But the climate was changing. By the middle of the Carboniferous, Earth was sliding into an Ice Age, the Permo-Carboniferous. The growth
of large ice sheets at the southern pole locked up large amounts of water as ice. Because so much water was taken out of the environment, sea levels dropped, leading to a
mass extinction of shallow marine invertebrates, the gradual decline of the swamps, and an increase in dry land. Many times, these conditions were reversed when the glaciers receded. Glacial melt water was released back into the oceans, and again flooded the swamps
and low-lying plains. Carboniferous rock formations often occur as a pattern of stripes, with alternating shale and coal seams indicating the cyclic flooding and drying of
the land. Even under these stressful conditions, or perhaps because of them, life continued to develop. By the end of the era, the first large reptiles and the first modern
plants, ancestors of today's conifers, had appeared. In many ways the Carboniferous is unique in terms of its combination of atmosphere, climate and life forms, but each period of geologic time is
unique—that's why they are distinguished with individual names by the ICS. Fact is, the thing that makes these remote periods in time similar is that they are all different
from one another, and the only constant factor running through the sweep of Earth history is change. For greater detail on the charateristics of these geologic periods see The
Resilient Earth chapter 4, “Unprecedented Climate Change?,”
or get a copy of our book from Amazon. Now that we have a flavor of the types of change Earth has experienced in the past let's examine the temperature variation over the Phanerozoic Era. Below
is a figure that shows sciences best guess at how temperature has varied over the past 542 million years. Notice the wide variation in temperature over time, sometimes colder
than the average 14°C of today but much of the time considerably warmer. Note also the blue rectangles along the bottom of the plot representing periods of ice house
conditions. Even though there have been several extensive ice ages during the Phanerozoic for the majority of the past half billion years there have been no permanent ice
caps in either hemisphere. In that sense, the total melting of the Greenland and Antarctic glacial ice sheets would mark a return to historically normal conditions for our
planet. Next, take a look at variation in atmospheric CO2 levels shown in the graph below. Though the uncertainty in the measurments
grows as we look farther into the past the general trend can be seen—there used to be much more CO2 in the air in most earlier times. There is an
overall trend toward reduced levels but what is most interesting is to compare the CO2 graph with the temperature graph above. At this scale, there is really no apparent correlation between carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures. What's more, there have been ice ages when CO2
has been as much as 10 to 15 times higher than modern levels (for example the end-Ordovician Ice Age) . There have also been times when temperature was increasing but CO2
was decreasing and times when CO2 was increasing but temperatures decreasing (during the Silurian and Devonian and during the Triassic and Jurassic,
respectively). The dip in CO2 levels at the end of the Carboniferous and into the Permian can be attributed to the over active coal swamps that
were busy accumulating the thick coal seams that provide energy for much of the world's power generation today. That dip persisted throughout the great Karoo Ice Age (360-260
mya) but started to rise following the Permian-Triassic Extinction (251 mya). Many have speculated that ice ages are a cause of ancient mass extinction events and there may
be a connection. The timing of know extinction events is shown in the biodiversity graph below. The Ordovician-Silurian extinction event, also called the end-Ordovician extinction, was the third-largest of the five major extinction events in Earth's
history in terms of percentage of genera that went extinct and second largest overall in the overall loss of life. Somewhere between 450 and 440 mya, two bursts of extinction
occurred, separated by about a million years. Notice how, after each major extinction (denoted by the red triangles) life bounces back with increased diversity. Clearly life
rises to a challenge (for more about extinction see “Nature, Cruel and
Uncaring”). The graph below shows CO2, temperature and ice age timing information on a single plot. Did the cold have something to do with
the extinction? Arguments rage on in the paleological community. Conversely, some have suggested that a sudden rise in CO2 levels at the end of the
Permian was responsible for the Permian-Triassic Extinction. Science may never know. What we do know is human CO2 emissions at their worst cannot approach the levels of natural GHG release, even events that did not
trigger mass extinctions (see “Could Human CO2
Emissions Cause Another PETM?”). But what about the often mentioned link between and temperature? “In a nutshell, theoretical models cannot explain what we observe in
the geological record,” says Rice University Oceanographer Gerald
Dickens, “There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models.” There have been many other factors at work during the past that affect climate change. This examination—being limited to carbon dioxide levels,
temperature and the occurrence of ice ages—ignores the impact of shifting continents, variation in solar activity and the possible impact of cosmic rays on Earth's climate.
Greater detail on all of these factors are presented in our book. One interesting thing to notice is that having a continental land mass spanning either pole seems to help
promote ice house climate conditions. During the Devonian the supercontinent Gondwana passed over the south pole, during the Carboniferous the polar ice cap of covered the
southern end of Pangaea, and today we have Antarctica astride the south polar region. Observations That concludes our whirlwind tour of Earth's climate history. There are a number of observations that can be made from our overview of the Phanerozoic: What the future holds climate scientists are unable to portend with all their computer models and IPCC consensus reports. The Earth and its climate are
constantly changing—there is no one correct climate or temperature for our planet. Those who say CO2 is the most important factor in climate
change, that human GHG emissions will cause runaway global warming, have no historical basis for such claims. As Earth's climate history has shown, nothing predicted by the global warming alarmists would be unprecedented—Earth's climate has been colder than
today's and much, much warmer. CO2 levels have also been many times higher than they currently are, even during ice ages. Ice ages come and go,
caused by mechanisms mankind is powerless to control. And after every ice age the world warms and the glaciers disappear only to return millions of years later. No change in
climate is irreversible. Given 4 billion years of Earth history and 542 million years of complex life, blaming mankind for 9,000
years of global warming seems rather silly. As it says in Ecclesiastes: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing
new under the sun.” Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. [The information in this post was taken from our book The
Resilient Earth and represents the first half of my presentation to the Scientists for Truth conference
held during August 2009, in Springfield, Mo. After hearing my presentation Dennis Avery, co-author of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years, christened it the
“Grand View” of climate change, hence the title of this post. For more information and references see chapters 4, 5, and 6 of TRE.] (The Resilient Earth) Spurious Warming in New NOAA Ocean
Temperature Product: The Smoking Gun After crunching data this week from two of our satellite-based microwave sensors, and from NOAA’s official sea surface temperature (SST) product ERSST v3b, I think the
evidence is pretty clear: The ERSST v3b product has a spurious warming since 1998 of about 0.2 deg. C, most of which occurred as a jump in 2001. The following three panels tell the story. In the first panel I’ve plotted the TRMM Microwave Imager (TMI) SST anomalies (blue) for the latitude band 40N to 40S. I’ve
also plotted SST anomalies from the more recently launched AMSR-E instrument (red), computed over the same latitude band, to show that they are nearly identical. (These SST
retrievals do not have any time-dependent adjustments based upon buoy data). The orange curve is anomalies for the entire global (ice-free) oceans, which shows there is
little difference with the more restricted latitude band. In the second panel above I’ve added the NOAA ERSST v3b SST anomalies (magenta), calculated over the same latitude band (40N to 40S) and time period as is available from
TRMM. The third panel above shows the difference [ERSST minus TMI], which reveals an abrupt shift in 2001. The reason why I trust the microwave SST is shown in the following
plot, where validation statistics are displayed for match-ups between satellite measurements and moored buoy SST measurements. The horizontal green line is a regression fit
to the data. (An average seasonal cycle, and 0.15 deg. C cool skin bias have been removed from these data…neither affects the trend, however.) I also checked the TMI wind speed retrievals, and there is no evidence of anything unusual happening during 2001. I have no idea how such a large warm bias could have
entered into the ERSST dataset, but I’d say the evidence is pretty clear that one exists. Finally, the 0.15 to 0.20 deg. C warm bias in the NOAA SST product makes it virtually certain that July 2009 was not, as NOAA reported, a record high for global sea
surface temperatures. (Roy W. Spencer) My 1991
View of “Overlooked Scientific Issues In Assessing Hypothesized Greenhouse Gas” In 1991 I published a paper which had my views on the issue of the GCM modeling of global warming. This weblog revisits the topics I raised at that time. Pielke, R.A., 1991: Overlooked scientific issues in assessing hypothesized greenhouse gas warming.
Environ. Software, 6, 100-107. I summarized the focus of my article in the text “Numerical models of the global atmosphere and ocean circulations (referred to as general circulation models -GCMs) have been used to investigate the impact on
climate of an increase in these trace gases [which include carbon dioxide, methane, chlorofluorocarbons, and nitrous oxide]. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
concluded in 1983 based on these models, for example, that an increase of the average global temperatures of 5°C by the year 2100 with an incrcase or sea level up to around
2 meters will result because of the global enhancement of these gases. The World Meteorological Organization has concluded that greenhouse gas cause warming could cause a
global warming of 1.5°C to 4°C by the middle of the next century. The purpose of this paper is to discuss a number of serious shortcomings in the GCM model simulations which produced these conclusions regarding climate change, These
limitations, which are either inadeqately handled or not represented at all in GCMs are summarized in this paper.” The following are the issues that I have raised, and what has been accomplished since the appearance of this paper: 1. INCREASED CARBON DIOXlDE CONSUMPTION RESULTING FROM INVIGORATED PLANT GROWTH ON LAND AND IN THE OCEAN Biogeochemisty and biogeography are now recognized as first order climate effects [e.g see NRC, 2005]. 2. INABILITY FOR GCM MODELS TO PROPERLY RESOLVE THE EVOLUTION OF EXTRATROPICAL AND TROPICAL CYCLONES DUE TO THER POOR SPATIAL RESOLUTION Even though the models now have finer spatial resolution, The IPCC community still fails to recognize that they must test the ability to faithfully simulate weather
features (i.e. they need to be run in a numerical weather prediction mode). This is a necessary test in order to evalute the dynamics and thermodynamics in the GCMs. 3. INABILITY FOR GCM MODELS TO PROPERLY RESOLVE REGIONS OF OCEAN UPWELLING WHOSE COLD WATERS CAN ENHANCE THE OCEANIC UPTAKE OF CARBON DIOXIDE The issue still requires futher investiagation. I would welcome urls of peer reviewed papers that have looked at this specific issue [which is directly related to
the spatial resolution in the ocean part of the global climate models, as well as both the physical temperature effect and the biogeochemical (carbon assimilation) effect
on ocean biomass]. 4. OCURRENCE OF GREATER GLOBAL CLOUD COVERAGE AS A RESULT OF COLLODIALLY MORE STABLE CLOUDS DUE TO ANTHROPOGENIC INPUT OF AEROSOLS This climate forcing is now recognized as a major effect on the climate system [NRC, 2005]. Its complexity,
however, and the microphysics spatial scales in which this occurs, continue to challenge skillful modeling of this process. 5. MODIFICATION OF THE AMOUNT OF SOLAR RADIATION REFLECTED BACK INTO SPACE DUE TO MAN-CAUSED LANDSCAPE CHANGE This effect is included in the 2007 IPCC report. 6. MODIFICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF EVAPORATION AND TRANSIPIRATION TO THE ATMOSPHERE AS A RESULT OF MAN CAUSED LANDCAPE CHANGES This has been one of my major research areas, and it has been elevated to a first order climate effect (e. g. see NRC,
2005), although the 2007 IPCC failed to adequately discuss it. 7. CLOUDS WHICH CONTAIN SULPHATE PARTICLES, RESULTING FROM FOSSIL FUEL COMBUSTION, HAVE HIGHER ALBEDO THAN PRISTINE CLOUDS As with #4, this climate forcing is now recognized as a major effect on the climate system [e.g, see NRC, 2005].
Clouds and precipitation process are not seen, however, as an even more difficult modeling issue than in the early 1990s (e. g. see Table
2-2 in NRC, 2005). 8. GREATEST WARMING IS PREDICTED TO BE IN POLAR REGIONS, AND YET WARMING HAS NOT OCCURRED. This warming has occured in the Arctic (and, while there is disagreement), it has not warmed in the Antarctic region at the same level. 9. SINCE THE ATMOSPHERE IS A NONLINEARLY RSPONDING SYSTEM. EVEN WITH ALL RELEVANT PHYSICS FAITHFULLY REPRESENTED. THE GCMS COULD ONLY SIMULATE EXAMPLES OUT OF A SPECTRUM
OF POSSIBLE ATMOSPHERIC RESPONSES TO INCREASED GREENHOUSE GASES The 2007 IPCC continued to perpetuate the view that the models can skillfully predict the climate in the coming decades despite their own admission that the GCMs do not
even have all of the first order climate forcings (see the caption to figure SPM.2). I summarized my recommendations are follows “Since climate change is a natural feature of the earth, we need to husband our resources even if there were no man-caused changes (e.g. Schneider). With respect to
man’s potential influence on climate, the “path-of least- regret” is that we should immediately adopt policies which mitigate man’s impact providing there are no
deleterious economic, environmental, or political effects of these policies. Even better, of course, is if these policies result in positive benefits to mankind. Conservation
of fossil fuel resources, for example, and utilization of renewable energy resources represent examples of beneficial activities which should be promoted by government policy
makers regardless of the direction of climate change. Recommendations by Rosenfeld and lIafemeister represent definite steps which could be taken to achieve this goal.
Policies which require significant hardship, are in this writer’s opinion premature.” (Climate Science) Guaranteed to upset the "people done it" brigade and elicit a great deal of weaseling: One
sunspot mystery solved, researchers say For some time, scientists have observed that sunspots seem to have an inordinate impact on earth’s weather. Sunspots are areas of intensified magnetic activity on the sun’s surface. They occur roughly on an 11-year cycle. Right now, we’re at the minimum of the cycle, and
poised, most likely, to enter a phase of increased activity. Here’s the mystery when it comes to sunspots: The small increase in energy emitted by the sun during solar maximums (the peak of sunspot activity) doesn’t seem to match the higher temperatures observed on earth.
During sunspot years, the sun’s total energy output rises by just one-tenth of one percent. During those years, average sea surface temperatures increase by about 0.1
degrees C. But scientists calculate that, to get those higher temperatures, the amount of solar energy reaching earth would have to increase by about 0.5 Watts per square
meter. And that’s where observed reality refuses to align with scientists’ number-crunching. During the peak of the sunspot cycle, the energy reaching Earth only
increases by about 0.2 Watts per square meter – less than half what scientists think is necessary. In short, Earth seems to warm up too much during solar maximums. Where is that extra energy coming from? A new study appearing today in the journal Science offers an answer to this longstanding mystery.
Two climate processes, one top-down and the other bottom-up, amplify the effects of increased solar activity, say the authors, raising temperatures beyond what you might
expect. How do they know? With ever more powerful computers, scientists can run increasingly complex climate models. In this case, scientists at the National
Center of Atmospheric Research took two existing models, neither of which was able to reproduce observed changes alone, and combined them. This “super” model includes
more atmospheric layers than in the past, like the stratosphere, and allows for changes in atmospheric chemistry induced by solar radiation, both of which proved crucial to
getting a result that approximated reality. The scientists focused on the Pacific Ocean, which shows a strong response to periods of increased solar activity. And here’s what they came up with: First, more incoming solar radiation warms the stratosphere over the tropics. Warmer conditions, in turn, lead to the production of more ozone. More ozone causes more of
the sun’s incoming energy to be “caught” in the stratosphere. This feedback changes circulation patterns in the stratosphere. The stratosphere is separated from the troposphere (the lower atmospheric layer where most weather happens) by the tropopause. So if the two layers are distinct, how does
what happens up high affect what we experience down low? Answer: by what scientists call “wave energy.” The layers don’t necessarily mix. Rather, just as waves travel and transmit energy through water without necessarily
moving the water forward or backward, waves travel – and transmit energy – through different layers of the atmosphere. In this case, changes in stratospheric circulation
affect the troposphere by reinforcing, through these energetic waves, certain wind patterns. These strengthened winds cause stormier conditions over the western Pacific. Then there’s the bottom-up component. At the equator, heated air rises. Once cooled, that air descends over the subtropics. Where the hot humid air rises and cools, you
generally get storms and rainfall; where it sinks, you generally get clear skies and not much precipitation. (For this reason, many of the world’s deserts occur at
subtropical latitudes.) During sunspot years, a little more energy hits the sea surface of the Pacific. The subtropics, which naturally have few clouds to reflect the sun’s energy back into
space, warm more than other areas as a consequence. That increases evaporation and water vapor. The westerly trade winds carry the extra moisture to the western tropical
Pacific. More rain falls there. The entire cycle is reinforced. The end result of these “top down” and “bottom up” processes working together: during solar maximum years, the subtropics are more cloudless than usual, and more
sunlight – which is a little stronger – hits the ocean. That warms the ocean more than usual, raising the observed temperature. This increased warmth isn’t evenly
distributed: The trade winds are stronger than usual, too, making the eastern Pacific cooler, drier, and less stormy than usual. The western Pacific, meanwhile, gets more
warm water and more rain. If that sounds familiar, that’s because it mimics, very generally, the conditions that prevail during La Niña years. Not everyone is persuaded that the study satisfactorily explains the sunspot-earth connection. A news article accompanying the Science study airs some scientists’
doubts: The study “is not nearly as conclusive as they would have it,” says Joanna Haigh of Imperial College London, who developed the top-down mechanism. Among additional
critiques, she and others say the researchers ran the model too few times to give reliable results. “The atmosphere and oceans are a big coupled system,” she says,
“but it’s incredibly complicated.” For those wondering how the study bears on global warming, Gerald Meehl, lead author on the study, says that it doesn’t – at least not directly. (For more on
sunspots’ possible role in global warming, see Monitor colleague Pete Spotts’s article. Global warming is a long-term trend, Dr. Meehl says in a phone conversation. By contrast, this study attempts to explain the processes behind a periodic occurrence. But,
he says, a model finally able to reproduce a complex phenomenon observed in the real world does suggest that our climate models – the same ones we use to predict what will
happen to global climate as we ratchet up co2 concentrations – are improving. And that will, inevitably, have an affect on the climate discussion. (CSM) Interestingly, every time someone comes up with another attribution of some portion of climate forcing it leaves less room for carbon dioxide. The case
for carbon control died long ago -- can we please move on? Sunspots Do Really Affect Weather Patterns, Say Scientists A new
study in the journal Science by a team of international of researchers led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research have found that the sunspot cycle has
a big effect on the earth's weather. The puzzle has been how fluctuations in the sun's energy of about 0.1 percent over the course of the 11-year sunspot cycle could affect
the weather? The press release describing the new study explains: The team first confirmed a theory that the slight increase in solar energy during the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone. The energy warms
the air in the stratosphere over the tropics, where sunlight is most intense, while also stimulating the production of additional ozone there that absorbs even more solar
energy. Since the stratosphere warms unevenly, with the most pronounced warming occurring at lower latitudes, stratospheric winds are altered and, through a chain of
interconnected processes, end up strengthening tropical precipitation. At the same time, the increased sunlight at solar maximum causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific, where Sun-blocking clouds are
normally scarce. That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing additional water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the
normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains and reinforcing the effects of the stratospheric mechanism. The top-down influence of the stratosphere and the bottom-up influence of the ocean work together to intensify this loop and strengthen the trade winds. As more sunshine
hits drier areas, these changes reinforce each other, leading to less clouds in the subtropics, allowing even more sunlight to reach the surface, and producing a positive
feedback loop that further magnifies the climate response. These stratospheric and ocean responses during solar maximum keep the equatorial eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing conditions similar to a La
Nina event. However, the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused farther east than in a typical La Nina, is only about half as strong, and is associated with
different wind patterns in the stratosphere. Are these new findings relevant to scientific analyses of man-made global warming? The Christian Science Monitor reports: For those wondering how the study bears on global warming, Gerald Meehl, lead author on the study, says that it doesn’t – at least not directly.... Global warming is a long-term trend, Dr. Meehl says in a phone conversation. By contrast, this study attempts to explain the processes behind a periodic occurrence. But,
he says, a model finally able to reproduce a complex phenomenon observed in the real world does suggest that our climate models – the same ones we use to predict what
will happen to global climate as we ratchet up co2 concentrations – are improving. And that will, inevitably, have an affect on the climate discussion. A recent paper in Eos considers the evidence that we could be in for an extended period with few sunspots: Why is a lack of sunspot activity interesting? During the period from 1645 to 1715, the Sun entered a period of low activity now known as the Maunder Minimum, when
through several 11- year periods the Sun displayed few if any sunspots. Models of the Sun’s irradiance suggest that the solar energy input to the Earth decreased during
that time and that this change in solar activity could explain the low temperatures recorded in Europe during the Little Ice Age. Doesn't the Eos paper suggest that sunspot activity may not just affect weather but climate too? (Ronald Bailey, Reason) Hmm... A brief history of climate change and
conflict Article Highlights Lee is the associate director of the Center for Teaching Excellence and a professor in the School of International Service at American University. He has extensive
experience as an analyst of international trade, environmental policy, and security issues. He is the author of Climate Change and Armed Conflict: Hot and Cold Wars
and Exploring the Gaps: Vital Links between Trade, Environment, and Culture. Well, he seems to be correct about climate changes but draws lessons from times and cultures necessarily lacking global trade and infrastructure,
consequently neglecting the effect of modern transport abilities and trade. Climate change does involve varied effects (change in rainfall patterns, for example) and
"winners and losers" but modern effects are greatly alleviated by our ability to exploit advantage and redistribute excess to areas of disadvantage (Egypt was
once Rome's grain producer, so exploitation of location is hardly new but modern scale and speed is). Another ambitious claim: Steamy Heat More Common In California: Study LOS ANGELES - Bouts of extreme muggy heat lasting for days, once rare in California, are becoming more frequent and intense due to ocean patterns altered by climate
change, scientists said in a study released on Tuesday. (Reuters) Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Aug. 28th 2009 In this week’s round-up, you will discover the dark secrets behind some of the most influential green groups, why polar bears are shrinking and how the world can be
saved with only the judicious use of English actors. (Daily Bayonet) From the department of ironies: Weather
supercomputer used to predict climate change is one of Britain's worst polluters The Met Office has caused a storm of controversy after it was revealed their £30million supercomputer designed to predict climate change is one of Britain's worst
polluters. In the Pursuit of ‘Weather Modification’ Last week Nevada announced the end of a cloud-seeding program due to budget cuts. Today nagging the British, tomorrow the world: Green
quango launches campaign to preach abroad A green quango funded by the British taxpayer has caused outrage by launching an international campaign to preach about the need to curb emissions. Legislature takes urgent action in climate change fight China's top legislature Thursday approved a resolution on climate change -- which was originally not on its work plan for the year -- speeding up the country's effort to
fight global warming. India and climate change talks I have been surprised by the number of reasonable Indians who have come to accept the proposition, advanced by equally reasonable but perhaps Transcript (from the rubber room): Professor
Schellnhuber of the Potsdam Institute talks pre-industrial carbon dioxide levels for safe climate ... Scott Bilby: Is it? And James Hansen has mentioned we need to go to 300 to 325 ppm of CO2 to avoid deglaciation of the planet. Now, you’ve recently stated
only a return to pre-industrial levels of CO2, which is about 280ppm, would be enough to guarantee a safe future for the planet. So, on that are you basically agreeing with
Hansen or are you saying that perhaps his target is not low enough? Speaking of rubber rooms: Climate
change calculator spells out facts for US When Dickson Despommier boldly stated that, at our current climate change and population growth rate, " In roughly 50 years, farming as we know it will no longer
exist. This means that the majority of people could soon be without enough food or water." (See Vertical farming solution to climate change damage.) Not sure Rebecca spells her surname correctly... Oh dear... Big Role Urged For Energy Research In Climate Pact OSLO - Research into clean energy technology should get a leading role in new U.N. climate pact ahead of ever tougher curbs on greenhouse gas emissions, a study said on
Friday. How do you avoid damage that won't occur anyway? Granted, there is zero value in burying carbon we have spent time, effort, energy and finance mining to
begin with, in fact it's plain stupid but before you can "save" money on abating damages some potential damage must exist. That's the bottom line here -- there is
no known downside to carbon dioxide emission. None, zip, nada, zilch... it feeds plants and greens the Earth but it has no known downside whatsoever. All the stories and
allegations of harm come from make-believe worlds and fevered imaginations. The EPA may be considering closing the watchdog office that exposed the flimsy evidence of man-caused warming. So much for the administration's promise to "restore
science to its rightful place." Desperately trying to inflate the cost of adaptation to something nearer the absurd cost of "addressing gorebull warming": Adapting
To New Climate Dearer Than U.N. Says: Report LONDON - Adapting to the effects of climate change such as floods and droughts will probably cost many times more than the United Nations estimates, a report said on
Thursday ahead of a major U.N. summit in December. Stop 'emotionalizing' the cap-and-trade
debate Environmental activists who favor anti-global warming regulations like the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill now before the U.S. Senate have long claimed that government
intervention is essential to save the planet from an imminent man-made catastrophe. In fact, only Waxman-Markey threatens to be a man-made catastrophe. The bill would create
billions of dollars' worth of government credits to businesses that reduce carbon emissions. Businesses that exceed the required reductions could sell the credits to firms
that fail to do so. The approach won't work because it would use a government mandate to create a market for which there is no consumer demand. Carbon tax better: Clinton official TRADING of emission permits around the world will become a financial rort that fails to reduce carbon emissions - and will ultimately be scrapped in favour of a simple
carbon tax, a former senior official in the Clinton administration has forecast. Better than a cap & tax scam -- but that isn't really saying anything since neither But why? Rich Could Add CO2 Cuts To Bolster Climate Pact LONDON/OSLO - Industrialized nations can deepen planned cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to shore up a U.N. climate treaty due in December but analysts say there are risks
they will promise more than they deliver. This week marks the 150th anniversary of the first oil well drilled in Titusville, Pennsylvania by “Colonel” Edwin Drake. The commodity would prove essential to the
development of modern societies, enabling communications, travel and trade on a global scale. Let's Celebrate Oil's 150th Birthday And The Value It Adds To Our Lives Thursday marked the 150th anniversary of a seminal event in history: the birth of the oil industry. On that day in 1859, Edwin Drake struck black gold with the first
commercial oil well — creating an industry that would provide the lifeblood for modern civilization. Oil refiners: Cap-and-trade will cost Oil refiners, including regional giant Sunoco Inc., say that proposed federal legislation aimed at curbing global warming could impair fuel production nationally and in
the region, where it is a mainstay of the economy. Deficits, Dollars, and the Price of Energy Ed. Note: This article first appeared on Geoffrey Styles' blog, Energy Outlook. Turki: Energy Independence is ''Political Posturing At Its Worst…'' The new issue of Foreign Policy magazine includes a section called “Oil: The Long Goodbye.” The issue has several good articles, but the one by Turki al-Faisal brought
a smile to my face. Turki, who briefly served as Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the US, has also served as the head of Saudi intelligence. In his essay, “Don’t Be
Crude,” Turki channels many of the points that I make in Gusher of Lies, saying that for US politicians, invoking the phrase “energy independence” is “now as
essential as baby-kissing.” From there, Turki goes into a full-on indignant rant. (Robert Bryce, Energy Tribune) Trying to talk it to death now? Recession Speeds Coal's Long-Term Decline HOUSTON - Declining industrial electricity demand and an abundance of cheap natural gas will threaten coal's status as the dominant U.S. fuel to generate electric power,
even after the economic recession ends. Greens threaten
Indian American prosperity Navajo Nation, the largest tribe in the United States, has faced a number of enemies in its long history: Anasazi warriors, Andrew Jackson and now, lawyered-up
environmentalists. "So what?" of the moment: Australia admits
new LNG plant 'greenhouse intensive' SYDNEY -- Australia has admitted a huge new energy project to supply Asian markets could raise national greenhouse gas emissions by up to one percent if ambitious efforts
to capture them fail. Basically because they are no real value... More
Sun for Less: Solar Panels Drop in Price When Greg Hare looked into putting solar panels on his ranch-style home in Magnolia, Tex., last year, he decided he could not afford it. “I had no idea solar was so
expensive,” he recalled. This piece claims solar panels can "pay for themselves" in 22 years. All I can say is they must be installed in regions with the world's
highest electricity tariffs. Where I live, in sunny Queensland, we can get an average of 6 hours full sun per day and a return of almost 1 kWh per 4 square meters of solar
panels per day, displacing approximately $22 worth of metered power per year. A $16,000 1kW system (current local list price) can potentially displace 6kWh/day to return
about $131 in "saved power" annually, thus "paying for itself" in about 6 times its expected lifespan, not including cleaning and maintenance, loss of
use of finance... Of course, current solar panels lose efficiency over time and will certainly not continue delivering electricity at the nominal rating and will probably
be scrap (hazardous waste?) in 10-15 years, tops. Oh good grief! Study Warns of ‘Energy Sprawl’ A paper published on Tuesday by the Nature Conservancy predicts that by 2030, energy production in the United States will occupy a land area larger than Minnesota — in
large part owing to the pursuit of domestic clean energy. EU Imports More Argentine Biodiesel: Biopetrol HAMBURG - Growing imports of cheap Argentine biodiesel into Europe are replacing U.S. imports hit by European Union anti-dumping duties in March, Swiss-German biodiesel
producer Biopetrol said on Thursday. August 27, 2009
Rep.
Tom Price on the Government Takeover This video has gotten more than 1,000,000 views on YouTube. It deserves one more: yours. (Jim
Harper, Cato at liberty)
Newsweek Editor Plays Psychiatrist -- Links Health Care Opponents to
Saddam-9/11 Theorists Magazine's Sharon Begley rationalizes a large part of opposition to ObamaCare is from a distortion of 'mental processes.' (Jeff Poor, Business & Media Institute) Another Attack On Big Drugmakers Powerful California Rep. Henry Waxman wants to save Medicare billions by going after drug industry "windfalls." As usual, his "savings" will very
quickly turn into higher costs for you-know-who. Drug ads may not alter most cancer patients' care NEW YORK - A new study suggests that most cancer patients have seen ads for various drugs used against their disease, but it may ultimately have little impact on their
treatment. D'oh! EU Chemicals Law "Spells Surge In Animal Testing" LONDON - Far-reaching European safety rules on tens of thousands of chemicals used in everything from car seats to face cream will lead to a surge in animal testing and
should be urgently reviewed, scientists said on Wednesday. FTC
to Protect Us from Multi-Colored Beer Cans Recently
Anheuser-Busch hit upon the marketing idea of selling Bud Light beer in cans decorated with the college-team colors. As the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) doesn’t have much
else to do - its not like there’s been say fraud going on in the mortgage market – it quickly turned its attention to the issue, expressing “grave concern”
that these team-colored cans would encourage underage and binge drinking. As quoted in the Wall Street Journal, FTC attorney
Janet Evans said “this does not appear to be responsible activity.” What’s not responsible is the FTC wasting taxpayer resources wondering what color beer cans we are
drinking out of. When I was an underage drinker, the last thing on my mind was the color of the can. The ultimate purpose of the marketing campaign is to shift demand away
from boring, non-team color beer cans toward team color cans. If beer drinkers (or can collectors) get some pleasure out of a certain colored can, where’s the fraud or
deception in that? The real purpose of FTC’s interest is revealed in the comments of the Licensing Resource Group, which represents the colleges in protecting their logos. Almost all the
colleges that have asked Anheuser-Busch to stop selling the cans have cited trademark concerns. Yet none of the cans have any team logos. While no one would
dispute the right of a college to control the use of its team logo, is it really reasonable to conclude that the colleges also own the rights to the use of certain colors?
(Mark A. Calabria, Cato at liberty) The adiposity bandwagon is really rolling: Muscle mass, not
fat, makes for stronger bones NEW YORK - New findings call into question the idea that being overweight or obese might protect people from developing brittle bones. Molecular Link Found Between Insulin Resistance And Inflammation An exploration of the molecular links between insulin resistance and inflammation may have revealed a novel target for diabetes treatment, say scientists at the John G.
Rangos Sr. Research Center, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Their findings were published earlier this month in the online version of Diabetes, one of the journals
of the American Diabetes Association. (ScienceDaily) New Discovery Could Open Door To Obesity, Diabetes Treatments At a time of alarming increases in obesity and associated diseases -- and fiery debates about the cost of health care -- a UCF research team has identified a new genetic
mechanism that controls the body's fat-building process. Sugar-free drinks help in
battle of obesity Calorie fighters everywhere know that losing weight is only half the battle against the stubborn bulge -- keeping the weight off is even trickier. 4WDs avoid prangs, says survey (for those who don't speak Aussie,
"prangs" are accidents) FOUR-wheel-drives are less likely to be in an accident than standard passenger cars. K.Rudd, nanny: Price of alcohol, tobacco to rise under government blueprint THE price of alcohol and cigarettes would rise and glitzy marketing campaigns pitched at teenagers would be curbed under a radical blueprint to make Australians healthier
and leaner. 'Marketing failure to blame' for Australia's obesity Members of Australia's preventative health task force say a marketing failure in the food sector has contributed to the alarming rate of obesity in the country. Bee genome gives killer clue to colony
collapse disorder Beekeepers have seen hive after hive fall prey to colony collapse disorder (CCD). Now insights from the honeybee genome could overthrow guesswork in the effort to diagnose
the cause of the die-offs. Changes in transcript abundance relating to colony collapse disorder in honey bees (Apis mellifera)
(PNAS) When heated, high-fructose corn syrup can be dangerous Researchers have established the conditions that foster formation of potentially dangerous levels of a toxic substance in the high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) often fed to
honey bees. Their study, which appears in the current issue of ACS' bi-weekly Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, could also help keep the substance out of soft
drinks and dozens of other human foods that contain HFCS. The substance, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), forms mainly from heating fructose. "Formation of Hydroxymethylfurfural in Domestic High-Fructose Corn Syrup and Its
Toxicity to the Honey Bee (Apis mellifera)" (American Chemical Society) Uh-huh... Wolves Provide a Buffer Against Climate Change As Senators Mark Udall and John McCain held a formal hearing in Estes Park today concerning global climate change and its impact on national parks, conservationists called
on the senators to acknowledge the roll that gray wolves necessarily play in buffering against the effects of climate change. If hikers or snowmobilers disturb elk, that's a crime... but wolves must be introduced because elk need disturbing for the sake of a healthy environment?
Right. Scientist Says Trees Can Help Reverse Hunger, Global Warming Scientists attending the second World Congress on Agroforestry which kicked off in Nairobi on Monday said planting of trees can help reserve the effects of climate change,
land degradation and keep drought-hit communities alive when all other food crops fail. Measuring the Damage of our 'Water Footprint' A Dutch hydro engineer has come up with a "water footprint." At a conference in Sweden, he and other participants discussed water waste, supermarkets filled with
fruits and vegetables produced in some of the world's most arid regions and ways we can stop wasting our most precious resource. Illegal fishing evades U.N. crackdown: study ROME - Illegal fishing is depleting the seas and robbing poor nations in Africa and Asia of resources, but a lack of global cooperation is undermining efforts to track
rogue vessels, an environmental group said on Tuesday. Say what? Sierra Club objects to
letter sent by NWE HELENA - A Montana representative of the Sierra Club says he is "profoundly disappointed" with NorthWestern Energy President Bob Rowe's recent letter to
customers warning them about a clean-energy bill before Congress. Are Sierra trying to suggest cap & tax will not raise energy costs? Um, that is its stated purpose and in fact its sole raison d'être.
Not could raise their electricity and gas rates but absolutely certainly will do so. It’s important to follow up on yesterday’s interesting story
that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is demanding to see the scientific evidence EPA used in its efforts to regulate carbon dioxide. The Chamber published a blog post to add
some clarification: To be specific, in order to ensure that regulations which reengineer our economy are needed and would ultimately be effective, we are pushing the EPA to reveal the data
they used to justify their endangerment proposal. We need to drop the articles of faith and use the entirety of scientific study on the effects of climate change not a
sub-set, chosen by the EPA, not for its validity but rather on its ability to forward their policy goal — the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. Essentially, the Chamber is fighting to ensure that sound science — not global warming myths — are driving policy. Steve Milloy is arguing for the same in his article
over at Investors Business Daily, in which he writes of the Waxman-Markey effort to impose a cap and trade regime, “Climate
Bill Is Built On ‘Clean Coal’ Myths.” (Chilling Effect) Target fixation... Synthetic trees and algae can counter climate change,
say engineers Giant fly-swat shaped “synthetic trees” line the road into the office, where blooms of algae grow in tubes up the walls and the roof reflects heat back into the sky
— all reducing the effects of global warming. There is no value in tweaking global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. None whatsoever. Promo for a no-no: Carbon busters: 8 climate change solutions As carbon dioxide levels creep ever higher, scientists are working to put greenhouse gas in its place. We investigate carbon sequestration. (Sid Perkins, Cosmos) Even if global warming ever did become a problem trying to tweak atmospheric greenhouse gas levels is the most expensive and least effective way of
attempting to deal with it. Don't do it. Don't even think about it. Carbon capture: a
flimsy plaster or the answer to climate change? Of course, wind, solar and hydro aren’t the answer to the climate change problem, the chief executive of an energy company breezily threw at me this week. It just doesn’t seem to fit with the wholesome-clean-green fantasy to burn coal to create energy, then pump the carbon through pipelines into disused gas fields deep
under the ground. But if it uses less space than rubbish landfills and is safer than nuclear waste, then why should there be a problem? (Rowena Mason, Daily Telegraph) Nope, it's a hugely expensive non-solution to a non-problem, see Why is JunkScience.com
so opposed to CCS? They do provide a pretty graphic though. Appeasement is never the answer: Clean Coal Technology Fund Reports First Successes Aug. 26, 2009 -- As the top coal-producing state in a nation motivated to significantly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, Wyoming faces an ultimatum of sorts: Clean
your coal -- or else. What is required is pointing out just how little effect total cessation of all coal-fired electricity generation carbon dioxide emissions can possibly
have -- and by extension how little effect not restraining those emissions will have. Carbon dioxide and gorebull warming is simply the current excuse for the attack
on the energy supply and "solving" such a non-problem will not reduce the assault on energy. Gaia nuts simply don't want people to have abundant affordable energy
and have repeatedly explicitly stated so. There is absolutely no advantage in appeasing these flakes since they'll merely move the goalposts again, claiming there's yet
another "problem". Total waste of time, effort and money: Gorgon's emissions storage
under fire Environment Minister Peter Garrett has given the $50 billion Gorgon gas project the green light but the consortium's plan to bury millions of tonnes of greenhouse gas
emissions remains in doubt. Wrong: Whoever
figures out how to safely trap carbon will make a fortune IT'S easy to be sceptical - deeply - about efforts to clean up Australia's coal industry. No they wont. CCS is all expense for no benefit and should not be done at all. ETS - Energy Tax Swindle - A double
dissolution could be a referendum on the ETS Whenever I see the climate change minister on television, I feel like a kulak. To give her the benefit of the doubt, I assume she really believes that what she is
proposing is in the public interest. I suppose that even the Bolsheviks believed they could actually run agriculture better than the kulaks, but their overriding interest was
control, and neutralising, if necessary liquidating, their opponents, particularly their class enemies. Then they could begin on one another. Poland May curb Utility CO2 Trade From 2013 WARSAW - Poland may ban utilities from selling European Union carbon emissions permits many of them will get for free from 2013 as a way of curbing windfall profits, a
government source said on Wednesday. Seeking subsidy rather than markets: DuPont Offers Real Solutions to Climate Change Passage of environmentally effective and economically sustainable climate legislation in the U.S. will bring business opportunity to DuPont. Climate Money: Bigger Money Moves In Climate Money is poised to rocket—creating even larger pools of vested interests. Once it starts, how could we unwind trillions of trading rights? Say hello to the real new force in climate science—banks. The Shadow of Stratospheric Climate Money. Far north South Australia, Aug 2009. First Up. Governments Up the Ante. In the 2008-2009 financial year, Bush threw billions on the table with financial rescues and tax credits, only to be wildly outdone by Obama. The new funding provisions made since the financial emergency of Sept 2008 are not included in the previous table
of climate funds that amounted to $79 billion (so far). It’s difficult to assign the rescue package figures into strict financial years—yet the new numbers are
titanic, and step right out of the scales drawn on the past funding graphs. The financial recovery legislation that President Bush
signed1 on October 3 last year included the Energy
Improvement and Extension Act of 20082 which contained about $17
billion3 in tax incentives for clean energy services. Then in February 2009, the $787 billion American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act4 was signed into law, containing some $110
billion5 in clean energy investments in the bill. Many of these “investments” defy easy categorization. For example, research into alternative energy has
value regardless of whether carbon dioxide is a problem—though arguably there is less urgency. But expenses like the $3.4 billion for carbon sequestration have no other
purpose or use. They depend 100% on the assumption that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant. That’s a 100% vested interest. What’s Bigger than Big Government—Big Banks The stealthy mass entry of the bankers and traders poses major threats to the scientific process. Even though the US government has poured in around $80 billion dollars of influence over the last 20 years, that pales in comparison with the rapidly growing force of
carbon trading. According to the World Bank, turnover of carbon trading doubled from $63 billion in 2007 to $126
billion in 2008.6 Not surprisingly banks are doing what banks should do: they’re following the promise of profits, and hence urging governments to adopt carbon trading.7,8
Even though banks are keen to be seen as good corporate citizens (look, there’s an environmental banker!), somehow they don’t find the idea of a non-tradable carbon tax
as appealing as a trading scheme where lo-and-behold, financial middlemen can take a cut. If you are a bank who believes in the carbon crisis, taxes might “help the
planet,” but they won’t help your balance sheet. The potential involved in an entirely new fiat currency has banks and financial
institutions “wholly in bed” with a scientific theory.9 And that might be good for banks… For the rest of us, a new fiat currency in carbon gives us the chance to support a whole new layer of parasites. The 10-Trillion-Dollar Gorilla in the Kitchen Commissioner Bart Chilton, head of the energy and environmental markets advisory committee of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), has predicted that within
five years a carbon market would dwarf any of the markets his agency currently regulates: “I can see carbon trading being a $2
trillion market.”10 He ought to know. Ominously he adds: “The largest
commodity market in the world.”11 Chilton puts it into a global financial perspective: “It wouldn’t be as large as some of the financial markets — Treasury bills — but it would be larger than any physical commodity market.”12 What a relief, it wouldn’t be as big as all the loans issued to the largest financial entity on the planet—the US government—but it would be larger than iron, coal,
oil, gold, copper and uranium. Can anyone else see a new species of carbon-CEOs with 100 million dollar bonuses, all paid for, ultimately, by guess who? New Carbon Finance, a London-based investment adviser that tracks the market, predicts the carbon market will reach $3
trillion by 2020.13 Richard L. Sandor, chairman and chief executive officer of Climate Exchange Plc, which owns the world’s biggest carbon dioxide exchange in London, sees an even larger
market: “We’re going to see a worldwide market, and carbon will unambiguously be the largest non-financial commodity in the world.” He predicted trades eventually will total
$10
trillion a year.”14 In other words, carbon trading will be bigger than oil, and even the promise of a market that massive and lucrative represents a pretty considerable vested
interest. As Bart Chilton says: “This issue is too important to our economy and to our world, and we need to get this right from the get-go.” Too true. But the “get-go” starts with the science. If there is no evidence that we need to curtail carbon, there is no need to trade it. (JoNova) References 1 Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, The Library of Congress. H.R. 1424, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:6:./temp/~c1109OQL0p::. 2 Division B–Energy Improvement And Extension Act Of 2008 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:6:./temp/~c1109OQL0p:e137069:. 3 Clean Tech Advisory newsletter. Congress Extends and Approves New Alternative Energy Tax Credits. http://www.goodwinprocter.com/~/media/256D1BFFA62A4145924B772DED1BE58A.ashx. 4 Committee on Appropriations: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Conference Agreement, http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/PressSummary02-13-09.pdf. 5 Congress Approves Clean Energy Provisions of Stimulus; Consistent with Apollo Economic Recovery Act. http://apolloalliance.org/feature-articles/clean-energy-provisions-of-stimulus-are-consistent-with-apollo-economic-recovery-act/.
Table 1, page 7. 6 World Bank, State and Trends of the Carbon Market, 2009. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCARBONFINANCE/Resources/State___Trends_of_the_Carbon_Market_2009-FINAL_26_May09.pdf. 7 Banks Urging US to adopt the Trading of Emissions, James Kanter, Sept 26, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/business/26bank.html?scp=1&sq=banks%20urge%20carbon%20trading&st=cse. 8 Banks Seek Carbon Trading. New York Times, Sept 26, 2007. Today in Business. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=980CE4D61630F935A1575AC0A9619C8B63&scp=4&sq=banks%20urge%20carbon%20trading&st=cse. 9 Carbon Credits: Another Corrupt Currency? Science and Public Policy Institute. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/corrupt_currency.pdf. 10 US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Commissioner Bart Chilton: U.S. Regulators Gearing-Up for Climate Change, Chilton Says “Carbon Markets Need
Sure-Footed Oversight” http://www.cftc.gov/newsroom/generalpressreleases/2009/pr5648-09.html. 11 Carbon as a Commodity, Marianne Lavelle, Feb 24, 2009. The Centre for Public Integrity. http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/climate_change/articles/entry/1179/. 12 Bill on climate change offers hope to Wall St., The Hill.com. Brush and Snyder, May 20 2009. http://thehill.com/business–lobby/bill-on-climate-change-offers-hope-to-wall-st.-2009-05-20.html. 13 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aLM4otYnvXHQ. 14 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aLM4otYnvXHQ. Climate Money: PARTS 1- 5. 1. Climate Money Massive Funding Exposed. 2. How auditing of the Climate Industry is mostly left to volunteers. 3. How the monopolistic funding ratchet slows scientific progress. 4. Why blaming Exxon is a smoke screen to disguise the real vested
interests. 5. Climate Money: Bigger Money Moves In. (You are on this page). The full
report is an SPPI Original, 4400 word pdf. Australian Institute of Geoscientists A public debate on Climate Change: The case for and against Anthropogenic Global Warming Atmospheric
Temperature and Carbon Dioxide: Feedback or Equilibrium? R. Taylor writes in to Tips and Notes to WUWT with this. Anthony: If you shift Vostok temperatures by reasonable time lags, and use reasonable parameters for an
equilibrium between temperature and CO2, you get predicted values for CO2 that closely match CO2 measurements in Vostok. Really simple and conclusive, but I don’t think
anyone has done it before. I’m always interested in posting others research, so here it is. – Anthony For several years, the suggestion that there is positive feedback between atmospheric temperature (T) and carbon-dioxide concentration (CO2) has dominated the scientific
literature, and has become a fundamental assumption of climate science. Alternatively, the relationship between T and CO2 might be one of equilibrium. We can test models of
each type by comparison with the Vostok record, first published by Petit, et al. (1999). The Vostok record contains about 3,300 determinations of T and 280 determinations of
CO2, spanning the last 420,000 years. Figure 1 shows the Vostok record; for clarity, the dates and measurements of T have been averaged in groups of 10, and those after 0 BCE are not shown (cf. Figure 4). Figure 1: Temperature and Carbon Dioxide Inferred from the Vostok Ice-core. T ranges through about 13 °C in the record, and CO2 ranges through about 120 ppm. There are peaks and valleys of various amplitudes and durations, and changes in T
precede corresponding changes in CO2 (Mudelsee, 2001). The resolution of the record improves as measurements become more recent. The first quantitative model comparable to the Vostok record with feedback between T and CO2 seems to be that of Hogg (2008). Hogg simulated insolation and other factors
over a given interval of 500,000 years to predict values of T and CO2. Figure 2 is rescaled from Hogg’s figure 2a, so T and CO2 have approximately equal amplitude. Feedback systems typically have characteristic amplitude and period. For this model, 1.7 °C is the characteristic amplitude of T, and 100,000 years is about the
characteristic period. Adjusting the parameters of the model will change its amplitude and period, but these will be characteristic for any given set of parameters: Other
amplitudes and periods will be suppressed. Since the model assumes that CO2 has a significant effect on T, changes in CO2 happen before corresponding changes in T through a substantial portion of its cycle, viz.
the latter portion of the rises to the peaks (cf. Hogg) and through essentially all of the subsequent declines. As previously mentioned, however, the Vostok record shows that
changes in CO2 happen after corresponding changes in T. This lag is shown most clearly by large-amplitude features in the more recent portion of the record: CO2 rises
hundreds of years after T rises, and falls thousands of years after T falls. The substantially inverted lag of this feedback model confirms what is self-evident in an equilibrium model: A lagging entity can have no significant effect on a leading
entity. For example, CO2 at a given time cannot affect the level of T that existed hundreds-to-thousands of years earlier. A model of equilibrium between T and CO2 can be based on balance between temperature dependent processes that (i) release CO2 into the atmosphere and (ii) absorb it into
the surface of the earth. If the temperature dependency is simply linear, we can express our model as: CO2(t+l) = mT(t) + b where t is time, l is the length of time required for CO2 to regain equilibrium after a change in T, m is the number of units that CO2 changes for a unit change in T, and
b is the constant offset between units of CO2 and units of T. Using this equation, we can predict a value for CO2 at some time in the future from each value of T. If we give l a value of 50 years after a rise in temperature and 8000
years after a fall in temperature, m a value of 10 and b a value of 270, and average the times and predicted values of CO2 in groups of 10, we obtain the predicted values
shown in figure 3. The figure also shows the measured values of CO2 for comparison. The output of the equilibrium model is consistent with the lag, spectrum and amplitudes of the record. The correspondence between predicted and measured values of CO2
indicates that CO2 is in temperature-dependent time-lagged equilibrium, and that the temperature dependence of CO2 is essentially linear through the Vostok range. Let us turn our attention to the last 11,000 years, during which humans have disturbed the equilibrium between T and CO2. The most recent CO2 determination from the
ice-core has a date of about 340 BCE. We can add an early-industrial-era value of 290 ppm at 1800 CE and a value of 365 ppm at 2000 CE to provide figure 4. The scaling in the
figure is consistent with the T and CO2 appear to have been in equilibrium until about 3,000 BCE. Over the 5,000 years since then, CO2 has risen increasingly above its natural equilibrium. By 1,800 CE,
CO2 had risen to a level comparable to the highest in the Vostok record. During this time, T declined at a rate of 0.1 °C per thousand years, indicating again that CO2 has
no apparent effect on T. The trends of this 5,000-year interval of excess CO2 are consistent with the equilibrium model, in The last 5,000 years are trivial compared to the 420,000 years of the Vostok record; of even less significance are the last 1,200 years. However, climate science has put
great emphasis on the features of this interval, even though they fit within the noise-envelope. The “medieval warm period” spanned 800 CE to 1,200 CE; Vostok shows it
wasn’t really warm, but wasn’t really cold either. The “little ice age” followed (although average T was barely lower), and ended after the low of -1.84 °C around
1,770 CE. By the early 1800s, T was higher than it is at present, and it has fluctuated within levels typical of the last 11,000 years since then. It is remarkable that
climate hysteria should be based on noise-level changes in T over the last 200 years, which is an eye-blink in the Vostok record. It seems to be the superstition of our time. In summary, the Vostok record indicates that CO2 is in lagged equilibrium with T and that, for the range of T in Vostok, the dependency of CO2 on T is essentially linear.
Unnaturally high CO2 for the last 5,000 years has had no apparent effect on T. This empirical evidence supports a conclusion that there cannot be any significant feedback
between CO2 and T. Such feedback would cause predicted T and CO2 to show fundamental disagreement with the lag, spectrum and amplitudes evident in the Vostok record. It is impossible to say how enduring the feedback fallacy will be. However, any such model proposed in the future can be regarded as qualitative if it does not specify
lag, characteristic amplitude and period, and as speculative if it cannot be compared to the Vostok record. Accordingly, any such model can be ignored. If we may depart for a moment from objectivity, any such model should be ignored if its proponents declare that it shows polar bears are in peril, and you can save them by
painting your roof white and burning nuts and corn in your car. References Mudelsee, M., 2001, The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature and global ice volume over the past 420 ka. Quaternary Science Reviews, 20, 583-589.
Petit, J.R., Jouzel, J., Raynaud, D., Barkov, N.I., Barnola, J.-M., Basile, I., Bender, M., Chappellaz, J., Davis, M., Delaygue, G., Delmotte, M., Kotlyakov, V.M., Legrand,
M., Lipenkov, V.Y., Lorius, C., Pépin, L., Ritz, C., Saltzman, E. and Stievenard, M., 1999, Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice
core, Antarctica. Nature, 399, 429-436. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_data.html provides on-line data. Code with data: Is available upon request. (WUWT) Creating catastrophe - Destroying the factory, building the
bureaucracy The government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme has the potential to ruin Australia’s productive economies and to build an even greater bureaucracy. Even the name
of this bill should ring warning bells as carbon is the foundation of life and is not a pollutant. It is claimed that there is a scientific consensus about human-induced climate change. Consensus is a process of politics not science. There is certainly no scientific
consensus about human-induced climate change and the loudest voice does not win scientific discussions. Science is married to evidence, no matter how uncomfortable. To argue that temperature has increased 0.8ºC since 1850 is misleading because the Little Ice Age ended in 1850 and it is absolutely no surprise that temperature
increases after a long cold period. Since 1850, there has been temperature increase (1860-1880, 1910-1940, 1976-1998) and decrease (1880-1910, 1940-1976,1998-present) and the
rate of the three periods of temperature increase has been the same. A simple question does not get asked: What part of warming and cooling since 1850 is natural? The first
two warmings could not be related to human additions of CO2 from industry hence why wouldn’t the 1976-1998 warming also be due to natural processes? It is claimed that, since 1950, human additions of CO2 has been the dominant cause of warming. The scales and rates of temperature change in the past have been
far greater than when humans emitted CO2 from industry. What has caused the coolings (1940-1976 and 1998-present) or, by some tortured logic, is global cooling
this century actually global warming cunningly disguised? (Ian Plimer, Quadrant) He's a climate scientist now? Top UN climate scientist backs
ambitious CO2 cuts PARIS — Barely 100 days before the world hopes to seal a global climate treaty, the UN's top climate scientist has given his personal endorsement to hugely ambitious
goals for slashing emissions. Crikey! Pachauri Supports Goal Limiting Atmospheric CO2 to 350 ppm Apparently they haven't figured out Pachauri says different things to different audiences. When scamming for carbon funds AGW is a big deal, at home in
India "there's no science supporting AGW". Bottom line is: why would anyone care what he says? TRMM Satellite Suggests July
2009 Not a Record for Sea Surface Temperatures (UPDATED 8/26/09 at 13:30 CDT NOAA/NCDC recently announced that July 2009 set a new record high global sea surface
temperature (SST) for the month of July, just edging out July 1998. This would be quite significant since July 1998 was very warm due to a strong El Nino, whereas last month
(July, 2009) is just heading into an El Nino which has hardly gotten rolling yet. If July was indeed a record, one might wonder if we are about to see a string of record warm months if a moderate or strong El Nino does sustain itself, with that natural
warming being piled on top of the manmade global warming that the “scientific consensus” is so fond of. I started out looking at the satellite microwave SSTs from the AMSR-E instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite. Even though those data only extend back to 2002, I though it
would provide a sanity check. My last post described a significant discrepancy I found between the NOAA/NCDC “ERSST” trend and the satellite microwave SST trend (from the
AMSR-E instrument on Aqua) over the last 7 years…but with the AMSR-E giving a much warmer July 2009 anomaly than the NCDC claimed existed! The discrepancy was so large that
my sanity-check turned into me going a little insane trying to figure it out. So, since we have another satellite dataset with a longer record that would allow a direct comparison between 1998 and 2009, I decided to analyze the full record from the
TRMM Microwave Imager (TMI). The TRMM satellite covers the latitudes between 40N and 40S, so a small amount of N. Hemisphere ocean is being missed, and a large chunk of the
ocean around Antarctica will be missed as well. But since my analysis of the ERSST and AMSR-E SST data suggested the discrepancy between them was actually between these
latitudes as well, I decided that the results should give a pretty good independent check on the NOAA numbers. All of the original data that went into the averaging came from
the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) website, SSMI.com. Anomalies were computed about the mean annual cycle from data over the whole period of record. The results are shown in the following three panels. The first panel shows monthly SST anomalies since January 1998, and as can be seen July 2009 came in about 0.06 deg. C
below July 1998. At face value, this suggests that July 2009 might not have been a record. And as you can see from the first 3 weeks of August data, it looks like
this month will come in even cooler. The third and final panel in the above figure shows that a substantial fraction of the monthly SST variability from year to year is due to the Southern Oscillation (El
Nino/La Nina), and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, PDO. Each of these indices have a correlation of 0.33 with SST for monthly averages over the 40N-40S latitude band, while
their sum (taking the negative of the SOI first) is correlated at 0.39. I did not look at lag correlations, which might be higher, and it looks like some additional time
averaging would increase the correlation. I will post again when I have new information on my previously reported discrepancy between NOAA’s results and the AMSR-E results. That is still making me a little
crazy. 8/26/09 13:30 CDT UPDATE I computed the monthly global (60N to 60S latitudes) AMSR-E SST anomalies, adjusted them for the difference in annual cycles with the longer TMI record, and then plotted
the AMSR-E and TMI SST anomalies together. Even though the TMI can not measure poleward of 40 deg. latitude (N or S), we see reasonable agreement between the two products. El
Niño falters, climate models follow
From the BoM website: Summary: Mixed El Niño indicators as development slows The El Niño pattern across the Pacific has not intensified during the past fortnight. Furthermore, the coupling between the ocean and atmosphere which amplifies and
maintains El Niño events has so far failed to eventuate. The neutral SOI and sub-surface cooling are evidence of this. However, the Trade Winds are weakening over a broad area and this may promote renewed warming. In addition, leading climate models continue to predict further
development of the El Niño, although not as emphatically as a month or two back. Therefore, the odds remain strongly in favour of 2009 being recognised as an El Niño
year. (David Stockwell, Niche Modeling) Table of contents for SOI Below is the abstract of the manuscript I have been preparing. A draft is available via the contact form above if you are interested in helping out with feedback. Comments
from the mysterious Dr Jones that prompted this manuscript are listed below. Recent Data Show no Weakening of the Walker Abstract: Various authors have examined the strength of the equatorial Pacific overturning known as the Walker Circulation in both climate models and observations,
attributing a generalized weakening to anthropogenic global warming. Here we review the analysis in Power and Smith [2007] using updated Southern Oscillation Index (SOI)
and NINO sea surface temperature indices. We find no significant long-term changes in the indices, although the SOI appears to have recovered from an anomalously low period
from 1976 to 1998. The increasing sea surface temperature in the NINO4 region is not significant, nor representative of other NINO regions. The findings of a weakening
Walker circulation appear to be premature, and the corresponding climate model projections cannot be substantiated at this time. A range of empirical and theoretical
results suggest that despite the indications of climate models, changes in the strength of horizontal atmospheric transfer are quite unlikely, and should therefore be
regarded with caution. I want to acknowledge the contribution of Dr Jones, who’s comments appearing across a number of blogs including NM over a period of a few days played a part in prompting
this manuscript. (I know who Dr Jones is, but will preserve his anonymity) Here are a selection of gems: Dr Jones: You mix changes in variability and changes means. The slowing down of the
Walker circulation is an observed fact and can happen regardless of whether you get more, less or the same number of El Nino/La Nina events. A shift towards a weakened
Walker circulation is required by basic physics otherwise the tropical atmosphere will quickly rain itself out. The slow down leads to a shift towards a more negative mean
SOI which has clearly been seen seen over the last century (http://www.agu.org/journals/gl/gl0718/2007GL030…). I have shown you just one paper - there are many more - in the peer reviewed literature which deal with this very issue. Dr Jones: Under global warming evaporation increases (about) linearly in temperature
but water holding capacity increases exponentially in temperature. This relationship forces a slow down in the Walker circulation which will lead to a tendency for more
negative SOI values with warmer global temperatures. See Vol 441|4 May 2006|doi:10.1038/nature04744. Climate has long ago moved from the blind application of statistics. Your 9% mixes up correlation with causation (though even so is correct in showing that global
warming is not caused by ENSO). Dr Jones: So if summer is
hotter than winter that disproves global warming? You really have no idea do you. ANDREW REPLIES: Readers, what is scary about this troll-like response - so angrily missing the point that AP made a blatantly false claim - is that it comes from one of
the leading warming “experts” in the country. That should tell you plenty. His fury is directed not at the scaremonger, but the debunker. I appreciate when experts do visit the blogs to provide their perspective, as it always seems to send things off in an interesting direction. (David Stockwell, Niche
Modeling) 2
to 1 odds for Prof. David Barber We are well into summer and the Arctic ice extent and area are taking their annual plunge. How deep will the plunge be? David Barber of the University of
Manitoba thinks it will be very large. Just a year ago he predicted that the the North Pole would be ice free in the summer of 2008. National
Geographic reported: “We’re actually projecting this year that the North Pole may be free of ice for the first time [in history],” David Barber, of the University of Manitoba, told
National Geographic News aboard the C.C.G.S. Amundsen, a Canadian research icebreaker. It turned out that he was wrong. The 2008 summer minimum turned out to have more ice than 2007’s minimum. But he has a fallback predicton: that the Arctic
Basin will be ice free, at least part of the summer, by 2015. This is a much more profound prediction. The North Pole is just a dot on the map, but the
Arctic Basin is 4 million square kilometers surrounding the North Pole. Last December I challenged Barber on this blog to
wager over his 2015 prediction. He has not taken me up on the offer. Now I have doubled the odds for him. One week ago (8/15/09) I sent him the following
email: Dear Prof. Barber, I took great interest in your widely reported prediction that the Arctic Basin would see its first ice free summer in 2015. Last December I wrote a blog post in which I
challenged you to a wager. That post can be seen here: This post has been viewed thousands of times on both my website and on the sites of others who have re-posted it. In that post I said: “I propose a friendly wager based on this prediction. I will bet David Barber $1000(US) that the ice covering the Arctic Basin will not be gone anytime before December
31st, 2015. The bet would involve no transfer of cash between myself or Barber, but rather, the loser will pay the sum to a charitable organization designated by the
winner. Definition of terms. The Arctic Basin is defined by the regional map at Cryosphere Today. “Gone” means the Arctic Basin sea ice area is less that 100,000 square
kilometers, according to National Center for Environmental Prediction/NOAA as presented at Cryosphere Today . Charitable organizations will be agreed upon at the time the
bet is initiated. David Barber is a smart guy and evidently an expert in his field. Taking on a wager with an amateur like me should be like shooting fish in a barrel. I look forward to
reaching an agreement soon.” Perhaps you did not see that challenge online – but many other people did. I am now willing to give you two to one odds on the same wager. Are you
interested? Best Regards, That’s right. I will put $2000 dollars against Professor Barber’s $1000. It should be difficult for him to turn this down. He can put
that $2000 dollars to any good cause that he desires. If this sum is too small, perhaps we can negotiate something larger. He knows how to find me.
But I haven’t had a response yet. One more point: The Arctic Basin is about 4 million square kilometers that roughly surround the North Pole. If the Arctic Basin were ice free, then it would be a
pretty good bet that all the arctic regions south of the Arctic Basin would also be ice free. So Barber’s bet that the Arctic Basin will be ice free at
some point by 2015 is effectively like saying the entire Arctic will be ice free. Look at the AMSR-E
plots of Arctic sea ice extent below. Anybody interested in taking my wager? Why am I making this bet? Because I am concerned about climate exaggerations and the effect they have on public policy makers. It seems quite clear that David
Barber was off the mark when he predicted for 2008 “this year that the North Pole may be free of ice for the first time,” because neither the Arctic Ocean, the Arctic
Basin nor the North Pole were ice free in the summer of 2008. Same with the summer of 2009, so far. And the Arctic Basin will not be ice free by 2015 either.
(Climate Sanity) An
update on Jeff Id’s excellent sea ice video by Jeff Id As we approach the Arctic Sea Ice minimum, a lot of eyes are looking and projecting what the minimum will be. In a previous post I calculated the centroid of the sea ice
as a method for determining how the weather patterns were affecting the data. About a month ago, it seemed that the weather pattern was going to support a leveling off of the
sea ice shrink rate so that’s what I predicted and that’s what happened. The curve cut across the 2008 line and reached over until it touched the 2005 line. The shift in weather pattern is most visible in the shadows on the ice which are actually clouds blowing through. The shadows indicate the 29GhZ microwave data is
sensitive to clouds which is part of the noise in the long term signal. Below is an updated 2007 – present video. If you missed the original video which is full record length and shows the unusualness of the current weather patterns in the last 30 years, it’s linked at this post
below. That post explains the arrow vector and the source of the data. I’m going to update my prediction from this shift in weather. Now I think the ice level will dip quickly downward in relation to 2005 but will still sit above the 2008
minimums. It looks like the ice has been thinned by the recent blasts of weather from the southeast and if this pattern maintains itself the dip will be fairly strong.
Of course I’m an engineer and not a meteorologist so we’ll see. (WUWT) Why the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets
are Not Collapsing
By Cliff Ollier and Colin Pain Global warming alarmists have suggested that the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica may collapse, causing disastrous sea level rise. This idea is based on the concept
of an ice sheet sliding down an inclined plane on a base lubricated by meltwater, which is itself increasing because of global warming. In reality the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets occupy deep basins, and cannot slide down a plane. Furthermore glacial flow depends on stress (including the important
yield stress) as well as temperature, and much of the ice sheets are well below melting point. The accumulation of kilometres of undisturbed ice in cores in Greenland and
Antarctica (the same ones that are sometimes used to fuel ideas of global warming) show hundreds of thousands of years of accumulation with no melting or flow. Except around
the edges, ice sheets flow at the base, and depend on geothermal heat, not the climate at the surface. It is impossible for the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to ‘collapse’. In these days of alarmist warnings about climate warming, the ice sheets of Greenland and
Antarctica have an important role. Many papers have described their melting at the present times, and dire predictions of many metres of sea level rise are common.
Christoffersen and Hambrey published a typical paper on the Greenland ice sheet in Geology Today in May, 2006. Their model, unfortunately, includes neither the main form of the Greenland Ice Sheet, nor an understanding of how glaciers flow. They predict the behaviour of the Ice
Sheet based on melting and accumulation rates at the present day, and the concept of an ice sheet sliding down an inclined plane on a base lubricated by meltwater, which is
itself increasing because of global warming. The same misconception is present in textbooks such as The Great Ice Age (2000) by R.C.L. Wilson and others, popular magazines
such as the June 2007 issue of National Geographic, and other scientific articles such as Bamber et al. (2007), which can be regarded as a typical modelling contribution. The
idea of a glacier sliding downhill on a base lubricated by meltwater seemed a good idea when first presented by de Saussure in 1779, but a lot has been learned since then. In the present paper we shall try to show how the mechanism of glacier flow differs from this simple model, and why it is impossible for the Greenland and Antarctic Ice
Sheets to collapse. To understand the relationship between global warming and the breakdown of ice sheets it is necessary to know how ice sheets really work. Ice sheets do
not simply grow and melt in response to average global temperature. Anyone with this naïve view would have difficulty in Conclusion The global warming doomsday writers claim the ice sheets are melting catastrophically, and will cause a sudden rise in sea level of many metres. This ignores the mechanism
of glacier flow which is by creep: glaciers are not melting from the surface down, nor are they sliding down an inclined plane lubricated by meltwater. The existence of ice
over 3 km thick preserving details of past snowfall and atmospheres, used to decipher past temperature and CO2 levels, shows that the ice sheets have accumulated for hundreds
of thousands of years without melting. Variations in melting around the edges of ice sheets are no indication that they are collapsing. Indeed ‘collapse’ is impossible. Icecap Note: See this powerful video in which Gerd Leipold, the outgoing leader of
Greenpeace, admitted that his organization’s recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was “a mistake.”
The coverage has exposed hundreds of thousands of people to one small kernel of truth about global warming hysteria, but that’s just a start. All of those people, and
millions more, need to see “Not
Evil Just Wrong” to absorb the depth of the deception by radical environmentalists. See more on this here.
(Icecap) Good grief! History Can No Longer Guide Farmers, Investors: U.N. GENEVA - Climate change has made history an inaccurate guide for farmers as well as energy investors who must rely on probabilities and scenarios to make decisions, the
head of a United Nations agency said on Wednesday. Their excessive reliance on models rather than observation has made forecasting worse, so they should rely even more heavily on make-believe! Um, no: Australians heeding warnings on
water usage A massive $30 billion investment in water infrastructure projects has made Australia a world leader in water efficiency, the peak body representing the urban water
industry says. Major domestic water use reductions occurred because large cities had bans on garden watering and severe restrictions in place. They did this because
successive State Governments have failed to increase infrastructure and water impoundments to suit increasing urban populations. People did not voluntarily allow their
gardens to die any more than they were in rapturous joy about leaving toilets unflushed and limiting showering. "Climate change"? Doesn't rate a mention by anyone
but politicians looking for excuses -- and they are not believed. Warming May have Peaked. Has Western Civilization Peaked with It?
By Joseph D’Aleo The only constant in nature is change. We have been able to reconstruct the past using proxy data like fossils, isotopes, polar and glacial ice. They tell us our climate
has varied considerably over the last 450 thousand years. The long glaciations (typically 100,000 years) are tied to variations in the sun-earth orbital parameters. They are
followed by periods of 10-15,000 years of warmer
interglacials. During the interglacials, global temperatures rise 18F but vary perhaps 2 degrees in millenium length ups and downs. Every great civiilization in history has reached its
peak during the warm periods during the interglacials periods. Civilizations (Eqyptian, Minoan, Roman) thrived in the warm periods as crops could be grown more successfully
in more places allowing for other societal advancement pursuits. They are tied to peaks
in solar activity. They have been followed by cooling periods (and civilization declines) as solar activity declined (as it did in what we call the little ice age or
Maunder Minimum) with crop failures, famines and migrations. See these two articles that suggest we may have reached our latest climate nadir in the Grand Solar Maximum’s Climate Optimum of the late 20th Century. The sun continues
to show signs of going into a slumber like it did 200 or 400 years ago. A civilization decline may have also started and this set of global leaders and the UN if we don’t
stop them will only make it accelerate down. For a time, the more opportunistic countries like China and India may advance but climate might have final say there too. See
these two relevant stories for more. Lawrence
Solomon: New Ice Age could be coming Earth could soon be entering a new Ice Age, according to scientists at Oregon State University and other institutions, in a study to b e released this week by Science
magazine. “Sometime around now, scientists say, the Earth should be changing from a long interglacial period that has lasted the past 10,000 years and shifting back towards
conditions that will ultimately lead to another ice age - unless some other forces stop or slow it,” states a release from Oregon State University. The Science study refutes claims by some scientists that carbon dioxide was an important factor in ending the last ice Age. It concludes that wobbles in Earth’s rotation
first led global ice levels “to reach their peak about 26,000 years ago, stabilize for 7,000 years and then begin melting 19,000 years ago, eventually bringing to an end
the last ice age. “The melting was first caused by more solar radiation, not changes in carbon dioxide levels or ocean temperatures, as some scientists have suggested in recent years.” Death of a Civilization by David Deming Over the past several years we have learned that small groups of people can engage in mass suicide. In 1978, 918 members of the Peoples’ Temple led by Jim Jones perished
after drinking poisoned koolaid. In 1997, 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate cult died after drugging themselves and tieing plastic bags around their heads. Unfortunately,
history also demonstrates that it is possible for an entire civilization to commit suicide by intentionally destroying the means of its subsistence. In the early nineteenth century, the British colonized Southeast Africa. The native Xhosa resisted, but suffered repeated and humiliating defeats at the hands of British
military forces. The Xhosa lost their independence and their native land became an English colony. The British adopted a policy of westernizing the Xhosa. They were to be
converted to Christianity, and their native culture and religion was to be wiped out. Under the stress of being confronted by a superior and irresistible technology, the
Xhosa developed feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. In this climate, a prophet appeared. Read the details of how this prophet led to the destruction of the Xhosa
civilization in which over 50,000 people starved to death in this story. Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the late eighteenth century, Europe and North America have enjoyed the greatest prosperity ever known on earth. Life
expectancy has doubled. In a little more than two hundred years, every objective measure of human welfare has increased more than in all of previous human history. But Western Civilization is coasting on an impetus provided by our ancestors. There is scarcely anyone alive in Europe or America today who believes in the superiority of
Western society. Guilt and shame hang around our necks like millstones, dragging our emasculated culture to the verge of self-immolation. Whatever faults the British
Empire-builders may have had, they were certain of themselves. Our forefathers built a technological civilization based on energy provided by carbon-based fossil fuels. Without the inexpensive and reliable energy provided by coal,
oil, and gas, our civilization would quickly collapse. The prophets of global warming now want us to do precisely that. Like the prophet Mhlakaza, Al Gore promises that if we stop using carbon-based energy, new energy technologies will magically appear. The laws of physics and chemistry
will be repealed by political will power. We will achieve prosperity by destroying the very means by which prosperity is created. While Western Civilization sits confused, crippled with self-doubt and guilt, the Chinese are rapidly building an energy-intensive technological civilization. They have
2,000 coal-fired power plants, and are currently constructing new ones at the rate of one a week. In China, more people believe in free-market economics than in the US. Our
Asian friends are about to be nominated by history as the new torchbearers of human progress. (Icecap) Warming
could cause tilt in Earth’s axis Excerpts from the New Scientist Warming oceans could cause Earth’s axis to tilt in the coming century, a new study suggests. The effect was previously thought to be negligible, but researchers now say
the shift will be large enough that it should be taken into account when interpreting how the Earth wobbles. The Earth spins on an axis that is tilted some 23.5° from the vertical. But this position is far from constant – the planet’s axis is constantly shifting in response
to changes in the distribution of mass around the Earth. “The Earth is like a spinning top, and if you put more mass on one side or other, the axis of rotation is going to
shift slightly,” says Felix Landerer of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena,
California. The influx of fresh water from shrinking ice sheets also causes the planet to pitch over. Landerer and colleagues estimate that the melting of Greenland’s ice is already
causing Earth’s axis to tilt at an annual rate of about 2.6 centimetres – and that rate may increase significantly in the coming years. Now, they calculate that oceans warmed by the rise in greenhouse gases can also cause the Earth to tilt – a conclusion that runs counter to older models, which suggested
that ocean expansion would not create a large shift in the distribution of the Earth’s mass. … The team found that as the oceans warm and expand, more water will be pushed up and onto the Earth’s shallower ocean shelves. Over the next century, the subtle effect is
expected to cause the northern pole of Earth’s spin axis to shift by roughly 1.5 centimetres per year in the direction of Alaska and Hawaii. The effect is relatively small. “The pole’s not going to drift away in a crazy manner,” Landerer notes, adding that it shouldn’t induce any unfortunate feedback
in Earth’s climate. … And climate change can also affect the Earth’s spin. Previously, Landerer and colleagues showed that global warming would cause Earth’s mass to be redistributed
towards higher latitudes. Journal reference: Geophysical Research Letters (in press) full story here (WUWT) Nicole Mölders has a very important new research paper that is in press. This paper illustrates the issue of what is an adequate spatial sampling of surface climate
variables, including the 2m temperatures. This is yet another illustration of the inadequacy of the use of 2m temperature trends over land, as applied by NCDC, GISS and CRU to construct a
multi-decadal global average surface temperature trend. As we have shown in a number of peer-reviewed research papers, this temperature has a diverse set of biases and uncertainties which make it quantitatively misleading
to use as a diagnostic of global warming, and even to monitor regionally averaged temperature anomalies (e.g. see,
see, see and see). The paper is PaiMazumder D. And N. Mölders, 2009: Theoretical assessment of uncertainty in regional averages due to network density and design. Journal of Applied Meteorology and
Climatology. (in press). [the paper will appear here, as soon as the AMS posts] The abstract reads “Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model simulations are performed over Russia for July and December 2005, 2006 and 2007 to create a “dataset” to assess the
impact of network density and design on regional averages. Based on the values at all WRF grid-points regional averages for various quantities are calculated for 2.8o X 2.8o
areas as the “reference”. Regional averages determined based on 40 artificial networks and 411 “sites” that correspond to the locations of a real network, are
compared with the reference regional averages. The 40 networks encompass ten networks of 500, 400, 200, or 100 different randomly taken WRF-grid-points as “sites”. “The real network’s site distribution misrepresents the landscape. This misrepresentation leads to errors in regional averages that show geographical and temporal
trends for most quantities: errors are lower over shores of large lakes than coasts and lowest over flatland followed by low and high mountain ranges; offsets in timing occur
during frontal passages when several sites are passed at nearly the same time. Generally, the real network underestimates regional averages of sea-level pressure, wind-speed,
and precipitation over Russia up to 4.8 hPa (4.8 hPa), 0.7 m/s (0.5 m/s), and 0.2 mm/ d (0.5 mm/d), and overestimates regional averages of 2-m temperature, downward shortwave
radiation and soil-temperature over Russia up to 1.9K (1.4K), 19Wm-2 , (14Wm-2 ), and 1.5K (1.8K) in July (December). The low density of the ten 100-sites-networks causes
difficulties for sea-level pressure. Regional averages obtained from the 30 networks with 200 or more randomly distributed sites represent the reference regional averages,
trends and variability for all quantities well.” The paper also writes “In the natural landscape differences between the regional averages derived from the real network and the true regional averages may be even greater than in our
theoretical study because the real network was designed for agricultural purposes, i.e. the real network represents the fertile soils within the 2.8o X 2.8o areas.
Consequently, it may be even more biased to a soil-type than in the simplified WRF-created landscape assumed in this case study.” (Climate Science) Accomplices in deceit - Launching The Climate Caper It’s a privilege to be asked to launch this important book. My mind goes back to the launching of Bill Kininmonth’s book Climate Change: A Natural Hazard here at 401 Collins Street, in 2004, by John Zillman. That launch
was written up in The Age by Melissa Fyfe, then The Age’s environmental reporter. Although she was actually in attendance, her report suggested otherwise. More recently we had Ian Plimer’s launch at the Windsor, with more than 300 people in attendance. The Age did not report on that event. In Perth, Dennis Jensen launched David Archibald’s Solar Cycle 24. That well-attended event did get a brief run in the Perth media. Now we have The Climate Caper and I’ll lay odds on that The Age will not report on this event. [Ed: They didn't.] (Hugh Morgan, Quadrant) Oh boy... Methodologies
Tame Forest Carbon Jungle As forests convert carbon dioxide in the air to carbon stored in woods, leaves and roots, a range of organizations are, in turn, working to convert forests into carbon
offsets. The 'exchange rate' of this conversion is determined by specific standards' methodologies — technical, but critical, tools shaping the rules of the game. (Michael
J. Coren, Ecosystem Marketplace) Perfect Storm 2030: Public attitudes This post is part of the BBC's Perfect Storm 2030 coverage, where correspondents explore the forecast by UK chief scientist John Beddington, of a "perfect storm"
of food, water and energy shortages in 2030. Good grief! That means half of people have been taken in by the absurd claims that the "science is settled". Perhaps they caused a lot of
confusion in the survey by ambiguously asking if people believed scientists agreed human activities affect climate in varying ways and to varying degree at local levels? Plenty of Vacancy
for Global Warming Fearmongering Is global warming losing its mojo? Hotel managers face 20,000 cancellations at the upcoming climate conference in Copenhagen, see story here.
Here’s this week’s cartoon: (Chilling Effect) They really do inhabit fantasy worlds... Energy, Man, Machine and
the Climate Crisis Who would have predicted the world of science fiction films would prove so prophetic? Our planet is being over-run by machines and we need people like Arnold
Schwarzenegger to save us More stupid symbolism: Lights go out on 100-watt bulbs OLD-style 100-watt light bulbs will be banned in Europe's shops from next week in favour of new energy-saving models, with consumer groups giving the move a guarded
welcome. WWF challenges EU ministers to revisit
CO2 standards WWF wrote to the Swedish EU Presidency on Friday (21 August) to urge governments to modify a "legally invalid" provision contained in draft rules on industrial
pollution, which prevents member states from introducing CO2 emission standards. Big problem for them there -- restricting carbon dioxide is anti-environment by virtue of limiting an essential trace gas underpinning the global food
web. Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal warns that coming economic recovery means tighter oil supplies and higher prices. He's right to be appalled at the White House's inability to
see the obvious. The costs of power - The Great Innovator or Terminator– the
Federal Government? Georges Pompidou when president of France counselled his prime minister, Giscard d’Estaing that the three great dangers for a politician were wine, women and
technologists. It is a pity that our Governor General may not have advised our Prime Minister of the modern danger of technologists. Yet parliament has just approved a target of 20 percent of our energy to come from expensive or developmental renewable energy sources by 2020. This is being put in place
before an ETS with the argument that these changes should be made now as carbon taxing will be slow to shift energy prices. What are the consequences for electrical energy,
the most pervasive energy source in society? (Tom Quirk, Quadrant) Utility Wants To Deploy Largest Grid Battery Ever SAN FRANCISCO - Southern California Edison said on Wednesday it is seeking a U.S. grant to store wind power in the largest-ever grid storage battery, to be built by A123
Systems. Over the last three decades, China’s energy consumption has soared. But as is usually the case with developing countries, that energy use was coupled with low
efficiency. August 26, 2009
Asia way short of vaccine to fight swine flu: WHO HONG KONG - Asia is going to be way short of the new H1N1 vaccine to fight swine flu when the next surge of infections hits during the cold season this year, a spokesman
for the World Health Organization said on Tuesday. Trying every scare: Male fertility linked to obesity: study Men have known for some time that putting on weight puts them at risk of a number of diseases. But now for the first time there is evidence that an expanding girth can
contract a man's ability to have children. (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Extreme obesity can shorten people's lives by 12 years Extremely obese people — those who are 80 or more pounds over a normal weight — live three to 12 fewer years than their normal-weight peers, a new study shows. Obesity linked to dementia, Alzheimer's by Pitt researchers Overweight elderly people might be at greater risk for dementia, Alzheimer's disease and other cognition-impairing conditions than their slimmer counterparts, University
of Pittsburgh researchers said today. Low-carb diet
damages arteries, study shows Low-carbohydrate diets may damage arteries and increase the risk of heart attacks, research suggests. Scientists believe cutting carbs on Atkins-style diets impairs the
regrowth and repair of blood vessels. (John von Radowitz, Press Association) Why exercise might not make you thin - Re-programming
body fat is the key to weight loss, not working out, says Richard Gray. Fat is a massive problem. Really massive. Nearly 60 per cent of the country’s adult population is now overweight, while one in 10 children are so obese by the time they
start school that their health is deemed to be at risk. All told, weight problems are estimated to cost the economy £16 billion a year – on top of the facts that
ambulances have to be fitted with reinforced heavy-lifting equipment to get patients into the vehicles and that a growing number of soldiers are, according to Army
commanders, too fat to fight. Virus blamed for half of penile cancers LONDON - A sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer is also to blame for half of all cases of cancer of the penis, Spanish researchers said on Tuesday. Shot! Missouri bans wrong plastic from rivers JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- A law taking effect this week could make criminals out of those who bring Tupperware onto many Missouri rivers. BRITAIN DONATING MILLIONS FOR
BIOTECH CROPS (but not in Britain) CHURCHVILLE, VA—Britain has pledged more than US$150 million over the next five years to support high-tech food crops for the world’s poorest countries—primarily
through genetic engineering. Experts Identify Fungus-Resistant Gene In Rice HONG KONG - Researchers in Japan have identified a gene that allows rice plants to fight off a fungal disease called blast, which may open the way for farmers to cultivate
hardier plants. In the make-believe realm, "we're saved," although that isn't the impression they want to give: Avoiding
the 2°C threshold To have a 90% chance of keeping temperature rise below 2°C – a limit widely accepted as likely to prevent dangerous climate change – cumulative carbon-dioxide
emissions for the period 2000–2500 must remain below a median estimate of 170 petagrams of carbon. Depending on the climate sensitivity and carbon-cycle feedback, that
figure could range from –220 petagrams to 700 petagrams, say researchers in Canada. (ERW) Note they are working in carbon and not carbon dioxide. Climate Bill Is Built On 'Clean Coal' Myths The fate of the Waxman-Markey climate bill rests upon two myths about so-called "clean coal." The first is that coal, as used today in the U.S., is a dirty fuel.
The other is that coal can be made "clean" by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants and storing them underground in geologic repositories. Just another little thing for CCS proponents to worry about: Thousands
at risk from Congo lake gas KINSHASA - Gases trapped below the surface of a lake in eastern Congo could explode any day, threatening the lives of tens of thousands of locals, the country's
environment minister warned on Tuesday. How GE puts the government to work
for GE "The intersection between GE's interests and government action is clearer than ever," General Electric Vice Chairman John G. Rice wrote in an Aug. 19 e-mail to
colleagues. Chamber Threatens
Lawsuit if EPA Rejects Climate Science 'Trial' The nation's largest business group is asking U.S. EPA to hold a public debate on climate change science -- or face litigation -- as the agency prepares to regulate
greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Comment On News
Article “U.S. Chamber of Commerce Seeks Trial On Global Warming” There was a news article in the LA times on August 25 2009 by Jim Tankersley entitled “U.S.
Chamber of Commerce seeks trial on global warming“. The article has the text “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, trying to ward off potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations, is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold a rare
public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change.” I do not know if a “trial” is effective, however, it is certainly clear that the EPA ruling is scientifically very flawed, as I wrote in a series of posts: Republican Comment On EPA Endangerment Findings Brief
Overview Of Several Climate Science Research Findings As I have written in the last weblog above ““In conclusion, the EPA Endangerment findings is the culmination of a several year effort for a small group of climate scientists and others to use their
positions as lead authors on the IPCC, CCSP and NRC reports to promote a political agenda. Now that their efforts have reached the federal policy decision level, Climate Science urges that there be an independent commission of climate scientists who
can evaluate the assement process that led to the EPA findings as well as the climate science upon which it is constructed. “ The Chamber of Commerce statement further documents that independent assessments of the EPA findings are required.
(Climate Science) Lawrence Solomon: New
Ice Age could be coming Earth could soon be entering a new Ice Age, according to scientists at Oregon State University and other institutions, in a study to b e released this week by Science
magazine. Does Carbon Labeling Confuse Consumers? Tesco, a British supermarket chain, began festooning cartons of milk this month with information on the carbon dioxide emissions associated with the production,
processing, distribution and and use of each pint. Are you selling the carbon content? Then why list some fictitious version of it (no one claims the listed amount can be found in the package). We wish: Big Deficits Could Hurt Obama on Health Care
& Energy If anyone was surprised that President Obama took time away from his summer vacation to announce that he’ll keep Ben Bernanke on as chairman of the Federal Reserve
Board, the benefit of that scheduling became clear a few hours later. Bernanke’s reappointment drew at much of the attention away from the horrendous news on the deficit
front. However: U.S. Budget Update Stands Pat On CO2 Permit Auction WASHINGTON - The White House budget update released on Tuesday still reflects a controversial Obama administration plan to combat global warming by auctioning all permits
to emit greenhouse gases even though Congress has said it will give away a substantial portion to industry. Today’s
Calamity: Will Cap and Trade Save the Planet? Last week, in our inaugural Cap and Trade Calamities, we laid out the exorbitant costs the Waxman-Markey cap and tax bill would impose on your family. But if it saves the
planet, isn’t it all worth it? The fact is, our planet is not in the immediate danger environmental activists purport it to be, and even if it were, Waxman-Markey would not
do a thing to stop it. When the benefits of cap and trade are measured against the costs, the costs significantly
outweigh the negligible benefits. We break down the exorbitant costs of Waxman-Markey’s imposed carbon emissions reductions here.
Let’s dissect the benefits. According to a calculation by climatologist Chip Knappenberger, the temperature reduction by 2100 if we enacted the
Waxman-Markey cap and tax bill would be between 0.1 and 0.2 degrees Celsius by 2100. Even the Obama Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency admitted
that U.S. action alone would not change world carbon dioxide emissions. One big reason that a bill with such sweeping economic changes would have no substantial environmental impact is because China, which emits more carbon than the U.S. and
is increasing their emissions levels much faster, will not cut back. China, as well as India and other
fast developing nations, have made clear that they will never hamper their own growth with global warming measures like Waxman-Markey. Increasing emissions is a sign of
industrial growth and no developing country wants to stunt that growth. Unfortunately, some in Congress don’t care that the extraordinary perils of carbon dioxide regulation for the American economy come with little, if any, environmental
benefit. They are siding with radical environmentalists who are willing to pay anything to “save the planet,” even when the benefit is barely noticeable. On Thursday, we’ll explain how the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill, in typical government fashion, promises more than it can deliver. You can sign up to receive Cap and Trade Calamities where we point out the problematic provisions in the Waxman-Markey bill, as well as our Energy & Environment
newsletter, here. (The Foundry) Lawrence Solomon: Carbon Baron
Gore - Who will be the Robber Barons of the 21st century? Al Gore is poised to become the first climate billionaire At the turn of the 20th century, a period famous for its Robber Barons, John D. Rockefeller was making his fortune in oil, Andrew Carnegie in steel, Cornelius Vanderbilt
in railroads and J.P Morgan in finance. Many predict that the history books of the future, when listing the legendary fortunes made at the turn of the 21st century, will
place Al Gore at the top of the list, as the first great Carbon Baron. (Financial Post) French Minister Sees Carbon Tax In 2010 Budget PARIS - France's proposed carbon tax is expected to be included in the 2010 budget but will probably be set below the 32 euros per metric ton level recommended by a
special advisory panel, Budget Minister Eric Woerth said on Tuesday. AFBF:
Grassroots Voices Can Help Defeat Climate Change Bill This summer’s raucous town hall meetings on national health care reform have brought high drama, while illustrating the considerable uneasiness of many Americans on the
subject. Less theatrical, but equally important, are the grassroots efforts of Farm Bureau members on the Waxman-Markey climate change bill passed by the House that awaits
Senate action. Talk about target fixation: Big biz seen short on emissions cuts The world's largest businesses are aiming to achieve only about half the recommended goal for greenhouse gas reductions, according to a study released Tuesday by the
Carbon Disclosure Project. A deal in Copenhagen should keep Kyoto's weak enforcement There is nothing to stop a country giving up on tackling climate change — a strict regime would make countries walk away (Anthony Hobley and Tim Baines, The Guardian) Actually no one should walk away from Kyoto -- run, you fools, run! Deepak Lal: Spiking the road to Copenhagen The Western obsession with curbing carbon emissions is wicked and also economically foolish, says Deepak Lal Asia hits back on climate change China and India have closed ranks on climate change, blaming developed countries for the lack of progress towards a deal. Dead wrong: Turnbull flays Nats over ETS rejection MALCOLM Turnbull has accused the Nationals of letting down businesses by condemning his negotiations with Labor over possible amendments to its planned carbon emissions
trading scheme. What is the point of an opposition that simply votes with the government out of fear? The Nationals have got it right, the ETS is a horrendous tax on
Australia with no prospect of ever delivering any value. Better: Ron Boswell calls on firms to bar ETS A SENIOR Nationals senator has called on corporate Australia to join his party's rebellion against carbon emissions trading in direct defiance of the Liberals. Much better: Business can save us from ETS disaster HOW many Greens does it take to change a light bulb? The answer is none because the Greens want to put all the lights out. During Senate debate last week on the renewable
energy legislation, Australian Greens senator Christine Milne mentioned the objective of a zero-carbon economy. The extreme nature of this vision is the ultimate driver in
the emissions trading scheme debate. The most significant political achievement this century is the ability of extremist Green policies to dictate the agenda of otherwise
mainstream governments. Possibly even better still: Senator
Barnaby Joyce - Transcript of Speech Nationals Fed Council 2009 Colleagues. I was hoping we could do it a bit later on because everybody leaves and you can say whatever you like. That’s very entertaining and very dangerous. The message is getting through: BUSINESS
GETS BUSY Nationals senator Ron Boswell calls on Australian industry to defend itself against
Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scam:
It is in the hands of business now: whether it wants to see Australian industry eaten away inch by inch through a Senate-controlled ETS or whether it will stand firm
against it. If business fails to hold the line that enabled us to block the ETS the first time, then the Labor-Greens alliance will carve up its investments. The Nationals are not alone on this. We have many Liberals on side. A strong and public show of leadership from business will seal the fate of the ETS. More strength to them. And in the US:
The nation’s largest business lobby wants to put the science of global warming on trial. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, trying to ward off potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations, is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold a rare
public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change. Chamber officials say it would be “the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century”—complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule,
essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect. “It would be evolution versus creationism,” said William Kovacs, the chamber’s senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. “It
would be the science of climate change on trial.” Bring. It. On. Meanwhile, greenoid Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull keeps trying to lure business to the dumb
side:
Emboldened by a lift in his Newspoll ratings, Mr Turnbull challenged colleagues today, telling a business breakfast in Melbourne: “Those people who say an emissions
trading scheme is an anathema must have been asleep during the last term of the Howard government. “Not only did we establish an emissions trading scheme, which is a market-based way of putting a price on carbon, we commenced legislating for it. It remains our
policy.” And hasn’t it worked out well. Your party lost the last election, Malcolm. And you’ll lose the next one. UPDATE. Nationals senator Barnaby Joyce:
“I can tell you the mood is changing,” the senator told this column about Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme. “I am now getting hundreds of emails a day
from people. They hate this [ETS] policy. They just hate it. It was marvellous when it was a thought bubble but people are saying, ‘We can hardly afford to live in our
home.’ People see this as madness. And they actually get the gist of it. They know it’s a new tax and they are asking: ‘How does putting another new tax on me change
the temperature of the globe?’ “And the more they think about it, the madder they get. In the coal industry they know it’s a new tax that will cost their jobs. In rural Australia they know
it’s a new tax that will send them broke.” Rural Australia’s population isn’t as dense as you’ll find in the inner cities. (Tim Blair blog) Coastal areas face planning upheaval COASTAL development in Queensland faces its biggest upheaval in decades with the State Government set to seize planning control to protect residents from the impacts of
climate change. Building with cyclones in mind is quite rational, given we live in the cyclone belt. Destroying their credibility with gorebull warming hand waving,
however, is not. ‘Peak Oil’ Is a Waste of Energy REMEMBER “peak oil”? It’s the theory that geological scarcity will at some point make it impossible for global petroleum production to avoid falling, heralding the
end of the oil age and, potentially, economic catastrophe. Well, just when we thought that the collapse in oil prices since last summer had put an end to such talk, along
comes Fatih Birol, the top economist at the International Energy Agency, to insist that we’ll reach the peak moment in 10 years, a decade sooner than most previous
predictions (although a few ardent pessimists believe the moment of no return has already come and gone). Scientifically Illiterate and Innumerate: Why Americans Are So Easily Bamboozled About Energy Two years ago, I interviewed Vaclav Smil, the prolific author and energy thinker. I asked Smil, a distinguished professor at the University of Manitoba, why Americans are
so easily swayed by politicians and others when it comes to energy matters. His response: scientific illiteracy and innumeracy. “Without any physical, chemical, and
biological fundamentals, and with equally poor understanding of basic economic forces, it is no wonder that people will believe anything,” he told me. (Robert Bryce, Energy
Tribune) Cap-And-Trade Is Refinery Killer A new study shows that Waxman-Markey will increase prices at the pump, deepen our dependence on foreign oil and shred our ability to turn crude into gasoline. Even
fuel-efficient cars will still need fuel. (IBD) Ed. Note: This article first appeared on Geoffrey Styles' blog, Energy Outlook. How right he is: Saudi Blasts American Energy
Policy The question of American “energy independence” clearly rankles officials in Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest exporter of crude oil, who seem increasingly puzzled by
the energy policy of the United States, the world’s biggest oil consumer. U.S. Power Bills Down, But Not For Long NEW YORK - Many Americans have been getting a break on their electricity bills during the recession, but they should not expect the relief to last long as power demand
recovers and climate regulations loom. Generator supplier Aggreko looks set to keep on running At the Department of Energy and Climate Change, civil servants are wringing their hands about the looming energy shortage, but at Aggreko, Rupert Soames, the chief
executive, is rubbing his palms in anticipation of windfall profits. In June, Babcock & Wilcox, a division of Houston-based McDermott International, announced plans to seek federal licensing for a 125-megawatt nuclear reactor that the
company calls mPower. The company’s move provides yet more intrigue to the modular reactor business. Two other US companies, Hyperion Power Generation and NuScale Power
Inc., also intend to produce modular reactors. (Another firm, Galvin Energy, is seeking funding). The key difference among the companies is that Hyperion and NuScale are
venture capital-backed startups. Babcock & Wilcox is backed by McDermott, whose 2008 revenues totaled $6.5 billion. Furthermore, Babcock & Wilcox has a long history
of manufacturing components for the power sector. In 1882, when Thomas Edison established the first central power plant in the US, on Pearl Street in Manhattan, he relied on
boilers made by Babcock & Wilcox. German Wind Power Moves Further Out To Sea. FRANKFURT - A pioneering German wind power plant's new high-tech equipment, to capture higher winds further offshore and for longer periods, is exciting the industry. August 25, 2009
An
interview with anti-health nanny Tom Naughton, part 2 Last Week I had the pleasure of interviewing Tom Naughton. Naughton is a health writer, filmmaker, and comedian who earlier this year released a documentary called Fat
head, an entertaining and informative piece of cinema guaranteed to irritate the Morgan Spurlocks of the world. Part 1 of our interview appeared here on Thursday. Today Tom
answers a few more questions about his documentary, discussing the health and science issues raised in Fat Head as well as the relationship between science and government.
(Cameron English, Examiner) Unsafe urban neighborhoods linked to teen weight NEW YORK - Living in an urban neighborhood that feels unsafe may be a factor in a teen's risk for being overweight, hints a study of public high school students in Boston,
Massachusetts. FDA Looking Into Liver Problems With Obesity
Drug Orlistat The Food and Drug Administration just announced that is has opened an investigation into reports of liver failure, liver disease, and related problems in people taking the
obesity drug orlistat. U.S. heart group draws hard line on sugar intake CHICAGO, Aug 24 - Americans need to cut back dramatically on sugar consumption, the American Heart Association said on Monday in a recommendation that is likely to rile
food and beverage companies. Sugar guidelines not so sweet for soft drink makers CHICAGO - New American Heart Association sugar guidelines released on Monday may come as an especially hard blow to soft drink makers, who were singled out as the top
source of "discretionary" sugar calories. According to the Nude Socialist: Expanding
waistlines may cause shrinking brains BRAIN regions key to cognition are smaller in older people who are obese compared with their leaner peers, making their brains look up to 16 years older than their true
age. As brain shrinkage is linked to dementia, this adds weight to the suspicion that piling on the pounds may up a person's risk of the brain condition. (New Scientist) but wait (weight?) Wider Waist Boosts Asthma Risk MONDAY, Aug. 24 -- Women with extra fat around their waists are more likely to develop asthma, even if they aren't overweight, a new study finds. there's more: Link between erectile dysfunction and obesity explored in
obesity and weight management New Rochelle, NY, August 24, 2009—Obese men are at increased risk for erectile dysfunction (ED), likely caused by atherosclerosis-related hypertension and cardiovascular
disease, as well as hormonal changes associated with obesity, as described in a timely article published in Obesity and Weight Management, a journalzine published by Mary Ann
Liebert, Inc. ( www.liebertpub.com ). The article is available free online at www.liebertpub.com/owm Whole Foods' CEO weighed in on health care, just as our president urged. But instead of engaging him in civil discussion, angry leftists boycotted his stores. They've
succeeded only in chilling debate. Democrats may duck health care foes in US Senate WASHINGTON - U.S. Democrats may sidestep Republican opposition to a sweeping healthcare overhaul by using Senate rules to pass some reform measures, a leading senator said
on Sunday. by Amy Ridenour and Ryan Balis. Introduction by Mark R. Levin, author of Liberty and Tryanny: A Conservative Manifesto (National Center) H1N1 flu 'serious health threat' to U.S.-report OAK BLUFFS, Mass. - The H1N1 flu poses a serious health threat to the United States, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology said in a report
released on Monday. In a four-part series on the New York Times Economix blog, Harvard economist Edward Glaeser
scrutinized high-speed rail and concluded that the benefits are overwhelmed by the costs. After making generous assumptions regarding the costs,
user benefits, environmental
benefits, and effects on urban development,
Glaeser concludes that all the benefits of high-speed rail would still be less than half the costs. As Washington Post writer Robert Samuelson observes,
the Obama administration’s vision of high-speed rail is “a mirage. The costs of high-speed rail would be huge, and the public benefits meager.” Yet even Samuelson falls
victim to the common assumption that high-speed rail “works in Europe and Asia” because population densities in those places are higher than in the United States. The truth is that high-speed rail doesn’t work in Europe or Asia either. Japan and France have both spent about as much on high-speed rail as they have on their
intercity freeway systems, yet the average residents of those countries travel by car 10 to 20 times as much as they travel by high-speed rail. They also fly domestically
more than they take high-speed rail. While the highways and airlines pay for themselves out of gas taxes and other user fees, high-speed rail is heavily subsidized and serves
only a tiny urban elite. Obama uses the fact that France, Japan, and a few other countries are racing one another to have the fastest high-speed trains to argue that we need to join the race.
That’s like saying we need to spend billions subsidizing buggy whip or horse collar manufacturers or some third-world country will beat us in those technologies. The fact
is that high-speed trains will never be as fast as flying on long trips and never be as convenient as driving on short trips, and there is no medium-length trip in which
high-speed rail can compete without heavy subsidies. The rail advocates go ballistic whenever anyone questions their fantasies, mostly engaging in ad
hominem attacks (”you must be paid by the oil companies!”) or accusing skeptics of lying
about rail. The reality is that Glaeser (like me) “almost always prefer trains to driving.” If anything, he was too generous in many of his assumptions about high-speed
rail. For example, Glaeser built his case around a hypothetical high-speed line between Dallas-Ft. Worth and Houston, the nation’s fifth- and sixth-largest urban areas which
together house close to 10 million people and are located about 240 miles apart, supposedly an ideal distance for high-speed trains. If the numbers don’t work for this
market, how are they going to work for Eugene-Seattle, Tulsa-Oklahoma City, New Orleans-Mobile, St. Louis-Kansas City, or any of the other much smaller city pairs in the
Obama high-speed rail plan? The rail nuts don’t want to hear Glaeser’s (or Cato’s) numbers because they fantasize
the Field of Dreams “build it and they will come” myth; that building rail will “create the demand for the rail lines.” That may have been true in nineteenth-century
America, when no alternative forms of transportation could compete with rail. But it wasn’t true in twentieth-century France or Japan (where heavily subsidized high-speed
rail carries only 4 to 6 percent of passenger travel), and it won’t be true in twenty-first-century America. Building high-speed rail will be like standing in the chilly vestibule of an Amtrak train in mid-winter Chicago and burning million-dollar bills to keep warm. But that’s
what happens when you base your transportation policies on a slogan from a Kevin Costner movie rather than on real data. (Randal O'Toole, Cato at liberty) Green and Eco-Friendly... Prove It! Environmentalists have been coaxing us for years to donate to their eco-nonprofits, and to pay more for green products and services. There has been a massive global
expansion in green marketing. Green marketers have developed slick schemes to sell an avalanche of green and eco-friendly products. These marketing tactics emphasize an
immediate and emotionally-compelling environmental benefit -- often when the claimed benefit is unproven. The US Federal Trade Commission regulates claims made in
advertisements for all products and services -- including environmental product and service advertisements. Locking up resources in case people might benefit: A
Real Fish Story Here is an unusual fish story. And a positive one. Pro-coal forum speaker opposes clean-coal technology CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Early next month, the state Chamber of Commerce will host a special forum called "Preserving West Virginia's Coal Industry" as part of its
annual Business Summit at The Greenbrier. Hmm... the only "solution" they seem to be talking about is aqueous MEA (mono-ethanol amine). Can't be talking about a "solution" in
the sense of problem solving since a complete, magical cessation of U.S. coal-fired carbon dioxide emissions by the end of next year could only result in the world being
about one-tenth of one degree cooler at end of century and no one could tell the difference. Their little exercise in futility would take 13,000 years to "save"
one part per million atmospheric carbon dioxide. Flat out waste of money and a biosphere resource at the same time: Federal
Carbon Storage Grants Awarded The Department of Energy announced $27.6 million in research grants on Monday, for projects intended to simulate the underground storage of carbon dioxide. U.S. Chamber of Commerce seeks trial on
global warming - The business lobby, hoping to fend off potentially sweeping emission limits, wants the EPA to hold a 'Scopes'-like hearing on the evidence that climate
change is man-made. The nation's largest business lobby wants to put the science of global warming on trial. So what's their problem, unless they are afraid science will win again and the gorebull warming scare will collapse? Home of the original free carbon offset certificate. Can it be true? Desperate Strategies for Desperate Times . . . and
Post. On August 18, both the New York Times and Washington Post featured uncharacteristically shrill top-of-masthead editorials demanding immediate climate-change legislation.
The Post warned of an imminent geophysical “tipping point” because of global warming, while the Times went one better, threatening the national security of the United
States. Too funny: A global climate deal must be simpler,
fairer, and more flexible than Kyoto - Negotiations on emissions in the run-up to the UN climate summit show no sign of the radical change we need Limiting global warming to 2C above preindustrial levels is absolutely crucial, says the G8 and most of the world's best climatologists. If this is to be more than lip
service, the consequences will be radical. Don't these guys ever check any of their numbers? Just because some geezer uses colorful graphics and a computer instead of sandwich boards on a
street corner doesn't make his prognostications of the end being nigh any more likely. Recycling tipsy research in the run up to CoP15: Tipping elements remain a
'hot' issue Research published by climate scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) has been named one of the most highly-cited in its field in the last two years. Humanity Blamed for 9,000 Years of Global Warming Not
satisfied with blaming modern civilization for causing rampant climate change, now a small group of scientists are saying that everything went wrong once humans stopped being
hunter-gatherers 9,000 years ago. The hypothesis, first advanced in 2003 by University of Virginia palaeoclimatologist William F. Ruddiman, remains controversial even among
global warming true believers. Ruddiman now claims to have proven his critics wrong, much to the glee of the blame-humanity-first wing of the eco-activist community. A paper in Quaternary Science Reviews by Ruddiman and Erle C. Ellis, entitled “Effect
of per-capita land use changes on Holocene forest clearance and CO2emissions ,” claims Homo sapiens were bad news for the environment from
humanity's first steps toward civilization. While most scientists discount the impact primitive humans had on the environment due to small populations and rudimentary tools,
Ruddiman and Ellis think otherwise. They are proponents of the early anthropogenic hypothesis (EAH), which states that humans took control of greenhouse-gas trends
thousands of years ago because of emissions from early agriculture. According to the paper: Implicit in this view is the notion that per-capita land clearance has changed little for millennia, but numerous field studies have shown that early
per-capita land use was large and then declined as increasing population density led to more intensive farming. Here we explore the potential impact of changing per-capita
land use in recent millennia and conclude that greater clearance by early agriculturalists could have had a disproportionately large impact on CO2
emissions. This hypothesis posits that thousands of years ago early agriculture caused large enough emissions of greenhouse gases to offset natural climatic cooling.
In earlier work, Ruddiman and others claimed that the spread of rice production across large areas in China 4,000 to 6,000 years ago supported the hypothesis. Supposedly,
early farming caused an anomalous reversal in methane levels (see Ruddiman et al. “Early
rice farming and anomalous methane trends”). Writing in the March 2005 edition of Scientific
American Ruddiman pushed the date for man's earliest environmental transgressions back another 2,000 years, saying: “[E]vidence suggests that concentrations of CO2
started rising about 8,000 years ago, even though natural trends indicate they should have been dropping. Some 3,000 years later the same thing happened to methane, another
heat-trapping gas. The consequences of these surprising rises have been profound.” Now the threshold for the beginning of anthropogenic global warming dates to the Neolithic Revolution some 9,000 years ago. Based on a comparison of CO2
and methane (CH4) levels during the current Holocene interglacial versus data during similar portions of the three previous interglacials, human
agricultural activity supposedly caused greenhouse gas levels to rise when they should have been shrinking. As a consequence of man's meddling Ruddiman claims that an
incipient ice age, which would have begun several thousand years ago, was avoided. Without these early anthropogenic emissions, the theory goes, current temperatures in the
northern parts of North America and Europe would be cooler by 3 to 4° C. Instead of a quick return to glacial conditions—something not expected if previous glacial
terminations are any guide—Earth's climate has remained warm and stable for thousands of years. Are we supposed to view this as a bad thing? The crux of the new paper's argument seems to be that early farmers used ten times as much land per person as modern farmers. Supposedly, ancient farmers
practiced slash-and-burn agriculture, as some farmers in underdeveloped regions do to this day. Burning off large areas of forest or grassland temporarily enriches the soil
with ash. After a few seasons crop yields begin to drop causing the farmers to move on to new land and repeat the cycle. However, the only way to reach the prehistoric land
use levels required to make the theory viable is for neolithic farmers to have practice slash-and-burn on a tremendous scale. Naturally, Dr. Ruddiman is not without his
critics. A
number of scientists have criticized the early anthropogenic hypothesis. One critic is NASA climate modeler Gavin Schmidt from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).
Schmidt states that crediting early human populations with the enormous environmental impacts that Ruddiman claims is extremely uncertain. He also says that recent studies of
methane emissions have shown that methane increases over the last 5,000 years could be attributed to the development of the boreal wetlands and other areas uncovered by
melting glacial ice. Indeed, a 2006 paper
by Sergey A. Zimov et al. claims methane emissions from defrosting tundra are more significant than previously thought. Zimov et al. state that carbon contained in permafrost—permanently frozen ground—is an additional large carbon reservoir that is rarely
incorporated into global carbon analysis. “The release of a large pool of radiocarbon-depleted carbon from permafrost could have contributed to declines in atmospheric
radiocarbon during two strong warming events that occurred during the last deglaciation,” they claim. “These radiocarbon changes have previously been attributed to an
assumed increase in deep- and mid-ocean venting, because no terrestrial pool that could readily release ancient carbon (such as permafrost carbon) was included in the
analysis.” In other words, as the glaciers retreated and the ice melted significant amounts of carbon, in the form of CO2 and CH4,
would be released from formerly frozen land. As tundra turned to grasslands and forests greenhouse gases would be released naturally. In fact, a recent paper in Nature claims
that tundra doesn't even need to fully defrost to emit significant volumes of greenhouse gas. The assumption has always been that a frozen, snowed-under environment did not
release much in the way of GHG—turns out that assumption was wrong. The winter emissions, thought to be squeezed out by the growth of surface frost, match up with an
atmospheric methane surge that had previously gone unexplained. “Mother Nature is showing us something that is really surprising," said lead author Torben Christensen,
a biogeochemist at Lund University in Sweden. “Nobody would expect to have loads of gas seeping out from a frozen environment.” Since these sources of carbon have been
overlooked scientists are free to cast about for other sources, like human activity. Ruddiman's conclusions rest mainly on Vostok ice core data going back hundreds of thousands of years. The EAH claim is that this interglacial is different
from previous ones and only humans could have caused that difference. However, calculations of the changes in the Earth's orbit that trigger ice ages, performed by Andre
Berger of the University of Louvain-le-Neuve in Belgium, demonstrate that the current warm period is actually quite anomalous compared to the recent past. This means that
comparing the Holocene with other recent interglacials is not meaningful. Indeed, recent results from the extremely long EPICA core show values in Marine Isotope Stage 11 are
very similar to those seen in the pre-industrial Holocene. That interglacial, which occurred some 400,000 years ago is thought to be more like the Holocene than other, more
recent interglacials. One really interesting thing about that interglacial is that it lasted significantly longer than other warmings—around 30,000 years verses 10-14,000
for more recent episodes. [For a good article on methane and its sources see “Methane:
A Scientific Journey from Obscurity to Climate Super-Stardom” by Gavin Schmidt on the NASA GISS website]. If Dr. Ruddiman had looked a bit farther back in the paleoclimate record he would have found that the Holocene is not an anomaly, and if he had checked the
recent research regarding GHG release during the early Holocene he would have had nothing to blame on our remote ancestors. There is nothing wrong with Dr. Ruddiman dusting
off his theory ever couple of years and publishing a new paper. Theories like his force other scientists to critically review what they think they know about human beings and
climate change, double check their data and re-validate the logic of their own theories. This is a good thing for science. Without improbable theories challenging existing
dogma science becomes static and moribund. No, the problem with the airing of such theories comes when they get picked up by the news media and become fodder for the climate
catastrophist crowd. Even a staid, conservative newspaper like the Economist has picked up on Ruddiman's misanthropic message. In an article entitled “Nothing
new under the sun,” it was reported that: “Long before the Industrial Revolution—indeed, long before a worldwide revolution in intensive farming, the results of
which kept humanity alive—people caused unnatural exhalations of greenhouse gases that had an impact on the world’s climate.” The article closes with the observation
“it looks as if humanity has been interfering with the climate since the dawn of civilisation.” What isn't mentioned, of course, is that all living things interact with
the environment and to some extent affect climate—ants to elephants. What gets lost in all of this shallow reporting is that the early anthropogenic hypothesis is not proven nor widely held by other paleoclimatologists.
Oddball theories are useful in science but are easily blown out of proportion by elements on the lunatic fringe and if a marginal idea gains political momentum you end up
with a mess like the current CO2 driven global warming debacle. The only cure for this sad state of affairs in a more informed and better educated
public, and fewer air-head reporters who are more interested in a catchy headline than accurate reporting. The easily dismissed EAH example aside, there exists a significant thread that runs through much of the bad climate science done over the past several
decades. The mainstream climate science community seems to have blinkered itself with respect to historical precedents in the climate record. The IPCC seems only interested
in the past few hundred years, probably because the well documented climate variations which occurred over the course of the Holocene don't fit their models or their world
view. Others, like Ruddiman and his colleagues, only go back far enough to convince themselves they have stumbled on something “unprecedented,” which naturally means they
can blame it on H. sapiens. Moreover, none of the CO2 driven global warming proponents wish to acknowledge that there have been ice ages when
the levels of carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere have been many times higher than today's. Climate science's myopic view of the past allows it to continue attributing
climate change to CO2 and the blame to humanity with a clear conscience. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (The Resilient Earth) Eye-roller: How real is the climate threat? As the framing of an Irish Climate Change Bill moves forward, our legislators will face difficult decisions on how best to respond to the environmental challenges that
confront us. Politicians will soon have to decide what resources are to be allocated for dealing with climate change. Still dredging up Stern's nonsense? Must be getting harder for these guys to buy a job... Dopey: Report: Future U.S. heat waves will be worse The nation is headed for strong heat waves in coming decades that will hit cities and farmers and threaten wildlife with extinction, a new global warming report warns. The way to "make heat waves worse" is to make people's electricity too expensive to run air conditioning to protect themselves from whatever
weather prevails. It isn't what the weather does that's the problem, only whether we can protect people from it. Silly blighters... Anthropogenic Global Warming? Not
So Fast . . . Skepticism about anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has engulfed the leadership of key scientific societies including the American Chemical Society (ACS), the American
Geophysical Union (AGU) and the American Physical Society (APS). Growing numbers of members of these prestigious organizations are clamoring for a reassessment of their
societies' positions on climate change. This skepticism of the accepted wisdom about the link between carbon dioxide and climate change makes a mockery of the ongoing claim
that when it comes to AGW, "the science is settled." If you can't muzzle the whistleblower, try to marginalize him. That seems to be the strategy of the Obama administration, which is showing that its commitment to liberal
ideology trumps its pledge to foster open government. Crank of the Week - August 24, 2009 - Nathan Rees This week we have a nomination
from down under. Premier Nathan Rees, head of the Australian state of New South Wales, has been nominated by his own constituents as our Crank of the Week. After
reviewing Rees' qualifications we are in full agreement—anyone who can stand up at a scientific conference and compared climate change skeptics to Nazi appeasers certainly
is a crank.
Premier Rees' ill-chosen remarks were made while addressing the Australian Museum's Eureka Awards ceremony. It is a nice bit of irony that the
Eureka Award, Australia's highest award for scientific achievement, has been won twice by Australia's leading geologist and prominent climate change skeptic, Ian Plimer.
Premier Rees said, “The threat of climate change is catastrophic. In fact, the current wave of climate change scepticism smacks of 1930s-style appeasement: 'Hide under the
blankets and it will go away'. But it won't go away.” What might go away, however, is the Premier. Recently Rees has announced an immediate ban on all departments and agencies buying bottled water, including supplies for water coolers. “Bear this in
mind. You take a 600ml plastic bottle, 200ml of oil has gone into its production,” said Rees. “That's leaving aside the CO2 that comes from
transporting it around the place.” The ban has been praised by eco-activists but it doesn't set well with everyone. Australians spent about $500 million on bottled water in
2008, a 10 per cent increase on 2007, so there is bound to be some backlash. Geoff Parker,
director of the Australasian Bottled Water Institute, which represents the industry, said he was disappointed by the ban. “The environmental footprint of one bottle of
water of locally produced water would be much smaller than a tin of canned tomatoes imported from overseas, some imported cheese, or French champagne,” he said. “I think
we need to keep it in perspective.” One of the first promises made by Premier Rees when he took office was that he would deal with climate change, so the bottle ban seems to be in character.
But according to Greens MP and mining spokesperson Lee Rhiannon, “Labor MPs voted to stifle the censure debate today to cover up Premier Rees' massive credibility gap
between his rhetoric on climate change and his actions.” It seems that Rees has been talking green while cozying up to the coal industry, something the Greens can't abide.
“Premier Nathan Rees deserves urgent censure for ignoring climate change experts and escalating the expansion of the NSW coal industry,” said Ms Rhiannon. Rees now admits he could have chosen his words better when he compared climate change skeptics with Nazi appeasers of the 1930s but that's unbottled water
under the bridge. Though he claims to work 17 hours a day for the people of NSW, the Premier now finds his popularity dropping in the polls. The latest Newspoll showed
that more than half of NSW voters were dissatisfied with him. As one digruntled constituent commented, “Please STOP working and give us all a break.” When asked how it
felt to be working such long hours for little pay-off he snapped, “how do you think?” It looks like, as an environmentalist, Nathan Rees has feet of clay (well, maybe coal). It saddens us to know that the Happy Land is also afflicted by the
same species of double talking, fear mongering political blatherskites as the US. Scumbags are evidently indigenous to both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. So, for
calling skeptics Nazi appeasers and banning bottled water while at the same time snuggling up to the coal industry this Crank of the Week is for you: NSW Premier
Nathan Rees. (The Resilient Earth) There has been quite a bit of discussion by James Annan (see
and see) and Gavin Schmidt (see) on
our paper Klotzbach, P.J., R.A. Pielke Sr., R.A. Pielke Jr., J.R. Christy, and R.T. McNider, 2009: An alternative
explanation for differential temperature trends at the surface and in the lower troposphere. J. Geophys. Res., in press. which is quite peripheral to the conclusions of our paper. In our multi-authored paper Mahmood, R., R.A. Pielke Sr., K.G. Hubbard, D. Niyogi, G. Bonan, P. Lawrence, B. Baker, R. McNider, C. McAlpine, A. Etter, S. Gameda, B. Qian, A. Carleton, A. Beltran-Przekurat,
T. Chase, A.I. Quintanar, J.O. Adegoke, S. Vezhapparambu, G. Conner, S. Asefi, E. Sertel, D.R. Legates, Y. Wu, R. Hale, O.W. Frauenfeld, A. Watts, M. Shepherd, C. Mitra, V.G.
Anantharaj, S. Fall,R. Lund, A. Nordfelt, P. Blanken, J. Du, H.-I. Chang, R. Leeper, U.S. Nair, S. Dobler, R. Deo, and J. Syktus, 2009: Impacts
of land use land cover change on climate and future research priorities. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., in press we summarized the issue as follows “The stable nocturnal boundary layer does not measure the heat content in a large part of the atmosphere where the greenhouse signal should be the largest (Lin et
al. 2007; Pielke et al. 2007a). Because of nonlinearities in some parameters of the stable boundary layer (McNider et al. 1995), minimum temperature is highly sensitive to
slight changes in cloud cover, greenhouse gases, and other radiative forcings. However, this sensitivity is reflective of a change in the turbulent state of the atmosphere
and a redistribution of heat not a change in the heat content of the atmosphere (Walters et al. 2007). Using the Lin et al. (2007) observational results, a conservative
estimate of the warm bias resulting from measuring the temperature from a single level near the ground is around 0.21°C per decade (with the nighttime minimum temperature
contributing a large part of this bias). Since land covers about 29% of the Earth.s surface, extrapolating this warm bias could explain about 30% of the IPCC estimate of
global warming. In other words, consideration of the bias in temperature could reduce the IPCC trend to about 0.14°C per decade; still a warming, but not as large as
indicated by the IPCC.” So far, it appears that neither James or Gavin are particularly knowledgeable on boundary layer physics. While they certainly have expertise
in other areas in climate science, they have failed so far to comment on the topic in the above paragraph (which is what the Klotzbach
et al (2009), Lin et al (2007) and Pielke and Matsui (2005)
papers are about. My current weblog is an invitation to them to comment on the above paragraph (either as guest weblogs or on their sites).
If they ignore this request, it would further demonstrate that they are commenting outside of their expertise on the subject of our papers, and that their real goal is simply
to malign papers they disagree with. (Climate Science) From CO2 Science Volume 12 Number 34: 26 August 2009 Editorial: Medieval
Warm Period Record of the Week: Subject Index Summary: Plant Growth Data: Journal Reviews: The Medieval Warm Period in the Karakorum Mountains of Northern Pakistan: How did its temperatures compare with
those of the late 20th century? ... and what are the implications of that comparison? Vegetation Dynamics of Spanish National Parks: 1981-2003: Were the temporal trends predominantly positive or
negative? Pollen and Hay Fever in Switzerland: How much have they risen in response to the major "environmental
evils" of the past century: rising air temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations? Litter Decomposition in Grasslands: How is it impacted by global warming? ... and how is global warming
impacted by it? (co2science.org) About as wrong as they can get: U.S. needs climate law before Copenhagen:
officials WASHINGTON - The United States needs to have a climate change law in place before international talks on a climate pact begin in December, two top Obama administration
officials said on Monday. 'bout time he came to his senses: Aggravation
Mounts in Minnesota Over Governor's Shift on Climate Minnesota's Republican governor used to make soaring speeches about defusing climate change. Now he's making jokes, and some environmentalists are wondering whether his
gone-missing support amounts to "bait and switch" politics. Int'l climate talks "wrestle over economy": China's top negotiator BEIJING, Aug. 24 -- China's top environment negotiator said Monday that the current global fight over climate change is in nature a multinational wrestling match on
winning or maintaining each country's economic competitive edge or room for development. Of course they do: Africa wants $67 billion a year to fight climate change ADDIS ABABA - African leaders will ask rich nations for $67 billion per year to mitigate the impact of global warming on the world's poorest continent, according to a
draft resolution seen by Reuters on Monday. Taxpayer cash for clunker ideas It’s finally been euthanized (or so they say). But in the minds of politicians and rent-seekers, the cash-for-clunkers program was so successful that it deserved
billions in taxpayer money. August 24, 2009
This is pathetic even by the dreadful standards of the senile Crone in August: Debating
How Much Weed Killer Is Safe in Your Water Glass For decades, farmers, lawn care workers and professional green thumbs have relied on the popular weed killer atrazine to protect their crops, golf courses and manicured
lawns. At this rate we can expect "Space aliens abducted my grandmother" by about Thursday... Rabid environmentalists and EPA apparatchiks created the dioxin bogeyman 30 years ago, and it's been on the world's most expensive life-support system ever since. After
three decades and a billion dollars in federally funded research, there is no proven "link" between dioxin and cancer. Online social media — marketing in disguise Millions of Americans have received emails and read blogs and commentary on social media sites and never realized that what they were reading was carefully crafted
marketing messages from the government — paid for with their tax dollars and manipulating them to support government agendas, programs and legislation. Why
Government Rationing Ain’t a Good Deal When government is paying the medical bill, it inevitably has to “ration” care. Choices obviously have to be made by whoever is paying, but there’s
good reason not to leave government with the dominant decision-making power, as in Great Britain. There’s no need to demonize British care. All one has to do is point out how government fiscal objectives so often run against good patient treatment. And
how most people have no exit to a better alternative. Consider this rather amazing story from the Daily
Telegraph: Doctors have launched a campaign on behalf of a war hero who has been told he must go blind in one eye before he can receive NHS treatment and accused Gordon Brown of
“incompetence” in managing the health service. More than 120 doctors have sent £5 cheques to Downing Street, made out to the Prime Minister, in the hope of shaming him into helping former RAF bomber Jack Tagg. The
88-year-old was recently diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness in Britain, which affects an estimated 500,000 people. Mr Tagg has the treatable, but most aggressive “wet” form of the disease, which can lead to the loss of central vision in as little as two months. But he has been told that the NHS will only fund the injections which could save his sight, after he has lost the vision in one eye. … “They told me there were three choices: let nature take its course and go blind, try to seek funding, or pay for immediate treatment. Time is of the essence, so we
opted to pay up and fight for funding. “This is happening to literally millions of people. It’s appalling and something has got to be done about it.” The American medical system needs reform. But that should be accomplished by promoting patient-directed care, with individuals and families, rather
than government, deciding how best to use scarce resources when it comes to medical treatment. (Doug Bandow, Cato at large) Ration
— verb, to restrict the consumption of That’s Dictionary.com’s fourth definition of the verb “to ration,” and it is
essentially the same as the other three. Here’s an example of government restricting the consumption of medical care. It comes from
a strange, faraway land called “Oregon.”
(Michael F. Cannon, Cato at liberty) Record numbers in hospital for obesity Evidence has emerged of a “bulge generation” with a 300 per cent rise in the most extreme cases of obesity among adults in their twenties. 5,000 admissions? Out of a population of about 50 million? That's just one admission per 10,000 of population. How many admissions for intoxication?
About 20 times that number (England alone racks up about 240 per day or over 85,000/year). Think they've got their priorities right? Calls to tax junk food gain ground - A
surcharge on cigarettes has helped curb smoking, but will the same tactic work to fight obesity? "Sin taxes" on cigarettes have turned out to be the most effective weapon in the campaign to reduce smoking. Video
game addiction linked to obesity, Vit D deficiency, ADD, ADHD, aggression Beware - parents of compulsive kid gamers! Excessive video or computer/console game playing has been linked to several negative health effects among modern children,
including obesity, deficiency of Vit D and lack of bone-building exercise. Study: Candle-lit dinners add to pollution Holy smokes. Grab the fire hose. Somebody notify Al Gore and maybe Ralph Nader. Candle-lit dinners -- with the flickering flames, those delicate glows -- are an
unrecognized source of indoor air pollution. Really. The American Chemical Society announced Wednesday that "emission products of petroleum-based candles in
nonventilated enclosed areas" are potential health hazards. Paraffin wax candles produce evocative ambience -- and known human carcinogens, too. Attacking every convenience: Unveiling a Plastic Bag Ban
in Mexico City Standard plastic shopping bags were officially outlawed in Mexico City this week, but you wouldn’t know from the check-out line at the supermarket. When it comes to having past views that should frighten every American citizen, Ezekiel Emanuel (see above editorial) has nothing on the president's "chief science
adviser," John P. Holdren. The combination of Mr. Holdren with Dr. Emanuel should make the public seriously concerned with this administration's moral compass concerning
care for the old and weak. Are you doing business with anti-gun
companies? Are gun owners unwittingly patronizing businesses that support infringements on their right to keep and bear arms? Hazards of not using modern building materials and fuels: Fashion
for wood burning stoves prompts record year for thatched cottage fires Thatched roofs are going up in smoke in increasing numbers because of the new fashion for wood burning stoves and the inexperience of a new breed of second home owner,
according to experts. (Daily Telegraph) Birdwatching 'not environmentally friendly' An academic study suggests competitions to spot as many species of bird in a day, along with thousands of enthusiasts visiting a garden when a rare bird is spotted, means
a heavy use of transport. Oh... Light in the Forests This has been a good month for the nation’s forests. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in California reinstated a landmark 2001 rule — the
so-called roadless rule — put in place by President Bill Clinton before he left office that prohibited commercial logging, mining and other development on about 58 million
acres of national forests. The Bush administration spent years trying to undermine the rule. Pity his alleged "firm grasp" doesn't include practical knowledge on how to achieve such lofty goals, like making sure there are roads,
firebreaks, access and profits to sustain them. Dopey city slickers... Trying to extend welfare dependency: In
Brazil, Paying Farmers to Let the Trees Stand QUERENCIA, Brazil — José Marcolini, a farmer here, has a permit from the Brazilian government to raze 12,500 acres of rain forest this year to create highly profitable
new soy fields. Don't do it José, feed your family and be a productive member of society -- your crops will help feed the world. Global forest destruction
seen overestimated RIO DE JANEIRO, Aug 21 - The amount of carbon emissions caused by world forest destruction is likely far less than the 20 percent figure being widely used before global
climate talks in December, said the head of the Brazilian institute that measures Amazon deforestation. Tree cover far bigger than expected on farms: study OSLO - Almost half of the world's farmland has at least 10 percent tree cover, according to a study on Monday indicating that farmers are far less destructive to
carbon-storing forests than previously believed. 'Super elms' begin to fill
the gaps in English landscape Saplings are to be propagated from specimens that survived when 20 million trees perished. Planted nationwide, they may transform the landscape again (The Independent) Global Warming: A Classic Case of Alarmism Dr. David Evans [The big temperature picture. Graph and insight from Dr Syun Akasofu (2009 International Conference on Climate Change, New York, March 2009).] The pattern suggests that the world has entered a period of slight cooling until about 2030. The global temperature has been rising at a steady trend rate of 0.5°C per century since the end of the little ice age in the 1700s (when the Thames River would freeze
over every winter; the last time it froze over was 1804). On top of the trend are oscillations that last about thirty years in each direction: 1882 – 1910 Cooling In 2009 we are where the green arrow points, with temperature leveling off. The pattern suggests that the world has entered a period of slight cooling until about 2030. There was a cooling scare in the early 1970s at the end of the last cooling phase. The current global warming alarm is based on the last warming oscillation, from 1975 to
2001. The IPCC predictions simply extrapolated the last warming as if it would last forever, a textbook case of alarmism. However the last warming period ended after the
usual thirty years or so, and the global temperature is now definitely tracking below the IPCC predictions. The IPCC blames human emissions of carbon dioxide for the last warming. But by general consensus human emissions of carbon dioxide have only been large enough to be
significant since 1940—yet the warming trend was in place for well over a century before that. And there was a cooling period from 1940 to 1975, despite human emissions of
carbon dioxide. And there has been no warming since 2001, despite record human emissions of carbon dioxide. There is no actual evidence that carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming. Note that computer models are just concatenations of calculations you could do on a
hand-held calculator, so they are theoretical and cannot be part of any evidence. Although the models contain some well-established science, they also contain a myriad of
implicit and explicit assumptions, guesses, and gross approximations—mistakes in any of which can invalidate the model outputs. Furthermore, the missing hotspot in the atmospheric warming pattern observed during the last warming period proves that (1) the IPCC climate theory is fundamentally
broken, and (2) to the extent that their theory correctly predicts the warming signature of increased carbon dioxide, we know that carbon dioxide definitely did not cause the
recent warming (see here for my full explanation of the missing hotspot). The alarmists keep very quiet about the missing hotspot. No one knows for sure what caused the little ice age or for how many more centuries the slow warming trend will continue. It has been warmer than the present for much of
the ten thousand years since the last big ice age: it was a little warmer for a few centuries in the medieval warm period around 1100 (when Greenland was settled for grazing)
and also during the Roman-Climate Optimum at the time of the Roman Empire (when grapes grew in Scotland), and at least 1°C warmer for much of the Holocene Climate Optimum
(four to eight thousand years ago). Addendum Measuring the global temperature is only reliably done by satellites, which circle the world 24/7 measuring the temperature over large swathes of land and ocean. But
satellite temperature records only go back to 1979. Before that, the further back you go the more unreliable the temperature record gets. We have decent land thermometer
records back to 1880, and some thermometer records back to the middle of the 1700s. Prior to that we rely on temperature proxies, such as ice cores, tree rings, ocean
sediments, or snow lines. Our readers may also want to check out this booklet by Joanne Nova: The Skeptics Handbook. Source: http://joannenova.com.au//globalwarming/graphs/akasofu/akasofu_graph_little_ice-age.gif
(The Peoples Voice) One of the signs of a change in the slope of temperatures is the change in the slope of PR descriptions. After chanting “The hottest year ever recorded” the message became the “second hottest year on record”, and after that, four of the five hottest years ever; and
now, eight of the ten hottest years. Look out for “12 of the hottest 15 years ever”... it’s coming. It’s time to knock this on the head. It’s true, but meaningless. It appeals to that prehistoric part of our brains and “gets” to people in
the same way that rising stock markets do. For example back in October 2007 we could have said that the top 8 of 10 record Dow Jones results were set that month (and
look what that did for the Dow?) Cluster-Busters 1. Analyzing trends is a lousy form of analysis. It tells you nothing about what happens next. When we don’t understand what drives the climate,
analyzing the technicals of “trend-lines” is up there with reading tea-leaves. We don’t know what caused the Little Ice Age; so we don’t know if that mystery
cooling factor stopped, or if another unknown warming factor kicked in; or both unexplained forces worked in concert with a silent friend. It sounds quasi-scientific but so
does astrology. Look! The night-hunter ate the saucepan. Join the dots. Find your own climate change star sign. 2. “Recorded” history is overrated. It only applies “since 1850″. That’s not long. Take your pick on longer scales: it was warmer 1000 years
ago, 5000 years ago, 130,000 years ago, and …. before 5 million years ago; it was hotter for most of the history of the earth. More accurately, we could say, “it’s
five of the ten hottest years recorded since humanity discovered thermometers, installed them, and recorded the details in multiple locations around the earth.”
Catchy. 3. Yes. It’s got warmer. So? The world has been getting warmer for 200-300 years. Sea levels have been rising, glaciers melting, and “records” have
been set decade after decade. And all this started long before Napoleon took 4000-gas-guzzling armored tanks to Russia (or not). He must’ve been disappointed that the Ford
Model T’s he’d ordered would not arrive for 103 years. Yet the world was warming. Ultimately, analyzing the technicals of stock trends is fraught with problems, but doing this on climate trends is inane. What are we relying
on—meterological psychology: the greed and fear of clouds? See Climate Bull or Bear? for a real poke at technical analysis of the climate. Borenstein’s
AP Sea Surface Temperature Article Is Misleading Guest Post By Bob Tisdale The Seth Borenstein AP article about the recent high sea surface temperature… Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July, where NOAA does. NOAA writes, “The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest
on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998.” Refer to Figure 1, which is a graph of
SST for July from 1982 to 2009 (NOAA’s ERSST.v3b version).
http://i28.tinypic.com/2ut3rzp.png Borenstein readers are told that July 2009 Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) were the highest since records began, but that is false. Figure 2 illustrates monthly SSTs from
November 1981 to July 2009. I’ve added a red horizontal line to show the July 2009 value. Whether or not July SSTs represented a record is also dependent on the SST dataset. NOAA’s satellite-based Optimally Interpolated (OI,v2) dataset presents a different
picture. That dataset clearly shows that July 1998, Figure 3, had a higher SST. And looking at the monthly OI.v2 data since November 1981, Figure 4, there are numerous months with higher SSTs. The Borenstein article also claims that Arctic SST anomalies are as high as 10 deg F (5.5 deg C) above average. Wow!! Really?? I used the SST map-making feature of the NOAA NOMADS system to create the map of high latitude Northern Hemisphere SST anomalies for July 2009. The Contour Interval was
set at 1 deg C to help find the claimed excessively high SST anomalies. Alas, Borenstein was right, BUT, as you will note, the ONLY area that reaches the 5 to 6 deg C range
is the White Sea (indicated by the arrow) off the Barents Sea. And to put that in perspective, Figure 6 is the global map. Based on the Kartesh White Sea Biological Station website… And the SST anomalies of one miniscule area do not represent the SST anomalies for the Arctic Ocean, as is obvious in Figure 7. Arctic SST anomalies have declined over the
past few years. SST anomaly graphs through July 2009 for the Arctic Ocean and other individual oceans can be found at my July
2009 SST Anomaly Update. To sum up the Borenstein article, it’s factually incorrect in places, and in others, it raises alarmism to ridiculous levels by dwelling on a meaningless statistic, the
July SST anomaly of the White Sea. (WUWT) Record
July 2009 Sea Surface Temperatures? The View from Space Since NOAA has announced that their data show July 2009 global-average sea surface
temperatures (SSTs) reaching a record high for the month of July, I thought I would take a look at what the combined AMSR-E & TMI instruments on NASA’s Aqua and TRMM
satellites (respectively) had to say. I thought it might at least provide an independent sanity check since NOAA does not include these satellite data in their operational
product. The SSTs from AMSR-E are geographically the most complete record of global SSTs available since the instrument is a microwave radiometer and can measure the surface
through most cloud conditions. AMSR-E (launched on Aqua in May 2002) provides truly global coverage, while the TMI (which was launched on TRMM in late 1997) does not, so the
combined SST product produced by Frank Wentz’s Remote Sensing Systems provides complete global coverage only since the launch of Aqua
(mid-2002). Through a cooperative project between RSS, NASA, and UAH, The digital data are available from the same (NASA Discover)
website that our daily tropospheric temperatures are displayed, but for the SSTs you have to read the daily binary files and compute the anomalies yourself. I use FORTRAN for
this, since it’s the only programming language I know. As can be seen in the following plot of running 11 day average anomalies, July 2009 was indeed the warmest month during the relatively short Aqua satellite period of
record, with the peak anomaly occurring about July 18. The large and frequent swings in global average temperature are real, and result from changes in the rate at which water evaporates from the ocean surface. These
variations are primarily driven by tropical Intraseasonal Oscillations, which change tropical-average surface winds by about 2 knots from lowest wind conditions to highest
wind conditions. As can be seen, the SSTs started to fall fast during the last week of July. If you are wondering what I think they will do in the coming months, well, that’s easy…I
have no clue. (Roy W. Spencer) Something’s Fishy With Global Ocean
Temperature Measurements (edited 8/23/09 0710 CDT: Changed plots & revised text to reflect the fact that NCDC, not CRU, is apparently the source of the SST dataset; also add discussion of
possible RFI interference in satellite measurements) (edited 8/22/09 1415 CDT: added plot of trend differences by month at bottom) In my previous blog posting I showed the satellite-based global-average monthly sea surface temperature (SST) variations since mid-2002, which was when the NASA Aqua
satellite was launched carrying the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS (AMSR-E). The AMSR-E instrument (which I serve as the U.S. Science Team Leader for)
provides nearly all-weather SST measurements. The plot I showed yesterday agreed with the NOAA announcement that July 2009 was unusually warm…NOAA claims
it was even a new record for July based upon their 100+ year record of global SSTs. But I didn’t know just HOW warm, since our satellite data extend back to only 2002. So, I decided to download the NOAA/NCDC SST data from their website
— which do NOT include the AMSR-E measurements — to do a more quantitative comparison. From the NOAA data, I computed monthly anomalies in exactly the same manner I computed them with the AMSR-E data, that is, relative to the June 2002 through July 2009
period of record. The results (shown below) were so surprising, I had to go to my office this Saturday morning to make sure I didn’t make a mistake in my processing of the
AMSR-E data. As can be seen, the satellite-based temperatures have been steadily rising relative to the conventional SST measurements, with a total linear increase of 0.15 deg C over
the 7 year period of record versus the conventional SST measurements. If the satellite data are correct, then this means that the July 2009 SSTs reached a considerably higher record temperature than NOAA has claimed. The discrepancy is huge
in terms of climate measurements; the trend in the difference between the two datasets shown in the above figure is the same size as the anthropogenic global warming signal
expected by the IPCC. I have no idea what is going on here. Frank Wentz and Chelle Gentemann at Remote Sensing Systems have been very careful about tracking the
accuracy of the AMSR-E SST retrievals with millions of buoy measurements. I checked their daily statistics they post
at their website and I don’t see anything like what is shown in the above figure. Is it possible that the NCDC SST temperature dataset has been understating recent warming? I don’t know…I’m mystified. Maybe Frank, Chelle, Phil Jones, or some
enterprising blogger out there can figure this one out. UPDATE #1 (8/22/09) UPDATE#2 (8/23/09) SOHO back online: Sun still blank It’s difficult sometimes to carry on a blog when the primary focus of your discussion doesn’t do anything. That’s the nature of solar minima, I guess, but
particularly true when you have an apparent regime change in the solar cycle. The latest news is that SOHO is back online after a glitch forced the software onboard to be reloaded with new commands, and mission controllers took an opportunity to
bake all of the CCDs onboard the spacecraft to remove dead pixels. Today the Sun is blank. This image from the EIT (Extreme ultra-violet Imaging Telescope) at 195 Angstroms show no spots and no significant coronal
holes. Confirmed! Orbital Cycles Control Ice Ages While
the IPCC and global warming alarmists continue to claim climate change is controlled by atmospheric CO2 levels, most knowledgeable scientists will
tell you that climate change is caused by variation in Earth's orbit and orientation. These periodic changes in movement and attitude are called the Milankovitch Cycles. A
new paper, to be published in Science, confirms that glacial terminations are caused by Earth's orbital cycles, not carbon dioxide. There are three components that comprise the Milankovitch Cycles: Orbital Eccentricity, Axial Obliquity, and Precession of the Equinoxes.
The cycles are named for Milutin Milankovitch, a Serbian engineer, who mathematically theorized that variations in these three orbital parameters determine climatic patterns
on Earth. Milankovitch's work, which was done in the mid-20th century, was hindered by the need to calculate orbital data by hand. Because of some inaccuracies in his
results, the theory was not accepted by the scientific main stream until later revisions by Wally Broecker and J. van Donk. In 1970, they published a paper that detailed
temperature changes going back 400,000 years and resolved a number of the apparent discrepancies in Milankovitch's theory. From their work it became widely accepted that
orbital cycles cause the glacial-interglacial cycles that have governed ice age conditions over the last few million years. Earth's orbit goes from measurably elliptical to nearly circular in a cycle that takes around 100,000 years. Presently, Earth is in a period of low
eccentricity, about 3%. This causes a seasonal change in solar energy of 7%. The difference between summer and winter is a 7% difference in the energy a hemisphere receives
from the Sun. When Earth's orbital eccentricity is at its peak (~9%), seasonal variation reaches 20-30%. Additionally, a more eccentric orbit will change the length of
seasons in each hemisphere by changing the length of time between the vernal and autumnal equinoxes. The variation in eccentricity doesn't change regularly over time, like a sine wave. This is because Earth's orbit is affected by the gravitational
attraction of the other planets in the solar system. There are two major cycles; one every 100,000 years and a weaker one every 413,000 years. The second Milankovitch cycle involves changes in obliquity, or tilt, of Earth's axis. Presently Earth's tilt is 23.5°, but the 41,000 year cycle varies
from 22.1° to 24.5°. This tilt is depicted in the upper-left panel of the illustration above. The smaller the tilt, the less seasonal variation there is between summer and
winter at middle and high latitudes. For small tilt angles, the winters tend to be milder and the summers cooler. Cool summer temperatures are thought more important than
cold winters for the growth of continental ice sheets. This implies that smaller tilt angles lead to more glaciation. The third cycle is due to precession of the spin axis. As a result of a wobble in Earth's spin, the orientation of Earth in relation to its orbital
position changes. This occurs because Earth, as it spins, bulges slightly at its equator. The equator is not in the same plane as the orbits of Earth and other objects in the
solar system, as shown in the illustration below. The gravitational pull of the Sun and the Moon on the equatorial bulge tries to bring Earth's spin axis into perpendicular alignment with the orbital
plane. Earth's rotation is counter clockwise; gravitational forces make Earth's rotational axis move clockwise in a circle around its orbital axis. This is called precession
of the equinoxes because, over time, the retrograde axial rotation causes the seasons to shift.
Until recently, variations in the intensity of high-latitude Northern Hemisphere summer insolation, driven largely by precession, were widely thought to
control the timing of glacial terminations. However, it has been suggested that changes in Earth’s obliquity may be a more important mechanism. According to the paper by R.
N. Drysdale et al., “Our record reveals that Terminations I and II are separated by three obliquity cycles and that they started at near-identical obliquity
phases.” During the Late Pleistocene, the period of glacial-to-interglacial transitions (or ‘terminations’) has increased when compared to the Early
Pleistocene. The length of the cold glacial periods shifted from ~40,000 years to ~100,000 years in length some 700,000 years ago. Why this change took place is still a
matter of debate, though we know that CO2 levels did not cause the change (see “Change
In Ice Ages Not Caused By CO2”). Although many different explanations have been proposed for the shift, the most widely accepted one invokes
changes in the intensity of high-latitude Northern Hemisphere summer insolation (NHSI). These changes were thought to be primarily driven by precession, which produces
relatively large seasonal and hemispheric insolation variation. The new work by Drysdale et al. claims that obliquity, not precession, is the proximate cause of glacial terminations. Moreover, based on a detailed
study of the last two terminations (T-I and T-II), it was found that glacials can span multiple obliquity cycles. The researchers make the case for obliquity as the forcing
mechanism: Based on our results, both T-I and T-II commence at the same phase of obliquity and the period between them is exactly equivalent to three obliquity
cycles (~123 ky). Obliquity is clearly very important during the Early Pleistocene, and recently a compelling argument has been advanced that Late Pleistocene terminations
are also forced by obliquity, but that they bridge multiple obliquity cycles. Under this model, predominantly obliquity-driven total summer energy is considered more
important in forcing terminations than the classical precession-based peak summer insolation model, primarily because the length of summer decreases as the Earth moves
closer to the sun. Timing of the Termination II was established by matching a uranium–thorium (U–Th) chronology derived from a high-resolution speleothem δ18O
time series to the T-II marine sediment record from the Iberian margin in the northeast Atlantic Ocean. A speleothem is a secondary mineral deposit formed in caves. The
figure below, taken from the paper's preprint online, compares timing,
insolation and obliquity data for the two terminations. Shown above is a comparison of the benthic δ18O record through T-I (orange crosses; plotted on the upper timescale) and T-II
(black crosses; plotted on the lower timescale), showing similarities in the duration of both terminations. Southern Hemisphere summer insolation at 65°S (blue) and
obliquity curves (red) for T-I (dashed lines) and T-II (solid lines), and obliquity. The gray vertical bar marks the commencement points for both terminations, revealing an
age difference of ~123,000 years, which is equivalent to three obliquity cycles of ~41,000 years each. As the author's put it: “Our record reveals that Terminations I and
II are separated by three obliquity cycles and that they started at near-identical obliquity phases.” What this means is that another nail has been put into the coffin of carbon dioxide as the primary driver of climate change. While the earlier paper by Hönisch
et al. showed that CO2 could not be the driver of glacial-interglacial transitions (again see “Change
In Ice Ages Not Caused By CO2”), this paper shows that change in obliquity is the probable trigger for the onset of global warming. Indeed,
obliquity also nicely matches the previous ~40,000 year glacial-interglacial cycle that had been dominant prior to ~700,000 years ago. As we discussed in The Resilient Earth, the major drivers of long-term, medium-term, and short-term cycles all seem to have extraterrestrial
origins. Henrik Svensmark's recent paper confirming the linkage between
galactic cosmic rays and low level cloud formation provides a mechanism for both long-term climate cycles, those acting over tens of millions of years, and short-term decadal
variations. By tracking the water content of low clouds following solar coronal mass ejections a causal link is established. According to Svensmark et al, “a link
between the sun, cosmic rays, aerosols, and liquid-water clouds appears to exist on a global scale.” That linkage allows cosmoclimatology,
as framed by Svensmark and expanded on by Nir Shaviv and Jan Veizer, to explain long term trends as the passage of the solar system through the arms of the Milky Way galaxy.
The same mechanism links solar activity on the decadal scale to events like the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. Now the cause of middle-term changes, like the
glacial-interglacial cycles, can be confidently attributed to changes in Earth's orbital cycles, perhaps with an assist from solar variation. Throw in some random events,
like meteor strikes, near by supernovae and volcanic eruptions, and there remains no role for CO2 as a driver of terrestrial climate. Yet the global warming doomsayers and climate change catastrophists continue to spout their nonsense, threatening the world with plague, famine and
destruction. They claim it is time for action and I agree—we need to disband the IPCC and redirect its funding toward solving the world's real problems. Earth's climate is
driven primarily by extraterrestrial events: supernovae, cosmic rays and orbital dynamics. It seems the Bard got it wrong—when it comes to global warming the fault is not
in ourselves, but in our stars. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth) Comments
On An E-mail Exchange With James Annan James Annan and I have been exchanging e-mails over the weekend, and while he clearly is misunderstanding the focus of the papers, Pielke Sr., R.A., and T. Matsui, 2005: Should light wind and windy nights have the same temperature trends
at individual levels even if the boundary layer averaged heat content change is the same?Geophys. Res. Letts., 32, No. 21, L21813, 10.1029/2005GL024407 Lin, X., R.A. Pielke Sr., K.G. Hubbard, K.C. Crawford, M. A. Shafer, and T. Matsui, 2007: An examination of
1997-2007 surface layer temperature trends at two heights in Oklahoma. Geophys. Res. Letts., 34, L24705, doi:10.1029/2007GL031652. Klotzbach, P.J., R.A. Pielke Sr., R.A. Pielke Jr., J.R. Christy, and R.T. McNider, 2009: An alternative
explanation for differential temperature trends at the surface and in the lower troposphere.J. Geophys. Res., in press. the fact that he is engaging in more-or-lessconstructive debate is encouraging. I have posted below my edited latest reply to James, as the information should be useful to those have been misled by James’s
and Gavin Schmidt’s posts on our paper [James still
concludes this is only about the radiative forcing of CO2; James's statement in the comments that "At least it now seems fairly clear from the recent
distraction tactics (eg belatedly trying to convolute the effect of different atmospheric states with that of anthropogenic forcing) that he realises his error"
still emphasizes his missing the point on our papers]. Here is my latest e-mail. With James permission, I would post his also. E-Mail to James Annan August 23 2009 James I do not reject the figure by Woods. That figure presents the instantaneous radiative flux divergences for the specific vertical profiles used in that analysis.
However, it does not have the time integration that would result in the development of a stable boundary layer near the surface. To more closely illustrate the actual issue in our papers, as one example, we compute vertical heating rates all of the time in our modeling. As an easily accessible
sample, see Fig 8-6 in my modeling book [Mesoscale MeterologicalModeling, 2nd Ed.
2002] for a location in Australia. The rate of cooling is about 0.18K per hour with the largest cooling near the surface. At 1.5 km, it is about an order of magnitude
smaller. An alteration in the vertical distribution of this heating will necessarily alter the minimum temperature at 2m. What I see is the issue is that you are fixated on the radiative effect of doubled CO2. I agree with you that it is a much smaller effect than other influences on
changing the vertical distribution of the heating. In the Eastman et al 2001 paper , see
Figure 8. These results present an integrated analysis of the effect on the vertical distribution of heating on minimum temperatures where both radiative flux divergence
and vertical divergence of turbulent heat fluxes are included. The radiative effect of CO2 on the minimum temperature is an inconsequential -0.017 C, but it does have an effect. The biogeochemical effect (which alters stomatal
conductance and the growth of leaf area and roots during the period of the simulation) is +0.097 C and the land use change is +0.261 C. The later two are significant. Both of
the later, we attribute to the addition of water vapor into the atmosphere [and its effect on the vertical profile of the long wave radiative flux divergence] as
a result of the greater leaf area. Thus the focus on the radiative effect of doubled CO2, which was presented in P&M as just one example of what could alter 2m temperatures, is a diversion from
the focus of our paper. Anything which alters the vertical distribution of heating will alter the temperatures at 2m. If the alteration is systematic over
years, it will result in a bias in the interpretation of the 2m temperature trends (anomalies) as moving in tandem with the trends (anomalies) higher up. I invite you to comment on the core of the three papers [P&M; Lin et al; and Klotzbach et al] instead of the peripheral discussion of TOA and surface radiative
heating from the doubling of CO2. The core issue is “Our results also indicate that the 1.5 or 2 m minimum long term temperature trends over land are not the same as the minimum long term temperatures at other heights
within the surface boundary layer (e.g. 9 m), even over relatively flat landscapes such as Oklahoma. For landscapes with more terrain relief, this difference is expected to
be even larger. Therefore, the use of minimum temperatures at 1.5 or 2 m for interpreting climate system heat change is not appropriate. This means that the 1.5 to 2 m observations of
minimum temperatures that are used as part of the analysis to assess climate system heat changes (e.g., such as used to construct Figure SPM-3 of Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change [2007] and of Parker [2004, 2006] study) lead to a greater long term temperature trend than would be found if higher heights within the surface boundary layer
were used.” Your comments on the above conclusion would be where the focus of your weblogs are. If you disagree, discuss why. You are using the discussion of the role of the radiative effect of added CO2 in directly altering the surface fluxes as an way to divert attention
from the actual conclusions of our paper. Indeed, if we accept your interpretation that the direct radiative effect of doubled CO2 is so small, yet the other effects, such as
lnad use change are so much more important even at short time periods, we should take away the message that there is much more to climate change than just changes in the
radiative top of the atmosphere forcing due to added CO2. (Climate Science)
Does
Gavin Schmidt Understand Boundary Layer Physics? I want to thank Bryan Sralla for alerting me to the comment by Gavin Schmidt on Real Climate regarding our papers Klotzbach, P.J., R.A. Pielke Sr., R.A. Pielke Jr., J.R. Christy, and R.T. McNider, 2009: An alternative
explanation for differential temperature trends at the surface and in the lower troposphere. J. Geophys. Res., in press and Mahmood, R., R.A. Pielke Sr., K.G. Hubbard, D. Niyogi, G. Bonan, P. Lawrence, B. Baker, R. McNider, C. McAlpine, A. Etter, S. Gameda, B. Qian, A. Carleton, A.
Beltran-Przekurat, T. Chase, A.I. Quintanar, J.O. Adegoke, S. Vezhapparambu, G. Conner, S. Asefi, E. Sertel, D.R. Legates, Y. Wu, R. Hale, O.W. Frauenfeld, A. Watts, M.
Shepherd, C. Mitra, V.G. Anantharaj, S. Fall,R. Lund, A. Nordfelt, P. Blanken, J. Du, H.-I. Chang, R. Leeper, U.S. Nair, S. Dobler, R. Deo, and J. Syktus, 2009: Impacts
of land use land cover change on climate and future research priorities. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., in press. The questions on Real Climate by
Paul Klemencic and Gavin’s comment are reproduced below along with my responses. FROM REAL CLIMATE Paul Klemencic Question #1: Since this post was set up to discuss how to critique a scientific paper, I wonder whether an example from a paper currently
in publication might be interesting. The paper accepted by Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society is “Impacts of Land Use Land Cover Change on Climate and Future
Research Priorities” by Rezaul Mahmood, Roger Pielke Sr., et. al. A copy of the paper is here: http://www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-323.pdf One of the key findings seems to summarized in this passage: “The stable nocturnal boundary layer does not measure the heat content in a large part of the atmosphere where the greenhouse signal should be the largest (Lin et
al. 2007; Pielke et al. 2007a). Because of nonlinearities in some parameters of the stable boundary layer (McNider et al. 1995), minimum temperature is highly sensitive to
slight changes in cloud cover, greenhouse gases, and other radiative forcings. However, this sensitivity is reflective of a change in the turbulent state of the atmosphere
and a redistribution of heat not a change in the heat content of the atmosphere (Walters et al. 2007). Using the Lin et al. (2007) observational results, a conservative
estimate of the warm bias resulting from measuring the temperature from a single level near the ground is around 0.21°C per decade (with the nighttime minimum temperature
contributing a large part of this bias). Since land covers about 29% of the Earth’s surface, extrapolating this warm bias could explain about 30% of the IPCC estimate of
global warming. In other words, consideration of the bias in temperature could reduce the IPCC trend to about 0.14°C per decade; still a warming, but not as large as
indicated by the IPCC. ” A couple of quick questions on this result: 1. Is it fair to conclude that every one of the very large number of temperature measurements made on the land would be impacted by a surface boundary layer? Can a direct
linear extrapolation be used to estimate the warming bias, as was done in this paper? [Gavin Schmidt Response: As is being discussed in a number
of places, there is a strong possibility of misunderstanding these statements. Changes in the BL structure for whatever reason do not cause the surface temperature trend to
be wrong in any respect. If however you wanted to calculate the total heat content trend of the atmosphere (something which has not heretofore been a big
requirement), thenyou would want to take the vertical profile changes into account (and not just in the boundary layer). If however, you are trying to
compare observed surface trends to a model then you'd not have to make any corrections since a perfect model would have exactly this same behaviour. - gavin] Roger A. Pielke Sr. Comment: Our papers do not indicate that the measurement of the temperature is incorrect. It is the interpretation of the 2m temperatures in terms of the heat content trend
above the surface that is the issue. Gavin actually agrees with this perspective, but then ignores its significance. The use of a global average surface temperature
trend to diagnose climate system heat changes introduces a bias in the magnitude of the heat changes. The GISS
communication of a global average surface temperature trend, as a surrogate to describe global warming is quantitatively flawed (e.g. see and
see for how the global average surface temperature trend is linked to climate system heat changes [global
warming]). Paul Klemencic Question #2: 2. It appears that correcting the land reading by the large warm bias in this report would wipe out almost all of the land warming trend. If so, is a stable or cooling
land surface trend consistent with satellite measurements over the continents showing warming of the lower and mid-level troposphere? [Gavin Schmidt Response:This is not evidence that the land surface trend needs to be adjusted if you are comparing like with like. There
is plenty of reasons to expect the land surface trend to be faster than the ocean trends - just as is observed. - gavin] Roger A. Pielke Sr. Comment: Gavin shows that he does not understand the issue raised in the text from the Mahmood et al paper. There is a
significant bias in the use of 2m minimum temperatures as a diagnostic for deeper atmospheric temperature trends and anomalies. I can only imagine that Gavin
superficially read our papers, if he read them at al. He does clearly inadequately understand boundary layer dynamics. Paul Klemencic Question #3: 3. The paper seems to conclude that much of the warming bias is due to heat generated from man’s activities other than the GHG forcing. Is the heat released from
mankind’s activities enough to explain the warming bias of 0.21 K per decade? [Gavin Schmidt Response:Really? First off, this isn't evidence that there is a bias in the surface temperature trends. Secondly, I don't think this is
related to the direct output of waste heat into the atmosphere. This might be locally important in some regions, but as a global effect (or even just a land effect) it is a
couple of orders magnitude smaller than the impact of increased CO2 on the forcing. - gavin] Roger A. Pielke Sr. Comment: Here Paul Klemencic misinterprets the papers. While waste heat certainly is another effect that will alter the minimum
temperatures, the issue we raise occurs whenever there are stably surface boundary layers. This typically occurs everywhere at night (particularly on clear and light
wind nights) and in the high latitudes in the winter. This happens even in pristine landscapes. Gavin Schmidt, by not reading the papers, or as a result of his lack of
knowledge regarding boundary layer dynamics, did not accurately reply to Paul’s question. Final Paul Klemencic Comment If you would prefer to defer addressing this issue and answering these questions at this time, I will understand. Roger A. Pielke Sr. Comment: Gavin Schmidt should have invited me (or one of our other co-authors to respond). Clearly, however, despite clear evidence of his
inadequate lack of knowledge of boundary layer physics, he elected to be the authority on our research papers. This just further documents that Real Climate does
not present balanced viewpoints on research papers, but uses misinformation to seek to discredit them. This is a pity, since Gavin Schmidt, if he would educate himself on the
issues we raise, could contribute significantly to a constructive discussion of our papers. So far, he has not done so. (Climate Science)
Major
Errors In James Annan’s Post “Pielke and Matsui (2005) revisited” UPDATE: James made this new claim on his weblog titled PM05 resolved (see his comment linked to one of my weblogs
in the last paragraph of his post). Roger, The change in heating rate in those plots is much less than 0.05K/day near the surface, probably 0.01K/day (green curve = relevant to the real world). How do
you reconcile this with the change in heating rate of about 0.1K PER HOUR that you used in your calculations? The classic book The Climate Near the
Ground by Geiger et al (reprinted most recently in 2009) illustrates the error in James’s statement. On
page 124, for example, they report changes of at least 0.1C PER HOUR, and often more, as a result of changes in vertical stratification and surface
characteristics. The sensitivity of the 2m temperatures to the overlying thermodynamic stability, intensity of turbulent mixing, and surface fluxes is illustrated even
in this early study. The authors discuss atmospheric moisture and cloud cover effects elsewhere in their excellent book. I recommend that James read this
text to update himself on the surface boundary layer and for an explanation of the physics of minimum temperatures that occur overnight. ******************************************************************************* James Annan has posted on his weblog “Pielke and
Matsui (2005) revisited”. In it, he perpetuates his misunderstanding of that paper, as well as its role in defining the issue that is examined
further in Lin et al 2007 and Klotzbach
et al 2009. His errors start with his text [where he is referring to Pielke Sr., R.A., and T. Matsui, 2005: Should light wind and windy nights have the same temperature trends
at individual levels even if the boundary layer averaged heat content change is the same?Geophys. Res. Letts., 32, No. 21, L21813, 10.1029/2005GL024407] “In all this work, they apply the radiative cooling at the surface, even though they explicitly portray
this forcing as being representative of the effect that arises from a change in GHG concentrations. Standard climate theory holds that the radiative forcing is applied the
top of the atmosphere – indeed this is the level at which the forcing is defined. It is simply wrong to claim
that a doubling of CO2 will generate a forcing of 3.7Wm-2 at the surface, for example.” What we actually wrote is “……if the nocturnal boundary layer heat fluxes change over time, the trends of temperature under light winds in the surface layer will be a function of
height, and that the same trends of temperature will not occur in the surface layer on windy and light wind nights.” The addition of CO2 was presented as just one example of how the nocturnal boundary layer fluxes can change over time. Other examples, include changes in
atmospheric water vapor content, cloudiness , and alterations in the surface heat fluxes due to landscape change. He clearly further illustrates his misunderstanding of this issue as he wrote “Thus, a large increase in GHGs generates a warming rate of about 0.04K per day across the boundary layer, as compared to the Pielkian ~1K over a single night
(depending on wind speed).” We never stated that there would be a 1K change across the boundary layer. He has completely misrepresented our paper. The 1K change is concentrated near the surface (e.g. 2m). Figure 1 in Pielke Sr., R.A., C. Davey, D. Niyogi, S. Fall, J. Steinweg-Woods, K. Hubbard, X. Lin, M. Cai, Y.-K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood, S.
Foster, R.T. McNider, and P. Blanken, 2007: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multi-decadal global land
surface temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229 provides a real world example of how the nocturnal boundary layer cools during the night. With respect to the actual changes in surface heat fluxes due to a doubling of CO2, this is discussed on my weblog at Relative Roles of CO2 and Water Vapor in Radiative Forcing). Further
Analysis Of Radiative Forcing By Norm Woods where the instantaneous simulated flux change from a doubling of CO2 is on the order of 1 Watt per meter squared, as we used in Pielke and Matsui paper.
However, it does not matter in our analysis,, what the reason for a change in the cooling rate of 1 Watt per meter squared is. He also writes “The startling impact of this odd application of “bottom of the atmosphere” forcing is apparent from their Table 1. A change in this “forcing” of a mere 1Wm-2
leads to a temperature difference of a whopping 1.5C (at the 2m level) over a single calm night! This is the simple result of applying 1Wm-2 of cooling to the
fairly shallow layer at the bottom of the atmosphere, which has relatively low heat capacity due to its shallowness.” He actually recognizes the issue (the cooling effect is concentrated in a fairly shallow layer), but does not see its
significance! The 1.5C temperature difference that he lists results from the manner in which cooling is vertically distributed in the surface boundary layer. With
stronger winds, for example, this heating is distributed through a deeper layer. What we have explored in the Pielke and Matsui (2005), Lin et al (2007) and Klotzbach
et al (2009) papers is summarized as follows: 1. A global average surface temperature trend is used to diagnose the magnitude of global warming. This is clearly shown in the equation (from NRC,
2005) dH/dt = f – T’/λ where H is the heat content in Joules of the climate system, f is the radiative forcing at the top of the tropopause, T’ is the change in surface
temperature in response to a change in heat content, and λ is the climate feedback parameter. Equation (1) above is a thermodynamic proxy for the thermodynamic
state of the Earth system; as such, it must be tightly coupled to that 2. T’ is computed from the equation T’ = [T' (over the ocean) * area of the ocean + T' (over land) * area of the land]/[area of the Earth's surface]. 3. T’(over land) = [T' (maximum) + T' (minimum)]/2 4. T’ is supposed to be monitored at a standard height (e.g. 2m); if it is not, this introduces another bias, but for this discussion,
I will assume that all of the land measurements are at 2m. 5. Our papers show that whenever the boundary layer is stably stratified, any alteration in the cooling rate (for any reason), results in a greater
temperature change in T’ at 2m than would occur higher up. 6. This means that these values of T’ (from the 2m height) are NOT an appropriate thermodynamic proxy for the thermodynamic state of the Earth system. Values
of of temperature anomalies used to calculate T’ when the atmosphere is stably stratified are not tightly coupled to the thermodynamic state of the global
climate system. 6. Using observed data from Lin et al 2007, we report (see) that “[T]he monitoring (and predicting with multi-decadal global models) the temperature at a single level over land near the surface, as
representative of deeper layer temperature trends that are positive, introduces a significant warm bias. Until further analysis is completed
using temperature trend data at two or more levels near the surface, the best estimate that we have is that this warm bias explains about 30%of
the IPCC estimate of global warming [based on a global average surface temperature trend].” As a final comment, I have worked with James Annan in the past (see).
I would be disappointed if he now has decided join the group (such as we see on Real Climate) who inaccurately discuss research
papers in order to discredit them. (Climate Science)
Kiminori Itoh of Yokohama National University has prepared a guest weblog
for us. It is titled “Soot And The Arctic Ice – A Win-Win Policy Based On Chinese Coal Fired Power Plants” [UPDATE: see also Mike
Smith's Guest Weblog on this subject] GUEST WEBLOG As you saw in a recent weblog in Climate Science, China appears to be modifying the global climate through aerosol emission from a large number of coal fired power plants:
August 12, 2009,
New Paper “Increase In Background Stratospheric Aerosol Observed With Lidar” By Hofmann Et Al 2009. This paper gave me an idea that soot from China may be
responsible for the recent reduction of the Arctic ice, which finally leads me to a Win-Win policy on coal fired power plants in China, as you see below. The target of the paper of Hofmann et al was sulfate aerosol transported into stratosphere. Thus, its main effect on the global climate is cooling of the troposphere
and warming of the stratosphere similar to volcanic eruptions. In fact, this paper was introduced in Science (24 July 2009, p. 373) with the title of “China’s Human
Volcano.” The Chinese aerosol, however, can have another effect on the climate. That is, a possible influence of soot on the Arctic ice. It seems to me that Hofmann et al.’s
paper, together with other recent findings, gives evidence for this possibility as follows: 1) Hofmann et al’s paper shows that stratospheric haze became densest in 2007 and declined a little after that. According to their claim, this is associated with the
changes in sulfate emissions from China. This fact reminds me that the ice extent in the Arctic sea was significantly reduced in the 2007 summer and recovered after that.
Since the amount soot should be proportional to that of sulfate, also the amount soot transported to the Arctic may have a peak in 2007, and may explain the dramatic
reduction of the sea ice extent; the soot deposited onto the ice surfaces absorbs sun light of Arctic summer, gives heat to the ice, and lets it melt. This process should be
particularly effective during summer of the Arctic when the sun does not set. 2) About half of the recent temperature increase in the Arctic region is reportedly due to aerosols (combination effects of sulfate and soot) (D. Shindell and G. Faluvegi,
Nature Geosci. 2, 294-300 (2009)); this result convinces one that the influence of soot on the Arctic environment does exist. 3) There are other recent papers on soot: e. g., “Atmospheric brown clouds: Hemispherical and regional variations in long-range transport, absorption, and radiative
forcing,” V. Ramanathan et al., J. Geophys. Res. vol. 112, D22S21, doi:10.1029/2006JD008124, 2007. From these results, I suspect that the soot from China is responsible for the recent reduction of sea ice in the Arctic summer. To verify this, detailed chemical analyses,
such as carbon allotropes, should be made if the soot can be sampled from the ice (this may be an interesting project). Thus, I can claim that the influence of the soot is likely large. Then, according to the spirit of the precautionary principle, the soot from China should be reduced even
if the scientific basis is not sufficient. The precautionary principle should be applied not just to CO2, but to other primary factors of climate changes. If this
is not possible just because there is no statement on soot in the FCCC (Framework of Convention of Climate Change), we need another convention (or protocol) which enables us
to treat soot properly. Otherwise, countermeasures on climate change will be useless. Now, I want to point out that the reduction of the Chinese soot can become a Win-Win policy for China as well as for other countries. About 80% of the Chinese electricity
comes from coal fired power plants. The CO2 emission from China in 2004 was about 2.27 billion metric tons, which was 8.6% of the world emissions (26.3 billion metric tons).
But, their efficiency of energy production is still low (34.6% as an average), and emissions other than CO2 and aerosol (i. e., mainly SOx, NOx and mercury) bring heavy
health problems as well. In fact, resultant atmospheric pollution causes 300 thousands to 400 thousands of deaths a year. If countries like Japan, which has advanced technologies of coal fired power plants (e. g., energy production efficiency being 41.1% in Japan), can cooperate with China to
increase the efficiency of energy production and to decrease all kinds of emissions, this will become a true Win-Win policy. China can save a lot of human lives and working
hours, can reduce the influence of the aerosol on the global climate, and in addition, can reduce CO2 emission. The other countries also benefit from this policy,
including economical ones and a reduction of transboundary pollution. This Win-Win policy actually will reduce the emission of CO2. Just from this aspect, it is much better than the cap-and-trade policy which in fact will increase the CO2
emissions. Moreover, and importantly, when considering a large capacity of coal reserves, this is a reasonable tactics in near future. With this kind of Win-Win policies, developing countries like China can agree with developed countries on their energy policies. There will be no progress in the
negotiation between them if the developing countries can participate in the climate policies only through the reduction of CO2. We need flexible approaches for complicated
issues like the climate changes. (Climate Science) This post responds to the last of Conor
Clarke’s comments on my study, “What to Do About Global Warming,” published by Cato. This
series started with the imaginatively titled, Response to Conor Clarke Part I,
and continued with Cherry Picking Climate
Catastrophes and Do
Industrialized Countries Have a Responsibility for the Well-Being of Developing Nations? CONOR said: I think Goklany is a bit picky and choosey with the evidence. … I also like the Goklany paper a lot. [THANK YOU!! I'll take whatever I get.]
But in this case it’s hard to resist. [Emphasis in original.] To take one example (of several), Goklany’s hunger estimates rely heavily on those published by Global Environmental Change (GEC), which he uses to make the
argument that “the world will be better off in 2085 with respect to hunger than it was in 1990 despite any increase in population.” But the GEC produced two estimates of
hunger and climate change — one that assumes the benefits of CO2 fertilization and one that does not. Goklany picks the former estimate (I have no idea why), despite the
fact the GEC says the effects of climate change “will fall somewhere between” the two. … [I}f you embrace anything other than the most Pollyanish CO2
fertilization estimate -- the one that Goklany uses in his Cato paper -- we will be living in a world in which climate change puts tens of millions of additional people at
risk of starvation by 2085. My RESPONSE: First, let me elaborate on my selection of the set of studies that I used in my paper. Essentially, the selected set of studies (published in Global
Environmental Change) was the only one that had estimated global impacts using detailed process models in conjunction with the IPCC’s latest
scenarios, and were peer reviewed. Moreover, they come with a provenance that people who may be unhappy with my results cannot impugn. [This is important only because
many people arguing about global warming seem to be more concerned about who did the study and whether the results bolster their predilections, than how the study was done.]
Specifically, virtually all the authors were intimately connected with the IPCC. The senior author of the hunger study was also the co-chairman of the IPCC’s Work Group II,
which was responsible for compiling the portion of the IPCC’s latest assessment that dealt with impacts, vulnerability and adaptation. The authors of the water resource and
coastal flooding studies were the lead authors of corresponding chapters in that IPCC report. An earlier version of the same set of impact studies was the basis for the claim
by Sir David King, erstwhile science advisor to Her Majesty’s Government, that global warming was a more serious threat than terrorism (see here).
The Stern Review also drew quite heavily from these studies (see below). Let’s now turn to Conor’s comments on the hunger study and why I assumed that the benefits of carbon fertilization would be realized in the future. Indeed, the hunger
study (Parry et al.) produced two separate estimates — one assuming that carbon fertilization is a reality, and the other assuming zero carbon fertilization. But
the two estimates are not equally likely. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands
of experimental studies that show carbon fertilization is a reality (see also here), that
higher CO2 not only increases the rate of photosynthesis, but also increases the efficiency of
water use by plants (i.e., it confers a degree of immunity to drought), among the many other benefits CO2 bestows on plants and other carbon based life, including all
creatures – big and small — in the biosphere that depend directly or indirectly on photosynthesis. The probability that direct CO2 effects on crop growth are zero
or negative is virtually non-existent (IPCC, 2001b: 254–256). Second, the positive effect of carbon fertilization was based on the average of experimental
studies; it’s not an upper bound estimate. On the other hand, the notion of “zero fertilization” is an assumption not supported by the vast majority of empirical data.
So averaging results from the two estimates makes no sense and would understate the average benefits that would likely result from carbon fertilization. Notably, the Stern Review, invoked a study by Long
et al. (subscription required) to estimate future levels of hunger based on “zero fertilization” using precisely the same study (Parry et al.) that I – and
Conor, in his comments — used. But Long et al.’s results have been disputed
by other scientists (also see here), including some contributors to the IPCC’s assessment.
More importantly, Long et al. only suggested that under field conditions, carbon fertilization may be a third to less than half of what is indicated by experiments
using growth chambers, not that it would be zero. It also noted that fertilization may be stronger under drought conditions or if sufficient nitrogen is employed. But drought
is one of the bogeymen of global warming, and increased use of nitrogen is precisely the kind of adaptation that would become more affordable in the future as
countries become wealthier, as they should if the IPCC’s scenarios are to be given any credence. Indeed, that is one of the adaptations allowed in Parry et al.
Also, the fact that crop yields are higher in richer countries is partly because they can more easily afford nitrogen fertilizers (see here,
p. 78). In fact, China’s nitrogen use per hectare is already among the world’s highest. For all these reasons, even if one accepts the Long et al. study as gospel, it is
reasonable to assume that the effect of carbon fertilization will be closer to the “higher” estimate from the Parry et al. study than to the “zero fertilization”
case. But, more importantly, the uncertainties related to the magnitude of the CO2 fertilization effect is most likely swamped by a major source of overestimation of hunger in
Parry et al.’s estimates. Although Parry et al. allows for some secular (time-dependent) increases in agricultural productivity, increases in crop yield with economic growth due to greater
application of fertilizer and irrigation in richer countries, decreases in hunger due to economic growth, and for some adaptive responses at the farm level to deal with
global warming, Parry et al. itself acknowledged that these adaptive responses are based on the “current range” of available technologies, not on technologies that would
be available in the future or any technologies developed to specifically cope with the negative impacts of global warming (Parry
et al., p. 57). The potential for future technologies to cope with global warming is large, especially if one considers bioengineered crops (see here,
chapter 9), which Parry et al. admittedly didn’t consider. Moreover, an examination of the sources cited in Parry et al. indicates that the “current range” of
technology is actually based on 1990s or earlier technology. That is, it is not quite current. The approach used in Parry et al. to estimate the impacts of global warming decades from now is, in essence, tantamount to estimating today’s level of hunger (and
agricultural production) based on the technology of 50 years ago. In fact, the major reason why Paul Ehrlich’s Population Bomb turned out to be a dud was that it
underestimated or ignored future developments in agricultural technology. As noted in Part I of this series of responses, ignoring
technological change can, over decades, lead to overestimating adverse impacts by orders of magnitude. Notably, due to a combination of technological change and
increasing affluence, U.S. death rates due to various water related diseases – dysentery, typhoid, paratyphoid, other gastrointestinal disease, and malaria – declined by
99%–100% from 1900 to 1970. For the same reasons, during the twentieth century, global death rates from extreme weather events declined by over 95%. This basic methodological shortcoming, however, is not unique to Parry et al. It is common to ALL global warming impact studies that I have read – and I have read plenty
of them. For all these reasons, the adverse impacts of global warming for hunger (as well as other aspects of human well-being, e.g., due to malaria and coastal flooding) that I
used in my paper are, more likely than not, substantially overestimated. And by the same token, ignoring technological change (and not fully accounting for increases in
wealth) also assures that the positive impacts of global warming are likely to be underestimated, further overestimating the net negative impacts of global warming. Therefore, far from being Pollyanish, the estimates used in my paper most likely substantially exaggerate the net negative impacts of global warming. Despite that, those
estimates cannot justify emissions cuts that go beyond no-regret actions at this time or through the foreseeable future. (Indur Goklany, Cato at liberty) Bjorn Lomborg, the bête noir of the environmentalist movement, is causing more controversy. He originally shot to fame (or notoriety, depending on your point of view) by
questioning what he called the pessimistic 'litany' of environmentalism in his iconoclastic 2001 book The Skeptical Environmentalist. Having originally set his graduate
students the task of pulling together the evidence to disprove the rather optimistic views on the environment of Julian Simon and others, he found that, in essence, Simons
was right. This in itself is a powerful illustration of how an individual's opinion can be radically changed by hard evidence. New Documentary Explores
Human Cost of Global Warming Propaganda Scientifically unsound claims about global warming are being used to seduce young students and to cajole lawmakers into accepting the legitimacy of regulatory schemes that
restrict the use of fossils fuels, according to a new documentary. Global warming remains a theory Since President Barack Obama has announced his energy policy and the U.S. House has passed a cap and trade bill, it's imperative that we understand what drives their
decisions. Life thrives with warmth and carbon dioxide -- such a revelation: Climate
change doubles tundra plant life, boosting shrubs, grasses Climate change is already having a dramatic effect on plants in the High Arctic, turning the once rocky tundra a deep shade of green and creating what could be another
mechanism speeding up global warming. The Global Warming Movement (AGW) has taken on the worrisome attributes of a pseudo-religious cult, which operates far more on the basis of an apocalyptic
"belief" system than on objective climate science. Climate campaign creates carbon crimes AMSTERDAM | Customs agents this week arrested nine people in the London area suspected of a multimillion-dollar fraud in trading carbon permits, bringing attention to a
rich new field for crime sprung from the fight against climate change. The Post asked politicians, academics and others whether the health-care debate has made it unlikely that climate change legislation will be passed in the near future.
Below are contributions from Steven F. Hayward, Kenneth P. Green, James M. Inhofe, Geoff Garin, Tony Fratto, Steve Seidel, David G. Hawkins, Harold Ford Jr., Kay Baily
Hutchison and Barbara Boxer. (Washington Post) Demand for tariffs in global-warming legislation splits
allies Midwestern Democrats, who want duties placed on countries who don't limit greenhouse gas emissions, are at odds with Obama. Steven Chu, A Political Scientist "What the U.S. and China do over the next decade," declared Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the Nobel
Prize – winning physicist who is leading President Obama's push for a clean-energy economy, "will determine the fate of the world." Chu had gone to Beijing's Tsinghua University, the "MIT of China," to make his half-apocalyptic, half-optimistic pitch about climate change. In his nerdy
professor style and referring to "Milankovitch cycles" and the "albedo effect" as well as melting glaciers and rising seas, Chu methodically explained
that the science is clear, that we're boiling the planet - but also that science can save us, that we can innovate our way to sustainability. He acknowledged that the
developed nations that made the mess can't tell the developing world not to develop, but he also warned that China is on track to emit more carbon in the next three decades
than the U.S. has emitted in its history; that business as usual would intensify floods, droughts and heat waves in both countries; that greenhouse gases respect no borders.
This earth, he concluded, is the only one we've got; it would be illogical and immoral to fry it. "Science has unambiguously shown that we're altering the destiny of our
planet," he said. "Is this the legacy we want to leave our children and grandchildren?" (Time) Really? We'd call him a raving activist... Quite open about wanting to continually screw you harder: Pass U.S.
climate law, then strengthen: Waxman SAN FRANCISCO - The United States can follow California's lead of raising climate change goals over time, a congressional leader on global warming initiatives said on
Friday. Yeah, disappointment all 'round... We believed Obama
was going to tackle climate change. It isn't that easy Barack Obama might be the most powerful man in the world, but he faces tough opposition from all sides over climate-change legislation (Eric Roston, The Observer) Right in one respect: Agency warns current climate
proposals won't work BRUSSELS — Reversing global warming will cost up to $185 billion (euro130 billion) a year before 2020 and require more action by world governments than currently
pledged, an international environmental analysis group said Thursday. No amount of tweaking atmospheric carbon dioxide will have any measurable difference on global mean temperature -- it simply can not work as proposed.
Not the first time we have pointed out this is all pain for absolutely no gain. China Says Climate Talks Stymied
By Political Interests - Report BEIJING - Little progress has been made so far on a new pact to combat global warming, with "commercial and political interests" continuing to prevail, China's
senior climate change official said on Monday. (Reuters) We're good with that. Um... no: Carbon targets may be too tough, says John Prescott
- Emissions plan may have to be watered down to reach a deal, claims former deputy prime minister Targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions may have to be watered down to get a deal at the critical Copenhagen climate summit, the former deputy prime minister John Prescott
warns today. Carbon control is not, was not and never will be a viable climate control strategy. If global warming should ever become a problem then you
address it with something which can work and carbon constraint can never be part of any such solution. Lord Adonis:
We can cut greenhouse gas emissions without travelling less Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, faced accusations of undermining the Government’s position on “green” taxes after saying it isn't necessary to tax people out
of their cars and planes. Running away, but oh so bravely: Climate-change
chief turns away from Kyoto pact AUSTRALIA'S chief climate change negotiator says a dramatic shift from the design of the Kyoto Protocol could be the best way to reach an international climate change
agreement.
Sensibly: Nationals vote against emissions bill The National party has unanimously rejected the federal government's emissions trading scheme legislation at the party's annual council in Canberra today. Nationals call to Malcolm Turnbull ETS rebels THE Nationals have directly challenged Malcolm Turnbull's authority on climate change, boasting that Liberal MPs are beginning to back their blanket rejection of a carbon
emissions trading system. Oilsands not a problem after all: U.S. approves Alberta Clipper
pipeline project CALGARY, Alberta - The United States approved Enbridge Inc's $3.3 billion Alberta Clipper pipeline project on Thursday, granting the project, which will deliver Canadian
oil to U.S. refineries, a presidential permit, and raising the ire of some environmental groups. How to increase energy dependence: Waxman-Markey
Climate Bill To Harm US Refining Industry -Study HOUSTON -- Proposed federal legislation aimed at curbing global warming would drastically reduce domestic fuel production and could potentially double U.S. demand for
imported oil products, says a new study commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute as part of its effort to combat the landmark climate bill. ND burns off natural gas due to lack of pipelines BISMARCK, N.D. — Enough natural gas to heat every home in North Dakota through at least two brutal winters was burned off as an unmarketable byproduct in the state's oil
patch in 2008, records obtained by The Associated Press show. Energy experts say vast undersea reserves of natural gas hydrates may be more accessible than previously thought, potentially offering an important stopgap in the coming
energy transition. Take a hike, Alphonse: European Union releases list of
airlines that must limit emissions or face penalties BRUSSELS — The European Union says nearly 4,000 airlines, business jet operators and air forces around the world must join its greenhouse gas emissions trading program
by 2012 or be penalized when flying to EU countries. The dopey things greenhouse hysteria makes people do: A New,
More CO2-Absorbent Algae Strain? A California start-up, Aurora Biofuels, says it has cultivated algae that doubles production of biodiesel by absorbing more than twice as much carbon dioxide as
conventional strains. Should Renewables Be ‘Made in the U.S.A.’? Tax credits for renewable-energy equipment manufacturing became a reality last week, with the United States Energy and Treasury Departments officially launching a $2.3
billion program that the stimulus package authorized back in February. Bigger question: should they be made at all? Europe's Saharan power plan: miracle or mirage? RABAT - A 400 billion euro plan to power Europe with Sahara sunlight is gaining momentum, even as critics see high risks in a large corporate project using young
technology in north African countries with weak rule of law. New meter to crank up power bills HOUSEHOLDS face an average $263-a-year leap in electricity bills with the installation of new smart meters that begins in 10 days' time. Good luck guys: Climate change opens Arctic route for German ships BERLIN - Two German ships set off on Friday on the first journey across Russia's Arctic-facing northern shore without the help of icebreakers after climate change helped
opened the passage, the company said. August 21, 2009
The sky is not falling … again Once again, the biggest health story of the year has found that we are healthier and living longer than in the history of our country. The Importance of Preservatives
Learn why preservatives are so important for your cosmetics and personal care products. Ever wonder what would happen without them?! (PersonalCareCouncil) Half of swine flu deaths in high-risk people -study WASHINGTON, Aug 20 - About half of people who have died from swine flu have been pregnant or had other health conditions, especially diabetes and conditions linked with
obesity, French researchers reported on Thursday. Mercury mania time again, already? Mercury-Tainted Fish Found Widely In U.S. Streams LOS ANGELES - Scientists have detected mercury contamination in every one of hundreds of fish sampled from 291 freshwater streams, according to a U.S. government study
released on Wednesday. Hmm... the headlines: Liver cancer cases triple and booze is to blame Cases of liver cancer have more than tripled in the past 30 years because of binge boozing. Sharp rise in liver cancer blamed on binge drinking and obesity Cases of liver cancer have tripled over the last three decades, according to figures published today by Britain's leading cancer charity. Statistics compiled by Cancer
Research UK show that in 1975 there were 865 cases of primary liver cancer. In 2006 that had risen to 3,108. Primary liver cancers 'soaring' Cases of primary liver cancer, an often preventable disease, have trebled in the last 30 years, figures suggest. But what does it all mean? Actually, not very much: How have rates of liver cancer changed? The War on Obesity and Social Conflict Obesity has become a threat to the nation, we are told. "Obesity is depleting our nation's pocketbook and devastating the health and wellness of millions of
Americans," says Dr. Clyde Yancy of the American Heart Association. "Left unaddressed, the obesity epidemic will undermine our country's health, reduce our
productivity and threaten our economic security." Oh boy... CDC launches Web site to help employers combat obesity, reduce costs The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention unveiled a Web site to help employers address the growing obesity problem. “Diversity” and “acceptance” have become politically correct ideas and appear in countless employee policy manuals and mission statements of nonprofit groups. As
well-intentioned as they may be, they also hold a troubling side. ObamaCare? Ask the British and Canadians "We spend more on health care than most other countries." "We need to bring costs down." A leaked report shows that Vancouver's health authority is considering cutting thousands of surgeries to balance the budget. However organized, government-run health care
inevitably leads to rationing. (IBD) Bush Quietly Saved a Million African Lives What if a president, on his own initiative, under no demands from staff or from supporters or opponents, set out to spend an unprecedented amount of money on AIDS in
Africa, literally billions of dollars, at a time when the nation could not afford it, citing his faith as a primary motivation and, ultimately, saved more than a million
lives? Commerce secretary approves Arctic fisheries plan ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The U.S. secretary of commerce has approved a plan that would prohibit an expansion of commercial fishing in the Arctic, at least until more is known
about the area. The question has been asked many times and this very concept is topical over on the forum at present. Let
me try to show you why Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is of no value as a global thermostat: The stated purpose of CCS is to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) accumulating in the atmosphere and so limit enhanced greenhouse warming. Let's put in
some real numbers to see how that works out. According to the U.S. EPA, the average emission rates in the United States from coal-fired generation
is 2,249 lbs/MWh of carbon dioxide. We convert 2,249 lbs to 1.02 metric tons for the purposes of calculation. Calling the warmists' bluff Question: What is a "renewable" or "low carbon" energy requirement? Answer: Nothing but the first tranche of Cap & Tax under a different name -- but it surely stinks as badly. Think about it. Its purpose is exactly the same -- make your energy more expensive as part of making you use less of it. It is also an insidious move
toward supply restriction (read: rationing) since it relies on the unreliable (largely wind) and is too poorly supplied to meet levels proposed for legislation. People who don't want you to have affordable energy and who want to lower your standard of living like it (which should tell you a lot). Rent-seeking
organizations who get massive subsidies (of your tax funds) supplying expensive and inferior product like it too. Lawmakers currently like it because misanthropes and
rent-seekers currently have them convinced people must want it to save them from a heating planet (which is currently not heating). Do you think you will
like it? Do you really want it? If you don't want it and don't want your representatives to introduce Cap & Tax under a different name then you are going to have to tell them so.
No mandated energy mix. Most reliable supply at best available price to get America working again. <chuckle> Oh Mae... O2 Dropping Faster than CO2 Rising - Implications for
Climate Change Policies New research shows oxygen depletion in the atmosphere accelerating since 2003, coinciding with the biofuels boom; climate policies that focus exclusively on carbon
sequestration could be disastrous for all oxygen-breathing organisms including humans (Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS) Just in case anyone is actually concerned about this latest example of Mae-Wan Ho's lunacy: With forest resources --"the lungs of the Earth"-- under attack in many regions, some have raised concerns about the planet's oxygen supply. A leading
geochemist assesses these claims and finds that we can probably breathe easy (Wallace Broecker, Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory) For the Full Report in PDF
Form, please click here. [Illustrations, footnotes and references available in PDF version] America's "mainstream" media missed it, but April 17 was a red-letter day for its Deep Ecologists. Red letter because it was the day the Obama Administration
declared that carbon dioxide and five other gases emitted by industry threaten "the health and welfare of current and future generations." This opens the door to
regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency to "cap" emissions. The Deep Ecologists see this as the path to their cherished dream of a less populous nation
with greatly reduced industrial production. It will also lead to a poorer (they would call it "simpler") standard of living. (Peter Hannaford, SPPI) Anthropogenic Global Warming? Not So Fast… Skepticism about anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has engulfed the leadership of key scientific societies including the American Chemical Society (ACS), the American
Geophysical Union (AGU) and the American Physical Society (APS). Growing numbers of members of these prestigious organizations are clamoring for a reassessment of their
societies’ positions on climate change. This skepticism of the accepted wisdom about the link between carbon dioxide and climate change makes a mockery of the ongoing claim
that when it comes to AGW, “the science is settled.” Consensus Thaws On Global Warming What's the climate change scare really about? Not what the alarmists want the public to think. Just ask the retiring head of Greenpeace. In an unguarded moment, he might
spill the secret again. (IBD) The
Post and Times Push for Cap and Trade Since the June House vote on the Waxman-Markey “cap-and-trade” bill, lawmakers from both chambers have backed significantly away from the legislation. The first
raucous “town hall” meetings occurred during the July 4 recess, before health care. Voters in swing districts were mad as heck then, and they’re even more angry now.
Had the energy bill not all but disappeared from the Democrats’ fall agenda, imagine the decibel level if members were called to defend it and Obamacare. But none of this has dissuaded the editorial boards of the The New York Times and Washington Post. Both newspapers featured uncharacteristically shrill
editorials today demanding climate change legislation at any cost. The Post, at least, notes the political
realities facing cap-and-trade and resignedly confesses its favored approach to the warming menace: “Yes, we’re talking about a carbon tax.” The paper—motto: “If
you don’t get it, you don’t get it”—argues that in contrast to the Boolean ball of twine that is cap-and-trade, a straight carbon tax will be less complicated to
enforce, and that the cost to individuals and businesses “could be rebated…in a number of ways.” Get it? While ostensibly tackling the all-encompassing peril of global warming, bureaucrats could rig the tax code in other ways to achieve a zero net loss in economic
productivity or jobs. Right. Anyone who makes more than 50K, or any family at 100K who thinks they will get all their money back, please raise you hands. The prescription
offered by the Times, meanwhile, is chilling in its cynicism and extremity. It embraces the fringe—and heavily discredited—idea of “warning that global
warming poses a serious threat to national security.” It bullies lawmakers with the threat that warming could induce resource shortages that would “unleash regional
conflicts and draw in America’s armed forces.” (Patrick J. Michaels, Cato-at-liberty) Carbon traders bet on California redwoods GARCIA RIVER FOREST, Calif., Aug 21 - A stand of young redwoods, survivors in what was once a magnificent forest of towering giants, could play a small part of the battle
to slow global warming -- and forms part of an emerging market. There is no "right" way to restrict carbon, an aim which is wrong on all levels. Don't be a life-hater, return carbon to the biosphere. Europol Expects More Arrests In Carbon Fraud Probe LONDON - European police agency Europol expects further arrests in connection with suspected carbon credit tax fraud after Britain's tax office said two more people were
arrested in London late on Wednesday, bringing the total to nine. UNFCCC warns on climate talk delays The head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has warned that reaching a post-2012 climate agreement in Copenhagen will not be possible unless
negotiators speed up their work. This comes as a key delegate tells Carbon Finance that “time-wasting” by the G77+China group at last week’s informal talks in Bonn,
Germany meant that a mandate for the next session, in Bangkok next month, could not be agreed. UN summit on climate change under fire The much-ballyhooed UN summit on climate change, scheduled to take place on September 22 in New York, is mired in controversy even before it gets off the ground. (IPS) Tony Blair:
Copenhagen climate summit must not be about 'percentages' World leaders must not get bogged down in 'precise percentages' when they negotiate a successor the Kyoto climate change treaty in Copenhagen, Tony Blair has said. (Daily
Telegraph) Recommendation to postpone the 2009 Copenhagen Conference
(.pdf) The so-called “global warming” issue viewed in the context of politics and the economy of the world. (Syun Akasofu, International Arctic Research Center, University of
Alaska Fairbanks) Special interests battle for
climate-change ground The climate battle will be waged in the ornate setting of the U.S. Senate this fall, but for now the fight is taking place in humbler locales like local libraries, college
campuses and county fairs as supporters and critics struggle for hearts and minds beyond the beltway. Well, It’s Not A Party Til These Guys Show
Up AP reports “US unions, green groups unleash climate change campaign”: A coalition of US environmental groups and major labor unions on Wednesday unveiled a national campaign to refute charges that legislation to battle climate change would
cost US jobs in a recession. “The fact of the matter is, you’re either going to have both, or you’ll have neither,” Leo Gerard, the head of the United Steelworkers union, told reporters on a
conference call to announce the 50-stop, 22-state push. “This is about creating good family-supporting jobs as we do the right thing for the planet,” said Gerard, who predicted that legislation to fight global warming
would create hundreds of thousands of jobs “if we do it right.” Oh, great … back to this canard. Like a bad penny that keeps turning up, carbon-cappers keep saying that climate legislation will create green jobs. So it’s worth
remembering this lesson from The Beacon Hill Institute: Recent studies forecasting the potential economic benefits of government green job programs are critically flawed and erroneously promote these jobs as a benefit,
according to a report released today by The Beacon Hill Institute (BHI) at Suffolk University. The economic analysis reviewed the primary claims of three of the most influential green jobs studies and found serious economic flaws in each. “Contrary to the claims made in these studies, we found that the green job initiatives reviewed in each actually causes greater harm than good to the American economy
and will cause growth to slow,” reported Paul Bachman, Director of Research at the Beacon Hill Institute, one of the report’s authors. (Chilling Effect) Climate
Change Legislation Hot Topic at Ag Issues Forum It was standing room only in the First National Bank South Dakota Pavillion for the Agriculture Issues Panel featuring Senator John Thune, Representative Stephanie
Herseth-Sandlin, South Dakota Secretary of Agriculture Bill Even, State Director of the Farm Service Agency Craig Schaunaman and Michelle RookState Director of Farm Service
Agency (FSA) Schaunaman and Michelle Rooke as the moderator. And, the main topic of discussion: climate change legislation. The Waxman-Markey Bill (HR 2454), better known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, passed
the U.S. House of Representatives on June 26, 2009. While the bill seems to have noble intentions to clean up the environment, it has the agriculture community worried about
the implications this bill will have on the nation’s food producers. Senator Thune and Representative Herseth-Sandlin weighed in on this important bill.
“I will work with every fiber of my being to defeat the bill that passed in the House,” promised Senator Thune. “I think we should all be in favor of cleaning up
the environment, but it shouldn’t be at the expense of the American farmer and rancher. Let me make this point clear: We can’t quantify the benefits of cap-and-trade
legislation, but we all know how much it’s going to cost us.” “There is no doubt that we need to do something about climate change,” said Representative Herseth-Sandlin. “I did not vote for HR 2454 as it was written, and the
bill has absolutely no chance of passing the Senate in its current form. I believe we need to have a production title to offset the costs for cap-and-trade. This shouldn’t
be a patchwork quilt of regulations. We need to slow the process down a bit and do this bill right. I share the same concerns as Senator Thune, but there are people that
believe carbon sequestration could be beneficial to agriculture. So, let’s work together to make sure this bill doesn’t harm the agriculture industry.” (AgWired) Senators say they’ll fight
cap-and-trade legislation CASPER - The cap-and-trade legislation before Congress can achieve a 17 percent carbon reduction for a cost of about $83 per household per year, according to recent
analysis by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Journalists Show Bias on Global Warming
Issues. Read these quotes: “As scientific evidence has accumulated that the planet is warming and that humans are behind it, many previous skeptics have been won over. There remains a vocal
cadre of critics, however, at least some of whose arguments have shifted over the last several years from outright denial that the earth is warming to insisting it's
unrelated to human activity — and even if it is, likely nothing much to worry about." The paragraphs above are taken from the website of the Society of Environmental Journalists section on “Skeptics and Contrarians." Dubious claim of the day goes to Seth Boringtheme: In
hot water: World sets ocean temperature record WASHINGTON — Steve Kramer spent an hour and a half swimming in the ocean Sunday — in Maine. The water temperature was 72 degrees — more like Ocean City, Md., this
time of year. And Ocean City's water temp hit 88 degrees this week, toasty even by Miami Beach standards. Just one teensy problem with Seth's narrative -- Argo data shows the oceans aren't accumulating heat, so it's a little difficult to classify them as
"warming". Ocean surface temperature records are poor, at best, so this is pretty easy to quantify as "Drama Queen Boringtheme rides again." Letter of the moment: Use precise climate terms In regard to your Aug. 15 editorial on cap and trade, you mar a reasonably objective editorial by constantly using the term “climate change” when you probably mean
human-caused global warming. This guys have a serious fixation issue: Climate Justice It is nearly time for the COP 15 conference on climate change. Achieving global consensus at the COP15 conference is more than necessary. The agreements that are made at
COP 15 will influence the future of the economy and environment on a global scale. (CoP15 blog) Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Aug. 21st 2009 This week British kids wear eco-uniforms, polar bears refuse to drown and greens celebrate their efforts to make our lights go out. Agency warns current climate proposals won't work Reversing global warming will cost up to $185 billion (euro130 billion) a year before 2020 and require more action by world governments than currently pledged, an
international environmental analysis group said Thursday. They're certainly right about it being all pain for no gain. Big Benefits Seen In Adapting To Climate Change OSLO - Helping developing nations to adapt to climate change such as floods or heatwaves can give bigger economic benefits than a focus on deep cuts in greenhouse gas
emissions, a study indicated on Friday. Well, yes, adaptation is the correct response to any change which occurs -- always has been. That doesn't mean it's what will happen though, because
politicians have a pathological need to be seen to be "doing something", hence our tentative support for more practical and less harmful response than carbon
constraint. Boy they give those virtual worlds a hard time: Climate extremes set to worsen in
some, but not all, countries Floods, droughts and heat waves – these are the kind of climate extremes that can bring devastation, particularly in developing countries. To make matters worse these
extreme events are expected to become more frequent in some countries, due to global warming. Now a new study assesses which people are most vulnerable to climate volatility,
and asks how we might reduce the impact of these extreme events. (ERW) Check some of the assumptions in Study
of 16 Developing Countries Shows Climate Change Could Deepen Poverty: The global climate model experiments developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, were used for the future projections of extreme events. The
team used an IPCC scenario that has greenhouse gas emissions continuing to follow the current trend, Diffenbaugh said. Check out what Hansen et al say about the deficiencies of their own
state-of-the-art toy: ModelE (2006) compares the atmospheric model climatology with observations. Model shortcomings include ~25% regional deficiency of summer stratus cloud cover off the
west coast of the continents with resulting excessive absorption of solar radiation by as much as 50 W/m2, deficiency in absorbed solar radiation and net radiation
over other tropical regions by typically 20 W/m2, sea level pressure too high by 4–8 hPa in the winter in the Arctic and 2–4 hPa too low in all seasons in the tropics, ~20%
deficiency of rainfall over the Amazon basin, ~25% deficiency in summer cloud cover in the western United States and central Asia with a corresponding ~5°C
excessive summer warmth in these regions. In addition to the inaccuracies in the simulated climatology, another shortcoming of the atmospheric model for climate change
studies is the absence of a gravity wave representation, as noted above, which may affect the nature of interactions between the troposphere and stratosphere. [em added] Is any of that important? Is a 50 W/m2 discrepancy much? I guess that depends on whether you consider 20 times the total estimated change from
greenhouse gas emission over the last 250 years "much", doesn't it? According to the Carbon Dioxide
Information Analysis Center the change from carbon dioxide and methane amount to 2.14 W/m2 since 1750. Even a full doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide is
estimated at less than 4 Watts per meter squared so errors of -20 to +50 Watts could be considered "significant". This is a seriously stupid game. Amazing, a flood delta doing what flood deltas do... Nile
Delta: 'We are going underwater. The sea will conquer our lands' The Nile Delta is under threat from rising sea levels. Without the food it produces, Egypt faces catastrophe (The Guardian) Yes, flood deltas compact and subside. Yes, it happens all the time all over the world. No, it is not unusual nor is it temperature related. The answer is and must remain "No": Australia Government Seeks Talks On Emissions Scheme CANBERRA - Australia's government challenged conservative rivals on Thursday to support deadlocked emissions trade laws after both sides reached agreement on a new
national target to sharply lift the use of renewable energy. Renewable Tax Down Under - Australia's pols
choose a green dream over economic reality. Australia generates about 85% of its electricity from coal because it has a lot of it and it's cheaper than any other form of energy. Yesterday, political parties on both
the right and left decided that was a bad thing, and passed a law to make Australians pay more for energy. Look at the nonsense that gets slipped into these articles: Use less coal
power, green groups tell Bligh Government ENVIRONMENT groups have called on the Bligh Government to reduce the state's dependence on coal-fired power for its electricity needs, not increase it. Oh for goodness sake! There is absolutely zero chance of "runaway climate change", period. China’s Natural Gas Pricing Quandary Compared with international natural gas prices, China’s methane prices are relatively low. Residential natural gas prices are set by the government, which looks at three
factors: the wellhead price, pipeline transportation costs, and local pipeline network fees. In 2008, the average natural gas price from domestic sources was only about $3.80
per thousand cubic feet (mcf), equivalent to $21 per barrel of crude oil, not unlike the price differential in the United States. However, in a country suffering from some of
the world’s worst air quality, natural gas only provided 3.4 percent of the total energy in China, comparing to the world average of 24.1 percent during the same period. Drilling Ordeals Said to Delay Geothermal Project The Obama administration’s first major test of geothermal energy as a significant alternative to fossil fuels has fallen seriously behind schedule, several federal
scientists said this week, even as the project is under review because of the earthquakes it could generate in Northern California. Tony Blair: 'We can't ask people not to own cars' Despite a projected tripling of traffic in China over the next decade, the focus should be on low-carbon technology rather than sacrifice, says a report by Tony Blair's
Climate Group (The Guardian) Toyota, Hybrid Innovator,
Holds Back in Race to Go Electric TOKYO — Despite Toyota’s image as the world’s greenest automaker, the company that brought us the Prius — totem of the environmentally conscious — has fallen
behind in the race for the all-electric car. August 20, 2009
Media: "It's all getting worse! We're all gonna die!" Reality: CDC says life expectancy in US up, deaths not ATLANTA — U.S. life expectancy has risen to a new high, now standing at nearly 78 years, the government reported Wednesday. The increase is due mainly to falling death
rates in almost all the leading causes of death. The average life expectancy for babies born in 2007 is nearly three months greater than for children born in 2006. U.S. Life Expectancy at All Time High Americans are living nearly two-and-a-half months longer, according to new life expectancy statistics released today. In 2007, life expectancy in the United States reached
a high of nearly 78 years, up from 77.7 a year earlier. Americans Gained 73 Days to Live in 2007, CDC Says Americans gained 73 days to live in 2007. With opposition growing to their planned takeover of U.S. health care, Democrats have an idea: They'll go it alone without GOP votes. Looks like they'll have to go it
alone without the American people, too. Big No On Higher Taxes For Health Care Despite repeated promises that President Obama will not raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 a year, senior administration officials recently floated the
possibility that tax increases on middle class Americans might be necessary to pay for health care reform. US views unchanged on Obama's healthcare plans WASHINGTON - Americans remain skeptical of President Barack Obama's healthcare reform drive, but their views have not changed much after weeks of sometimes angry protests
at public meetings, according to an NBC poll released on Tuesday. Once upon a time Australia had a good system, people could privately insure at whatever level they felt appropriate (right up to no fee gap insurance
covering any and every requirement) and basic care was delivered without fee for those on welfare or government assistance. It was a very workable and fully funded system
and the people were happy. Then we had a socialist government who decided to make things "more equitable" and the system has been broken and declining since. And
not even the socialists are happy. As the president flips, then flops, on his government-run option, the words of leftist activists come back to haunt them. A "public option" was always a Trojan
horse for socialized medicine. Health Care Is Your Business, Not Everyone's When famed bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he said: "Because that's where the money is." For the same reason, it is as predictable as
the sunrise that medical care for the elderly will be cut back under a government-controlled medical system. Because that's where the money is. (Thomas Sowell, IBD) WITH the “public option” part of President Obama’s health care reform plan looking dead in the water, many of its supporters are taking issue with the legitimacy of
its opposition. “We call it ‘Astroturf,’ ” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said of the protesters at town-hall meetings. “It’s not really a grass-roots
movement.” Let workers with flu stay home, US tells businesses WASHINGTON, Aug 19 - Businesses should encourage employees to stay home sick at the first symptom of swine flu and should drop requirements for doctor's excuses during flu
season, U.S. officials said on Wednesday. Not having infectious staff is generally good advice. An
interview with anti-"health nanny" Tom Naughton, part 1 If you watched Super Size Me and decided afterwards that McDonald's is to blame for obesity in America and taxing, restricting, and labeling fast food will make everyone
healthier, Tom Naughton says you’ve been fed a load of bologna. Naughton is a health writer, filmmaker, and comedian who earlier this year released a documentary called Fat
head, which takes aim at the “Spurlockian Bologna” presented in Super Size Me, as well as the nonsense perpetuated by many other misinformed health nannies who believe
it’s their job to protect consumers. D'oh! Health care cost burden for obese getting heavier NEW YORK - Caring for obese people is eating up an ever-bigger slice of the US health care spending pie, a new government report shows. (Reuters Health) Gosh, you medicalize people's weight and it chews into your healthcare budget... Go figure! Overweight friends eat more when they dine together NEW YORK - Overweight children and teenagers may eat more when they have a snack with an overweight friend rather than a thinner peer, a new study suggests. So... people who enjoy food, enjoy food together? And people in the company of strangers are less likely to be relaxed enough to enjoy eating? Such
breakthroughs! How do they do it? PCBs In The
Hudson: Environmental Protection Or Environmental Politics? Sadly, this is yet another monumental EPA screw-up. For one thing, the dredging will likely makes things worse, but more than that, NO human health effects have ever been documented on the area workers, exposed to PCBs. In 1999, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)—a unit of the CDC—concluded that "The weight of evidence does not support a causal
association for PCBs and human cancer at this time." Apparently, this was not the PC finding, though, because they reversed it in 2000, for no scientific reason whatsoever. Yes, friends, this whole business stinks to high heaven. Read my complete Health News Digest article, which includes some inside dope never before
published. (Shaw's Eco-Logic) Simulated threat in simulated ocean under simulated conditions... Scientists
uncover new ocean threat from plastics Scientists have identified a new source of chemical pollution released by the huge amounts of plastic rubbish found floating in the oceans of the world. A study has found
that as plastics break down in the sea they release potentially toxic substances not found in nature and which could affect the growth and development of marine organisms. Vast oceans may lay beneath the Earth's
surface, new research suggests. Scientists believe areas of enhanced electrical conductivity in the mantle - the thick region between the Earth's crust and its core - betray the presence of water. Precautionary principle destroys EU innovation
EurActiv.COM published a sensible yet pessimistic interview
with David Zaruk, an environmental health risk consultant in Brussels.
The scientific method as used in the EU policymaking. Reading it is enough to make you want to stop breathing… On the desk in front of me is a set of graphs. The horizontal axis of each represents the years 1750 to 2000. The graphs show, variously, population levels, CO2
concentration in the atmosphere, exploitation of fisheries, destruction of tropical forests, paper consumption, number of motor vehicles, water use, the rate of species
extinction and the totality of the human economy’s gross domestic product. So writes writer, environmentalist and poet, former editor of The Ecologist, Paul Kingsnorth to his friend, ally, and comrade in misery, George Mon-and-on-and-on-biot. The
two are discussing the question ‘Is there any point in fighting to stave off industrial apocalypse?’ Their
exchange is printed in the Guardian. The subtitle sets the terms of the debate between these two apocalyptic nutcases. The collapse of civilisation will bring us a saner world, says Paul Kingsnorth. No, counters George Monbiot – we can’t let billions perish Kingsnorth, who curiously shares his name with the site of the site of recent Climate Camp protests, recites a familiar litany – we are going to hell in a
fossil-fuel-and-capitalism-powered handcart, and the human race is just to stupid to notice or care, and it will be a good thing when billions of us are dead, because those
who remain will have learned a lesson. Like the Rapture, but for Gaia-worshippers. (Climate Resistance) Plastic Bag Wars Poised to Continue In the wake of Seattle voters’ decisive rejection of a proposed 20-cent fee on paper and plastic bags, opponents of disposable shopping bags have vowed to press for an
all-out ban on the bags. You would have thought, with less than 10 weeks until the bushfire season, this week's Victorian bushfires royal commission interim report might have mentioned the most
frequently raised concern in submissions, the one which experts say determines whether a manageable blaze becomes an inferno: the availability of fuel. Gene Experts See High-Yield Rice In Flood Zones HONG KONG - Researchers in Japan have identified two genes that make rice plants grow longer stems and survive floods, and hope this will enable farmers to grow
high-yielding rice species in flood-prone areas. Forget Usain Bolt. A new 100 metre record has been set in Britain. It was announced today
during a press conference at the Metropolitan University of Nether Wallop. Dr Max Hadcrut, leader of the project, announced a new world record of 9.4239765 seconds.
Questioned on whether a computer model could really be said to compete with a real human race, he said that the scientific consensus is now agreed that models are now much
more reliable than physical measurements – “for example, physical measurement suggests that the planet is cooling, when everyone knows that it is warming.” “We have incorporated into our model everything that is known to physiologists, psychologists, nutritionists and many other disciplines. We have been absolutely
thorough. For example, the response of CO2 receptors in the brain has to be adjusted to accommodate the disastrously rising CO2 content of the
atmosphere. They were exciting and stressful times as we gradually refined our model and the times slowly came down. When we finally broke the record, the scenes were like
those at NASA when man first landed on the moon, though we only have fifty staff.” Asked by one of the serried ranks of media journalists whether he was seeking to replace the human race Dr Hadcrut chortled and said “No, no, no; after all somebody has
to write the programs.” When asked whether he was prepared to release information about the data and processing methods used in the project, he said that it was not institutional policy to do so,
especially in a competitive field like athletics. He likened it to the gradual development of chess programs to the point where they could defeat world masters. It is known that the University of Much Hadham had been competing to achieve this goal, but after all it is Nether Wallop that is now on the map. (Number Watch) Kevin
Libin: You'll just have to take our word on the global warming stuff Though a striking number of prominent scientists have recently recanted their initial belief in manmade global warming, joining an already robust community of
distinguished skeptics, those who continue to advance the theory could be their own worst enemy. Whatever the truth is about anthropogenic climate change — the contention
that carbon dioxide emitted by human industrial activity — the tendency among some climate-change believers to embellish the effects of planetary warming has only served to
undermine their credibility in the eyes of the public and, less so, the media. (National Post) Is “mistake” another
word for a warming lie?
Just an honest mistake, which purely coincidentally scared people into thinking we really are heating the world to hell: The outgoing leader of Greenpeace has admitted his
organization’s recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was “a mistake.” Greenpeace made the claim in a July 15 press release entitled “Urgent Action Needed As Arctic Ice Melts,” which said there will be an ice-free Arctic by 2030 because
of global warming. Under close questioning by BBC reporter Stephen Sackur on the “Hardtalk” program, Gerd Leipold, the retiring leader of Greenpeace, said the claim was
wrong. “I don’t think it will be melting by 2030. … That may have been a mistake,” he said. Mistake? Leipold tries another form of weasel words: We as a pressure group have to emotionalise issues. I think the BBC reporter (and what a turnaround this is) is right: Sackur said the claim was inaccurate on two fronts, pointing out that the Arctic ice is a mass of 1.6 million square kilometers with a thickness of 3 km in the
middle, and that it had survived much warmer periods in history than the present. [Clarification: Sackur was referring to the Greenland ice cap, within the Arctic ice
area.] The BBC reporter accused Leipold and Greenpeace of releasing “misleading information” and using “exaggeration and alarmism.” Standard operating procedure for warming alarmists actually, as
Professor Steven Schneider once cheerfully conceded. Amazing how green lies collapse once reporters actually do their job and subject them to scrutiny. But what hope that the ABC will do as the BBC at last has, given that
its chief science broadcaster is Robyn
“100 Metres” Williams? But if Greenpeace now admits it was a “mistake” to claim the Artic would be ice-free in 30 years, what would you call a scare-claim at wild as this one: Tim Flannery
also warned ”this may be the
Arctic’s first ice-free year” And this, from Al Gore: … the entire
Arctic ice cap may totally disappear in summer in as little as five years... Yacht Fiona hopelessly trapped in ice On this blog, we've had a lot of fun with Arnesen+Bancroft, Lewis
Pugh, as well as Pen Hadow and company. All these teams were trapped in the brutal conditions
of the Arctic while they were trying to prove that the Arctic has become balmy because of global warming. On the Determination of Climate Feedbacks from ERBE Data Written by Richard S. Lindzen & Yong-Sang Choi For the Full Report in
PDF Form, please click here. [Illustrations, footnotes and references available in PDF version] Climate feedbacks are estimated from fluctuations in the outgoing radiation budget from the latest version of Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) nonscanner data. It
appears, for the entire tropics, the observed outgoing radiation fluxes increase with the increase in sea surface temperatures (SSTs). The observed behavior of radiation
fluxes implies negative feedback processes associated with relatively low climate sensitivity. This is the opposite of the behavior of 11 atmospheric models forced by the
same SSTs. Therefore, the models display much higher climate sensitivity than is inferred from ERBE, though it is difficult to pin down such high sensitivities with any
precision. Results also show, the feedback in ERBE is mostly from shortwave radiation while the feedback in the models is mostly from longwave radiation. Although such a test
does not distinguish the mechanisms, this is important since the inconsistency of climate feedbacks constitutes a very fundamental problem in climate prediction. (SPPI) PLEASE
NOTE: NEW WEBLOG ADDRESS ClimateScience is in the process of moving to a newer wordpress implementation on wordpress.com that will provide for better maintenance, automated
backups, and more features. Thanks again to Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That for doing this! the new address is: http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/ And after a day or two, the previous domain name www.climatesci.org will point there also. In the meantime please look for fresh content on http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/ (Climate Science) We have a new multi-authored paper that has been accepted. This paper illustrates the breadth and diversity of scientists who have concluded that land
use/land cover change is a first order climate forcing. The paper is Mahmood, R., R.A. Pielke Sr., K.G. Hubbard, D. Niyogi, G. Bonan, P. Lawrence, B. Baker, R. McNider, C. McAlpine, A. Etter, S. Gameda, B. Qian, A. Carleton, A.
Beltran-Przekurat, T. Chase, A.I. Quintanar, J.O. Adegoke, S. Vezhapparambu, G. Conner, S. Asefi, E. Sertel, D.R. Legates, Y. Wu, R. Hale, O.W. Frauenfeld, A. Watts, M.
Shepherd, C. Mitra, V.G. Anantharaj, S. Fall,R. Lund, A. Nordfelt, P. Blanken, J. Du, H.-I. Chang, R. Leeper, U.S. Nair, S. Dobler, R. Deo, and J. Syktus, 2009: Impacts
of land use land cover change on climate and future research priorities. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., accepted. The paper starts with the text “Human activities have modified the environment for thousands of years. Significant population increase, migration, and accelerated socio-economic activities have
intensified these environmental changes over the last several centuries. The climate impacts of these changes have been found in local, regional, and global trends in modern
atmospheric temperature records and other relevant climatic indicators.” In our conclusions, we write “It is the regional responses, not a global average, that produce drought, floods and other societally important climate impacts.” as well as make the following recommendations “we recommend, as a start, to assess three new climate metrics: 1. The magnitude of the spatial redistribution of land surface latent and sensible heating (e.g., see Chase et al. 2000; Pielke et al. 2002). The change in these
fluxes into the atmosphere will result in the alteration of a wide variety of climate variables including the locations of major weather features. For example, Takata et al.
(2009) demonstrated the major effect of land use change during the period 1700-1850 on the Asian monsoon. As land cover change accelerated after 1850 and continues into the
future, LULCC promises to continue to alter the surface pattern of sensible and latent heat input to the atmosphere. 2. The magnitude of the spatial redistribution of precipitation and moisture convergence (e.g., Pielke and Chase 2003). In response to LULCC, the boundaries of regions of
wet and dry climates can change, thereby affecting the likelihood for floods and drought. This redistribution can occur not only from the alterations in the patterns of
surface sensible and latent heat, but also due to changes in surface albedo and aerodynamic roughness (e.g., see Pitman et al. 2004; Nair et al. 2007). 3. The normalized gradient of regional radiative heating changes. Since it is the horizontal gradient of layer-averaged temperatures that force wind circulations, the
alteration in these temperatures from any human climate forcing will necessarily alter these circulations. In the evaluation of the human climate effect from aerosols, for
example, Matsui and Pielke (2006) found that, in terms of the gradient of atmospheric radiative heating, the role of human inputs was 60 times greater than the role of the
human increase in the well-mixed greenhouse gases. Thus, this aerosol effect has a much more significant role on the climate than is inferred when using global average
metrics. We anticipate a similar large effect from LULCC. Feddema et al. (2005), for example, have shown that global averages mask the impacts on regional temperature and
precipitation changes. The above climate metrics can be monitored using observed data within model calculations such as completed by Matsui and Pielke (2006) for aerosols, as
well as by using reanalyses products, such as performed by Chase et al (2000) with respect to the spatial pattern of lower tropospheric heating and cooling. They should also
be calculated as part of future IPCC and other climate assessment multi-decadal climate model simulations.” We also write “With respect to surface air temperatures, for example, there needs to be an improved quantification of the biases and uncertainties in multi-decadal temperature
trends, which remain inadequately evaluated in assessment reports such as from the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP 2006). We also recommend that independent committees
(perhaps sponsored by the National Science Foundation) conduct these assessments.” (Climate Science) Unexpected Relationship Between Climate Warming And Advancing Treelines A new study reveals that treelines are not responding to climate warming as expected. The research, the first global quantitative assessment of the relationship between
climate warming and treeline advance, is published in Ecology Letters and tests the premise that treelines are globally advancing in response to climate warming since 1900.
(ScienceDaily) Temperature Readings in Isolated Australian Locations Show
No Increases for 100 Years By A. E. McClintock BA, MSc, PhD Temperature readings in isolated Australian locations show no increases for 100 years. Weather observatories in Australia, dating back 100 years or more show cities getting hotter as they get bigger but country towns have generally NOT been warming
up. Some have actually been cooling down. Read the full document, with additional graphs here.
[PDF, 796 KB] (Carbon Sense Coalition) Crisis! Rain returns to normal The warming alarmists of the Bureau of Meteorology concede what I first
pointed out three years ago: that our rainfall is doing little
more than return to the levels before the usually wet post-war years: Rainfall has decreased substantially since 1950 on the east coast, and in Victoria. This
decline is less marked if measured from 1900. “Less marked” is another way of saying rainfall levels are around what Australians lived with for decades, long before “global warming” got blamed for anything and
everything. Check the graphs yourself on the second link above. Or here: UPDATE So how refreshing to finally hear a public official go against the warming alarmism and booga-booga predictions by the
likes of Tim Flannery that we’ll all run out of water: As speculation grows that consecutive years of dry conditions could be a permanent climate ‘’step change’’, Murray-Darling
Basin Authority chief Rob Freeman has expressed confidence that wetter times will return. Speaking at a water summit in Melbourne yesterday, Mr Freeman took aim at doomsday climate predictions that have followed the driest three-year period on record for the
Murray-Darling Basin… ‘’We are always going to have droughts and floods, but to suggest the future is this, I think is misrepresenting the situation … while it’s nice to have a
burning platform on which to implement reforms, we’ve also got to be very honest,’’ he said. I hope his message sinks into the overheated mind of Climate Change Minister Penny Wong: The Federal Government is well aware of the huge
challenges posed by drought and climate change for rural and regional communities across southern Australia, particularly in the Murray-Darling Basin. (Thanks to reader Cameron.) (Andrew Bolt blog) Senator Stabenow’s Flying Climate Circus Examined by SPPI In a just released paper, the Science and Public Policy Institute examines Senator Stabenow’s fanciful claim that “we are paying the price” for human advancement
“in more hurricanes and tornadoes.” Global Warming Funding Can Be a Cash Cow Rarely, if ever has the scientific establishment seen a gravy train the likes of global warming, reports Christopher Horner, “The money flowing into studying the issue
is jaw-dropping: federal taxpayer expenditures on climate-related research for the entire panoply of related inquiry is now pushing up against $6 billion per year, more than
taxpayers send to the National Cancer Institute and even more than our government spends on AIDS.”(1) It's time to drop the alarmism and get real about climate change This December, world leaders will gather in Denmark to draft a successor agreement to the Kyoto Accord. Methods designed to reduce climate change questioned Is America on the right path to combat climate change? One member of a United Nations group following the issue told Utah lawmakers on Wednesday that the country could be
headed toward a potentially dangerous slippery slope. Reuters has prepared a nice graphic of the three emissions scenarios considered in a
recently published report by a panel from the National Development and Reform Commission and the Development Research Center of the State Council. The panel has
previewed its findings a number of times over the past several months, but has now formally published them in 2050 China Energy and CO2 Emissions Report. Feast your
eyes on a climate death sentence: There is no guarantee that the Chinese government will translate any of the report’s recommendations into domestic action or policy, much less make them part of its
Copenhagen negotiation strategy, but the disturbing fact is that there is no chance, let me repeat that, NO CHANCE, China will agree to any scenario better that the
“Enhanced Low Carbon” approach, and that isn’t good enough. I base my “no chance” assessment on the simple fact that China’s top leadership will only commit to actions that have been thoroughly studied and for which costs
have been estimated. This is the only purely domestic effort (there have been a few private studies: McKinsey’s “China’s
green revolution” and the UK’s Tyndall Centre China’s
Energy Transition: Pathways for Low Carbon Development) that has studied the issue and estimated costs; its conclusions, therefore, will inform and guide
public policy to the extent China is inclined to budge from its current “no limits” official position. In the best case scenario (which I still consider to be extremely unlikely), sometime between now and whenever a Copenhagen deal is struck (which could be after
the December meeting itself) , China will put in place or signal commitment to actions that will allow it to embark upon the “Low Carbon” path. China will demand
significant concessions in terms of money and technology transfers to get it to the “Enhanced Low Carbon” path. Of course, there is no way those will be forthcoming
from the US, especially given the relentless drumbeat from some sectors that China is beating the US in the cleantech race. Let’s assume by some miracle China does pursue the “Enhanced Low Carbon” path without strings attached. Look at the numbers and tell me how we get to an 80%
reduction in global emissions in 2050? We don’t. The Cost
of Energy Blog has run the numbers, using all the favorite base years. Can anyone suggest how we reach a 450, much less a 350, ppm world with those kinds of
emissions levels from China? (China environmental Law) Most developing countries stubbornly resist western admonitions on the need to cut carbon emissions. Until recently, that included China, but signs from what is now the
world’s largest emitter suggest a cultural revolution is afoot in its attitude to climate change policy. For the first time, two senior climate change officials, Yu Qingtai and Su Wei, have left open the possibility that China will plan for an eventual peak
in emissions. “Emissions will not continue to rise beyond 2050,” said Mr Su. As a quantitative measure of China’s intention to help fight climate change, the statement fails to overwhelm. Simply stupid: US unions, green groups unleash climate change
campaign WASHINGTON — A coalition of US environmental groups and major labor unions on Wednesday unveiled a national campaign to refute charges that legislation to battle climate
change would cost US jobs in a recession. How dumb do you have to be to believe pricing energy out of people's ability to use it will create good jobs? That is the whole purpose of climate
legislation, to make energy more expensive. Sheesh! Oh... Vilsack defends climate change bill In an appearance today at the Iowa State Fair, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack defended efforts by the Obama administration and Democrats in congress to pass
climate change legislation, saying "I start from the proposition that climate change is real. I know some disagree." Here's a thought: what about exploiting the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide to feed and power the people and only treating any ill effect when and
if it should occur? Too funny: BP and Shell warned to halt campaign against US
climate change bill - Oil firms urged to leave American Petroleum Institute and halt political lobbying by Greenpeace BP and Shell are being told to tear up their membership of the American Petroleum Institute (API) in protest at the organisation's attempts to incite a public backlash
against Barack Obama's energy and climate change bill. Professional lobby and serial stunt holders Greenpeace want a halt to competing lobbying with conflicting message. Um... take a hike, you dopey bozos. Perry nets endorsement thanks to opposing
climate change rules Gov. Rick Perry's stance against climate change legislation has already won him at least one endorsement. Gov. Perry is a longtime champion of causes important to the Texas chemical industry, including his recent stand against federally proposed cap-and-trade legislation and
regulation of CO2 by the Environmental Protection Agency. It is clear that such policies being discussed in Congress would set our nation on the road to the largest tax
burden ever levied upon American families. Regulating greenhouse gases could boost demand for natural gas, which generates less greenhouse gas when burned than oil or coal. Greater demand for natural gas might
cause prices to rise. Energy workers oppose climate change measure The message was clear to the 3,500 people attending the Energy Citizens rally in downtown Houston Tuesday: stop the climate change bill expected to come before the Senate
this fall. Ooh, what a fib! US coal industry won't give up easily on
using atmosphere as a dumping ground Fossil fuel lobbyists are fiercely fighting US attempts to make the world's dirtiest power sector pay for its carbon emissions (Smog's Kevin Grandia, in The Guardian) For a start carbon dioxide emitted to atmosphere feeds the biosphere -- it sure ain't no "pollutant" and it is being equitably shared, not
"dumped". (Surprising as it may seem, this magnificent resource is not charged for, although it increases crop yields substantially around the world, increases
forest growth and protect wildlife habitats from the plow.) Is 'Green China' just hot air? How serious is China about Climate Change? He's right: Lord
Adonis: no need to cut travel to save the planet, says Transport Secretary Personal sacrifices are not necessary in the fight against global warming, according to Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, who promised that greener technologies would
mean Britons should have no need to cut back on travel. (Daily Telegraph) People need not fight global warming. If at some later time we agree the need to cool the planet that can be done through geo-engineering (we don't
anticipate any such need but it is by far the superior option). Germany's new clean coal "Schwarze Pumpe" plant is not clean yet ... CFTC Muscles Into Emerging U.S. Carbon Market NEW YORK - A proposal by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission to oversee a greenhouse gas contract on a voluntary Chicago trading exchange shows the agency is
staking out its territory before Congress decides which agencies should regulate the country's burgeoning carbon market. Seven Arrested In Suspected Carbon Tax Fraud LONDON - The British tax office arrested seven people in London on Wednesday in a suspected 38 million pounds ($62.6 million) value-added tax fraud in the European market
in carbon allowances, it said. Inconvenience and discomfort for thee but not for me... Open
a window? We prefer air conditioning say Whitehall's climate change tsars Breath of fresh air? Not for Whitehall workers who prefer air conditioning STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, Colo., Aug 18, 2009 --The Steamboat Institute is pleased to announce that climate change experts Patrick J. Michaels, William M. Gray, and Marc Morano
are scheduled to speak at the 2009 Inaugural Freedom Conference on Saturday, August 29, 2009. The event will be held at the Steamboat Grand Hotel in Steamboat Springs,
Colorado. If one is looking for a sign of the changing world order, the size and scope of recent Chinese moves in the energy field should serve the purpose. Possible advance on hydrous monoethanolamine absorption: Reusable organic liquid
scrubs emissions - Liquid could directly replace current systems SCIENTISTS at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in the US have developed a reusable organic liquid which can capture acidic gases such as carbon dioxide and
sulphur dioxide from power station emissions. AIChE talks carbon management - US engineering societies discuss solutions THE American Institution of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) and four other US engineering societies have developed a scorecard scheme to evaluate carbon management
technologies. Higher efficiency is always welcome: UQ expert's invention scores a clean
coal coup A UNIVERSITY of Queensland scientist said yesterday he had successfully tested technology that delivers twice the power from coal while minimising greenhouse gas
emissions. Retrofitting Dams to Generate Electricity Environmental opposition often means that new hydropower facilities are non-starters. But there may be a way around that: retrofitting existing dams. Only 3 percent of the 80,000 dams in the United States are used to generate power, according to Norm
Bishop, a vice president at MWH, a water engineering firm. They were built for other purposes, like flood control, recreation,
irrigation or water storage. To expand the nation’s hydropower capacity, “We should be looking at the dams in the 97 percent range that have no existing power facilities,” Mr. Bishop said. One such effort is happening along the Ohio River. American Municipal Power, a large power supplier based in Ohio that is working with MWH, broke ground earlier this month on the
first of five planned hydropower retrofit projects on the river. The total cost will come to around $1.9 billion, according to Marc Gerken, A.M.P.’s chief executive, and
the projects should be completed between 2013 and 2015. Total power production will be 350 megawatts, enough to supply 350,000 homes. “These powerhouses will last 70 years,” Mr. Gerken said. “Once you construct them, and once debt service is done, you basically have free fuel.” He cited renewable energy and climate policies as part of the motivation for retrofitting the dams, which would be a clean source of power. Carbon regulation is “coming,
and you’d better manage your carbon footprint,” he said. A Sierra Club representative in Ohio said that he fully backed A.M.P.’s project. “Retrofitting dams to produce hydropower can displace dirty energy from the grid,”
said Nachy Kanfer, who is with the group’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “There’s really nothing to dislike with this proposal.” The existing dams along the Ohio River were built in the 1950s and 1960s, for navigation and watershed purposes, according to Mr. Gerken. A.M.P. also retrofitted the
Belleville Dam, along the Ohio River in West Virginia, in 1999. Getting a license from the Army Corps of Engineers, which operates the dams, tends to be a painstaking, multiyear process, according to Mr. Gerken. “I had envisioned starting all of these projects six months ago, and obviously I only got one started,” he said. Another power developer, Brookfield Renewable Power, has a retrofit project under construction on the Mississippi River in
Minnesota. That project would add 10 megawatts of power capacity to an existing Army Corps dam. This 2007 federal survey of hydropower capabilities identifies other dams that with retrofit potential. Asked about whether he had received money from the stimulus package for the projects, Mr. Gerken of A.M.P. responded that he had gotten “not one red nickel.” “What’s really ironic to me,” he added, “is how hydro has just totally fallen under the radar screen” in terms of incentives, relative to wind and solar. Can't wait to see the creative bookkeeping that comes from this nonsense: Australian
Senate endorses renewable energy target CANBERRA, Australia — Australia's Senate passed legislation Thursday to require that 20 percent of the country's electricity come from renewable sources such as the sun
and wind by 2020, matching European standards and up from about 8 percent now. Germans Seek to Spark Electric Car Market The cabinet of German Chancellor Angela Merkel is seeking to put one million electric cars on the country’s roads by the end of the next decade. Car makers like Volkswagen and Daimler could receive about 500 million euros (about $705 million) in financial sweeteners from the government aimed at supporting the
manufacture and sale of electric cars, Bloomberg News reported on Wednesday. The plans also foresee hundreds of millions of euros aimed at increasing the production of batteries and ensuring that German experts are trained in the technology,
according to The Associated Press. Sigmar Gabriel, the country’s environment minister, told German television that the introduction of electric cars into the German market would have the additional
benefit of helping drive down the price of carbon-based fuels for those who chose not to swap to battery power, according to Deutsche
Welle. But Mr. Gabriel reportedly added that the technology for efficient and safe electric cars would not be in place until 2011 at the earliest, in part because batteries still
needed to be made safer and smaller. In fact the economics of making electric cars for a mass market are still largely unproven. But that hasn’t stopped companies from asking governments to help them roll out electric models. Nissan has reportedly been in negotiations with British authorities to
support its plans to produce a fully electric-powered car — a five-door family-sized hatchback called Leaf — that would be ready for showrooms next year. Ontario, in Canada, has also announced a subsidy that is widely
expected to help sales of the new Chevrolet Volt, a plug-in hybrid car that will go on sale in 2010. And President Barack Obama has announced $2.4 billion of support for the electric-vehicle sector in the United States. (Green Inc.) August 19, 2009
50 million uninsured Americans?
Most people without health insurance are uninsured for a relatively short time No single topic drives the health care reform debate like the number of uninsured Americans, variously numbered in speeches and ads at 45 million, 46 million, 47 million,
or even 50 million. Unfortunately, most of what we think we know about the uninsured is wrong. Diabetes Case Shows Pitfalls of Treatment
Rules It sounds like a simple idea for improving health care: draw up guidelines on how best to treat a particular illness and then pay doctors to follow them. That strategy,
which some insurers and health plans already employ, has been embraced during the health care debate by some lawmakers in Congress who want to extend it more broadly. Study questions need for folic acid mandate NEW YORK - A study from Ireland suggests that mandatory folic acid fortification may be unnecessary as many people may be getting plenty of folic acid already. Call for crackdown on children buying energy
drinks Doctors are backing a crackdown on children buying energy drinks. Federal Government cracks downs on weight-loss industry WEIGHT-LOSS programs and products will have to prove they can help people keep off the kilos long-term as the Federal Government cracks down on the $414-million-a-year
industry. Just couldn't resist... Paranoia alert -- science
proves zombies will kill us all In more bad news for the living today, scientists have determined that humanity would almost certainly perish in the (probably still unlikely) event of a zombie outbreak. Enviro-panicker Marion "the clarion" gets enviro recognition? What're the odds... Eureka
moment for Herald journalist THE Sydney Morning Herald's Environment Editor, Marian Wilkinson, has won the 2009 Eureka Prize for Environmental Journalism, along with Neale Maude, Kate Wild and Ruth
Fogarty of ABC TV, for The Tipping Point, a report on climate change published in the Herald last August. (SMH) Oh boy... Is there any point in fighting to stave off
industrial apocalypse? The collapse of civilisation will bring us a saner world, says Paul Kingsnorth. No, counters George Monbiot – we can't let billions perish (The Guardian) Mild weather prompts second wave of
butterflies Warm weather has prompted the declining Duke of Burgundy butterfly to produce a second brood this year - only the third time it has done so in more than a century, the
National Trust said. (Daily Telegraph) It's Fish Versus Farmers in the San Joaquin Valley - Crops
rot and people stand in line for food while the EPA engineers a drought. San Joaquin Valley, Calif. Float water bags south for Murray: scientist A scientist has suggested floating giant plastic bags of water down Australia's coast to help the drought-affected Murray-Darling Basin. The future of wheat - Genetically modified
wheat would increase yields, cut pesticide use and give Canadian farmers a global edge Nine wheat organizations in Australia, Canada and the United States, among them the North American Millers’ Association, recently released a joint statement that called
for a synchronized introduction of genetically modified (GM) wheat into the marketplace. Renewable energy target initiative is mad, bad tokenism HURRAH, the Rudd government and Turnbull opposition have agreed to pass the Renewable Energy Target, an initiative unjustified in economic terms that makes emission
reduction costs three times more expensive than the price of permits under cap and trade and resurrects government planning that Australia spent half a century trying to
escape. Wirth: target coal-fired power
plants with climate change cap and trade Former Democratic Colorado Sen. Tim Wirth last week told Bloomberg News the cap-and-trade aspects of the House-approved climate change bill are spread too broadly across
the economy instead of focusing on coal-fired power plants. Energy Legislation Pushed Further Aside as Health Care Fight Continues With health care town halls generating all the heat this August, global warming legislation has been left to simmer on the back burner. Companies Nudge Rally
Against Climate Bill
Houston is the capital of the American oil industry; some in the industry even call it “Rome” since so much of the world’s energy business is done here. Energy workers rally against climate plan Local energy workers jammed a downtown Houston theater today to protest climate change legislation that the U.S. Senate will take up in the coming weeks. US energy industry stages rally against climate bill The US energy industry sought on Tuesday to put a human face on its lobbying effort against climate change legislation under consideration by Congress, staging the first
of a series of “energy citizen” rallies across the country. Mining industry not impressed by renewable energy targets The Minerals Council of Australia says it would rather see a "clean energy" scheme, to encourage clean coal and carbon capture technologies, than the
government's renewable energy targets. Well, that's a start, now how about showing some real good sense and objecting to all energy rationing schemes? From CO2 Science Volume 12 Number 33: 19 August 2009 Editorial Medieval
Warm Period Record of the Week Subject Index Summary Plant Growth Data Journal Reviews Late Holocene Water Balance in the Experimental Lakes Area of Canada: What does it reveal about the nature of
past climate change there? Elevated CO2 and Warming: Not Always Detrimental: The sea star Pisaster ochraceus
appears to thrive in CO2-enriched and warmer waters. Chinese Forests to the End of the 21st Century: How will they fare in the face of business-as-usual
anthropogenic CO2 emissions and Al Gore's climate crisis? Chinese Agriculture to the End of the 21st Century: How will it fare in the face of continued anthropogenic CO2
emissions and what Al Gore calls the coming climate crisis? (co2science.org) There is an excellent new M.S. Thesis which I would like to alert you to. The topic fits within the vulnerability framework which, as reported frequently on my
weblog, is an effective way to deal with risk from climate and other environmental variability and change. The Thesis is Sharp, Kevin, 2009, M.S. Thesis: The influence of landfall variation on tropical cyclone losses in the United States as simulated by HAZUS.
Department of Geography, University of Colorado, 67 pp. The abstract reads Sharp, Kevin Joseph (M.A., Geography) The Influence of Landfall Variation on Tropical Cyclone Losses in the United States Thesis directed by Dr. William R. Travis “Tropical cyclone losses in the United States have shown an increasing trend since the beginning of the 20th century. This is mainly due to increased exposure along
America’s coast. The amount of coastal property at risk persistently increases due to inflation, wealth increase, and population growth. When researchers have normalized
the loss record to remove the influence of exposure and vulnerability change, no trend can be discerned in the damage record. This has been used to refute the claim that
tropical cyclones are becoming more potentially destructive, and to keep the locus of explanation firmly in socio-demographic trends. But physical variation, in storm size,
intensity and location, still make a significant difference the impact of any individual storm event. This fact occasionally induces calls renewed efforts at hurricane
modification and routinely evokes a sense of either or alarm at “close calls” that, except for a difference of a few miles in landfall location or a modest weakening of
peak winds, separate hurricane disasters from catastrophes. This project examined the effect of landfall location on storm damage using the Federal Emergency Management
Agency’s (FEMA) risk assessment HAZUS. Thirty-mile track shifts were prescribed for the top 10 most damaging storms in the normalized record since 1988. The alternate
storms yielded drastically different damage estimates from the original storms, indicating large spatial variations in exposure. Each landfall shift resulted in a rank change
in the overall normalized record. The damage record is dominated by individual extreme events like those used in this analysis, and although random, differences in landfall
location would presumably average out in a long record. The fact that a few storms account for a large majority of losses, and that small differences in their landfall yield
large differences in impact, points to a very large noise to signal ratio that would make it difficult to discern a climate-induced trend, and may also obscure some
dimensions of socio-economic exposure and vulnerability trends.” (Climate Science) Climate negotiations
drowning in a sea of brackets: Forest protection missing At the start of last week’s UN climate negotiations in Bonn, Yvo de Boer, the UNFCCC Executive Secretary, described the negotiating text as “200 pages of
incomprehensible nonsense”. By the end of the week, de Boer wasn’t much more optimistic. “We seem to be afloat on a sea of brackets,” he was reported as saying in the
New York Times. Drowning in a sea of brackets would perhaps have been more appropriate. “The speed of the negotiations must be considerably accelerated at the [next]
meeting in Bangkok,” de Boer said. China losing out in low-carbon economy bonanza BEIJING - China might be the world's biggest generator of carbon credits, but its sclerotic financial sector is still holding the market back, the head of the country's
pioneering CO2 exchange said. And they are quite right to avoid the hot air market, which will inevitably collapse. Climate bill would bloat federal agencies The House-passed climate change bill, if enacted, would expand the federal government so much that it would take billions of dollars and thousands of new employees to
implement. CFTC Seeks To Boost Oversight Of Carbon Trading WASHINGTON - The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission on Monday proposed increasing federal oversight of the Chicago Climate Exchange's carbon spot contract. Given that it is a total scam with no value whatsoever why aren't they shutting the nonsense down altogether? With frightening ignorance: Unions Favor Deep CO2 Cuts And Green Jobs OSLO - Trade unions are supporting deep cuts in greenhouse gases as part of a planned U.N. climate pact and want to ensure jobs are preserved in a shift to a green
economy, a leader of a global labor group said on Tuesday. "Low carbon" will not and can not kill global warming even if warming were a real problem but it can and will certainly kill real jobs. Paul
Chesser: Governor's summit makes cap-and-trade inevitable for the South This weekend in Williamsburg, the Southern Governors Association (SGA) has its annual confab. If some reality isn't injected into the planned panel discussions, their
constituents may come away from it stuck with yet another costly cap-and-trade agreement. Treasure papers show advice ignored Treasury papers released today show the Government did not follow a call from its financial advisers for it to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions target 15 percent above
1990 levels. The silly assault continues: The Greenhouse Gases That
Cool Your Fridge Many cooling units – from refrigerators to air-conditioners – use HFCs, or hydrofluorocarbons. The use of these chemicals has grown significantly over the last decade
as an alternative to substances that damage the ozone layer and that are being phased out under the Montreal
Protocol. The problem for the planet, critics argue, is that HFCs have 100 to 3,000 times as much
global warming potential as carbon dioxide, and can remain in the atmosphere for long periods. Moreover, large quantities of HFCs are released during their manufacture and from filling up and disposing of cooling units like refrigerators and air-conditioners,
according to opponents of HFCs. Refrigerated transport like food delivery trucks is another major source of leaks, they say. This month, one group, called BeyondHFCs, began an online campaign in support of a global phase-out of production
of these so-called F-gases by 2020. BeyondHFCs is seeking agreement on a production ban at talks in December in Copenhagen, aimed at drafting a new global climate treaty. BeyondHFCs says current technologies should be replaced by using equipment adapted to using fluids like
ammonia and propane which much lower greenhouse gas potentials. Such equipment is manufactured by several companies, including Itomic, Advansor, Shecco, Oberist and
Earthcare Products — companies that, incidentally, support the group’s campaign against HFCs. Christianna Papazahariou, the head of the campaign, told Green Inc. that letters were being forwarded electronically to the offices of environment officials around the
world, including Lisa Jackson, the administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and Jean-Louis Borloo, the French environment minister, as soon as they
are filled out online. Ms. Papazahariou also said her group was using data from the chemicals industry as part of the campaign to show that in some cases up to 80 percent of some HFCs placed on
the market had already escaped into the atmosphere. (Green Inc.) More
eye opening facts about the Chevy Volt OK, so maybe the Chevy Volt doesn’t really get 230 miles per gallon. Are such exaggerations
justified because they serve a greater cause? The Chevy Volt will help save the world, after all, by reducing CO2 emissions, right? Wrong! In fact, in some cases the amount of CO2 generated per mile for the Chevy Volt is the same as a conventional automobile getting only 21 miles to the gallon.
Read on… When running on gasoline (known as ”charge sustaining operation”) the Volt will get 50 miles per gallon. According
to the EPA burning one gallon of gasoline yields 19.4 pounds of CO2. That means the CO2 emitted per mile driven while running on gasoline will
be 0.39 pounds. (19.4 lbs of CO2 / Gallon) / (50 miles / gallon) = 0.39 lbs of CO2 per mile How much CO2 will be emitted per mile when the Volt is powered by energy from the electrical grid that has been stored in its battery? That
depends on how the energy on the grid is generated. If you live in an area where the power on the grid is generated primarily with coal, then the amount of CO2
per kilowatt-hour generated is fairly high. If you live in an area where the power on the grid is generated primarily from nuclear, then the amount is fairly low.
On the average, though, there are 1.34 pounds of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere for every kilowatt-hour of energy generated for the electric power grid in the
United States, according to the Department of Energy
(2000). The fully charged lithium-ion batteries hold 16 kilowatt-hours of energy and will propel the Volt 40
miles. That works out to 0.4 kilowatt-hours per mile. So that means on the average, 0.54 pounds of CO2 will be put in the atmosphere for
every mile that the Volt drives on energy drawn from the electrical grid, assuming perfect charging efficiency. (1.34 lbs of CO2 per grid kWh) x (0.4 kWh per mile) = 0.54 lbs of CO2 per mile But charging a lithium-ion battery off the grid is not 100% efficient. There are grid transmission losses and grid to battery conversion
losses which add up to about 10%. So running your Volt off of electric grid power will yield closer to 0.59 pounds of CO2 for every mile your drive.
That is 151% of the CO2 put in the atmosphere by the running the Volt off of gasoline. How many miles per gallon must a conventional automobile get in order to put the same amount of CO2 into the atmosphere per mile as a
Chevy Volt does when running off of grid power? That’s easy- about 33 miles per gallon. Here
are some cars that will do better. (19.4 lbs of CO2 per Gallon) / (0.59 lbs of CO2 per mile) = 33 miles per gallon If you drive in an area where the electric grid is primarily powered by coal, then the numbers are even worse. Burning coal to power the
electric grid yields about 2.1 pounds of CO2 for every kilowatt-hour generated. Driving your Volt with grid generated power will yield about 0.92 pounds of
CO2 for every mile driven (when 10% conversion inefficiencies are added in). (2.1 lbs of CO2 per grid kWh) x (0.4 kWh per mile) x 1.1 = 0.92 lbs of CO2 per mile That is the same amount of CO2 per mile as a conventional automobile that gets only 21 miles per gallon! (19.4 lbs of CO2 per Gallon) / (0.92 lbs of CO2 per mile) = 21 miles per gallon So don’t be fooled by astronomical claims of miles per gallon for the
Chevy Volt. And if you are worried about CO2 (I’m not), then don’t count of the Chevy Volt to save you - it won’t. (Climate Sanity) Brazil Seeks More Control of Oil
Beneath Its Seas RIO DE JANEIRO — Faced with the world’s most important oil discovery in years, the Brazilian government is seeking to step back from more than a decade of close
cooperation with foreign oil companies and more directly control the extraction itself. Another Outrage of the Ethanol Scam: Increased Gasoline Consumption
Many aspects of the use of corn based ethanol in motor fuel are well known. This “renewable” source of energy was alleged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and start
the nation on the path to energy independence. In the pursuit of these goals, the federal government has mandated wide usage of gasoline blended with 10 percent ethanol.
Billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent subsidizing the production of ethanol for use in fuel. In this report, I will show that using 10 percent ethanol blended in
gasoline results in higher petroleum usage than if the ethanol were not used.
Before turning to that task, here are some salient facts regarding the use of corn-based ethanol in motor fuel:
However, one aspect of ethanol has not previously been considered. That is that it very likely increases the nation’s consumption of fossil fuel. But, you say,
the very purpose of using ethanol is to reduce our dependence on imported petroleum. Well, I’m not a rocket scientist, but I am a mechanical engineer with 32 years
of work experience in the automotive industry and another 12 in energy distribution. I have been a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers for 52 years. Using my
background and my own experience, I will show that a given trip, say, one that would require 100 gallons of unadulterated gasoline would require more fossil fuel if
the trip were made with a 10 percent ethanol blend (E10).
Consider: Based on data from the EPA, a gallon of ethanol contains about 76,100 Btu, while a typical gallon of gasoline has 114,000 Btu. Crunching the numbers shows that
E10 has about 3.3 percent less energy than 100 percent gasoline and thus could be expected to decrease fuel mileage by that percentage. If the only degradation in gas mileage
with E10 were 3.3 percent, you would not be reading this article. However, I have been fortunate to find a local source of 100 percent gasoline near my home. I have made a
careful comparison of mileage with E10 vs. that with pure gasoline. It is well known that gas mileage varies depending on whether the driving is highway or local. So in order
to make a valid comparison, I have taken advantage of the trip computer in my 2008 Nissan Rogue and recorded the average speed (mph) for every tank full of fuel. (See chart
below.) For the (tank average) speed range of 27 to 53 MPH, using pure gasoline gave me an average of 7.8 percent better mileage than E101. I know this is anecdotal, but
others who fill up at the same station report similar savings with the ethanol-free fuel.
Fuel Mileage vs. Average Speed Effect of Ethanol on 2008 Nissan Rogue
Return now to that hypothetical trip that took 100 gallons of pure gasoline (E0). Based on my experience, the same trip would require 107.8 gallons of E10. Agreed? Ten
percent of this E10 usage would be 10.78 gallons of ethanol. Well, from that we note that the energy equivalent of the ethanol would be 7.2 gallons of gasoline. (10.78 x
76,100 / 114,00 = 7.2) But not even ethanol protagonists allege that a gallon of ethanol requires less than 75 percent of its energy content to produce. So that 7.2 gallons
would need the equivalent of 5.4 gallons of gasoline to produce. (7.2 x 0.75 = 5.4) Thus the trip with E10 would need 102.4 gallons of gasoline or its equivalent. (107.8 -
10.78 + 5.4 = 102.4) Which is to say that by using 10 percent ethanol in my fuel, I am using 2.4 percent more fossil fuel than if our misguided government had not
modified our motor fuel in the first place.
It is patently obvious that the government's ethanol mandates and subsidies have but one indisputable effect: They enrich the corn growers and the ethanol producers at the
expense of the rest of us taxpayers. When, oh when will courageous people in government stand up to the farm and ethanol producer (think ADM) lobbies and declare that there
should be an end to this blatant scam on the American public? Think of what those billions in wasted subsidies could do for our troubled economy.
Harry Wertheimer, is a retired automotive engineer who lives in Salem, South Carolina. (Energy Tribune) Peter Foster: Is the
Mackenzie Pipeline dead? New technology has revitalized old gas exploration areas and opened new ones, putting the economic logic of northern pipelines in doubt (Financial Post) Lucky blighters... Canada Loses Out As U.S. Ups Green Ante VANCOUVER, British Columbia - The Obama administration's titanic $60 billion spending plan for the U.S. clean energy sector is luring investors away from green businesses
in Canada, threatening the industry's growth here. Fine except it can not work for its stated purpose: Germany Launches CO2 Scrubbing At RWE Plant FRANKFURT - German companies on Tuesday launched carbon dioxide scrubbing from flue gases at a coal fired power station operated by utility RWE in western Germany. CCS is a dog which will not hunt. See why here. Christina doesn't get it: The Great Paradox Of China: Green Energy And Black Skies This month, on the first anniversary of the opening of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, Beijing's skies were a hazy gray. Walking down the street, one was left with a tickle
in the throat and burning eyes. A recent study published in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, conducted jointly by Peking University and Oregon State
University, found that Beijing's $20 million investment to scrub the skies for the Olympics in fact had little impact on air quality. The U.S. embassy in Beijing now
maintains a Twitter feed posting data from an air-quality monitoring station on the embassy compound; readings of large particulates in the air in recent weeks have ranged
from "unhealthy" to "very unhealthy" to "hazardous." China might be producing "green power" equipment to sell to the gullible. It might even install chunks of "green generating capacity"
to idle (sunbathe, as the Chinese apparently term it) in the hope silly Westerners will buy indulgences. That does not mean, however, that China is foolish enough to rely
on "green power" for actual supply. Biofuel production 'is harming the
poor' The production of biofuels is fuelling poverty, human rights abuses and damage to the environment, Christian Aid warned today. August 18, 2009
The scientific process in action — Where is the
evidence for governmental efficiency? Scientific literacy isn’t the stuff found in a science textbook. That’s science literacy — and, while understanding the principles of science is important too,
it’s not as important as knowing how to think and reason. Scientific literacy means the scientific process — also known as thinking critically and logically. It’s a way
to carefully look at information, question ideas and test them, and make decisions based on the best information and evidence. It’s what protects us from being taken in by
unsound things or letting the fallacies of logic* get the better of us. What might feel intuitively correct to us, and everyone around us, often isn’t. PCBs
In The Hudson: Environmental Protection Or Environmental Politics? After more than seven years of planning and preparation, General Electric's $750 million Hudson River Dredging Project hit the water on May 15, 2009. This giant effort,
though, was temporarily suspended on August 7th, when it was discovered that the PCB levels in the river had exceeded allowable standards. Very likely, the dredging
operations themselves had disturbed the silt such that some already encapsulated PCBs were released. Dredging resumed on August 11th. Studies offer new insights into causes
of deformed frogs Remember Minnesota's famous deformed frogs? New studies from two groups of researchers working half a world apart have just added important insights into this tantalizing
environmental puzzle — while leaving a full explanation still out of reach. Soda makers: Don't tax our soft drinks Industry groups are fighting a soft-drink tax proposal that is not part of any pending health care measure. Water crisis to hit Asian food Scientists have warned Asian countries that they face chronic food shortages and likely social unrest if they do not improve water management. Guest essay: STOPPING CLIMATE CHANGE Richard S. Courtney There is need for a new policy on climate change to replace the rush to reduce emissions. The attempts at emissions reduction have failed but there is a ‘Climate Change
Policy’ that would work. Can Geoengineering Help Slow Global Warming? As we pump billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, we're doing more than warming the planet and scrambling the climate. We're also conducting what
climatologist James Hansen has called a "vast uncontrolled experiment." In effect, we're on our way to engineering a world very different from the one we were
handed. Belatedly, we're trying to turn off the carbon spigot, hoping that by incrementally reducing the emissions we've spent a couple centuries pouring into the air we can
stop the climate slide before it's too late. (Bryan Walsh, Time) Simple answer, yes it can. And it can do so far more effectively than the trivial effect of tweaking atmospheric carbon dioxide levels -- raising levels
35% over 250 years managed a mere portion of a total estimated rise of perhaps 0.75 °C. Changing levels of sunlight over land alters the entire planet's temperature
almost 4 °C with each northern hemisphere winter to summer cycle before cooling with the onset of the next summer to winter phase. Very obviously then tweaking the
amount of sunlight reaching the surface in given regions at given times is a far more effective mechanism for those wishing to control the globe's thermostat. To all intent
and purpose adjustment of CO2 emission is useless as a temperature control. Dead wrong, again: The Climate and National Security One would think that by now most people would have figured out that climate change represents a grave threat to the planet. One would also have expected from Congress a
plausible strategy for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that lie at the root of the problem. Where The Crone states: "the only way to prevent them is with sacrifices in the here and now: with smaller cars, bigger investments in new
energy sources, higher electricity bills that will inevitably result once we put a price on carbon" is where she falls into the rhetoric of misanthropists and
carbon scammers. Carbon constraint bears the distinction of being probably the most expensive means possible of not addressing global warming / climate change / weirding /
catastrophic climate interference or whatever the term du jour happens to be. Letter to CCNet: CO2, CLIMATE FORCING AND CLIMATE MODELS Dear Benny, Guest
Weblog “Solar Variability And Its Effect On Climate Change” By Nicola Scafetta In response to the interest in Nicola Scafetti’s earlier guest weblog (see),
he has prepared another post for today. Guest Weblog By Nicola Scafetti “Solar Variability And Its Effect On Climate Change” Understanding solar variability and its effects on climate change has become increasingly complex. While current climate models such as the EBMs and GCMs used by the
IPCC claim that solar change can affect climate only slightly, empirical studies of climate data do suggest that solar changes have significantly altered climate both in the
past and in more recent times, and will continue to affect climate in the future. Thus, from an empirical perspective modern climate models are poorly modeling the solar
effect on climate change. Herein I would like to advertise a conference session at the: AGU Fall Meeting, 14-18 December 2008, Monday-Friday, San Francisco, CA, USA that Dr. Willson and I are
organizing. For those who might be interested in submitting an abstract: the abstract deadline for electronic submissions is the 3rd of September,
23:59 ET. AGU Fall Meeting, 14-18 December 2008 Description: Solar variability and its climate change significance are to be explored. We invite papers relevant to solar variability and its effect on climate on all time scales
including theoretical and empirical papers dealing with: 1) total solar irradiance observations and proxy reconstructions, solar magnetic activity, solar cosmic ray
modulation and solar activity forecasts; 2) solar variation effects on global and local temperature cycles and trends, cloud cover, precipitations, droughts, floods, monsoons
and stream I also would like to advertise a new paper of mine that attempts to detect and reconstruct the solar signature on climate which is currently in press on the Journal of
Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. This new paper also discusses some limitation of previous approaches. The paper is Empirical analysis of the solar contribution to global mean air surface temperature change. with the abstract “The solar contribution to global mean air surface temperature change is analyzed by using an empirical bi-scale climate model characterized by both fast and slow
characteristic time responses to solar forcing: t1 = 0.4 +/- 0.1 yr, and t2 = 8 +/- 2 yr or t2 = 12 +/- 3 yr. Since 1980 the solar contribution to climate change is uncertain
because of the severe uncertainty of the total solar irradiance satellite composites. The sun may have caused from a slight cooling, if PMOD TSI composite is used, to a
significant warming (up to 65% of the total observed warming) if ACRIM, or other TSI composites are used. The model is calibrated only on the empirical 11-year solar cycle
signature on the instrumental global surface temperature since 1980. The model reconstructs the major temperature patterns covering 400 years of solar induced temperature
changes, as shown in recent paleoclimate global temperature records.” (Climate Science) The science is in: global warming will not be catastrophic says
SPPI SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the publication of a major peer-reviewed paper by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, demonstrating by
direct measurement that outgoing long-wave radiation is escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, and proving that the UN has exaggerated global warming 6-fold. They seem determined to press this: Nothing new under the sun
- Anthropogenic global warming started when people began farming IMAGINE a small group of farmers tending a rice paddy some 5,000 years ago in eastern Asia or sowing seeds in a freshly cleared forest in Europe a couple of thousand years
before that. It is here, a small group of scientists would have you believe, that humanity launched climate change. Long before the Industrial Revolution—indeed, long
before a worldwide revolution in intensive farming, the results of which kept humanity alive—people caused unnatural exhalations of greenhouse gases that had an impact on
the world’s climate. Much of what is known about recent ice ages comes from drilling into the ice at the planet’s poles. This holds a chemical chronology of the Earth laid out by depth.
There is evidence in this ice-core record of seven periods when the ice caps expanded, and each of them shows a steady decline in the level of greenhouse gases after the ice
receded again. All, that is, but for the one which saw the rise of modern agrarian societies. In Europe, slash-and-burn techniques for clearing forested land allowed the farming of crops that had spread from the Fertile Crescent. This practice loosed the forests’
stored carbon into the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide. In eastern Asia a couple of millennia later there was a tenfold increase in the growth of rice as the
region’s principal foodstuff. That meant the destruction of vast grasslands, which released equally vast amounts of methane—a gas far more efficient at trapping heat than
carbon dioxide is. The ice-core record shows that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere made an anomalous upturn about 7,000 years ago, and that methane levels, which were also
falling, began to increase about 5,000 years ago (see chart). These numbers correspond well with the rise of farming in Europe and Asia. This is not a new idea, but one of
its proponents, Bill Ruddiman, a palaeoclimatologist
at the University of Virginia, has recently refuted one of the main objections to it: that there were not enough people farming the land to have made a significant
difference. Dr Ruddiman argues,
in Quaternary Science Reviews, that with vast tranches of land at their disposal and only unrefined agricultural techniques, early farmers had no incentive to
maximise the potential of the land they farmed. Previous attempts to take into account the effects of early agriculture on the climate have assumed that people farming then
used about the same amount of land to grow food, per person, that they did into the modern era. Dr Ruddiman argues that such an assumption is tantamount to suggesting that
farmers have learned nothing in the past 5,000 years. He and his colleagues have turned to archaeological and anthropological data to show that early farmers used ten times as much land per person as modern farmers. Burning
off large areas of forest or grassland, they would farm the enriched soil until its yield began to drop, and then move off to do the same elsewhere—as practitioners of
slash-and-burn agriculture do to this day. Such profligacy would make the contributions of early farmers large enough to have an effect on worldwide levels of greenhouse gases. So although the size of the effect
has increased markedly since the industrial revolution, it looks as if humanity has been interfering with the climate since the dawn of civilisation. (Economist.com) Seems to me the biggest flaw in their little theory is that agrarian practices began in the Holocene Thermal Maximum and temperatures have steadily
declined since. How is declining temperature a symptom of people triggering global warming? Here come the all-too-predictable disaster prognostications in the lead up to CoP15: Climate
change set to 'wipe out species' RUNAWAY climate change will see thousands of animal and plant extinctions in Australia and massive changes to the eco-system, a Federal Government report warns. I call "Bullshit!" Climate change 'to affect tourism' The tourism industry will face a massive cost shock from climate change as coral bleaching increases, species are threatened, national parks are closed, wetlands are lost
and insurance bills grow, a tourism conference has been told. Plan to cope with climate change on
Reef A new strategy has been launched to cope with the single biggest threat to the Great Barrier Reef - climate change - and protect Australia's $5 billion reef tourism
industry. Nonsense! Even if Australia stopped producing carbon dioxide emissions altogether it can't affect temperatures sufficiently to influence bleaching events
on the reef, ever. It is a case for geo-engineering though because the entire Coral Sea could be cooled, if necessary, by overflying and dispersing sulfate particulates to
reduce solar energy penetration. There are ways of protecting the reef, should they ever be required but carbon constraint is not one of them. Hmm... Warming of plateau is 'threatening all Asia' Due to global warming, glaciers on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau are retreating extensively at a speed faster than in any other part of the world. But glacial mass balance is determined by precipitation more than temperature. Why is less ice apparently accumulating here? Has it anything to do with
the observed reduction in cloud over China? Has the temperature risen above freezing for significantly longer periods? Study
suggests plants stressed by climate change may emit more greenhouse gases CALGARY - Plants stressed by drought and rising temperatures brought on by global warming may actually release more greenhouse gases into the environment, says research
from the University of Calgary. And she's lashed herself to the mast of the carbon scam flagship: Boxer
could face re-election fight of her career against Fiorina Democrat Barbara Boxer's quest for a fourth term in the U.S. Senate may give Californians a chance to pass judgment on Washington in the Obama era: Do voters approve of
the early performance of the Democratic president and Congress? Or is it time to restore more power to Republicans, in this case to a controversial former Silicon Valley CEO
making her first run for elective office? The Old ‘Emissions Reduced or Saved’ Trick While sitting in DMV hell — prepping myself for a physician's waiting room under Obamacare, of course — I received this bit of desperate spin from Climate Progress. Rallies, Questions, Opposition Await Obama’s Climate Change Plan Opponents of President Obama’s climate change legislation are taking some cues from the protesters who have fired up the health care debate at town halls nationwide. Fifteen days. That is the time now available for formal negotiations before the UN climate policy conference starts in Copenhagen in December. The goal of international agreements being considered on climate change is to stabilise the world's human-caused carbon dioxide emissions. This ambition is barely
conceivable. For the main gas, carbon dioxide, it would require emissions to be set at an average global level of about three tonnes per capita. At present, Australia emits
16 tonnes, the United States 20 tonnes and the EU nine tonnes. China, which is only one-third developed, is already at 4.5 tonnes, i.e., 50 per cent above the required level. Careful what you wish for: Environmentalists hope UN talks
tough on climate change You're probably not thinking about what you would like for Christmas yet. But ask any environmentalist for their ideal gift and you'll get a version of this answer: a
binding agreement at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December that is strong enough to match the science. (CNN) "Match the science" eh? Laden with caveats, ambiguities and uncertainties then... somehow, I think they'll get their wish. You’ve heard the extraordinary numbers – 230 miles per gallon!! This is the claim GM is making for its new Chevy Volt electric car. Watch this video
If a voice in the back of your head is telling you this is too good to be true – listen to it. This claim is one of the biggest whoppers in advertising history. The
folks making these claims are counting on the listeners to be complete innumerate fools. And the news media seems to be playing along
with total credulity. You would think there would be some kind of government crack-down on GM’s fraudulent claims. Oh, I forgot, the government is GM. Here are some important facts about the Chevy Volt. It will be powered by an electric motor which is run off a lithium-ion battery. The battery will have an
energy capacity of 16 kilowatt-hours and will propel the car for 40 miles. That works out to 0.4 kilowatt-hours of energy per mile. The battery will have to be replaced after
about 150,000 mile. When the battery’s charge runs down, a gasoline powered electric generator will kick in to recharge it. Gasoline has an energy content of 1.3
x 108 Joules of energy per gallon. One kilowatt-hour is 3.6 x 106 Joules. So one gallon of gasoline contains about 36 kilowatt-hours of energy per
gallon (1.3 x 108 J0ules / 3.6 x 106 Joules/kilowatt-hour). So, if you could manage to squeeze every single kilowatt-hour of energy out of one gallon of gasoline and into your battery, then one gallon of gasoline
would drive your Volt 90 miles (36 kilowatts / 0.4 kilowatts/mile). But there are pesky complications – like the laws of physics – that insure not even 90 miles per
gallon will be achieved. Conversions are not 100% efficient. If you read the fine print, you will see that the reality is that if you drive your Chevy Volt on gasoline it
will get, at most 50 miles to the gallon. Fifty miles per gallon is still pretty good you might say. But $40,000 is a lot to pay to be squeezed like a sardine. Consider this: a 1987 Honda Civic Coupe HF got 57
miles to the gallon. It cost about $7500 dollars (about $16,000 in 2009 dollars). And, you didn’t have to spend $15,000 to replace the battery every 150,000 miles in
the old Honda. I drove a 1988 Honda Civic Hatchback for over 250,000 miles, always tracked the mileage, and consistently got 47 miles to the gallon. I comfortably took my family across
the country multiple times. Man, I miss that car. I am not impressed at all by the over-priced hybrids or electrics that we are seeing today. So how does GM justify the preposterous claim of 230 miles per gallon? The way they figure it, for every gallon of gas that you put in the tank, you will re-charge the
battery enough times by plugging it into the grid at home to power it for 180 miles. So, 50 miles from a gallon of gas and 180 miles from multiple charges from the
electric grid at home. Voila! 230 miles per gallon. They could just as easily claimed 1000 miles per gallon by figuring that you would charge it off the grid for 950 miles
worth of power for every gallon of gas you pumped into the tank. I think GM has a problem. Most people who are likely to spend $40,000 on a little car have been around long enough not to be innumerate fools. (Climate Sanity) Gas plant must curb emissions, watchdog says - Proposed facility could
become province’s largest source of CO2, group warns A proposed $500-million natural-gas-processing plant in northeastern British Columbia will become the province’s single-largest source of carbon dioxide unless the
government tightens the rules for greenhouse gas emissions, the Pembina Institute said Monday. Good thing carbon dioxide levels are irrelevant then, isn't it? Germany Solar Cell Producer Q-Cells To Slash 500 Jobs Germany’s Q-Cells, the world’s second-largest producer of solar cells, will cut 500 jobs after reporting a loss of EUR 696.9 million ($994 million) in H1 2009. August 17, 2009
Osteoporosis-linked fracture rates up dramatically NEW YORK - The number of Americans hospitalized for osteoporosis-related fractures and other injuries has climbed 55 percent since 1995, a U.S. government report finds. We said years ago that lousy government advice stemming from bias against dairy foods and sunlight exposure was setting up an aging population for
osteoporosis. Should we be surprised by this result? Florida doc fired over 'doughnuts equal death' sign PENSACOLA, Fla. — Dr. Jason Newsom railed against burgers, french fries, fried chicken and sweet tea in his campaign to promote better eating in a part of the country
known as the Redneck Riviera. He might still be leading the charge if he had only left the doughnuts alone. Dealing with America's obesity problem Obesity is depleting our nation's pocketbook and devastating the health and wellness of millions of Americans. Left unaddressed, the obesity epidemic will undermine our
country's health, reduce our productivity and threaten our economic security. (Clyde Yancy, Washington Times) Eradicating America's obesity epidemic Obesity is epidemic in the U.S. Currently, 72 million Americans are overweight or obese. The consequences are enormous and include personal suffering through disease and
disability, increased medical care and its attendant costs, and a substantial economic impact of lost wages. Daniel
Oliver: Fighting obesity is best left to the individual A report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that 65 percent of U.S. adults are overweight and 30 percent are obese. The proportion of those who are
obese has doubled in the last decade. Drug Promises Fix for Radiation Poisoning Dirty bombs are one of the biggest threats to the world's urban populations. Now an American molecular biologist has developed a drug that may protect against the effects
of radioactivity. Military officials are thrilled, and the discoverers could make billions. (Der Spiegel) Displaying the truth about policymaking - Newly released correspondence shows
how UK government tobacco policy is being created by anti-tobacco groups. A common accusation made by campaigners is that big business and corporate interests unduly influence government policy. But an important trend in recent years has been
the co-opting of non-governmental organisations – often with very clear vested interests of their own – to do research and create policy for government departments. This
is bad news for independent, objective policymaking. Here, Patrick Basham looks at recently released correspondence that shows how the formulation of recent tobacco policy is
a case study for this trend. (Patrick Basham, sp!ked) How ironic that China is learning what our own dear leaders are trying so hard to forget: China
Warms to New Credo: Business First BEIJING — So far this week, the World Trade Organization has rebuffed China in an important case involving Chinese restrictions on imported books and movies. The Chinese
government dropped explosive espionage charges against executives of a foreign mining giant, the Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto, after a global corporate outcry. And on Thursday,
the government said it had backed off another contentious plan to install censorship software on all new computers sold here. Nature nuts hate people: Attenborough
joins campaign to curb world's population Sir David Attenborough yesterday joined environmentalists and scientists in calling for a campaign to limit the world's population. Pine bark beetles aren't all bad When you travel up to the Fraser or Granby area, do you feel sad or upset at the sight of mountains bristling with brown, dead trees? Trying to replay the 1980s Salmon Crisis British Columbia’s Fraser River is suffering a salmon collapse, says Canada’s Globe and Mail. “It’s beyond a crisis!” warns a fishing advisor to the Fraser’s
Indian tribes. The Watershed Watch Salmon Society says the Fraser should have had 10–13 million spawning sockeye salmon this season—but has gotten less than 2 million.
Canada’s government has closed its ‘biggest salmon river’ to commercial and recreational fishing for the third year in a row. Government scientist
suspected of contracting bovine TB from badger Farmers have renewed calls for a cull of badgers after it was revealed a government scientist is suspected of having contracted bovine tuberculosis (TB) from the mammal. Astronomers:
'Sun's output may decline significantly inducing another little ice age on the Earth' Astronomer Emeritus Dr. William Livingston and Associate Astronomer Dr
Matthew Penn have for many years been measuring the magnetic field strength of the Sun's magnetic fields. See for example: here.
WattsUpWithThat (WUWT) in June 2009 by them concluding that, broadly speaking, over the last 15 years the magnetic field strengths of sunspots were decreasing with time
independently of the sunspot cycle. A simple linear extrapolation of the magnetic data collected by their special observatory (the McMath-Pierce telescope (see here.)
published a report) suggests that sunspots might largely vanish in five years time. In addition, other scientists report that the solar wind (a large proportion of the Sun's
output of matter in the plasma form) is in a lower energy state than found since space measurements began nearly 40 years ago. (Climate Depot) New
Paper “Ocean Heat Content and Earth’s Radiation Imbalance” By D.H. Douglas and R.S. Knox 2009 There is a very important new paper that uses heat content of the climate system in Joules in order to diagnose global warming and cooling (see
also). It is Douglass, D.H. and R. Knox, 2009: Ocean
heat content and Earth’s radiation imbalance. Physics letters A The abstract reads “Earth’s radiation imbalance is determined from ocean heat content data and compared with results of direct measurements. Distinct time intervals of alternating
positive and negative values are found: 1960– mid 1970s (−0.15), mid-1970s–2000 (+0.15), 2001–present (−0.2 W/m2), and are consistent with prior reports.
These climate shifts limit climate predictability.” The summary reads “We determine Earth’s radiation imbalance by analyzing three recent independent observational ocean heat content determinations for the period 1950 to 2008 and
compare the results with direct measurements by satellites. A large annual term is found in both the implied radiation imbalance and the direct measurements. Its magnitude
and phase confirm earlier observations that delivery of the energy to the ocean is rapid, thus eliminating the possibility of long time constants associated with the bulk of
the heat transferred. Longer-term averages of the observed imbalance are not only many-fold smaller than theoretically derived values, but also oscillate in sign. These facts are not found
among the theoretical predictions. Three distinct time intervals of alternating positive and negative imbalance are found: 1960 to the mid 1970s, the mid 1970s to 2000 and 2001 to present. The
respective mean values of radiation imbalance are −0.15, +0.15, and −0.2 to −0.3. These observations are consistent with the occurrence of climate shifts at
1960, the mid-1970s, and early 2001 identified by Swanson and Tsonis. Knowledge of the complex atmospheric-ocean physical processes is not involved or required in making these findings. Global surface temperatures as a function of
time are also not required to be known.” This excellent paper shows why we need to focus on climate system heat content changes as urged in Ellis et al. 1978: The annual variation in the global heat balance of the Earth. J.
Climate. 83, 1958-1962 Pielke Sr., R.A., 2003: Heat storage within the Earth system. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84, 331-335 Pielke Sr., R.A., 2008: A broader view of the role of humans in the climate system. Physics Today, 61,
Vol. 11, 54-55 (Climate Science) New Ocean Heat Content Paper Supports
Tsonis et al ‘Climate Shifts’ A new paper by Douglass, D.H. and R. Knox, 2009 entitled: ‘Ocean
heat content and Earth’s radiation imbalance’ Physics letters A, doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2009.07.023, uses heat content of the climate system in Joules in order to
diagnose global warming and cooling. The Abstract states: Earth’s radiation imbalance is determined from ocean heat content data and compared with results of direct measurements. Distinct time intervals of alternating positive
and negative values are found: 1960– mid 1970s (−0.15), mid-1970s–2000 (+0.15), 2001–present (−0.2 W/m2), and are consistent with prior reports. These
climate shifts limit climate predictability. The summary states: We determine Earth’s radiation imbalance by analyzing three recent independent observational ocean heat content determinations for the period 1950 to 2008 and compare
the results with direct measurements by satellites. A large annual term is found in both the implied radiation imbalance and the direct measurements. Its magnitude
and phase confirm earlier observations that delivery of the energy to the ocean is rapid, thus eliminating the possibility of long time constants associated with the bulk of
the heat transferred. Longer-term averages of the observed imbalance are not only many-fold smaller than theoretically derived values, but also oscillate in sign. These facts are not found
among the theoretical predictions. Three distinct time intervals of alternating positive and negative imbalance are found: 1960 to the mid 1970s, the mid 1970s to 2000 and 2001 to present. The respective
mean values of radiation imbalance are −0.15, +0.15, and −0.2 to −0.3. These observations are consistent with the occurrence of climate shifts at
1960, the mid-1970s, and early 2001 identified by Swanson and Tsonis. Knowledge of the complex atmospheric-ocean physical processes is not involved or required in making these findings. Global surface temperatures as a function of time are
also not required to be known. (CRN) Another
UK climate data withholding scandal is emerging As many WUWT readers know, Steve McIntyre’s tireless quest to get the raw data that makes up the gridded Hadley Climate Research Unit HadCRUT dataset has been fraught
with delays, FOI denials, and obvious
obfuscation. In some cases the “dog ate my homework” is the excuse.
The UK Register has an excellent summary of the issue. A similar issue has been brewing in parallel over tree ring data in the UK. Doug Keenan tells us the story of getting the “ring around” for over 2 years trying to
obtain what many would consider a simple and non controversial data request. – Anthony Guest Post by Doug Keenan Queen’s University Belfast is a public body in the United Kingdom. As such, it is required to make certain information available
under the UK Freedom of Information Act. The university holds some information about tree rings
(which is important in climate studies and in archaeology). Following discusses my attempt to obtain that information, using the Act. Scientists study tree rings for two main purposes. One purpose is to learn something about what the climate was like many years ago. For instance, if many trees in a
region had thick rings in some particular years, then climatic conditions in those years were presumably good (e.g. warm and with lots of rain); tree rings have been used in
this way to learn about the climate centuries ago. The other purpose in studying tree rings is to date artefacts found in archaeological contexts; for an example, see here. Tree-ring data from Northern Ireland Most of the tree-ring data held by QUB was gathered decades ago; yet it has never been published. There is a standard place on the internet to publish such data: the International
Tree-Ring Data Bank (ITRDB), which currently holds tree-ring data from over 1500 sites around the world. QUB refuses to publish or otherwise release most of its data,
though. So I have tried to obtain the data by applying under the UK Freedom of Information Act
(FoI Act). I have submitted three separate requests for the data. Each request described the data in a different way, in an attempt to avoid nit-picking objections. All three
requests were for the data in electronic form, e.g. placed on the internet or sent as an e-mail attachment. The first request was submitted in April 2007. QUB refused the first request in May 2007. I appealed the refusal to a Pro-Vice-Chancellor of QUB, who rejected the appeal. The primary reason that the Pro-Vice-Chancellor
gave for rejection was that some of the data was in paper form and had not been converted to electronic form. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor additionally claimed that after data was
converted to electronic form, “It is then uploaded to the International Tree Ring Data Base”. There might indeed be some small portion of the data that is not in
electronic form. My request, though, was for a copy of the data that is in electronic form. So, is all data that is in electronic form available at the ITRDB, as the
Pro-Vice-Chancellor claimed? QUB has in the past published the results of various analyses of its tree-ring data (most notably its claim to have sequences of overlapping tree rings extending back in
time many millennia). In doing the analyses, the sequences of tree-ring data are analyzed statistically, and the statistical computations are done by computer. This is well
known, and moreover has been stated by QUB’s former head tree-ring researcher, Michael
G.L. Baillie, in several his publications. (Indeed, Baillie and his colleague Jon R. Pilcher, also at QUB, wrote a widely-used computer program for tree-ring matching, CROS.)
Obviously the data that was used for those computations is in electronic form—and it has not been uploaded to the ITRDB. Thus the claim by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor is
untrue. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor further claimed that to organize the data in “the very precise categories which [I] have specified” [in my request] would entail a vast amount
of work. My request, though, was merely for the tree-ring data that had been obtained and used by the university; that hardly seems like precise categorization. Moreover, I
later submitted a second request for “the data about tree rings that has been obtained by [QUB] and that is held in electronic form by the university”. That request was
also refused. And a third request that was very similar to the second was refused. All three requests were refused in whole, even though the university is required to make
partial fulfillment when that is practicable. The UK Information Commissioner’s Office The ICO then contacted QUB, asking for further information. QUB then admitted that almost all the data was stored in electronic form. Thus QUB implicitly admitted that its
prior claims were untruthful. QUB now asserted, however, that the data was on 150 separate disks and that it would take 100 hours to copy those disks. (These were floppy disks—the type that slide
into computers and, prior to the internet, were commonly used to carry electronic data.) It takes only a minute or two to copy a floppy disk, however; so the claim of 100
hours to copy 150 floppy disks is an unrealistic exaggeration. QUB also said that it considered photocopying a printed version of the data, but that this would take over 1800 hours. As noted above, all my requests were for data that
is in electronic form; moreover, I have repeated this point in subsequent correspondences with QUB. The statement from QUB about photocopying is thus not relevant. On 22 December 2008, the ICO sent me a letter rejecting my appeal, on the grounds that the time needed by QUB would exceed an “appropriate limit” (as stipulated
in the FoI Act). The ICO had accepted QUB’s explanation for refusing to release the data without question, and without discussing the explanation with me. I telephoned
the ICO to raise some objections. To each objection that I raised, the ICO case officer gave the same reply: “I’m satisfied with their [QUB's] explanation”. I also offered to visit QUB with the case officer, to demonstrate how quickly the data could be copied (e.g. from floppy disks), and to copy the data myself. This seemed
particularly appropriate because the officer had told me when she started on the case that she would visit QUB as a standard part of investigation, yet she had not made such
a visit. The officer, though, declined my offer, again saying that she was satisfied with QUB’s explanation. There is a mechanism to appeal an ICO decision, to a tribunal. I told the case officer that I wanted to do so. The officer replied that, in order to file an appeal, I
would need a formal Decision Notice from the ICO. I requested a Decision Notice. The officer then informed me that the ICO would send a Notice, but that, because they were
busy, it would take about two years to do so. Environmental Information Regulations I had been aware that the EIR existed, but had assumed that the EIR was essentially the same as the FoI Act. After the discussion with Holland, though, I checked and
found that there is one major difference between the EIR and the FoI Act: under the EIR, there is no limit on the amount of time that a public institution requires to
process a request. In other words, even if QUB’s original claim that some of the data was only available on paper were true, or even if QUB’s revised claim that copying
data from disks would take 100 hours were true, that would still not be a valid reason for refusing to supply the information. I am not an expert in how to apply the EIR or FoI Act, though. So I telephoned the ICO headquarters to ask for guidance. There I spoke with a Customer Service
Advisor, Mike Chamberlain. Chamberlain told me the following: that the information seemed obviously environmental; that there was no limit on processing time that could be
used to refuse a request for environmental information; that I could freely visit a site where environmental information was held in order to examine the information; and
that it was the duty of the public authority (i.e. QUB) to determine whether the EIR or the FoI Act was applicable. Chamberlain also confirmed everything that he told me
with someone more senior at the ICO. It is regrettable that I had not realized the above earlier. My initial request to QUB, in April 2007, had stated the following. It might be that this request is exempt from the FOIAct, because the data being requested is environmental information. If you believe that to be so, process my request
under the Environmental Information Regulations. QUB, however, had not processed my application correctly. I should have caught that. There is another issue. I had described the information to the ICO case officer by telephone and also by e-mail (on
24 November 2008). Hence the case officer must have known that the information was environmental, and thus exempt under the FoI Act and only requestable under the
EIR. Why did the ICO not act on that? On 29 January 2009, I e-mailed the case officer, citing the above-quoted statement from my request to QUB and saying “I would
like to know the reasoning that led to my request being processed under the Freedom of Information Act, instead of EIR”. Initially, there was no reply. The EIR was enacted pursuant to the Aarhus Convention, an international treaty on environmental information that the UK
promoted, signed, and ratified. Failure to implement the EIR would constitute a failure by the UK to adhere to the Convention. So, a few weeks after e-mailing my question to
the ICO, and with no reply, I contacted the Aarhus Convention Secretariat (ACS), at the United Nations in Geneva.
The ACS has a mechanism whereby individuals can file a complaint against a country for breaching the Convention. I had an initial discussion with the ACS about this. That
turned out to be unnecessary though. The Assistant Information Commissioner for Northern Ireland contacted me, on 10 March 2009: he was now handling my case and,
moreover, he had visited QUB and seen some of the data. On 22 April 2009, I received a telephone call from the Assistant Information Commissioner for Northern Ireland. The Assistant Commissioner said that he was preparing
a Decision Notice for the case, and he made it clear that the Notice would hold that the data should be released under the EIR. The next I heard anything was on 13 July
2009, when it was announced that the Assistant Commissioner had been suspended. On 13 August 2009,
I telephoned the ICO: I was told that a new officer would be assigned to the case within the next few days and that a draft Notice, which had been written by the Assistant
Commissioner, was in the signatory process. I am presently awaiting further word. Another example—Gothenburg University Gothenburg University does substantial tree-ring research. On 10 April 2007, I requested their tree-ring data. The university’s lead tree-ring researcher repeatedly
resisted, claiming that it would take weeks of his time, and that he was too busy to do it. On 22 April 2008, I sent a letter to the (new) rector of Gothenburg
University, saying that if the data was not supplied, I would file complaints with both the Court and the Parliamentary
Ombudsmen of Sweden. The next day, all the data was submitted to the ITRDB. What transpired with Gothenburg University exemplifies the importance of laws on Freedom of Information for tree-ring data. Motivations for withholding data … they ARE my data. Funding agencies pay me for my expertise, my imagination, and my insights to be able to make some advance in our understanding of how nature works,
not for raw data sets. … It is the understanding and inferences supplied by the scientist that funding agencies are interested in, not her or his raw data. In other words, even if the research and the researcher’s salary are fully paid for by the public—as is the case at QUB—the researcher still regards the data as his
or her personal property. There are only a few tree-ring laboratories where attitudes are different. One example is the University of St Andrews, in the
UK. Almost all tree-ring data held by St Andrews is freely available in the ITRDB. It is notable that QUB continues to withhold its data even though, in 2009, the tree-ring laboratory at QUB was effectively closed. The closure was primarily due to the
lab lacking funds, which presumably resulted from having almost no research publications (i.e. the lab had not been producing anything; so funding agencies declined to
support it). The dearth of publications occurred even though the lab has some extremely valuable data on what is arguably the world’s most important scientific
topic—global warming (as outlined here). This problem arises because the QUB researchers do not have expertise
to analyze the data themselves and they do not want to share their data with other researchers who do. (WUWT)
Wonder what the phenologists make of this Russian language NTV video news reports flowers in Western Siberia that normally blossom in early Spring -with snow still on the ground - are unexpectedly blooming again -
in the middle of Summer. Experts say that the re-blooming is due to very severe (and uncharacteristic for summer) temperature drops in the area. They add that (due to cold
weather) the flowers are responding as if it is Spring -again - not summer. It is not just one type of spring-time-blooming flower but a variety of the type (that normally
bloom in early spring).
Really don't know whether to laugh or cry... Early
farmers 'began global warming process' Farmers who used "slash and burn" methods of clearing forests to grow crops thousands of years ago could have increased carbon dioxide levels enough to change
the climate, researchers have claimed. Over the years we've seen claims the Little Ice Age might have been a purely North Atlantic regional event precipitated by the clearing of dark European
forests for agriculture and lumber for dwellings, shipbuilding in the dawn of the golden age of sail and for cooking and heating fuel. We've also seen the studies
suggesting temperate forests are warming forests (mainly due to the albedo difference between dark forests and the more persistent snowfields of clear areas) and that only
tropical forests are "cooling" forests. One
of Antarctica's largest glaciers 'thinning four times faster than ten years ago' One of Antarctica's largest glaciers is thinning four times faster than it was ten years ago, researchers have warned. Recall this? Antarctic volcanoes identified as a possible culprit in glacier melting -
Another factor might be contributing to the thinning of some of the Antarctica's glaciers: volcanoes. Um... gosh! The CRU Gong Show: Refusing Ross McKitrick Today brought in some CRU refusals- their rejections of Ross Mc, Roman M, myself. (They're going to have to re-do their Roger Pielke rejection, since they replied to the
wrong request in his case.) Each one deserves to be savored. So today I'll post up their obstruction of Ross McKitrick. (Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit) Slowly getting there: Where is the
global warming A-Team? Those apparently tasked with carrying the standard for anthropogenic global warming are increasingly resembling the Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight. This has huge
implications for the political struggle for resources to reduce emissions and convert our energy base to greener technologies. So what follows will look like piling on--but
it isn't. We really need to get better measurements, better analysis and better communications or our efforts to control global warming will go the same way as Australia's,
where they recently voted down their version of Cap and Trade. Fuller hasn't yet got a handle on the whole gorebull warming thing being a rank fraud but he is slowly finding just how scantily clad is the emperor. Prominent
scientists push to revise physics society climate statement Eighty prominent scientists, researchers and environmental business leaders – many of them physicists – have called on the American Physical Society (APS), the
nation's leading physics organization, to revise its policy statement on climate change. The century-old APS is the premier scholarly group in the U.S. dedicated to the
advancement and dissemination of the knowledge of physics. Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been
expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th [and] 21st century changes are neither
exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that
examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals. This is a far cry from what we are reading in the very unscientific mainstream media. As a matter of fact, it would be a great surprise if the major media even report the
challenge of these courageous scientists to the APS status quo. Chad, located along the southern
edge of the Sahara Desert, is the dustiest place on Earth. Recognizing that aerosols plays a vital role in climate and biophysical feedback in Earth's environmental system,
climate researchers are turning to dust as a major driver of climate change. A new article, to be published in PNAS, identifies the Bodélé Depression in Chad as the
producer of about half the mineral aerosols emitted from the Sahara. According to Richard Washington et al. dust could be a “tipping element” where “small
features of the atmospheric circulation, such as the Bodélé Low-Level Jet, could profoundly alter the behavior of this feature.” With the impact of CO2
diminished due to a cooling climate climate, researchers are searching for new hazards: Is African dust the new carbon dioxide? The role of aerosols, both mineral and biological, has been under intense scrutiny in recent years. The IPCC AR4 reported aerosols as one of the most
potent climate forcings about which science understood very little. The paper “Dust
as a tipping element: The Bodélé Depression, Chad” is but the latest paper to call attention to the importance of African dust. I have previously reported on the
impact of Saharan dust storms on the tropical Atlantic (see “African
Dust Heats Up Atlantic Tropics”) and how aerosol levels from dust storms and volcanoes alone would account for much of observed global temperature rise (see “Arctic
Aerosols Indicate Melting Ice Not Caused By CO2”). Now, in the PNAS paper, researchers claim that the Bodélé area may be a “tipping
element” in the context of climate change, due to its location and prodigious dust output. The Bodélé Depression is Chad’s lowest point and it is one of the world’s most active sources of dust storms. On November 9, 2006, NASA’s Terra
satellite took this picture of a dust storm in the Bodélé Depression showing two visible plumes. The dust plumes appear as pale beige brush strokes against a tan
background. To the southwest of the dust storm is Lake Chad, which appears mostly dark green. Irrigation and declines in rainfall have reduced the size of the lake, once as
big as Lake Erie in North America, to only 5 percent of its size in 1966. So much dust is produced by the Bodélé Depression that it provides most of the mineral dust to the Amazon forest. In a paper
in Environmental Research Letters, Ilan Koren et al. reported that, based on satellite observations, dust is continuously transport 3,000 miles (5000 km)
from Saharan sources to the Caribbean Sea and North America in the Northern summer and to the Amazon basin during the Northern winter. According to the PNAS paper: About 40 million tons of dust are transported annually from the Sahara to the Amazon basin. Saharan dust has been proposed to be the main mineral source
that fertilizes the Amazon basin, generating a dependence of the health and productivity of the rain forest on dust supply from the Sahara. Here we show that about half of
the annual dust supply to the Amazon basin is emitted from a single source: the Bodélé depression located northeast of Lake Chad, approximately 0.5% of the size of the
Amazon or 0.2% of the Sahara. Placed in a narrow path between two mountain chains that direct and accelerate the surface winds over the depression, the Bodélé emits dust
on 40% of the winter days, averaging more than 0.7 million tons of dust per day. There is evidence that during the Last Glacial Maximum atmospheric dust concentration was as much as an order of magnitude greater than present-day values,
but dust levels are highly variable. Modern observations suggest that between 1960 and 2000 annual mean African dust generation may have varied by a factor of 4. It is
thought that minor modifications to global circulation patterns could cause dust production from the Bodélé to increase significantly or reduce it to near zero. “We argue
that the Bodélé is indeed capable of profound changes in future emissions,” state Washington et al. “Although the full consequences of these change have not yet
been quantified, the case exists for doing so.” Indeed, recent analysis of aerosols' complex heating and cooling influences have led to a greatly reduced impact for atmospheric CO2
levels. As previously reported, a large aerosol cooling implies a
correspondingly large climate sensitivity. Conversely, reduced aerosol cooling implies lower GHG warming, which in turn implies lower model sensitivity. The upshot of this is
that CO2 sensitivity values used in models for the past quarter of a century have been set too high. With global temperatures flattening and even
declining since 2002 it looks like all those climate models that had been tweaked to match last century's temperature curve—thereby pumping up the importance of human
carbon dioxide emissions—have quietly left the world stage. The new found emphasis on dust has been bearing scientific fruit in a rash of recent papers including one published in Quaternary
Research in November of 2007. This paper by Elsa Jullien et al. reports a link between low-latitude “dusty events” and “icy Heinrich events,” which
occur at higher latitudes. As you may recall from previous
posts, Heinrich events happened when the American ice sheets became unstable. That gave rise to enormous ice surges which formed vast flotillas of drifting ice floes in
the Atlantic Ocean and noticeable increases in ice rafted debris deposits. The last event (H1) some 14,000 years ago set the stage for the onset of the Holocene warming.
According to the abstract of the paper by Jullien et al.: We explore low-latitude Heinrich events equivalents at high resolution, in a piston core recovered from the tropical north-western African margin. They
are characterized by an increase of total dust, lacustrine diatoms and fibrous lacustrine clay minerals. Thus, low-latitude events clearly reflect severe aridity events
that occurred over Africa at the Saharan latitudes, probably induced by southward shifts of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone. At a first approximation, it seems that
there is more likely synchronicity between the high-latitude Heinrich Events (HEs) and low-latitude events (LLE), rather than asynchronous behaviours. Heinrich events, numbered 1 through 6, occurred during a period of extensive sea-ice in the North Atlantic similar to today’s Arctic Sea. Heinrich events
are relatively brief and tend to occur at the boundaries of major climatic transitions as indicated by δ18O proxy measurements. Event number
six, the oldest accepted event, occurred around 60,000 years ago. Heinrich event 1 marked the onset of the termination which signaled the end of the last interglacial. It is
thought that fresh water released during the Heinrich events disrupted deep-water formation, thereby prompting switches between glacial and interglacial modes of thermohaline
circulation. If these recent papers linking dust to HEs prove accurate then it is possible that large amounts of dust from the Sahara is a sign of cooling, not global
warming. Again science has uncovered significant factors not considered by the IPCC's models, with significant impact on the doomsday predictions made by climate
change alarmists. The important link between dust and climate was only suspected when the IPCC was busy cranking out dire global warming scenarios with their computer models.
None of the models accurately accounted for aerosols and their affect on other forcings like albedo and the hydrological cycle. Now some scientists even suspect that dust is
an important trigger for larger climate change events, a “tipping element.” “Several factors distinguish the Bodélé as a potential tipping element,” argue Washington et al. “it is the largest single source of mineral
dust on the planet, producing about half of the Sahara’s mineral aerosol loadings.” They list the following reasons for thinking dust could be a tipping element:
“Mineral dust plays a key role in modifying climate through interaction with cloud physics and radiative heating. It is also involved in numerous biophysical feedbacks both
in the oceans and on land.” Even so, the Bodélé is a very small region and the effects of dust on the world's environmental system are still mostly unknown. The authors
almost sadly conclude “The Bodele, at this stage, qualifies as a potential tipping element until more work can be done to quantify the radiative impacts and biogeochemical
consequences of mineral aerosols.” Is dust then the new carbon dioxide, a villain to base predictions of disruptive climate change on? Probably not, aerosols' complex environmental
interactions can't be dumbed down into a simple formulation as rising CO2 levels were. When trying to frighten the public simple sells, and dust's interaction
with the environment is far from simple. But one simple point is becoming clearer and clearer: Climate modeling centered on CO2 levels, instead of
providing a solid foundation for global warming theory, has proven to be less substantial than the dust blowing out of Africa. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (The Resilient Earth) In the virtual realm: Study links drought
with rising emissions Drought experts have for the first time proven a link between rising levels of greenhouse gases and a decline in rainfall. The models are so bad they don't mimic the real world without make-believe drivers so that proves make-believe is real? Sheesh! And Wilkinson thinks this
constitutes "proof"? Heating of Arctic current contributes to global warming Washington, August 16 : Scientists have found that the warming of the northward-flowing West Spitsbergen current in the Arctic over the last thirty years has contributed
to global warming by triggering the release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from methane hydrate stored in the sediment beneath the seabed. Really? Then why did atmospheric methane levels slow and then stop rising altogether about a decade ago? Resilient Earth Authors Attend Scientists For
Truth Conference Al Simmons and Doug Hoffman
attended the “Scientists for Truth” conference in Springfield, Mo, on August 13, and report that the affair was a complete success. The conference's mission was to raise
awareness in America's heartland regarding the pernicious lies spread by climate change extremists and how dangerous the global warming hoax is to the country. Several
hundred attendees, including a class of high school students, stood for a rousing rendition of the national anthem to kickoff a day of presentations by a full slate of
prominent global warming skeptics. After a warm welcome and introductions by conference organizer Ron Boyer, Joesph D'Aleo, founder and editor of ICECAP
US, one of the oldest and most respected skeptic web sites, was the first presenter was. D’Aleo, who was the first Director of Meteorology at the cable TV Weather
Channel, has over 30 years experience in professional meteorology. As he skillfully laid out the evidence contradicting claims by Al Gore and the IPCC, murmurs of agreement
could be heard from the enthusiastic audience. Next up was Duane Highley, director of Power Production at Associate Electric
Cooperative, Inc., who addressed the potential impact of energy legislation pending in the Congress. As he described the financial repercussions of the Waxman Markey energy
bill—which would severely impact the people of Missouri, who get 85% of their electricity from coal—the audience was obviously displeased. The crowd reacted angrily when
told to expect an $1,800 increase in their electric bill if “Cap and Trade” becomes the law of the land. Dennis Avery, a senior fellow at the Hudson
Institute and the co-author, with S. Fred Singer, of “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years,” was next at the speaker's podium. Avery's presentation focused on
explaining the major theme of the his New Your Times best selling book. Using a wealth of scientific evidence he showed how global warming, as insignificant as it is,
results from natural cycles that have affected Earth's climate for millions of years. Dr Anthoney Lupo, Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University
Missouri, presented his insights about climate modeling, gained through years of experience in environmental science. Then, following lunch, Dr.
Marlo Lewis Jr., from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, linked political, economic and scientific data, warning against taking precipitous action to stop imaginary
global warming. Marc Morano, the driving force behind the Climate Depot web site, gave an energetic and
humorous review of ridiculous statements made by politicians and the slanted coverage of global warming in the news media. Marc's spirited presentation had the audience
alternation between howls of laughter and shouts of outrage. Using politicians' own statements, the foolishness and folly of our public officials was made painfully obvious. Given the unenviable task of following Marc's high-energy presentation, Dr.
Craig Loehle returned to the scientific evidence and the weak case for anthropogenic global warming. Loehl is Principle Scientist at the National Council for Air and
Stream Improvement, an independent, non-profit research institute that focuses on environmental topics. The final speaker of the day was Dr. Doug L. Hoffman, who's presentation placed the whole matter of human caused global warming into perspective. Hoffman
finished the day with an eye opening talk that spanned the birth of the universe, Earth's changing climate over time, mass extinctions and the history of global warming.
Talking afterward with Resilient Earth co-author Al Simmons, Dennis Avery remarked that Doug's presentation captured the “grand view” of science and showed how
trivial the climate change alarmists' arguments truly are. In all, it was a very successful and well attend conference. Students, local politicians and the public all departed with a much clearer view of the
controversy surrounding global warming. While Al and Doug autographed copies of The
Resilient Earth for a crowd of enthusiastic participants, one attendee was heard to say, “meetings like this one should be held all across the country.” A
sentiment shared by the attendees and speakers alike. So thanks to Ron and his family, who provided the labor to organize and run the conference—the result was a
spectacular success. (Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth)
The Scientists Speak Video Archive
Global Warming: The True-Believer Mindset (Uploaded 14 August 2009) What if it’s too late to head off climate change? What if the race against time has already been lost? (NYT) Not too late, not even close to time to act (and no problem yet to act against). The real threat is not climate change but green
climate policies I’ve just had an article on climate policy published in the journal Energy and Environment. It will appear in a special issue of the journal focusing on “Climate
Policy and Energy Poverty.” UN chief warns
the world 'will not make it' to agreement on climate change The UN's climate change chief Yvo de Boer has warned the world will "will not make it at this rate" to come to an agreement on how to tackle global warming.
(Daily Telegraph) Um... yeah, we're good with that. Gloomy Negotiators End
Bonn Climate Talks The latest round of preparatory talks for the U.N. climate conference concluded today with negotiators lamenting that the languid pace of talks could mean there won't be a
deal on emissions in Copenhagen this December. ‘Limited Progress’ Made At Latest Round Climate Talks, Says Top UN Official New York, Aug 14 2009 1:10PM Only “limited progress” has been made at the most recent United Nations climate change talks – which are expected to culminate later
this year in Copenhagen with a new pact on slashing greenhouse gas emissions – a senior United Nations official said today. Canberra Carbon Race - What not to do before December's U.N.
conference. The United Nations climate change confab is in December, and Australia's ruling Labor Party is eager to show "leadership" beforehand by passing a sweeping
emissions trading scheme. Luckily, the Senate in Canberra is showing more common sense. (WSJ) Australian
carbon defeat is bad news for Copenhagen summit The failure to pass new climate change legislation in Australia does not bode well for a global agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol at the end of the year in
Copenhagen. (Daily Telegraph) Yep, good with that, too. Got to admit they've played a good game: Beijing sets date
for emissions cut China’s carbon emissions will start falling by 2050, its top climate change policymaker said, the first time the world’s largest emitter has given such a time-frame. China study urges greenhouse gas peak in 2030 BEIJING, Aug 17 - China should set firm targets to limit greenhouse gas emissions so they peak around 2030, a new study by some of the nation's top climate change policy
advisers has proposed ahead of key talks on a new global warming pact. The White House is using a patently and demonstrably false line to defend cap-and-trade over the less inefficient tax: "And unlike a tax, [a White House aide] says, a
cap ensures carbon reduction." Farm Bureau: Climate Bill Will Not Change the
Climate American Farm Bureau Federation: Climate change legislation currently being considered by Congress will have a devastating impact on family farms and agricultural
production across the country. The House-passed bill (H.R. 2454), which is being examined by the Senate to serve as the potential basis for its climate change legislation,
poses a real economic threat for the U.S. agricultural economy. It also places our nation at a competitive disadvantage with our trading partners and fails to provide viable
alternative sources of energy to keep our economy strong and hold down costs. And, after all this, the measure would have little or no impact on the climate. (Natural
Resource Report) Climate Change Measure Should Be Set Aside, U.S. Senators Say The U.S. Senate should abandon efforts to pass legislation curbing greenhouse-gas emissions this year and concentrate on a narrower bill to require use of renewable
energy, four Democratic lawmakers say. Talk about last minute: Oil lobby to fund campaign against Obama's climate change
strategy Email from American Petroleum Institute outlines plan to create appearance of public opposition to Obama's climate and energy reform (The Guardian) And what do this lot mean "appearance of public opposition"? Who wants to decimate employment and living standards to fail to address a
fictional ill to begin with? No one? Then who is actually "for" Obama's climate and energy "reform" other than the scammers and rent seekers driving it? The reelection site for Texas governor Rick Perry has started a petition opposing cap-and-trade: (Drew Thornley, Planet Gore) So, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council for Capital Formation modeled the economic impacts of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill —
“the most significant revenue generating proposal of our time,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) . . . but don’t worry, it don’t cost nuthin’! Right -- for the wrong reasons: Climate change report urges cut in costs Avoiding a global temperature increase of more than 2 degrees Celsius, which scientists regard as the safe limit, will be prohibitively expensive, while a far less
ambitious target would produce a more cost-efficient result for the world economy, according to a new study. Current plans to attempt to control planetary mean temperature through manipulation of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are horrendously expensive and
doomed to failure. There are cheap alternatives which could be deployed rapidly with existing technology to directly manipulate Earth's energy balance in the event they
were ever required and none involve rationing or making your energy supply unnecessarily expensive. Richard Tol on Mitigation, and Two Responses Lawrence Solomon: Carbon disaster
- Don’t worry about the risks of earthquakes or suffocation or water contamination. Carbon capture is good, really If you live in or near a community that manufactures chemicals or cement, or that has a refinery or a coal or natural gas electricity generating station, or that has
abandoned mines or other suitable geological formations, you may soon be asked to save the planet from global warming by hosting an underground carbon dioxide storage
facility. Nonsense: North Sea’s new bonanza Britain could be in line for a new North Sea bonanza following research which reveals its suitability to store billions of tons of waste carbon dioxide. And there still is no incentive for power companies to do so, nor society generally. As demonstrated in this week's feature, there is no realistic
expectation of measurable temperature constraint to be had from sequestration if coal-fired emissions of carbon dioxide. It's far cheaper, and certainly more effective, to
directly manipulate albedo -- always provided the need ever arises to do so. Argh! No one should be wasting the atmospheric carbon resource! Energy
experts call for carbon capture scheme for gas fired power stations Executives from leading energy firms argue that new gas plants should fit carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology Sigh... Carbon fund has $120M to spend on green ideas Alberta's rapidly-growing carbon technology fund, which banks penalties from major greenhouse gas emitters, is looking for the best ways to spend $120 million. The perverse efficiency disincentives of carbon control: 'The
Clunkers of the Power-Plant World' - Old Coal-Fired Facilities Could Escape New Rules CHICAGO -- The twin smokestacks of the 85-year-old Crawford Generating Station are a familiar backdrop in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago. It's a largely
Mexican immigrant community where children play in the street, families congregate on stoops and pushcart vendors sell corncobs within blocks of the plant and its large coal
pile. Food prices to surge under emissions trading scheme SHOPPERS face a jump in grocery prices of up to 7 per cent under Labor's scheme to reduce carbon emissions, prompting calls for the Rudd government to come up with a
compensation package to help low- and middle-income families. Opencast coalmine surge 'weakens UK's authority at climate change talks' Britain will be a joke at Copenhagen, warns Nasa scientist James Hansen, as government authorises more mines (The Guardian) And the problem is... ? Turbine firm Vestas closes two
plants with loss of 425 jobs The wind turbine firm Vestas, which prompted an 18-day occupation when it announced plans to stop producing blades, closed two factories yesterday with the loss of 425
jobs. (Daily Telegraph) Wind turbines stopped by power fault A power fault has shut down nearly a quarter of the turbines at Little Cheyne Court on Romney Marsh - the biggest onshore wind farm in the south of England - just a month
after it was officially opened. (Daily Telegraph) Kill it! Kill it! Renewable energy gets
another go KEVIN RUDD has pulled his threat of an early election on climate change and will next week seek to appease green groups and investors by allowing legislation for the
increased use of renewable energy through the Senate. Forced "renewable" content is merely carbon constraint / ETS by another name and it stinks just as badly. Oh... Malcolm Turnbull hails change as common sense THE federal government's decision to detach its rewardable energy target (RET) assistance package from its emissions trading scheme is a victory for common sense,
Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull says. N-o-o-o-o... Changes in wind for energy target LABOR will consider reserving part of its 20 per cent renewable energy target for base-load solar, geothermal and tidal power amid concerns about a rush on investment in
wind power. We just dodged a bullet, what do you want to go wrecking things for? Quick! Come up with a way to derail this nonsense. The RAT Scheme and the RENT Scheme - should both be rejected. The Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, Mr Viv Forbes, today called on the Australian Senate to reject the Renewable Energy Targets Bill if it is re-introduced next
week. Opposition wants aid for smelters THE Federal Opposition wants more assistance for the heavy-polluting aluminium industry as part of its deal to pass the Government's renewable energy bill. Emissions battle to focus on aluminium EXEMPTIONS for aluminium producers will be at the centre of negotiations between the government and opposition on Monday over legislation to force major power users and
retailers to source 20 per cent of their electricity from renewables by 2020. Doubt it: Poll wipe-out will keep Coalition off the trigger SOMETIMES political reporting is like watching a bad movie; you have to suspend disbelief and go along with the twists of the plot even though you're pretty sure you know
it all ends quite differently. Bring it on, Labor, pull that trigger When the
Government's chief climate change science adviser, Professor Will Steffen, was asked to participate in an open debate this week for the benefit of senators about to vote on
the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill, he refused. Instead, he sent the independent senator Steve Fielding a letter belittling the scientist he was asked to debate. If everything goes to plan, within three months Australia will be on on course to host our first carbon election. For fans of the bizarre and pointless, it can’t get
much better than this, unless the major parties somehow conspire to add an astrology element. All these "cures" for no known ill: Seaweed cure
for coal-fired power CALLS to provide full compensation to coal-fired energy utilities from the emissions trading scheme are probably based on the premise that there is little or nothing they
can do to reduce their emissions. But that may not be the case. High Carbon Cost for ‘Clunkers’ Program Two academics say the cash for clunkers program is not cost effective from an environmental standpoint. Not an effective stimulus either -- all it does is bring purchases forwards a few months but there is no indication it creates new sales. Worse, it
removes flow-on business activity from motor mechanics, parts recycling, panel workers and so on by destroying quite a lot of repairable (and lower-income affordable)
vehicles from the availability pool, leaving lower earners less mobile and restricting their ability to travel to better employment. Stupid idea all around. Will Electric Cars Crash The Grid? The Chevy Volt is said to be able to get 230 miles per gallon. That's if it's continually plugged into a fragile and overburdened power grid. Where will you be when the
lights go out? (IBD) My Dog Gets Incredible Gas Mileage Today I am proud to announce that my toaster gets over 230 miles per gallon (in the city). In fact, it gets well over that, having used absolutely no gas in several years
of daily toasting of untold breads and pastries. Also, my computer gets shockingly good gas mileage, and my shoes, and my tomato plants. Even my dog gets incredible gas
mileage, and she’s been dead for five years. As Prices Slump, Solar Industry Suffers A run of poor earnings has damped confidence in once-booming solar companies. They forgot to mention that, with a maximum output of about 45 Watts per square meter for a maximum of about 6 hours per day the damn things are not
really worth having to begin with. August 14, 2009
Not this BS again! New EPA Rules on Arsenic Could Increase Water Costs by Billions A dispute over the toxicity of arsenic, a ubiquitous element found mostly at low levels in soil and water the world over, threatens to poison the nation’s public water
supplies. A group within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) is pushing hard to redefine on a large scale the level at which
arsenic should be considered toxic by EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), even though scientists at regional EPA offices and others have questioned the science
behind such a change. Some critics of the move also stress that ORD is bypassing the regular review process by which such changes are made. The myth of unhealthy belly fat Before continuing with the obesity paradox series, one of the most important null studies of the year deserves mention… especially since the media universally ignored
it. As the body mass index (BMI) is finally being recognized as an uncredible measure of health or predictive of premature death, other measures of body fat are being
promoted because everyone “knows” that fat is unhealthy. It’s inconceivable to contemplate that our condemnation of our body fat and of fat people might be little more than vanity, profit and prejudices. That increasingly
seems to be the case, though, when we stop to think about why we remain so intent on finding a reason to condemn fat even when the null studies are far stronger than any
others. One of the most popularized new measures is waist circumference or waist-to-hip ratio, as an indicator of belly fat. It’s based on the belief that there is good and bad
body fat, and that visceral fat — the fat that accumulates inside the abdomen — is the unhealthy, dangerous fat. (Junkfood Science) You didn't say anything, when they came for the smokers... Should
Employers Be Allowed to Deny Jobs to the Morbidly Obese? The Cleveland Clinic doesn’t hire smokers — part of its effort to “walk the talk” about healthy lifestyles, Cleveland Clinic CEO Toby Cosgrove said in a recent
chat with the Health Blog. U.S. Court Blocks Plan to Curb Mountaintop Mining WASHINGTON - A U.S. court on Wednesday blocked an attempt by the Obama administration to overturn a Bush administration rule that made it easier for coal mining companies
to dump mountaintop debris into valley streams. Exxon Agrees to Pay $600,000 in Bird Killings Case WASHINGTON - Exxon Mobil Corp has agreed to pay $600,000 and has already spent more than $2.5 million as part of a guilty plea to killing migratory birds in five states,
the U.S. Justice Department said on Thursday. Comment of the moment: ... I say US Airways should pay a fine for killing those poor geese that forced their plane to crash land into the Hudson (Cathy,
Green Inc.) Like it! Runner up: OK, so now can we expect wind power companies to start paying the same price per bird killed? (James,
Green Inc.) Millions of Salmon Disappear From Canadian River WINNIPEG, Manitoba - Millions of sockeye salmon have disappeared mysteriously from a river on Canada's Pacific Coast that was once known as the world's most fertile
spawning ground for sockeye. Plunge in India Water Levels Threatens Farms: Study NEW DELHI - Groundwater levels in northern India have fallen about 20 percent more than expected because of excessive pumping, threatening to spark a major food and water
crisis, according to a study based on U.S. space agency data. Egypt Denies Banning GMO Crop Imports CAIRO - Egypt's agriculture minister has not issued a decision to ban the import of genetically modified crops, the state news agency MENA said on Thursday, denying an
earlier report. Whoa! We didn't say that at all.
This discussion is on greenhouse effect and possible enhanced greenhouse, but that's a long way from anthropogenic effect in total. Whether or not they really affect
global mean temperature, human endeavors have significant local effects.
The heat island effect mentioned earlier or the local effect of increased water vapor from large scale irrigation schemes would be good examples. Then there's land use
change which can be variable depending on latitude -- replacing dark forest with wheat fields might significantly affect local albedo and cooling one region while denying
shade in a more heavily irradiated region might cause ground heating through increased absorption.
There are many effects in a hugely complex system, some will be negative, some positive and all represent change, although that is neither good nor bad in and of itself.
That humans affect the region of their activities is true -- that enhanced greenhouse from human activity is known to be a current or imminent catastrophe is not. And this
document is only dealing with greenhouse effect and "global warming." Water vapor and carbon dioxide are major greenhouse gases.
Water vapor accounts for about 70% of the greenhouse effect, carbon dioxide somewhere between 4.2% and 8.4%.
Much of the wavelength bands where carbon dioxide is active are either at or near saturation.
Water vapor absorbs infrared over much the same range as carbon dioxide and more besides.
Clouds are not composed of greenhouse gas -- they are mostly water droplets -- but absorb about one-fifth of the longwave radiation emitted by Earth.
Clouds can briefly saturate the atmospheric radiation window (8-13µm) through which some Earth radiation passes directly to space (those hot and sticky overcast
nights produce this effect - that is greenhouse but has nothing to do with carbon dioxide).
Greenhouse gases can not obstruct this window although ozone absorbs in a narrow slice at 9.6µm.
Adding more greenhouse gases which absorb in already saturated bandwidths has no net effect.
Adding them in near-saturated bands has little additional effect. Here's
a very simplified graphic on atmospheric absorption. And, at right, there's a somewhat more detailed graphic.
Right:
(a) Normalized blackbody curves for 5780 K and 220 K, plotted so that irradiance is proportional to the areas under the curves. (c) Atmospheric absorption in clear air for
solar radiation with a zenith angle of 50 degrees and for diffuse terrestrial radiation. (b) Same as (c) but for the portion of the atmosphere lying above the 11-km level,
near the middle latitude tropopause. [From Wallace and Hobbs, p. 332]
Finally, here's a palm-size reference version for those pub trivia nights.
So, now you know. Evidence that Global Temperature Trends Have Been
Overstated (Roger Pielke Jr.) When I served on the committee that resulted in the CCSP (2006) report on reconciling the
surface and tropospheric temperature trends, one of the issues I attempted to raise was a warm bias in the construction of long term surface temperature trends when near
surface land minimum temperatures (and maximum temperatures when the atmospheric boundary layer remained stably stratified all day, such as in the high latitude winter) were
used. This error will occur even for pristine observing sites. Tom Karl and his close associates suppressed this perspective as I document in Pielke Sr., Roger A., 2005: Public Comment on CCSP Report “Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere:
Steps for Understanding and Reconciling Differences“. 88 pp including appendices. As a result of the poor treatment by Karl as Editor of the CCSP (2006) report, I decided to invesitgate this issue, and others, in a set of peer reviewed papers with
colleagues which include Pielke Sr., R.A., C. Davey, D. Niyogi, S. Fall, J. Steinweg-Woods, K. Hubbard, X. Lin, M. Cai, Y.-K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood, S.
Foster, R.T. McNider, and P. Blanken, 2007: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multi-decadal global land
surface temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229. Pielke Sr., R.A., and T. Matsui, 2005: Should light wind and windy nights have the same temperature trends
at individual levels even if the boundary layer averaged heat content change is the same?Geophys. Res. Letts., 32, No. 21, L21813, 10.1029/2005GL024407. Lin, X., R.A. Pielke Sr., K.G. Hubbard, K.C. Crawford, M. A. Shafer, and T. Matsui, 2007:An examination of
1997-2007 surface layer temperature trends at two heights in Oklahoma. Geophys. Res. Letts., 34, L24705, doi:10.1029/2007GL031652. Fall, S., D. Niyogi, A. Gluhovsky, R. A. Pielke Sr., E. Kalnay, and G. Rochon, 2009: Impacts of land use
land cover on temperature trends over the continental United States: Assessment using the North American Regional Reanalysis.Int. J. Climatol., accepted We now have a new paper accepted which documents further a warm bias in the use of multi-decadal global surface temperature trends to assess global warming. It is Klotzbach, P.J., R.A. Pielke Sr., R.A. Pielke Jr., J.R. Christy, and R.T. McNider, 2009: An alternative
explanation for differential temperature trends at the surface and in the lower troposphere. J. Geophys. Res., in press. Our paper is also effectively discussed in my son’s weblog Evidence that Global Temperature Trends Have Been Overstated The abstract of the Klotzbach et al (2009) paper reads “This paper investigates surface and satellite temperature trends over the period from 1979-2008. Surface temperature datasets from the National Climate Data Center
and the Hadley Center show larger trends over the 30-year period than the lower-tropospheric data from the University of Alabama-Huntsville and Remote Sensing Systems
datasets. The differences between trends observed in the surface and lower tropospheric satellite datasets are statistically significant in most comparisons, with much
greater differences over land areas than over ocean areas. These findings strongly suggest that there remain important inconsistencies between surface and satellite
records.” We tested the following two hypotheses: 1. If there is no warm bias in the surface temperature trends, then there should not be an increasing divergence with time between the tropospheric and surface
temperature anomalies [Karl et al., 2006]. The difference between lower troposphere and surface anomalies should not be greater over land areas. 2. If there is no warm bias in the surface temperature trends then the divergence should not be larger for both maximum and minimum temperatures at high latitude land
locations in the winter. Both were falsified. The paper has the following text “We find that there have, in general, been larger linear trends in surface temperature datasets such as the NCDC and HadCRUTv3 surface datasets when compared with
the UAH and RSS lower tropospheric datasets, especially over land areas. This variation in trends is also confirmed by the larger temperature anomalies that have been
reported for near surface air temperatures (e.g., Zorita et al., 2008; Chase et al., 2006; 2008, Connolley, 2008). The differences between surface and satellite datasets tend
to be largest over land areas, indicating that there may still be some contamination due to various aspects of land surface change, atmospheric aerosols and the tendency
of shallow boundary layers to warm at a greater rate [Lin et al., 2007; Esau, 2008; Christy et al., 2009]. Trends in minimum temperatures in northern polar areas are
statistically significantly greater than the trends in maximum temperatures over northern polar areas during the boreal winter months. We conclude that the fact that trends in thermometer-estimated surface warming over land areas have been larger than trends in the lower troposphere estimated from
satellites and radiosondes is most parsimoniously explained by the first possible explanation offered by Santer et al. [2000]. Specifically, the characteristics of the
divergence across the datasets are strongly suggestive that it is an artifact resulting from the data quality of the surface, satellite and/or radiosonde observations. These
findings indicate that the reconciliation of differences between surface and satellite datasets [Karl et al., 2006] has not yet occurred, and we have offered a suggested
reason for the continuing lack of reconciliation.” What our study shows is that maps prepared by NCDC, as given below, are biased presentations of the surface temperature anomalies. BIASED NCDC MAP OF SURFACE TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES While additional research is required in order to determine the magnitude of the bias, we can use the analysis of trends using two levels near the surface from the Lin
et al (2007) paper as an estimate. I reported on this in my weblog where I wrote Back of the Envelope Estimate of Bias in Minimum Temperature Measurements To present a preliminary estimate, lets start with the value reported for the recent trend in the global average surface temperature. The 2007 IPCC Report
presents a global average surface temperature increase of about 0.2C per decade since 1990 (see
their Figure SPM.3). Their trend is derived from the average of the maximum and minimum surface temperatures; i.e., T(average) = [T(max) + T(min)]/2. “From our papers (Pielke and Matsui 2005 and Lin
et al. 2007), a conservative estimate of the warm bias resulting from measuring the temperature near the ground is around 0.21 C per decade (with the
nightime T(min) contributing a large part of this bias) . Since land covers about 29% of the Earth’s surface (see),
the warm bias due to this influence explains about 30% of the IPCC estimate of global warming. In other words, consideration of the bias in temperature would reduce
the IPCC trend to about 0.14 degrees C per decade, still a warming, but not as large as indicated by the IPCC. This is likely an underestimate, of course, as the value is not weighted for the larger bias that must occur at higher latitudes in the winter when the boundary layer
is stably stratified most of the time even in the “daytime” . Moreover, the warm bias over land in the high latitudes in the winter will be even larger
than at lower latitudes, as the nightime surface layer of the atmosphere is typically more stably stratified than at lower latitudes, and this magnifies the bias in the
assessment of temperature trends using surface and near surface measurements. [not coincidently, this is also where the largest warming is claimed; e.g., see the map on Andy
Revkin's Dot Earth's weblog]. Land is also a higher fraction of the Earth’s surface at middle and higher latitudes in the northern hemisphere and at the highest latitudes in the southern
hemisphere (see).” Our new paper Klotzbach et al (2009) provides evidence of the significant error in the global surface temperature trend analyses of NCDC, and well of other centers
such as GISS and CRU, due to the sampling of temperatures at just one level near the surface. It is also important to recognize that this is just one error of a number
that are in the NCDC, GISS and CRU data sets, as we have summarized in our paper Pielke Sr., R.A., C. Davey, D. Niyogi, S. Fall, J. Steinweg-Woods, K. Hubbard, X. Lin, M. Cai, Y.-K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood,
S. Foster, R.T. McNider, and P. Blanken, 2007:Unresolved issues with the assessment of
multi-decadal global land surface temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229. (Climate Science) Ocean
heat content and Earth’s radiation imbalance This paper is to be published on-line on Friday in Physics
Letters A Dr. Douglas graciously sent me an advance copy, of which I’m printing some excerpts. Douglas and Knox show some correlations between Top-of-atmosphere
radiation imbalance and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). The authors credit Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. with reviving interest on the subject due to his discussions on using
ocean heat content as a metric for climate change. Abstract Ocean heat content and Earth’s radiation imbalance Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, PO Box 270171, Rochester, NY 14627-0171, USA Earth’s radiation imbalance is determined from ocean heat content data and compared with results of direct measurements. Distinct time intervals of alternating
positive and negative values are found: 1960–mid-1970s (−0.15), mid-1970s–2000 (+0.15), 2001–present (−0.2 W/m2), and are consistent with prior reports.
These climate shifts limit climate predictability. Introduction: A strong connection between Earth’s radiative imbalance and the heat content of the oceans has been known for some time (see, e.g., Peixoto and Oort [1]). The heat
content has played an important role in recent discussions of climate change, and Pielke [2] has revived interest in its relationship with radiation. Many previous papers
have emphasized the importance of heat content of the ocean, particularly the upper ocean, as a diagnostic for changes in the climate system [3–7]. In this work we analyze
recent heat content data sets, compare them with corresponding data on radiative imbalance, and point out certain irregularities that can be associated with climate shifts.
In Section 2 the conservation of energy is applied to the climate system and the approximations involved in making the radiation-heat content connection are discussed. In
Section 3 data sources are enumerated. Section 4 gives the radiation imbalance for the Earth’s climate system. In Section 5, climate shifts, radiative imbalances and other
climate parameters are discussed. A summary is in Section 6. Discussion: … What is the cause of these climate shifts? We suggest that the low frequency component of the Pacific Decade Oscillation (PDO) may be involved. The PDO index changes from
positive to negative near 1960; it remains negative until the mid-1970s where it becomes positive; then it becomes negative again at about 2000. This mimics the FTOA data.
The PDO index is one of the inputs in the synchronization analysis of Swanson and Tsonis [43]. One would like to be able to predict future climate. Such predictions are based
upon the present initial conditions and some expectation that changes in the climate state are continuous. However, if there are abrupt changes such as reported by Swanson
and Tsonis then this is not possible. These abrupt changes presumably occur because the existing state is no longer stable and there is a transition to a new stable state. Summary: Three distinct time intervals of alternating positive and negative imbalance are found: 1960 to the mid 1970s, the mid 1970s to 2000 and 2001 to present. The respective
mean values of radiation imbalance are −0.15, +0.15, and −0.2 to −0.3. These observations are consistent with the occurrence of climate shifts at 1960, the
mid-1970s, and early 2001 identified by Swanson and Tsonis. Knowledge of the complex atmospheric-ocean physical processes is not involved or required in making these
findings. Global surface temperatures as a function of time are also not required to be known. (WUWT) Ravinder Kumar Chaujar Not knowing the difference between model output and data: How Superfast
Ethernet Can Help Tackle Climate Change Blazing fast Ethernet holds a lot of potential for Department of Energy scientists — at least $62 million worth. That’s how much the agency has awarded to the Berkeley
National Lab to develop a prototype Ethernet network connecting DOE supercomputers and transferring data at 100 gigabits per second, or 10 times faster than the existing
network, insideHPC reports. Most of the funds, awarded to the Berkeley Lab’s ESnet team under the stimulus package, will end up going toward new equipment and
infrastructure support services (read: boon for selected hardware vendors), but ultimately the project could help accelerate work around computing to fight climate change. Here's the source of so much angst and global strife -- modelers these days are so infatuated with the pretty graphics and cool scenarios available at
the literal press of a button they've completely lost sight of the difference between their make-believe worlds, so conveniently manipulated in air-conditioned comfort, and
actual data measured in the real world, however inconveniently. Now we have reached the bizarre state of affairs where historical empirical data is adjusted to suit the
models! Nature has published another remarkable example of academic check kiting by
Michael Mann et al, this time "Atlantic hurricanes and climate over the past 1,500 years". (Prior examples of academic check kiting discussed at CA are Ammann and
Wahl, the story of which is well told by Bishop Hill's Caspar and the Jesus Paper and "Mann, Bradley and Hughes 2004", cited in Jones and Mann 2004.) Mann et al 2009 reconstructs Atlantic tropical cyclone counts resulting in a curve that looks pretty much like every other Mannian curve. Atlantic tropical cyclone counts
as a linear combination of reconstructed Atlantic SST in the east tropical Atlantic "main development region" (MDR), reconstructed El Nino and reconstructed North
Atlantic Oscillation, using a formula developed in (3,16) - which surprisingly enough turn out to be articles by Mann himself (Mann and Sabatelli, 2007; Sabatelli and Mann
2007) previously discussed at CA here. (Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit) Walter Starck on the friendly folk who contacted Vancouver Sun writer Jonathan
Manthorpe following publication of an item expressing some agreement with Ian Plimer’s Heaven
and Earth (currently ranked #699 at Amazon, by the way): Manthorpe reported that he had received around 100 e-mails about his Plimer piece. About two-thirds were from ordinary people who agreed with Plimer. Another healthy
portion was from scientists who agreed with Plimer’s overall contention about natural variabilities in climate on which humans have little or no influence. However, they
disputed various specific claims and details made by him. Manthorpe also noted that, “… the disturbing letters were from the scientist believers in man-man global warming.” He then went on to say, “I have met a lot of unpleasant people in the course of my life, but I have never seen such a torrent of nasty, arrogant and downright
stupid abuse as has been aimed at me this week by people who aggressively sign themselves ‘PhD’ as though it were a mark of divine right that is beyond challenge or
question.” We need a new set of source words for that particular abbreviation. (Via Garth Godsman) (Tim Blair blog) Global warming non-believers
bound for Chicago And you think the health care debate is heating up… UN Chief’s warning
– the end of the world is nigh! UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has such a low profile on the world stage that he’s referred to as “the invisible man”. Perhaps in an effort to boost his press
coverage he’s given a speech in Incheon, South Korea (hat tip: Drudge), that can only be described as a bizarre PR stunt, with the sort of cataclysmic environmental
statements doled out in scientifically dodgy disaster movies like The Day After Tomorrow or the forthcoming 2012. Oh... Tom Karl's propaganda farm: Climate
change hits home, NOAA head says ASHEVILLE — Scientists based in Asheville think their conclusion is solid — climate change is for real. Recall this from a few days ago? The American Meteorological Society (AMS) released its AMS Policy
Statement on Geoengineering the Climate System on July 20 2009. The statement begins with the text “Human responsibility for most of the well-documented increase in global average temperatures over the last half century is well established. Further greenhouse
gas emissions, particularly of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, will almost certainly contribute to additional widespread climate changes that can be
expected to cause major negative consequences for most nations. “Three proactive strategies could reduce the risks of climate change: 1) mitigation: reducing emissions; 2) adaptation: moderating climate impacts by increasing
our capacity to cope with them; and 3) geoengineering: deliberately manipulating physical, chemical, or biological aspects of the Earth system. This policy statement
focuses on large-scale efforts to geoengineer the climate system to counteract the consequences of increasing greenhouse gas emissions.” This statement represents a very narrow view of the role of humans in the climate system (e.g. see).
The main purpose of my comment, however, is to document a clear bias and conflict of interest by the AMS, and, in particular, its current president, Tom
Karl. (Roger Pielke Sr., Climate Science) Uh-huh... French Winemakers Sound Alarm Over
Climate Change Experts warn that France could lose its famous wine vineyards because of global warming. Senator Kerry Misfires about Global Warming and National Security Senator John Kerry’s statement in early August 2009 about “global warming” before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which he chairs, was false in every
particular, leading him to draw the incorrect conclusion that “global warming” was a threat to national security. The Senator got every fact wrong – (Christopher
Monckton, SPPI) Six Ways to Cool Down Over the Climate-Change Security Scare There's perhaps no one better than our resident global-threat expert to smack down what the Times calls our "new" global-warming threat. So breathe easy and
learn something, because it's really just another spooky headline. Why
Carafano Has it Right on Climate Change, Part I In response to Heritage analyst James Carafano’s paper, “National Security Not a Good
Argument for Global Warming Legislation”, the American Security Project responded to four “myths” in Carafano’s piece. But their retaliatory facts ignore Carafano’s central premise that the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill will do much more economic harm than environmental good and would
undermine “the nation’s capacity to deal with natural disasters here and abroad.” The truth is the climate has been changing on its own for centuries and wide
scientific dissent exists disputing how much warming is human-induced or even caused by carbon dioxide. In any event, climatologist Chip Knappenberger modeled
the climate effects of the Waxman-Markey climate legislation and found the regulations would only lower temperatures by only hundredths of a degree Celsius in 2050 and no
more than two-tenths of a degree Celsius at the end of the century. Let’s take a look at ASP’s
critiques: (The Foundry) Why
Carafano Has it Right on Climate Change, Part II In response to Heritage analyst James Carafano’s paper, “National Security Not a Good
Argument for Global Warming Legislation”, the American Security Project responded to four “myths” in Carafano’s piece. But their
retaliatory facts ignore Carafano’s central premise that the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill will do much more economic harm than environmental good and would
undermine “the nation’s capacity to deal with natural disasters here and abroad.” (The Foundry) Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Aug.14th 2009 In this week’s round-up you can learn about the Green Guilt-o-meter, the mortal enemy of the biosphere and how much fun it’s possible to have have with alliteration
and Richard Branson. (Daily Bayonet) SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the publication of a major paper by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, demonstrating by direct measurement
that outgoing long-wave radiation is escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, showing that the UN has exaggerated global warming 6-fold.Report, page 3. Leaving The Planet And Poor Worse Off Environmental NGOs (nongovernmental organizations) Greenpeace and Worldwide Fund for Nature have just released the "NGO Climate Change Treaty." It's their wish
list for terms of a treaty to replace the expiring Kyoto Protocol, and they're pushing it this week at a U.N. meeting in Bonn, Germany. China Says Rich Up Pressure on Poor Over Climate BONN, Germany - China accused rich nations at U.N. climate talks on Thursday of increasing pressure on the poor to do more to combat global warming while shirking their
own responsibility to lead. Cap-and-Trade's Unlikely Critics: Its Creators - Economists Behind Original Concept
Question the System's Large-Scale Usefulness, and Recommend Emissions Taxes Instead In the 1960s, a University of Wisconsin graduate student named Thomas Crocker came up with a novel solution for environmental problems: cap emissions of pollutants and
then let firms trade permits that allow them to pollute within those limits. Doesn't matter how or why you restrict carbon you can't knowingly and predictable adjust the global thermostat. Why would you want to even if you could? More Cap-and-Trade War - Ten Senators insist on a carbon tariff
to avoid job losses. President Obama says his cap-and-trade energy tax won't hurt the economy, but at least 10 Senate Democrats disagree. Last week they sent Mr. Obama a letter demanding that
any bill taxing U.S. CO2 emissions must include a carbon tariff "to ensure that manufacturers do not bear the brunt of our climate change policy." The dangers of a carbon trade war CLIMATE POLICY and trade policy are on a collision course. Last week, 10 Democratic senators sent a letter to President Obama demanding that cap-and-trade legislation
include tariffs against dirty imports. Precisely such tariffs, aimed at countries that are not doing enough to cut their greenhouse gas emissions, were part of the climate
legislation recently passed in the House. Proponents argue that the tariffs are needed to prevent the loss of US jobs and the shift of emissions-generating activities to
other countries. Free trade advocates are horrified at the prospect, which they worry could violate global trade rules and spark an economic war. The administration likes to defend bad policies with analogies to the post office. New studies from a business group and the administration itself confirm that
cap-and-trade belongs in the dead-letter bin. (IBD) I think Marian actually believes: Libs,
backed by industry, torpedoed Rudd's carbon bill THE Rudd Government's big climate package was defeated yesterday because the estimated $16 billion or more it gives in assistance to Australia's big greenhouse-gas
polluting industries is either too much or too little to help them adjust to a clean energy future. No Marian, it was voted down because it's a total crock. It
should have been defeated because it’s insane Good decision, for bad reasons: The
Government’s contentious emissions trading laws have been voted down as expected in the Senate. UPDATE A terrific speech against Rudd’s scheme by Senator Nick Minchin, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, who truly does think it’s insane: Not only is the timing of this legislative initiative to be condemned, so too should the very name given to this package of legislation be condemned by this
parliament… For no more than base political purposes, the government has called its emissions trading scheme a ‘carbon pollution reduction scheme’. This is of course
the perpetuation of a cruel hoax on the Australian people, childishly simplistic and misleading. The scheme proposed does not deal with carbon. It purports to deal with
something quite separate—carbon dioxide emissions—and the scheme does not deal with pollution. Whatever the climatic role of human induced emissions of CO2, CO2 is not by any stretch of the imagination a pollutant. CO2 is, as we know, a clear, odourless,
colourless gas vital to life on earth… Indeed the Rudd government knows it too. Its own environment department’s website has a link to the official Australian National
Pollutant Inventory, which lists 93 pollutants. Surprise, surprise, carbon dioxide is not listed among them.... It is also typical of this deceitful and spin-driven government to so cynically misrepresent the nature of carbon dioxide. Of course this whole extraordinary scheme,
which would do so much damage to Australia, is based on the as yet unproven assertion that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are the main driver of global warming… The Rudd
government arrogantly refuses to acknowledge that there remains a very lively scientific debate about the extent of and the main causes of climate change, with thousands of
highly reputable scientists around the world of the view that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are not and cannot be the main driver of the small degree of global warming
that occurred in the last 30 years of the 20th century… Australia contributes a little over one per cent of the planet’s CO2 emissions. If we were to completely shut down the Australian economy tomorrow, Australia’s The cruel joke is that all those thousands of jobs to be destroyed by Labor’s CPRS will be in vain, because this scheme will make absolutely no difference to the
global climate At least a quarter of Rudd’s front bench will know every word of this to be true, and yet they do not speak. One day, when this insanity has finally blown itself out,
they will have to account - to themselves as much as to the rest of us - for their failure to defend not just reason but the best interests of their country. Read on for Minchin’s full speech: Nope: Deadlock over ETS bill may force double dissolution A DEADLOCK over climate change has brought the nation a step closer to an early election. Not in a fit. A double dissolution would mean K.Rudd had to take absolute ownership of a scheme to bankrupt voters, destroy his union-backers' members'
jobs, lower standards of living while lowering atmospheric carbon dioxide levels (published annually) not one scrap. Of all the things you could accuse Kevni, being
political suicidal is not on the list. More importantly, he's a particularly vain and emotionally-fragile flower in search of fame and a legacy -- that won't include being
seen as the most reviled ex-PM in Australia's history books. EU Carbon Ignores Aussie Carbon Plan Rejection LONDON - Prices for European carbon emissions futures ignored Australia's rejection of an emissions trading scheme on Thursday, rising with firmer German power and oil
prices, traders said. This also perpetuates the myth of a looming snap election and "financial uncertainty for polluters", who aren't polluters and who will have no
financial obligation in the absence of such stupid schemes. K.Rudd may be a lot of things be he does not want history to record him as Australia's most gullible and
financially destructive Prime Minister. He will not go to an early election that could commit him to implementation of an economic suicide pact when the rest of the
world is running away from such prospect. And here's the theater as K.Rudd escapes responsibility for doing anything, complete with a cudgel to bash the Opposition, just as he wanted all along: Grave
risk because of ETS failure: Rudd The Coalition has placed Australia's climate change future in grave jeopardy through its refusal to back the Government's emissions trading scheme, Prime Minister Kevin
Rudd has told Parliament. (AAP) Already backing away: Australia PM Says No
Intention to Call Snap Poll CANBERRA - Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said on Friday he had no intention of calling a snap election, despite parliament's rejection of his government's promised
plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Climate bill could cost 2 million jobs Add another climate bill cost estimate to the growing pile. Tough climate goals risk huge costs: Lomborg BONN, Germany - A goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) could mean crippling costs with gasoline taxes rising to $35 a gallon by 2100, a
self-styled "skeptical environmentalist" said on Friday. India clashes with EU, US at Bonn climate change talks The Indian response came during the five-day climate talks in Bonn, Germany, hosted by the UNFCCC--the UN forum responsible for any internationally binding agreement on
climate change (Live Mint) India blames Kyoto failure for climate standoff NEW DELHI — India said Thursday it was committed to fighting climate change but called developed nations' failure to implement the Kyoto Protocol the "single
biggest issue" facing multilateral talks. Please, no... Govt considers splitting climate change bills The Federal Government is under pressure from the Opposition and the Greens to reintroduce its bill for a 20 per cent renewable energy target to the Senate as early as
next week. (Australian Broadcasting Corp.) ... you've wasted far too much of my taxes already. So get real jobs: Greens jobs at risk after ETS fails THE Federal Government will consider separating its renewable energy targets and emissions trading scheme bills amid warnings green jobs are at risk. They don't seem to get it. Not many people are fooled by the "green jobs" myth and actually prefer not to pay a few glorified dole bludgers
vast sums in lieu of having people in real productive work. Big Oil and Clean Coal: Shell Joins CCS
Group in U.K. There’s been plenty of hand-wringing in Britain over the lack of progress on clean
coal (well, over the lack of progress on anything energy-related,
come to think of it). Could Big Oil bring the coal back to Newcastle, as it were? Royal Dutch Shell said today that it was joining a
consortium to compete for government money to build the country’s first commercial-scale clean-coal plant. The consortium includes Scottish Power (owned by Iberdrola) and
National Grid. Germany’s RWE and EON are also in the running with their own projects, but Shell is the only oil company involved. (More here
and here.) What difference does Shell make? It’s got
decades of experience getting liquids out of the ground—and more recently, injecting stuff into the ground to get more oil out. That is precisely the “storage” part of “carbon capture and storage” that hasn’t gotten so much attention lately, but which will be the ultimate test of the
feasibility or not of so-called clean coal. There are loads of pilot projects around the world, especially in the U.S., tinkering with ways to capture the carbon emissions from coal plants. Most, for now, just vent
the emissions back into the air when they’re done with their tests—there have been no large-scale demonstrations of long-term carbon storage from coal plants. That’s what makes Scottish Power’s project, at Longannet in Scotland, interesting. It also includes National Grid—the biggest pipeline operator in the country. And it is a retrofit of an existing coal plant, not a new build. Retrofitting
existing plants, MIT said, will be the key to actually making a dent in carbon emissions from coal plants. Longannet
is one of the plants Chinese power officials chose to visit as they crib up on clean-coal lessons. The British government won’t make a final decision on which project to fund until next year. It will be interesting to see how much weight Big Oil really carries. (WSJ) August 13, 2009
Dr. Rich hosts this week’s issue of Medical Grand Rounds. The topic is cost containment in healthcare reform. PC assertion of the moment: Preschool thinking skills linked to
weight NEW YORK - Smarter youngsters may be less apt to be overweight, a new study hints. Link Between Over-indebtedness And Obesity Identified Scientists at the University of Mainz have discovered a close correlation between over-indebtedness and obesity. Well, gosh... PCB Shift Forces G.E. to Suspend Hudson
River Dredging General Electric has temporarily suspended dredging for contaminants in the upper Hudson River after water samples showed that chemicals from the cleanup had traveled
several miles downstream. China’s Incinerators Loom
as a Global Hazard SHENZHEN, China — In this sprawling metropolis in southeastern China stand two hulking brown buildings erected by a private company, the Longgang trash incinerators.
They can be smelled a mile away and pour out so much dark smoke and hazardous chemicals that hundreds of local residents recently staged an all-day sit-in, demanding that the
incinerators be cleaner and that a planned third incinerator not be built nearby. Meh... dioxin -- not a big deal for people, mercury not so much either. They certainly might need forced ventilation to reduce the sooting and visual
pollution of particulates but garbage incineration is not a problem per se. Coal dust key culprit in miners' emphysema NEW YORK - Breathing coal dust worsens emphysema independently of cigarette smoking, suggest results of a study published this month. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration must notify a federal court next month whether it will do what is necessary to save endangered salmon in the Pacific
Northwest. The decision will tell us a lot about how the administration sees its obligations under the Endangered Species Act. The Bush team evaded its responsibilities with
amazing acts of legal casuistry. Fish defender... misanthropic twit -- eye of the beholder thing. Why? U.S. vows to embrace U.N. in break with Bush-era policy NEW YORK - The Obama administration will work with the United Nations to fight terrorism and other major world challenges, U.S. envoy Susan Rice said on Wednesday, marking
a clear shift from the Bush administration's disregard for the world body. With friends like these... And the moral is... don't fill swimming pools with nanoparticles? Brown
researchers question use of nanoparticles PROVIDENCE — Brown University researchers say they have new evidence that some carbon nanoparticles, which medical researchers are testing to treat a host of human
diseases, may pose health risks themselves. Egypt Says No GM Food Exports or Imports CAIRO - Any agricultural imports to Egypt must have a certificate from the country of origin that the product is not genetically modified and the rule will also apply to
Egyptian exports, the official news agency said on Wednesday. Who says it is warming catastrophically?
Humans have only been trying to measure the temperature fairly consistently since about 1880, during which time we think the world may have warmed by about We are pretty sure it was cold before the 1880 commencement of record and we would probably not handle the situation too well if such conditions returned but there has
been no demonstrable catastrophic warming while people have been trying to measure the planet's temperature.
If we have really been measuring a warming episode as we think we have, then setting new records for "hottest ever in recorded history" should happen just about every
year -- although half a degree over a century is hardly something to write home about -- so there's really nothing exciting about scoring the highest number when looking at
such a short history.
At
risk of belaboring the point, the following
data is from the merged land air and sea surface temperature data set (based on data from the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) of land temperatures and the
Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (COADS) of SST data). This is the Time series: Temperature January-December, 1880 - 2005: Global Trend: 0.04 °C/decade (for the
arithmetically-challenged that's 12.5 decades for a total of +0.5 °C since 1880).
The land temperature-only data (less than 30% of the planet and usually measured around cities) yields a trend of 0.07 °C/decade over the same period for a total
increment of 0.875 °C.
A
lot of people seem to like an idea of a specific temperature number so here's the National Climatic Data Center's monthly mean temperature record. Obviously seasonal change
throughout the year dwarfs net increment over one and one-quarter centuries.
While we are talking about thermometry and measured near-surface temperatures we must underline that these accumulate to mere estimates and are fraught with difficulties.
Seven-tenths of the globe's surface is water and historical temperature series from these regions are largely based on sailors tossing a bucket on a rope over the side and
then dangling a thermometer in the water hauled aboard, so coverage is basically from sea lanes and measurement somewhat, shall we say, agricultural.
Then there's the problems introduced by discontinuity in local records as observation points move over time or small towns cease to exist altogether, even gardens or the
growth of adjacent trees might influence how air flows around a specific recording point and then there's changes in equipment to take into account.
Calculating what the temperature is, let alone what it has been, is no trivial task and then accumulating myriad changing locales to a global amalgam leaves much room for
error.
We
briefly mentioned above that much of the temperature record is derived from measurement taken where people happen to be and thus there is an increasingly urban nature to the
temperature record (as rural recording sites have ceased to operate, especially over the last three decades or so). To some extent this is due to meteorological satellites as
there is no longer a need to maintain remote observation outposts for the purpose of deriving surface-based weather forecasts, hence the urbanization of the near-surface
temperature record. The significance of this is that there is an increasing difference between the temperatures found in the built environment and surrounding land surface -
it's called the Urban Heat Island Effect (UHIE). Berkeley Lab have a good example here.
To what extent UHIE is influencing the global temperature trends we think we are measuring remains uncertain. Although curators of global temperature datasets tend to
claim the effect has been eliminated through adjustments to the record, or that it is irrelevant, such claims are not entirely convincing.
There
are regions where temperature records have been maintained for much longer than the 1880 commencement usually seen and these make interesting comparators. Additionally, we
have some available rural and urban records from similar regions that can be viewed in parallel where we might expect similar trends if urban influence has genuinely been
removed from the record. Alongside we have an example of the Armagh Observatory and Central England Temperature trends compared. Since there is no obvious reason carbon
dioxide would behave differently in Northern Ireland than it does in Central England we must at least entertain the suspicion other factors are in play.
In
addition to relatively subtle disparity in trends between locations we have measurements which are likely less influenced by UHIE, those taken actually in the atmosphere by
instrument packs carried aloft by meteorological balloons. At left is the CDIAC radiosonde record from 1958-2004.
At
right we have the Alaskan surface record classically highlighting the effect of the PDO phase shift. There is no plausible means by which accumulating greenhouse gas could
effectively act as a major warming agent in one year but not in the preceding or subsequent years. There are many other datasets and attempts at measuring the temperature of
the Earth ranging from satellite-mounted Microwave Sounding Units (MSUs) to meteorological station near-surface thermometer records and a comprehensive collection of these
can be found here on JunkScience.com.
We
would be remiss if we did not at least mention the infamous "hockey stick" representation of global temperature as estimated for Earth's recent history. The graphic
linked at left comes from the IPCC's Third Assessment Report (TAR). The red "blade" section of
the graphic is the same data as depicted in red on the graphic linked below, right and serves as an object lesson - always check the scale of depiction.
Notice
that the graphic does not show absolute Central England Temperature as does the Armagh comparison above. Of particular significance is that the CET contains abrupt warming
episodes of similar or greater magnitude early in each of the previous centuries. While it appears that the CET makes a fair proxy for Northern Hemisphere temperatures as
derived by Jones and Mann this is merely speculative and constitutes no proof. It does, however, suggest great caution is warranted before attempting to extrapolate trends
from a mere century or so of temperature data.
What caused the apparently massive temperature leap at the beginning of the 18th Century? It certainly wasn't industrialization, that hadn't happened yet. If
such changes appear in the record during recent periods when people can not have caused them then they are by definition "natural" and, if such natural changes are
evident in recent history, why are we so fixated on carbon dioxide as a "culprit" driving lesser warming now?
Finally, it is worth wondering why, with some three and one-half centuries of population growth, development and urbanization depicted in the Central England Temperature
series, recent "chart-toppers" have managed to elevate top temperatures by a paltry 0.16 °C over those of the early 1730s.
The vast majority of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has taken place over the seventy years since the Second World War and if CO2 were a significant
driver of temperature change we would expect those years to be almost exclusively represented in the highest temperatures and yet fewer than half manage to make the warmest
one-hundred list.
The post hoc ergo propter hoc association of carbon dioxide is observed to increase, warmer temperatures are measured, therefore carbon dioxide warms the planet is
a very poor basis for the current fixation. We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. In response to a recent request, I was reminded of an op-ed I completed in 1994. Its message is still true in 2009. Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA) August 24, 1994, Wednesday Don’t Rely on Computer Models to Judge Global Warming By Roger A. Pielke Sr. HIGHLIGHT: Predicting the climate in the 21st century - when events will happen and, most important, why - is not yet possible Scientific controversy over ”global warming” continues. The great global-warming debate has taken shape around those who say the science is too uncertain to
justify action and those who warn that we cannot afford the luxury of waiting for science to answer all our questions. Such controversy need not block sensible actions,
however. One area of controversy has to do with the reliability of computer models of the global climate system. Can they accurately predict future climate change? At this point, the answer is no. Predicting the climate of the next century with precision is impossible. Scientists and the news media must take care to better
educate policymakers about the process of science, and in that effort, scientists must also be careful about the words they use. Policymakers must beware those who talk about
”climate predictions;” no one knows how to accurately predict climate. Computer simulations of the climate, referred to as ”general circulation models” (GCMs), can be used to assess the sensitivity of climate to changes that might
result from increased greenhouse gases. However, because physical feedbacks between Earth’s atmosphere (including clouds), the ocean, and the biosphere remain incomplete in
the models, their use as a tool is limited. For instance, T. Palmer, a scientist at the European center for medium-range weather forecast, writes in the journal ”Weather” that climate predictions using GCMs
could be grossly misleading because the computer simulations may be unable to accurately predict long-term changes in the frequency of weather patterns. A separate report in
the Journal of Climate by Australian atmospheric scientist J. Garratt found significant errors in GCM estimates of incoming solar radiation. The errors were four times larger
than the assumed impact of man-made greenhouse gases, a fact that seriously compromises the integrity of the computer model. While GCMs provide a powerful and valuable scientific tool to improve our understanding of climate physics, they have not demonstrated an ability to accurately predict
long-term climate changes. The overselling of climate predictions can result in less funding for more-immediate concerns. Some of these include urban air pollution, indoor air pollution, and
toxic and hazardous waste disposal. The preservation of wilderness areas as a means to promote species diversity and regions of pristine air and water is also vital. The
allocation of financial resources toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions could significantly reduce the number of dollars available to remedy these other threats to
environmental health. Atmospheric and other climate-change scientists need to meet regularly to discuss and debate what is known and what remains to be discovered about climate change.
Atmospheric scientists need to better communicate their concerns and needs with policymakers. Policymakers need to use the knowledge from the scientists to develop programs
that benefit the environment and economy. For example, we could prepare for both short- and long-term changes of weather and climate while we continue to investigate the
ecological and societal effects of atmospheric fluctuations, both natural and man-caused. Droughts, floods, hot spells, and cold waves will continue to occur irregularly.
Over longer time periods, global warm and cold cycles have naturally occurred and undoubtedly will again. The current state of knowledge of atmospheric science leaves us with uncertainty about the future. But this does not mean that effective policies to meet the
challenges of global change cannot be formulated. Effective policies in the face of scientific uncertainty need to be decentralized, small-scale, and short-term. Decentralization allows for different responses in various contexts. Policies that are small-scale limit the costs of being wrong about what’s going to happen or
what to do about it. Short-term policies also allow for rapid feedback into the policy process. In this manner, society can avoid placing all its eggs in one basket based on
a scenario that may or may not occur. Similarly, effective policies on greenhouse gas emissions should emphasize using fossil-fuel energy more efficiently and cleanly. We also need to make effective use of
solar and wind energy. These practices would be beneficial on their own. We need not rely exclusively on predictions generated by GCMs in order to justify sensible actions.
(Climate Science) New
Paper “Increase In Background Stratospheric Aerosol Observed With Lidar” By Hofmann Et Al 2009 There is a new paper which has appeared that demonstrates that geoengineering, although inadvertent, is already occurring (thanks to Kiminori Itoh for alerting us
to it!). The paper is Hofmann, D., J. Barnes, M. O’Neill, M. Trudeau, and R. Neely (2009), Increase in background
stratospheric aerosol observed with lidar at Mauna Loa Observatory and Boulder, Colorado, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L15808, doi:10.1029/2009GL039008. The abstract reads “The stratospheric aerosol layer has been monitored with lidars at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii and Boulder in Colorado since 1975 and 2000, respectively.
Following the Pinatubo volcanic eruption in June 1991, the global stratosphere has not been perturbed by a major volcanic eruption providing an unprecedented opportunity to
study the background aerosol. Since about 2000, an increase of 4–7% per year in the aerosol backscatter in the altitude range 20–30 km has been detected at both Mauna Loa
and Boulder. This increase is superimposed on a seasonal cycle with a winter maximum that is modulated by the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) in tropical winds. Of the three
major causes for a stratospheric aerosol increase: volcanic emissions to the stratosphere, increased tropical upwelling, and an increase in anthropogenic sulfur gas emissions
in the troposphere, it appears that a large increase in coal burning since 2002, mainly in China, is the likely source of sulfur dioxide that ultimately ends up as the
sulfate aerosol responsible for the increased backscatter from the stratospheric aerosol layer. The results are consistent with 0.6–0.8% of tropospheric sulfur entering the
stratosphere.” Among the conclusions in the paper are This study further highlights the diverse ways that humans are altering the climate, as was summarized in NRC
(2005). Proposals to deliberately geoengineer the climate system could learn from these inadvertent climate modifications. Predicting the consequences of the
human alteration of the climate is much more complicated, and has a wider range of consequences, than has been claimed in the existing ideas to influence the global
climate heating and cooling. (Climate Science) An ‘Increase’ in Big Storms May Just Be Better
Detection Since the mid-1990s, hurricanes and tropical storms have struck the Atlantic Ocean with unusual frequency — or have they? Two new studies suggest that the situation may
not be so clear. What a tragedy that Landsea's work gets lumped in with Mannian modeling... Pessimism and deadlock dominate as Bonn climate talks kick
off UN's top climate change official warns negotiators are running out of time to resolve rows over targets and clean tech financing (James Murray, BusinessGreen) Hmm... Signs that the Mainstream Climate Debate has Lost
Touch with Reality Speaking in Korea at the World Environment Forum 2009 UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has given a speech
that is remarkable for its over-the-top rhetoric and also its disconnect from anything resembling reality. He starts with an apocalyptic warning: If we fail to act, climate change will intensify droughts, floods and other natural disasters. Water shortages will affect hundreds of millions of people. Malnutrition will engulf large parts of the developing world. Tensions will worsen. Social unrest – even
violence – could follow. The damage to national economies will be enormous. The human suffering will be incalculable. We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet. What is needed is the political will. We have the capacity. We have finance. We have the technology. The largest lacking is political will. When the leaders of the G-8 agreed in July to keep the global temperature increase within two degrees centigrade by the year 2050, that was welcomed and I welcome that
statement. But I also said again, it was not enough. But leaders have agreed to cut green house gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. That is welcomed again. But that must be accompanied by the ambitious mid-term target by
2020 as science tells us to do. We might wonder what sign there has ever been that it was ever "in touch" with reality at all. Start counting the UN’s
scary millions Two years ago a British judge reprimanded Al Gore for falsely
claiming he knew of global warming refugees. Undeterred, United Nations officials take Gore’s scare and amp it up: “Climate
change will displace 25-50 million people by next year. The situation will be the worst in the poorer countries,” says Koko
Warner of the UN University’s Institute for Environment and Human Security. At least 25 million - and as many as 50 million - global warming refugees within the next 16 months? From zero to at least a million a month until December next year?
Is the UN really pinning its reputation on this prediction? I’m predicting that by the end of next year the number of global warming refugees will be closer to one - Ms Koko Warner, to be specific, who will deserve the boot from
her UN University position for such ludicrous scare-mongering. (Via The ShadowLands, who suspects that “by 2010” Warner actually means we’ll have these
refugees by next January.) UPDATE The UN’s map suggests even Australians from Albany, Kangaroo
Island, Tiwi Island and King Island could be among those refugees. UPDATE 2 Since hurricane
and typhoon activity is actually decreasing, not increasing, does that mean - by Koko Warner’s arithmetic - that global warming is actually preventing, rather than
causing, “climate change refugees”? UPDATE 3 UN chief hysteric Ban Ki Moon flew to South Korea to warn of the apocalyptic consequences of belching out more gases of the kind that he just blew out the back of his jet: Climate change, as all previous speakers have already stated, is the fundamental threat to humankind… The damage to national economies will be enormous. The human
suffering will be incalculable… We have just four months. Four
months to secure the future of our planet. Just four months? Which, of course, means that if no world-wide deal to truly slash emissions has been reached by December, it will be too late to save the planet anyway,
and we may just as well party until the end of the world. Right? So put it in your diary. By December, we must see millions of climate change refugees and a UN-brokered deal to save the planet. If we don’t see either, there’s
no point in any more panic. By then we’ll know the UN’s warnings are false, or the UN’s solution is too late. UPDATE The Climate Institute can’t wait for the UN predictions to come true. And I mean literally can’t wait until next year: Environmental problems caused and exacerbated by climate change are
currently responsible for an estimated 50 million refugees worldwide... Where are these 50 million, then? UPDATE 2 Reader Victoria 3220 traces the the UN’s claim of 50 million climate refugees by next year to its laughable source: A fact in 2009 is based on a probability in 2001, which was based on a 1995 ‘first-cut’ estimate, which is based on a 1993 unsupported assumption (roughly
estimated). Ah, science at its best. Read on for her astonishing account of how this preposterous claim was made without any attempt to actually count the people allegedly fleeing global warming: I’ve traced the 25-50 million climate refugee scare back to its source and it’s based on no scientific evidence, just guesstimates stated as fact but admitted to be
just to focus our attention. First stop, Koko Warner herself: Scientific challenge? I’d better look at the report, what’s the scientific basis of the report?- ”interviews
with 1,000 migrants”, what the! It offers a combination of empirical evidence, based on 23 case studies and interviews with 1,000 migrants and nearly as many non-migrants.... How does the good Doctor arrive at the figure of 25-50 million climate refugees by 2010? I went to the report: How many people will be uprooted by environmental change? Estimates of the numbers of migrants and projections of future numbers are divergent and controversial,
ranging from 25 to 50 million by the year 2010 [11] to almost 700 million by 2050. [12] IOM
takes the middle road with an estimate of 200 million environmentally-induced migrants by 2050. [13] The 25 to 50 million estimate is footnoted to a 2001 article by Norman Myers- here.
Starting with a figure of 25 million in 1995 (more on that starting point below), Myers states: In the light of patterns and trends of environmental decline and its associated problems, such as spreading poverty and population increase, it is probable that by
2010 there will be another 25 million such refugees on top of the 25 million in 1995.... So the whole scientific basis of the 50 million by 2010 figure is based on such a generalised assumption. That’s what passes for science if you are a believer. And
what of the starting point of 25 million climate refugees, who does Norman Myers cite as the source of that figure? Norman Myers, in a
1995 report: The position today. There are at least 25 million environmental refugees today. Wow, that’s a strongly asserted fact. What’s the scientific basis of it? These estimates constitute no more, and no less, than a first-cut assessment. They are advanced with the sole purpose of enabling us to “get a handle”, however
preliminary and exploratory, on an emergent problem of exceptional significance. So not fact at all. A figure advanced to focus our attention. That’s good science, isn’t it? But where did the 25 million climate refugee figure come from? I went to
Norman Myers’ 1993 article: According to recent estimates there are at least 10 million environmental refugees today. However, Norman Myers thought that figure to be on the low side: (Climate refugees) may now number (roughly estimated) as many as 25 million. Worse, their numbers may well increase several if not many times by the time that
global warming takes hold. So here’s how Climate Warming Science works. A fact in 2009 is based on a probability in 2001, which was based on a 1995 ‘first-cut’ estimate, which is based on a
1993 unsupported assumption (roughly estimated). Ah, science at its best. (Andrew Bolt blog) Copenhagen climate deal would be no fairytale - Until we have new technology in
place, we can either cut greenhouse gas emissions or tackle poverty — but not both. ‘It’s just an outrage that countries cannot live up to their responsibilities. We’re all parties to this convention, including the developed countries.’ Corollary of the day: Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Energy Leader (National
Review, 08.10.09) Detroit, Mich. - Michigan just experienced its coldest July on record; global temperatures haven't risen in more than a decade; Great Lakes water levels have resumed their
30-year cyclical rise (contrary to a decade of media scare stories that they were drying up due to global warming), and polls show that climate change doesn't even make a
list of Michigan voters' top-ten concerns. The mind boggles at what the Senator might feel while flying but I did like Henry's corollary 'bout them sea monsters :-) US manufacturers
say climate bill would cost jobs NEW YORK, Aug 12 - The U.S. climate bill would cut about 2 million jobs in coming decades as industries flee higher costs driven by the legislation's cap-and-trade plan on
greenhouse gas emissions, a manufacturing group said. More ills spawned by this climate nonsense: Tariff Provision May Be Critical
to Senate Climate Change Bill Writing climate change legislation that can win 60 votes in the Senate will hinge in part on two words — “border adjustment.” Hoosier Senators
Feeling Heat, May Be Hard Sell on Climate Indiana's two U.S. senators are considered critical fence sitters on major climate legislation moving through Congress. What appalling, contradictory nonsense: Ban calls for protection
of young against recession, climate change Young men and women around the world are hit excessively hard by the impact of the global economic meltdown and climate change, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned today
in a message marking International Youth Day. Is it stupidity or cynicism that has these pompous prats promoting mutually exclusive aims? To employ youth, particularly developing world youth means development
and economic vitality -- two things the gorebull warming myth aims to suppress. Sheesh! Oh so wrong: NFU President Talks Climate Change In Iceland WASHINGTON (Aug. 12, 2009) - National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson provided the keynote address entitled "Food and Climate Change in a Global Economy,"
at the conference of the Association of Farmers Organizations in Scandinavia in Reykjavik, Iceland today. Thing is, there are no known costs of inaction when it comes to addressing the phantom menace but plenty of costs in attempting to do so. Eye-roller: U.N. climate pact seen hinging on deeper CO2 cuts BONN - A U.N. climate deal due in December will be a flop unless industrialized nations sharply increase promised cuts in greenhouse gas emissions for 2020, the chair of a
key U.N. group said on Wednesday. We neither need nor want a climate pact. Plans for Poverty - A Statement by Mr Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition, Australia. The Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, Mr Viv Forbes, today claimed that both the Turnbull and the Wong Decarbonisation plans were “Plans for Poverty”. Senate votes down emissions trading scheme THE Coalition, the Greens and the two crossbench senators have joined forces to block the Government's emissions trading scheme in the Senate. Don't think it's gonna happen. K.Rudd shows every sign of wanting to be UN Secretary General and destroying the Australian economy will not get him
there. Wong defiant as Senate rejects carbon trade laws The Government's contentious emissions trading laws have been voted down as expected in the Senate. SCENARIOS: Where to now for Australia carbon trade, election CANBERRA - Australia's carbon trading laws were defeated in parliament's upper house Senate on Thursday, leaving the government's plan to curb greenhouse-gas emissions in
disarray and raising speculation of an early snap election. Try: "None of the above". K.Rudd will pontificate, politic, preen and prance, all the while making sure no deal is possible and no early
election eventuates on the issue of ETS (other excuses on other issues, maybe). This is merely the political cover, the excuse "we wouldda but the nasty opposition
stopped us doing the right thing..." that will be retold endlessly to cover lack of action on a non-issue. The K.Rudd government uses "climate change" in
exactly the same way P.Keating used to use "We'll change the national flag" -- a great distraction to keep the people and the press busy and off-balance.
There will be no election on destroying the country's economy. Wong’s seas aren’t so scary,
either Climate Change Minister Penny Wong last month brushed aside objections that the atmosphere was not warming, as she’d claimed, but had in fact cooled
since 2001, against the predictions of warming alarmists. Actually, she now said, the
true measure of climate change was in the warming seas: (I)n terms of a single indicator of global warming, change in ocean heat content is most appropriate. As I said at the time, one problem with her claim was that the seas also seem to have been cooling lately. And now comes a new peer-reviewed paper from Physics Letters
which rejects
alarmists claims that the oceans are storing lots of heat that will eventually be released to further warm the globe. In fact, it says, the climate models seem to
exaggerate this risk, too: We determine Earth’s radiation imbalance by analyzing three recent independent observational ocean heat content determinations for the period 1950 to 2008 and
compare the results with direct measurements by satellites. A large annual term is found in both the implied radiation imbalance and the direct measurements. Its magnitude
and phase confirm earlier observations that delivery of the energy to the ocean is rapid, thus eliminating the possibility of long time constants associated with the bulk
of the heat transferred. Longer-term averages of the observed imbalance are not only many-fold smaller than theoretically derived values, but also oscillate in sign. These
facts are not found among the theoretical predictions. Three distinct time intervals of alternating positive and negative imbalance are found: 1960 to the mid 1970s, the mid 1970s to 2000 and 2001 to present. The respective
mean values of radiation imbalance are ?0.15, +0.15, and ?0.2 to ?0.3. These observations are consistent with the occurrence of climate shifts at 1960, the mid-1970s, and
early 2001 identified by Swanson and Tsonis. Again we must ask Wong: what is your evidence that man’s gases are warming the planet, when the evidence now is that the planet has been cooling for the past eight
years, even when our gases are increasing? True, we may be pushed by an El Nino into a (very
small) warming trend very soon, but the big break in the warming until now is a puzzle. (Andrew Bolt blog) Bjorn Lomborg, the author of The Skeptical Environmentalist , now believes reaching an agreement at Copenhagen is vital. His Copenhagen Consensus has published a paper
calling for consideration of geo-engineering measures such as deflecting sunlight from the surface of the earth. Mr Lomborg answers readers' questions below. (Financial
Times) Shell joins carbon capture plant race Royal Dutch Shell will today enter the government-sponsored race to build a carbon capture and storage plant in the UK - becoming the only major oil company to do so. Lend $10 Billion To Drill... Brazil? We didn't hear the administration crow about it, but Brazil is about to get $10 billion from U.S. taxpayers to develop its offshore oil reserves. It's not a bad idea, but
something's still wrong with the big picture. LiveFuels Swaps Algae for Fish to Make Oil Love is the answer, and fish are our future, says LiveFuels. Motor lobby attacks planned emission rules Vans and light trucks sold in the European Union will have to meet tighter environmental standards within four years, under plans being developed by the European
Commission and already strongly criticised by the automotive lobby. Wave Power Setbacks in California Stroll through San Francisco and you can’t miss Pacific Gas & Electric’s latest ad campaign. Posters plastered around town read: “Wave Power: Bad for
sandcastles. Good for you.” Eurostar, the high-speed train service that connects London with Paris and Brussels, advertises a tenfold reduction in each traveler’s carbon footprint by comparison
with an airplane trip over similar distances. August 12, 2009
Pandemic flu spreading with Asian monsoon season-WHO GENEVA - H1N1 pandemic flu is spreading in India, Thailand and Vietnam with the onset of Asia's monsoon season, the World Health Organisation (WHO) said on Tuesday. Even "Safe" Ozone Levels May be Hard on the Lungs NEW YORK - Ozone concentrations below the current U.S. clean-air standard may still temporarily impair lung function, even in healthy young people, a small study suggests. Hmm... I don't think so, Tim: Mobile
phone text messaging is making children more impulsive, claim researchers - Predictive text messaging on mobile phones encourages children to behave impulsively without
thinking things through, according to a new study. Researchers believe the mobile phone system makes youngsters less thoughtful and more prone to making mistakes elsewhere in life. So, word processor use and spell checkers are responsible for falling spelling ability? I'm more inclined to put that down to lack of rote learning.
Blaming predictive text for poor English skills are kind of quaint given that texting abbreviations seem to resemble Klingon about as much
as they do English. 'We don't think that the mobile phones are frying their brains' Abramson said the findings were the same regardless of whether the children were making phone calls or texting. The Case Against A Tobacco Tax Increase California lawmakers have proposed an increase in cigarette taxes by $1.50 a pack, estimated to raise $1.2 billion in annual revenues. Given the state's massive fiscal
deficit, such an increase may appear to be a sensible part of a longer-term budget solution. GE Sees Tide Coming in for Water Business BOSTON - General Electric Co predicts that water purification could grow from a drop in the corporate bucket to a major growth driver within years, just as its wind unit
did. Greenpeace Drops Rocks Off Sweden to Halt Trawling OFF THE SWEDISH COAST, Sweden - The environmental group Greenpeace dropped dozens of boulders into the Kattegatt, the strait between Sweden and Denmark, on Monday to fight
'bottom trawling' with nets that rake the seabed. Fine, now make greenpeas liable for all gear damage and injuries suffered by legitimate fishermen in the area and scuttle the whole foolish band. C'est ridicule! French Green Groups Protest After Algae Fumes Kill Horse PARIS - Environmental groups have blamed intensive farming for a build-up of noxious algae that killed a horse and caused its rider to collapse on a beach in Brittany in
western France earlier this month. Salmon return to Paris - they must be in Seine It is not quite a return to the days when dolphins and even whales were seen making their way upstream to Paris, but the Seine is welcoming back at least one long-lost
visitor: the Atlantic salmon. Epidemic threatens even the fittest as mosquitoes invade Darwin’s islands Mosquitoes introduced to the Galápagos on chartered flights and tourist boats could put the islands’ unique species at risk of extinction, scientists will warn today. Ah, this is where it gets rather contentious because the big warming numbers come not from measurements but from computer models. These computer models and their output
are passionately defended by the modeling clique and frequently derided by empiricists -- but the bottom line is that models make an enormous range of assumptions. Whether
all the assumptions, tweaks and parameter adjustments really collectively add up to a realistic representation of the atmosphere is open to some conjecture (current climate
models do not model "natural" climatic variation very well), but there is no evidence yet that they can predict the future with any greater certainty than a pack of
Tarot cards.
Moreover, humans do a lot besides emitting greenhouse gases, changing vegetation and transpiration rates through agriculture, for example, and many effects expected to
both increase and decrease regional temperatures are not included in these models.
Regardless, climate models are made interesting by the inclusion of "positive feedbacks" (the multiplier effects mentioned before) so that a small temperature
increment expected from increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide invokes large increases in water vapor, which seem to produce exponential rather than logarithmic temperature
response in the models. It appears to have become something of a game to see who can add in the most creative feedback mechanisms to produce the scariest warming scenarios
from their models but there remains no evidence the planet includes any such effects or behaves in a similar manner.
There has been some claim we are ignoring "self-evident" positive feedbacks, which we'd be delighted to highlight if only someone could point to any such
empirical measure. The bottom line, however, is that the IPCC estimates a trivial It is evident, to us at least, that if positive feedback mechanisms exist (entirely plausible) then their effect is negligible or mitigated by negative feedback
mechanisms (equally plausible). Unlike modelers, who alter their virtual worlds at whim, we can only measure what the world actually does, and there simply isn't room in the
measured change for the existence of significant unmitigated positive feedbacks.
As an example of how mileage may vary, as they say, we've reproduced here a table
of comparisons between 108 model guess-timations for a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide compiled by Kacholia and Reck, published in 1997.
Note that the range of estimates spans from 0.2 °C to 8.7 °C and that the same modelers get large variations as they play with their model parameters. For
example Washington and Meehl show listings of 1.3 °C; 1.4 °C–3.5 °C; 1.6 °C; 4.0 °C and back to 1.6 °C over the course of a decade. This
is not highlighted as being egregious or any such thing, just frequent in this list. Charnock and Shine appear in this list (1993) with estimations of 1.5 °C–2.4 °C
and we derive their 1995 discussion in Physics Today as 1.46 °C so we're in the ballpark and they may have reduced their estimate. Lindzen seems to have done so
too, listed here from 1982 as 1.46 °C–1.93 °C and stating explicitly in the same Physics Today discussion that he estimated 0.5 °C for clear sky
conditions and just 0.22 °C when including 40% cloud cover.
Unfortunately there has been no narrowing of the estimated range of "expected" warming from a doubling of CO2 -- in fact the range has widened even
further as ever more players attempt to stand out in a crowded publication field. It isn't that the physics of carbon dioxide's radiative properties keep changing, rather
that ever more imaginative "feedbacks" are shunted into the positive column to make model output more interesting. The bottom line is that you need to stuff a huge
amount of CO2 into the atmosphere to get much response as more of the absorptive bands near saturation.
The modelers themselves point out that their models continue to suffer significant difficulties: ModelE [2006] compares the atmospheric model climatology with observations. Model shortcomings include ~25% regional deficiency of summer stratus cloud cover off
the west coast of the continents with resulting excessive absorption of solar radiation by as much as 50 W/m2, deficiency in absorbed solar radiation and net
radiation over other tropical regions by typically 20 W/m2, sea level pressure too high by 4-8 hPa in the winter in the Arctic and 2-4 hPa too low in all seasons in
the tropics, ~20% deficiency of rainfall over the Amazon basin, ~25% deficiency in summer cloud cover in the western United States and central Asia with a
corresponding ~5°C excessive summer warmth in these regions. In addition to the inaccuracies in the simulated climatology, another shortcoming of the atmospheric
model for climate change studies is the absence of a gravity wave representation, as noted above, which may affect the nature of interactions between the troposphere
and stratosphere. The stratospheric variability is less than observed, as shown by analysis of the present 20-layer 4°x5° atmospheric model by J. Perlwitz [personal
communication]. In a 50-year control run Perlwitz finds that the interannual variability of seasonal mean temperature in the stratosphere maximizes in the region of
the subpolar jet streams at realistic values, but the model produces only six sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) in 50 years, compared with about one every two
years in the real world. ... Climate simulations for 1880-2003 with GISS modelE --
Hansen et al. 2007, in press. We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. Climate Money - Big Government outspends Big Oil The Exxon “Blame-Game” is a Distracting Side Show Apparently Exxon was heavily “distorting the debate” with a mere 0.8% of what the US government spent on the climate industry each year at the time. (If so, it’s
just another devastating admission of how effective government funding really is.) As an example for comparison, nearly three times the amount Exxon has put in was awarded to the Big Sky sequestration project2 to store just 0.1% of the annual
carbon-dioxide output3 of the United States of America in a hole in the ground. The Australian government matched five years of Exxon funding with just one
feel-good advertising campaign4 , “Think Climate. Think Change.” (but don’t think about the details). Perhaps if Exxon had balanced up its input both for and against climate change, it would have been spared the merciless attacks? It seems not, since it has donated more
than four times as much to the Stanford-based Global Climate and Energy Project (GCEP).5, 6 Exxon’s grievous crime is apparently just to help give skeptics a
voice of any sort. The censorship must remain complete. The vitriol against Exxon reached fever pitch in 2005-2008. Environmental groups urged a boycott of Exxon for its views on Global Warming7. It was labeled An
Enemy of the Planet. 8 James Hansen called for CEOs of fossil energy companies to be “tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”9 In the
next breath he mentioned Exxon. Even The Royal Society, which ought to stand up for scientists and also for impeccable standards of logic, joined the chorus to implore Exxon to censor its speech10.
The unprecedented letter from the 350-year-old institution listed multiple appeals to authority, but no empirical evidence to back its claim that a link with carbon and
temperature was beyond doubt and discussion. The Royal Society claims that it supports scientists, but while it relies on the fallacious argument from authority how will it
ever support whistle-blowers who by definition question “authority?” The irony is that taxpayers’ money is forcibly removed at the point of a gun†, but Exxon has to earn its money through thousands of voluntary transactions. While Exxon has been attacked repeatedly for putting this insignificant amount of money forward, few have added up the vested interests that are pro-AGW. Where are the
investigative journalists? Money that comes from tax-payers is somehow devoid of corrupting incentives; while any money from Big Oil in a free market for ideas, is
automatically a “crime”. The irony is that taxpayers’ money is forcibly removed at the point of a gun†, but Exxon has to earn its money through thousands of voluntary
transactions. Those who attack Exxon over just $2 million a year are inadvertently drawing attention away from the real power play and acting as unpaid PR agents for giant trading
houses and large banks, which could sit a little uncomfortably with greenies and environmentalists. After all, on other days, some of these same groups throw rocks at big
bankers. The side show of blaming Big Oil hides the truth: that the real issue is whether there is any evidence, and that the skeptics are a grassroots movement that consists of
well respected scientists and a growing group of unpaid volunteers. 1. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/exxon-secrets. Wall St Journal “Climate Of Fear”, April 12, 2006.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008220. 2. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/exxon-secrets. 3. Big Sky Sequestration Project, http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/press/2008/08059-DOE_Makes_Sequestration_Award.html. 4. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/co2_report/co2report.html#table_1. 5. The Australian: Rudd advertising campaign on climate change cost $13.9 million, 7 Jan 2009,
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24883515-11949,00.html. 6. Exxon = oil, g*dammit!, by Geoff Colvin, Fortune Magazine. April 23 2007.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/04/30/8405398/index2.htm. 7. Environmental Groups Planning to Urge Boycott of Exxon Mobil July 12, 2005.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A04E4DF133DF931A25754C0A9639C8B63&sec=&spon=&scp=5&sq=Exxon%20skeptic%20climate&st=cse. 8. Enemy of The Planet, Paul Krugman, April 17, 2006.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9407EEDD173FF934A25757C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&&scp=3&sq=Exxon%20skeptic%20climate&st=cse. 9. Are Big Oil and Big Coal Climate Criminals? New York Times, June 23 2008
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/are-big-oil-and-big-coal-climate-criminals/?scp=10&sq=Exxon%20skeptic%20climate%20royal%20society&st=cse. 10. Letter from Bob Ward of The Royal Society to Exxon, 4 Sept, 2006. http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2006/09/19/LettertoNick.pdf. † This is not an exaggeration. Try “not paying” taxes. The short killer summary: The Skeptics Handbook. The most deadly point: The
Missing Hot Spot. The Global Warming Science Machine: $79 Billion and
Counting Over the last two decades, US taxpayers have subsidized the American climate change industry to the tune of $79 billion. That’s the headline from Climate Money, a report
published last month by the Science and Public Policy Institute. (Peter C. Glover and Michael Economides, SPPI) Alaska Glaciers Shrinking Fast: Survey ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Three major glaciers in Alaska and Washington state have thinned and shrunk dramatically, clear signs of a warming climate, according to a study
released Thursday by the U.S. Geological Survey. Are they melting or are there precipitation changes at work? These are important distinctions. A study of museum specimens found eight Australian species have reduced in size by between two and four percent over the past century. So, it could be warmer or people putting bird feeders in their gardens (and watering gardens, for that matter) that might be allowing smaller birds to
survive the harsh Australian environment. Over the period there have been immense changes in the regions occupied by these birds (largely cleared for habitation and farming
from the Great Dividing Range to the sea. By what remarkable leap of faith do they come up with body size alteration being due to global mean temperature? Comment
On A News Article On Green Urban Roofs There is an interesting development in urban areas where lawns, shrubs and even trees are planted on rooftops in urban areas. The newspapers the Baltimore Sun had an
article by Meredith Cohn titled “Look, up in the sky: green roofs“.
The article was quite informative, but it included an error in the science of one of the benefits of green roofs. The text is “For example, the roofs reduce runoff, so the city can approve them as alternatives to potentially more expensive and elaborate storm water management systems. And,
she said, “They help us with the heat island effect because they’re cooler than traditional roofs, even more so than painting the roof white. We love them and are talking
about ways we can encourage more.” The use of green roofs are not cooler than painting a roof white in terms of the reduction of Joules of heat absorbed by the roof. The higher albedo of the
white roofs result in a greater reflection of solar radiation and thus less heat absorbed by the roof top than is true for a green roof. This is why the house and other
buildings in Greece and other hot summer climates are
white. Green roofs are certainly an improvement over black asphalt roofs, however! (Climate Science) We have a new paper that has been accepted for publication. It is Wu., Y., U.S. Nair, R.A. Pielke Sr., R.T. McNider, S.A. Christopher, and V. Anantharaj, 2009: Impact of land
surface heterogeneity on mesoscale atmospheric dispersion. Bound.-Layer Meteor., accepted. The abstract reads “Prior numerical modelling studies show that atmospheric dispersion is sensitive to surface heterogeneities. However, past studies do not consider the impact of
realistic distribution of surface heterogeneities on mesoscale atmospheric dispersion. While past studies focused on dispersion in the convective boundary layer, the present
work also considers dispersion in the nocturnal boundary layer and above. Using a Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Model (LPDM) coupled to the Eulerian Regional Atmospheric
Modeling System (RAMS), the impact of topographic, vegetation, and soil moisture heterogeneities on daytime and nighttime atmospheric dispersion is examined in the present
study. In addition, sensitivity to the use of satellite-derived, realistic spatial distribution of vegetation characteristics on atmospheric dispersion is also The impact of vegetation and terrain heterogeneities on atmospheric dispersion is strongly modulated by soil moisture, with the nature of dispersion switching from
non-Gaussian to near-Gaussian behaviour for wetter soils (fraction of saturation soil moisture content exceeding 40%). At drier soil moisture conditions, vegetation
heterogeneity causes differential heating and formation of mesoscale circulation patterns that are primarily responsible for non- Gaussian dispersion patterns. Nighttime
dispersion is very sensitive to topographic, vegetation, soil moisture, and soil type heterogeneity and is distinctly non-Gaussian for heterogeneous land surface conditions.
Sensitivity studies show that soil type and vegetation heterogeneities have the most dramatic impact on atmospheric dispersion. To provide more skilful dispersion
calculations, we recommend the utilisation of satellite-derived vegetation characteristics coupled with data assimilation techniques that constrain soil-vegetation-atmosphere
transfer (SVAT) models to generate realistic spatial distributions of surface energy fluxes.” This is another research study that documents why landscape heterogeneity matter in weather and climate. (Climate Science) July
Lower Tropospheric Temperature Anomalies Phillip Gentry of the University of Alabama in Huntsville has graciously provided us with the figures illustrating the July 2009 global average lower
temperature anomaly and its spatial structure (and Dallas Staley is thanked for posting them!). The second figure has also been posted with comments at Watts
Up With That. What I wanted to comment on here is the clear absence of an El Niño temperature signal in the spatial map of the July anomalies.
Also, clearly evident is the regional patterning of the warm and cool anomalies. It is this regional structure that results in the wind circulations that cause our major
weather events, such as droughts, hurricanes, etc. and not a global average temperature anomaly of 2°C or whatever value one chooses; e.g. see What
is the Importance to Climate of Heterogeneous Spatial Trends in Tropospheric Temperatures? (Climate Science) From CO2 Science Volume 12 Number 32: 12 August 2009 Editorial: Medieval
Warm Period Record of the Week: Subject Index Summary: Plant Growth Data: Journal Reviews: Holocene Fluctuations in Arctic Sea-Ice Cover: How do the most recent fluctuations compare with those of the
past? ... and what are the ramifications of the answer? The Thermal Tolerance of Kelp Crab Larvae: Even crab larvae, which are more vulnerable to thermal stress
than adult crabs, have the capacity to successfully adjust to changing temperature regimes. Seagrasses Lend Calcifying Macroalgae a Helping Hand: Local seawater pH increases caused by seagrass
photosynthesis drive calcification in marine macroalgae. Global Warming and Late Spring Frosts: Bad for Apples?: Will the looming "climate crisis" articulated
by Al Gore soon spell The End for fruit growers around the world? (co2science.org) Dueling Polls on Support for Climate Change Legislation In an landmark vote on June 26, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would tackle climate change by imposing mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions. Now,
just about every industry is trying to either get a better deal, or kill the bill entirely. Coal-heavy utilities like Duke Energy, for instance, want to weaken down the
targets and timetables in the House bill. Biofuels and bioplastics companies want to get credit for the carbon reductions they create when they make bio-based products. Answering Three Simple Questions We wonder why it is so difficult for straight answers to be given to a few simple and direct questions. The regular scientific obfuscation that occurs regarding global
warming issues is surely a major reason for the confusion that exists on the issue amongst public and politicians alike. (Willie Soon and David R. Legates, SPPI) Hmm... Policy
advice, based on science, to guide the nation's response to climate change. View this video to learn about the National Academies America's Climate Choices study from the experts who are working on it.
In response to a request from Congress, the National Academies have launched America's Climate Choices, a suite of studies designed to inform and guide responses to
climate change across the nation. Experts representing various levels of government, the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, and research and academic institutions
have been selected to serve on four panels and an overarching committee. India Says Developing World Not Split in Climate Talks NEW DELHI/SINGAPORE - Bilateral climate agreements are no solution to fighting global warming and could trigger unwelcome competitive pressures, India's top climate change
negotiator said on Tuesday. Global 2008 CO2 Emissions Rose 2 Percent: German Institute FRANKFURT - Global carbon dioxide emissions in 2008 rose 1.94 percent year-on-year to 31.5 billion metric tons, German renewable energy industry institute IWR said on
Monday, based on official information and its own research. Climate-harming carbon dioxide? Oh puh-lease! Global CO2 production up 2% in 2008 Reuters
reported that the global carbon dioxide output in 2008 was 1.94 percent higher than in 2007. You can see that in 2008, the CO2 growth probably exceeded the GDP growth. Under
normal circumstances, the CO2 growth may be equal to the GDP growth minus 1 percentage point or so (because of the gradually increasing "carbon efficiency" of the
economy). New Figures Show India's Emissions a Fourth of China's NEW DELHI - India contributes around five percent to global carbon dioxide emissions, a new government report showed on Tuesday, but is still only about a quarter of the
emissions of China and the United States. Nope. Even if stupid enough to sign on to more of this gorebull warming nonsense Western governments have already thrown away all available funds for now and a
significant chunk of the future in panicked "stimulus packages". U.S. CO2 Emissions From Fuels Seen Falling 5 Percent in 2009 NEW YORK - Annual U.S. emissions of the main greenhouse gas from the burning of coal, natural gas and petroleum should fall 5 percent in 2009 as the recession crimps
demand, the government's top energy forecaster said on Tuesday. Rich Nations Offer 15-21 Percent CO2 Cuts By 2020: U.N. BONN, Germany - Industrialized nations excluding the United States are planning cuts in greenhouse gas emissions of between 15 and 21 percent below 1990 levels by 2020
under a new U.N. climate pact, official data showed on Tuesday. Cash for Climate: How to get your money's worth on climate change geoengineering Let's say the world will spend $250 billion a year for the next 10 years to minimize the suffering caused by climate change. What's the best bargain we can get for the
money? Sorry guys but there is absolutely no valid reason to attempt to cool the planet. Nor do we have the ability to knowingly and predictably adjust the
globe's temperature. Rightly: Interest in tying
farming to carbon dioxide credits waning A once popular program to pay farmers for battling air pollution is waning as industries pass on carbon credits and Congress looks at other options. But carbon dioxide is not an atmospheric pollutant -- this is not now and never has been about pollution at all. Global warming hystericists want to sequester plant food The Washington Post features an article today arguing for the urgent necessity to build devices to capture and sequester carbon emissions from coal-fired energy plants,
which are responsible for one-third of the U.S.'s "harmful" greenhouse gas emissions. Column - You’ll pay for this
panic WE’VE seen mass hysteria before, but we weren’t then mad enough to make it government policy. Coalition calls for new Frontier on carbon trading IN its current form, the federal government's emissions trading scheme will export jobs and emissions because of the massive tax on electricity that will make key regional
industries uncompetitive. There is an alternative. There's a far more plausible reason for the K.Rudd government's "take it or leave it" approach -- they really want if left but want to be able
to blame not taking action on gorebull warming (as they vowed to do pre-election) on Opposition obstruction. It's simply political theater but there is no real risk
of Australia committing economic suicide to appease the green gods. K.Rudd wants to be seen as an economic miracle worker, something not compatible with an ETS. SCENARIOS: Possible Outcomes for Australian Carbon Trade Laws CANBERRA - Australia's carbon trading laws are set to be defeated in the Senate this week, with conservatives, Greens and two independent lawmakers in rare agreement to
oppose it. New Zealand defends climate change targets WELLINGTON — The New Zealand government Tuesday denied it had failed to accept its country's share of the burden for tackling climate change after announcing greenhouse
gas emission targets. $200billion is a "small tax"? 30
House Dems Back Transportation Tax on Wall Street Oil Speculators More than a month after he first proposed the idea, Rep. Pete DeFazio (OR) -- along with 29 fellow Democrats -- has introduced legislation that would levy a small tax on
oil futures trades in order to close the yawning gap in the federal transportation budget. Ed. Note: This article first appeared on Geoffrey Styles' blog, Energy Outlook.
Three warships from Russia's northern fleet arrived for the Russian Navy's first visit to Cuba in decades. The Cold War allies recently signed contracts allowing Russia
to search for oil and natural gas in Cuban waters, as little as 45 miles off Florida's coast. Energy policies in the U.S. often seek to punish
our domestic oil and gas producers, while at the same time we work hard with foreign producers to ensure that the oil continues to flow. I noted in a recent essay:
It is ironic that Steven Chu doesn't seem to feel the need to work with our domestic oil industry,
but warns OPEC not to cut production, and then is pleased
when they don't. I believe the blind spot in the present administration over the need to support our domestic producers will simply mean that future energy secretaries are
even more beholden to OPEC. Now, over the weekend we have two bits of news that continue to show the irony of our energy policies: (Robert Rapier, Energy Tribune) We just bet they want mandated profits but that doesn't mean lawmakers should be so stupid: Ethanol Industry
Wants U.S. Cars Alt-Fuel Ready LAS VEGAS - The ethanol industry called for requirements that all vehicles sold in the United States accept high blends of the alternative motor fuel as part of a push to
lower greenhouse gas emissions and provide jobs at home. Va. judge nixes permit for coal power plant RICHMOND, Va. - In a victory for environmental groups, a Richmond judge on Tuesday invalidated a permit for a coal-burning power plant being built in southwestern
Virginia. Biotech startup Codexis eyes emerging carbon market SAN FRANCISCO - U.S. biotechnology company Codexis, which is partly owned by Royal Dutch Shell Plc, is expanding its product offerings to target the emerging market for
carbon capture and storage, President and Chief Executive Officer Alan Shaw said on Tuesday. It's well documented that clean coal technologies (aka "New Generation Coal") require increased coal consumption to produce the additional energy required for
processes related to reducing emissions, but often overlooked in the clean coal controversy is the issue of water. Peter Foster: GM’s electric clunker - The Volt would not exist but for
‘energy independence’ mania According to an announcement yesterday from GM, the Chevy Volt, which it claims will be on lots by the end of 2010, is expected to achieve city mileage of 230 per gallon
(around 92 kilometres per liter). On Wednesday, President Obama traveled to Indiana to announce the recipients of $2.4 billion in federal stimulus money designed to help energize the US battery
manufacturing and research business. Obama said the grants are “planting the seeds of progress for our country, and good-paying, private-sector jobs for the American
people.” He went on, saying that they would help in the “deployment of the next generation of clean-energy vehicles.” Obama may be right. The next generation of
vehicles may be the Next Big Thing. August 11, 2009
Hmm... is this principle really democratic? A
Century-Old Principle: Keep Corporate Money Out of Elections The founders were wary of corporate influence on politics — and their rhetoric sometimes got pretty heated. In an 1816 letter, Thomas Jefferson declared his hope to
“crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our
country.” Think, for a moment. The whole population constantly votes -- with their feet and their purchases. Corporates are immediately answerable to the people,
their customers, and need to respond to the will of the consumer constantly. That's far more accountability than we can expect from politicians or unelected enviro groups
and special interest NGOs, isn't it? Flu drugs little use for children, UK study says LONDON - Children should not routinely be given flu drugs like Tamiflu since there is no clear evidence they prevent complications and potentially harmful side effects may
outweigh any benefits, British researchers said on Monday. Medicines cause most accidental poisonings in kids NEW YORK - Medication overdoses send one in every 180 US 2-year-olds to the emergency department every year, researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention report. Such overdoses are responsible for more than two-thirds of all childhood poisonings. The White House and Congress claim the anti-ObamaCare uprising is artificially organized. But the violent — even racist — union counterattacks, urged on by Democrats,
are the real Rent-a-Mobs. (IBD) Craigslist ads recruiting 'Obamacare' lobbyists - 'Help pass Obama's health care
reform! Earn $325-$550 per week!' Amid accusations of insurance companies and the Republican Party deploying "Astroturf mobs" of health reform opponents, help wanted ads are appearing on
Craigslist that offer to pay citizens between $9 and $16 an hour to lobby for the passage of Obama's health care. Obamacare’s Impact On Obesity, Liberty And Cost President Obama may see resistance to his healthcare proposal from a group he was not expecting: Obese Americans. A new study in the journal Health Affairs found that
obesity-related health spending costs $147 billion annually, and that obese Americans spend an average of $1,400 more per year on health expenses than those in a healthy
weight range. Food Stamp Use Linked To Weight Gain, Study Finds he U.S. Food Stamp Program may help contribute to obesity among its users, according to a new nationwide study that followed participants for 14 years. A healthcare reform proposal to require some restaurant menus to carry calorie counts raises heavy questions. (LA Times) This is exactly what eco-socialists are trying to achieve: 'Rabbit
hutch Britain': new homes too cramped, survey reveals New homes are too often failing to provide enough space for storage, furniture and recycling bins, according to new research, in what has been called "rabbit hutch
Britain". Giving Up Meat To Save The Planet? One of the persistent, shallow global food myths is that the world could feed more people if we gave up eating meat. Ezra Klein wrote another misguided column about
this—“The Meat of the Problem”—in the Washington Post of July 29. Klein cites as his authority a naïve “study” by the kids at Carnegie-Mellon University. Really? Controlling The Ranching Boom That Threatens The Amazon Clearing land for cattle is responsible for 80 percent of rainforest loss in the Brazilian Amazon. But with Amazon ranching now a multi-billion dollar business, corporate
buyers of beef and leather, including Wal-Mart, are starting to demand that the destruction of the forest be halted. (Rhett Butler, Yale E-360) Why would they be that stupid? They're retailers & consumers want and are willing to pay for the product. Supply what consumers are willing and eager
to buy or go out of business as someone else fills the bill. At the same time it helps the local economy. I suppose they could always abandon the Amazon to this kind of thing instead: Wish
you weren't here: The devastating effects of the new colonialists A new breed of colonialism is rampaging across the world, with rich nations buying up the natural resources of developing countries that can ill afford to sell. Some
staggering deals have already been done, says Paul Vallely, but angry locals are now trying to stop the landgrabs (The Independent) Food production rethink urged in UK Britain must find ways to grow more food while using less water, energy and fertilisers to help feed a growing world population and offset the effects of climate change on
agriculture, the government said. Dills. The problems basically arose from government actions like the idiotic biofuel mandates, distinguishing between crops based on how they were
developed and restricting energy supplies. Good grief! Buy one
get one free food offers face axe over wastage Buy one get one free offers on supermarket food could be phased out under government plans to reduce waste. (Daily Telegraph) Has it occurred to these twits such offers are used to move products approaching the end of their shelf life? If they are not sold then they will be...
dumped. No Nutritional Advantage To
Organically-Produced Foods This is the title of my latest HND piece, and it summarizes the bravura work done by Dr. Alan
Dangour and team in the UK. Dangour and associates looked at an incredible 50 years of literature, to find articles that did nutritional comparisons between organic and conventionally produced
produce and livestock. More than 50,000 articles were examined, and were screened for relevancy and quality. For produce, 23 nutrients were compared, and for 20 of them there was no difference between organic and conventionally produced. Moreover, for the three nutrients in which
there was a difference, this was deemed not to be relevant to health. Similar results were obtained for livestock on the ten nutrients studied. The reaction of the organic community has been to either condemn the study or to shift the focus to the dangers of pesticides, but there are problems with either approach. It is quite unlikely that a more fair, balanced, and exhaustive protocol could ever be envisioned for a literature search and evaluation. If the best the organic side can
do is complain that some papers favorable to their side were eliminated in the culling out process of tens of thousands of papers, they should abandon that line of argument. As to pesticides, this is an emotional appeal at best, with no scientific support. Indeed, the most they can muster is some now pretty much discredited work on endocrine
disruptors. As it is, there have been numerous studies looking at cancer rates and other parameters for people who were exposed to huge amounts of pesticides, and their
health was no worse than the rest of the population. Heck, in one study [Alavanja MCR, Sandler DP, Lynch CF, Knott C, Lubin JH, Tarone R, Thomas K, Dosemeci M, Barker J, Hoppin JA, Blair A. Scand J Work Environ Health,
31 (S1): 39-45 (2005)] the cohort examined actually had lower overall cancer rates than the rest of the population. "The overall cancer occurrence among farmers and
their spouses in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) is significantly less than that expected compared to other men and women of the same age living in Iowa and North
Carolina." Save your money and buy conventional ag goods! (Shaw's Eco-Logic) Organic Food: Just A Superstition CHURCHVILLE, VA-The Green Movement has been called “the new religion.” It surely isn’t that. Religion is a belief in a higher power than humanity. The Green movement
believes nothing is more powerful than a press release from the Sierra Club or a lawsuit filed by Greenpeace. (Dennis T. Avery, CGFI) GM crops set for role in
Britain's food revolution - Environment Secretary says new techniques will help increase production Ministers left open the door for the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops yesterday as part of a new green revolution to transform food production. (The
Independent) Positive feedback is a multiplier effect, usually 2.5 times, added to models to make them 'wiggle fit' (reproduce previously observed temperatures) with the limited set of
parameters programmed. "The sensitivity of the climate system to a forcing is commonly expressed in terms of the global mean temperature change that would be expected after a time
sufficiently long for both the atmosphere and ocean to come to equilibrium with the change in climate forcing. If there were no climate feedbacks, the response
of Earth's mean temperature to a forcing of 4 W/m2 (the forcing for a doubled atmospheric CO2) would be an increase of about 1.2 °C
(about 2.2 °F). However, the total climate change is affected not only by the immediate direct forcing, but also by climate “feedbacks” that come into
play in response to the forcing."
"As just mentioned, a doubling of the concentration of carbon dioxide (from the pre-Industrial value of 280 parts per million) in the global atmosphere
causes a forcing of 4 W/m2. The central value of the climate sensitivity to this change is a global average temperature increase of 3 °C (5.4 °F),
but with a range from 1.5 °C to 4.5 °C (2.7 to 8.1 °F) (based on climate system models: see section 4). The central value of 3 °C
is an amplification by a factor of 2.5 over the direct effect of 1.2 °C (2.2 °F). Well-documented climate changes during the history of Earth,
especially the changes between the last major ice age (20,000 years ago) and the current warm period, imply that the climate sensitivity is near the 3 °C
value. However, the true climate sensitivity remains uncertain, in part because it is difficult to model the effect of feedback. In particular, the magnitude and
even the sign of the feedback can differ according to the composition, thickness, and altitude of the clouds, and some studies have suggested a lesser climate
sensitivity."
Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions,
pp 6-7, "Climate models calculate outcomes after taking into account the great number of climate variables and the complex interactions inherent in the climate
system. Their purpose is the creation of a synthetic reality that can be compared with the observed reality, subject to appropriate averaging of the
measurements. Thus, such models can be evaluated through comparison with observations, provided that suitable observations exist. Furthermore, model solutions can
be diagnosed to assess contributing causes of particular phenomena. Because climate is uncontrollable (albeit influenceable by humans), the models are the
only available experimental laboratory for climate. They also are the appropriate high-end tool for forecasting hypothetical climates in the years and centuries
ahead. However, climate models are imperfect. Their simulation skill is limited by uncertainties in their formulation, the limited size of their calculations,
and the difficulty of interpreting their answers that exhibit almost as much complexity as in nature."
Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions,
p 15, Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere and the initial conditions that must be set, ranging from solar output to the texture of the Earth's surface and its
effect on wind speed, seasons, humidity, cloudiness, ocean currents and so on, models are necessarily vastly simplified compared with the real world and hence need many
compromises and fudges.
Since the known physics of carbon dioxide when modeled with measured Twentieth Century changes do not produce sufficient swings to match measured 20th Century
temperature trends a multiplier of 2.5 is used (said to account for increased evaporation in a slightly warmer world which, in turn, produces more water vapor greenhouse
effect and more warming...).
Yes and no. While it is intuitively reasonable that the most prolific and important greenhouse gas could act as a magnifier there is no evidence that it does. In fact
water vapor is self limiting because it precipitates out as rain and snow and its effect also varies as cloud, with more bright low cloud acting as a cooling effect.
If positive feedback from water vapor was really a dominant climatic effect then it should be very easy to find, firstly by looking at an unusual event.
Depicted
in the adjacent graphic is Earth's response to the 1997/98 El Niño event. These are anomalies and several of the datasets produce anomalies with reference to different base
periods but that is of no particular interest here -- only the synchronous warming and subsequent cooling depicted in the atmospheric series (UAH and RSS satellite, HadAT
radiosonde balloon) and near-surface land and sea surface datasets (NCDC, GISS and HadCRUT3) of ~0.9 and ~0.5 K respectively.
This warming and subsequent cooling is in addition to the normal seasonal global variation (plotted as variation from the expected monthly mean temperature in each case)
and thus provides precisely the situation in which we are interested.
Since the world cooled almost as abruptly as it warmed we can only assume no positive feedback mechanism was invoked and thus Earth is not perilously perched upon some
critical temperature threshold beyond which new physics takes over and runaway enhanced greenhouse warming becomes a self-perpetuating nightmare. That test for a multiplier
effect surely failed.
Secondly, we know there's an annual warming, quite a severe one, in fact and that's the seasonal heating of the hemispheres. Since the Northern Hemisphere contains the
greatest proportion of landmass and land heats more than oceans the Northern Hemisphere summer season causes significant increase in the global mean temperature:
This is as reported by the National Climatic Data Center, the means 1961-1990 (commonly used as a reference period)
work out the same globally but do differ slightly on a regional basis:
There
is always the possibility this temperature effect is a seasonal artifact of near-surface measurement so we should check atmospheric measures. UAH MSU data tells us the lower
troposphere global mean varies somewhat less than near-surface temperature with monthly averages rising and falling approximately 2.3 °C through the year (there's no
significant difference between UAH and RSS lower tropospheric data).
The Northern Hemisphere (where most people live) cycles an impressive 9.76 °C through the monthly averages as far as lower
tropospheric measures are concerned and a whopping 11.6 °C according to land-based
near-surface measures.
With global and hemispheric variation to this extent each and every year it is somewhat difficult to view an estimated change of Nonetheless, the global troposphere warms at least 2 K from January to July every year without triggering any self-perpetuating water vapor-driven positive
feedback. Surely a positive feedback should manifest under the influence of a 10 K hemispheric warming and this should be sufficient to overwhelm lack of
insolation in the Southern Hemisphere winter inducing global warming and yet this doesn't happen. So much for 'positive feedback. We have shown you how to calculate feedback and even gave you some calculators to play with here: How
do they get a lot of warming from a little gas? We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. Frankly I'd be happy to offset these dills right off the pavement... Can
offsetting your website's carbon footprint make a difference? A Canadian group called Greenscroll hopes to get website owners to support renewable energy with their wallets. Are you convinced? (The Guardian) Carbon dioxide is not an atmospheric pollutant. It is an asset, a resource -- an essential trace gas. When will this stupidity end? UN chief says climate change biggest challenge SEOUL, South Korea — U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Monday that climate change is the greatest challenge facing a world beset by crises and called on
governments to reach a deal on the environment at a meeting in Denmark later this year. No, the gorebull warming myth and panicked actions to "address" the phantom menace are collectively the largest risk faced by humanity and, by
extension, the biosphere. Shut down the global warming gravy train and most of the world's population will see an immediate improvement in their situation. Only the scam
artists and their enabling hype-merchants will suffer. Time running out for December climate pact-U.N. BONN, Germany, Aug 10 - About 180 nations met for U.N. climate talks on Monday amid warnings that time was running out for them to reach agreement on a hugely complex
pact, due for completion at the end of the year. The August 4 issue of the New York Times features a rather illuminating article by Andrew Revkin – the Times’ climate reporter – on sentiment within the ranks of the
IPCC as that organization begins work on its upcoming 2014 report. Revkin reports that the IPCC’s scientists are frustrated that the world’s governments – even those
that are led by politicians who habitually give end-is-near speeches about global warming – are not taking the sorts of policy actions the organization thinks are necessary
to head-off global catastrophe. Hence, a growing number of scientists want the IPCC to be more explicit and prescriptive with regards to public policy, less inhibited when
discussing scientific issues where a great deal of uncertainty exists, more concerned with best practices pertaining to public risk management, and more politically sensitive
about the issues that are examined at-length in the upcoming report. Global Temperature, Withholding Critical Evidence, Dangerous Deception? “Half the work done in the world is to make things appear what they are not.” E.R. Beadle. Astroturf angry mob? Al Gore and The Climate Project will ‘launch a major movement…to help build a
formidable advocacy force’ (Gore Lied) People know politics when they see it In his recent column in the Calgary Herald, Prof. David Mayne Reid marched out a squad of seven straw men to explain why "so many" people do not "accept
climate change data." Among the reasons the professor suggested were fear of unpleasant truths; a genetic incompetence at managing slow-motion disasters; short-term
economic thinking; selfishness; ignorance; excessive humility about the ability of humanity to affect the climate; and misinformation campaigns that buy people off. The Crone... A Real Bill for the
Climate Every two years, like clockwork, Congress seems to pass an energy bill, each one marginally better than the one before. What this country does not need in 2009 is another
energy bill, even a better one. What it needs is a climate bill, one committed to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases in a way that engages the whole economy and forces
major technological change. Actually, we're good with that. Of all the races to lose the one to implement a "climate bill" is definitely it. Humanity's risk stems
not from some emission or industry but from misanthropists' attempt to sabotage human activity by any means and the gorebull warming myth suits them well. Argh! Coal's Future Wagered on Carbon Capture -
Efforts to Tame Greenhouse Gas Enjoy Funding But Face Hurdles At a bend in the Ohio River, a bulky new device is being attached to a 30-year-old coal plant near the small town of New Haven, W.Va. It's not merely an expensive pipe dream but a waste of two resources -- carbon dioxide that fuels the planet's biosphere and energy, which supports human
society. Forced carbon sequestration has to be a prize winner in the history of really dumb ideas. The three amigos want North America to be a carbon-poor desert: Three Leaders Vow to
Forge a "Low-Carbon North America' GUADALAJARA, Mexico, August 10, 2009 - "We share a vision for a low-carbon North America," the leaders of Mexico, the United States and Canada today declared,
reaffirming "the urgency and necessity of taking aggressive action on climate change." (ENS) One key feature of poor desert soils is lack of soil carbon. Adding water does not deliver fertile soil in a desert but removing carbon from fertile soil
can lead to desertification. FACTBOX-North American cooperation on climate change U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday the United States, Canada and Mexico had made progress on concrete goals that will be negotiated at international talks on
climate change in Copenhagen in December. Cold in the dark prospects - Federal energy policies spell
shortages, rising prices While the nation's leaders focus on expanding government's role in our health care system, they are working simultaneously to chew away at another foundation of America's
economic strength and our individual liberties -- affordable, reliable energy. Political climate for energy policies cools - Poll: Economy outweighs environment Monday's National Clean Energy Summit 2.0 will bring a parade of celebrated public policy experts to Las Vegas to discuss greening the country's economy. Great suite of items from Quadrant: Emissions
Trading Scheme Forum by Bob Carter The Most Important Vote Since Federation The government’s emissions trading legislation is to be considered again by the Senate on 13 August. The vote that Senators deliver then, and again later should the bill
be defeated and resubmitted, is the biggest decision that they will make in their political careers. For the passage or not of this bill will determine the fate of the
Australian economy, and the standard of living of average Australians, for decades to come. The matter is, or should be, one of simple cost:benefit analysis, though you would never know that from the hysterical nonsense that is propagated about global warming by
green propaganda organisations and their media sycophants – with ABC, SBS and the Fairfax press leading the charge. Depending upon the level of carbon dioxide taxation imposed at the start of an emissions trading scheme, the handed-down direct cost to an Australian family of four will
be about an extra $1,000-3,000 per year. These costs will also engender additional indirect costs, and will rise rapidly as the carbon dioxide levy is successively increased
in subsequent years. What then is the benefit? Because carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, if less is emitted (which is unlikely: the experience of early mover countries like Norway being that
emissions have continued to increase despite a tax of $20-30/tonne of carbon dioxide) then some future warming will be averted. How much? No-one knows accurately because it depends upon the details of the computer model that is used. But estimates are that if Australia reduces its emissions
significantly, then about 0.0001 deg. C of warming might be averted by 2100 - that is an unmeasurable one ten-thousandth of one degree in one hundred years. In other words, the introduction of emissions trading in Australia will have no measurable effect on future climate at all. You might as well stand under the shower and
tear up billion dollar notes for all the good that emissions trading legislation will do. This issue is now of such public importance that Quadrant Online has invited a group of respected and well qualified Australian commentators to share with you
their views about it. Their essays are linked below, and I commend them for reading. Having absorbed the various messages of these commentators – who cover topics across the spectrum of the science, economics, sociology and politics of global
warming and emissions trading - you will probably come to the same conclusion as I have. Which is that the grotesquely named “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme”, aka
carbon dioxide taxation, will cause major economic and sociological damage to Australian society for absolutely no environmental benefit in return. That agreed, Senators from all political parties are surely duty bound to reject this futile and ill-conceived legislation; for future generations are depending upon them
to do so. Quadrant Online ETS Forum participants: James Allan - A tax would be better David Archibald - It’s the sun, silly Ian Castles - Global targets won’t work Sinclair Davidson - Green jobs subtract value Terry Dwyer - Domestic solar power is a con David Evans - Economic stupicide Ray Evans - Get ready for power cuts Viv Forbes - Agriculture is a carbon zero sum game John Hyde - The “Save Our Seats” strategy John Izzard - Roll on climate rationalists William Kininmonth - The models are wrong Jennifer Marohasy - Great, let’s close the beef industry Des Moore - The Great Climate Scam Ian Plimer - It’s all in the rocks Alex Robson – Why no cost:benefit analysis? Walter Starck - The Climate Craze (Quadrant Online) Emissions trading is a tax, no matter the name THE first and most important thing to note about Kevin Rudd's emissions trading scheme is that it is a tax. Climate change target to hit consumers in pocket Consumers will be hit by about $1400 each in lost income by 2020 under the Government's new greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. Should the United States and other governments start supporting climate engineers’ research? We already engineer the climate through agriculture and irrigation, land use changes, etc. and that's fine by us. What we most assuredly do not
want any fool doing is attempting to cool and already too cold planet. Warmth is very life freindly. Oh... The Earth Is Warming? Adjust the Thermostat President Obama and the rest of the Group of 8 leaders decreed last month that the planet’s average temperature shall not rise more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit above
today’s level. But what if Mother Earth didn’t get the memo? How do we stay cool in the future? Two options: So, what's the "correct" setting for this "thermostat"? Who gets to decide what the weather will be like for the next century? The American Meteorological Society (AMS) released its AMS Policy
Statement on Geoengineering the Climate System on July 20 2009. The statement begins with the text “Human responsibility for most of the well-documented increase in global average temperatures over the last half century is well established. Further greenhouse gas
emissions, particularly of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, will almost certainly contribute to additional widespread climate changes that can be expected to
cause major negative consequences for most nations. “Three proactive strategies could reduce the risks of climate change: 1) mitigation: reducing emissions; 2) adaptation: moderating climate impacts by increasing our
capacity to cope with them; and 3) geoengineering: deliberately manipulating physical, chemical, or biological aspects of the Earth system. This policy statement focuses on
large-scale efforts to geoengineer the climate system to counteract the consequences of increasing greenhouse gas emissions.” This statement represents a very narrow view of the role of humans in the climate system (e.g. see).
The main purpose of my comment, however, is to document a clear bias and conflict of interest by the AMS, and, in particular, its current president, Tom
Karl. Last spring (May 2009), I and a number of colleagues were invited to write a draft policy statement for a new AMS Policy Statement on Inadvertent Weather Modification.
Danny Rosenfeld of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem is the chair. The members of the committee are Robert Bornstein (AMS member/Acad.) We iterated on this draft and produced the following statement AMS Policy Statement on Inadvertent Weather Modification [Draft] Clear evidence exists that human activity affects various weather phenomena at many space and time scales and, therefore, has major socio-economic impacts. These
impacts include effects of the anthropogenic emissions of gases and aerosols into the atmosphere, and changes in land use. The human influences include three main types: 1.) Emission of well-mixed greenhouse gases and other trace gases into the atmosphere The atmosphere, including the boundary layer, is a nonlinearly coupled part of the climate system that responds to changes in gases, aerosol, and land surface
usage in ways that include effects on water resources, air quality, and solar and wind energy production. Surface fluxes are modified indirectly by increased aerosol loading,
or by gases such as CO2 and nitrogen deposition (which affect vegetation dynamics), and these in turn affect convection, cloud formation, and surface winds. Surface
deposition of soot may be modifying ice-melt rates in high latitudes, with implications for reduction in ice-caps and sea-level rise. Land management and land cover change (e.g., irrigation, deforestation, dry land agriculture, and urbanization) can be either deliberate or haphazard. These
changes affect surface fluxes more directly and modify local and regional atmospheric circulations that in turn, for instance, modify air pollution dispersal, as well as
precipitation and other aspects of weather, underscoring the coupled nature of the system. Over pristine oceans, emissions from ship stacks have been observed to dramatically influence the extent and persistence of local cloud cover, and hence the amount
of solar radiation reflected back to space and the incidence of radiation at the surface. Pollution aerosol can change cloud composition and thereby precipitation amounts and
intensity; and in the aggregate, these changes can affect water resources and ecosystems at a range of temporal and spatial scales. The cumulative manifestation of these inadvertent weather modifications results in a climatic alteration that is superimposed on the global backdrop of climate
variability and change. The understanding of inadvertent weather modification issues is thus necessary for understanding the sources, triggers, and response mechanisms
of climate change. The goal of this statement is first to highlight inadvertent weather modification as a major issue that can have unanticipated and undesirable
socio-economical consequences, as nations move toward alternative energy sources as well as to consider geoengineering as a tool to deliberately alter weather and climate.
This statement will support efforts to quantify environmental costs and societal vulnerability from the following: the emission of well-mixed greenhouse gases and other trace
gases into the atmosphere; the emission of aerosols into the atmosphere; and land management practices and land cover change. This quantification, in turn, is essential to support correct decisions in developing planning, emission controls, and mitigation and adaptation strategies. In an
effort to inform Congress, key decision-makers, and the media about the impacts of inadvertent weather modification and potential required actions, this writing committee
will address the following concepts in crafting the statement: Uncertainty: Uncertainty in the impacts of emitted gases and aerosols, and of changes in land use on weather and climate, are common causes for ignoring these
potential impacts and forestall targeted actions to counter effects from anthropogenic activity. This committee will therefore address these concerns in the following ways: • Comment on the state of the science (from peer-reviewed sources) in which impacts (or lack thereof) of anthropogenic gases, aerosols, and changes in land use
are demonstrated. • Comment on the linkage between the state of the science of inadvertent weather modification and understanding climate variability and change, advertent weather
modification, and geoengineering. • Mention concerns in areas, including, for example, the socio-economic impacts of inadvertent weather modification, changes in water resources, changing
behavior of severe storms, decreased wind and solar energy power, poorer ventilation of polluted areas, trans-political boundary pollutant transport, and associated concerns
for states and nations, and then indicate where trans-political cooperation has been helpful in reducing unintended consequences (e.g., acid rain or stratospheric ozone). Mitigation: Mitigation (or avoidance of unintended consequences) requires a basic understanding of how inadvertent modification impacts the environment. This
committee will highlight these impacts by commenting on the following: • Evidence of regional changes in weather patterns and their teleconnection globally as a result of anthropogenically-driven inadvertent modification. • How advances in scientific and engineering understanding can minimize the causes or build the technology to counter adverse impacts. Adaptation: Adaptation has to be made with respect to impacts that cannot be easily mitigated. The committee will identify needs that include: • Adaptation of crops and water utilization. • Heightened protections from the possibility that inadvertent weather modification might increase the risks of floods and severe weather events. Recommendations: Due to impediments in understanding the uncertainty and risks associated with inadvertent weather modification, the committee has the following
recommendations: • Advocate further research leading to improved understanding of the impacts of inadvertent weather modification through well-constructed research programs. • Consider ways to coordinate efforts between inadvertent and intended weather modification research and how inadvertent impacts effect intended weather
modification attempts and vice versa. • Link the research on inadvertent weather modification to the broader question of climate variability and change. • Identify potential ways to mitigate/adapt to inadvertent weather modification outcomes. • Address ethical issues concerning how policy can handle these activities through a comprehensive research program. Upon the completion of our draft, the AMS procedure that was supposed to be followed is listed below as was communicated to us by the AMS when we submitted our final
draft: 1) Ideally, within the next week or so, both statements should be in final form and will be sent to the AMS Council for electronic voting. (this can take up to 2
weeks). -[The] finalized draft is submitted to an AMS editor for 7 days (with modification as needed) and sends to AMS Council. If Council approves, then sends electronically
to AMS Community for comment (posting lasts: 30 days) -Writing committee must respond to each comment (or groupings of comments if they are thematic in subject) and sen[t] back to Council -Council has 2 months to review comments. If Council agrees with your comments, then statement is instantly approved. If Council does not agree, then Council may hold
a conference call to rectify looming issues. -In the rare event that disputes remain open, then the committee is dissolved and the process begins anew with a new committee. However, we were told the Council could not resolve by e-mail and that the motion on this draft was tabled until their Fall meeting. Tom Karl, who is the current
President of the AMS, was strongly in favor of tabling. The publication of the AMS Policy Statement on Geoengineering, yet deferring a vote on a policy statement on inadvertent weather modificaton which clearly
conflicts with the geoengineering statement, indicates the very real biases and abuse of their positions at the leadership level of the AMS. The vote on the draft was clearly deferred so Tom Karl and his colleagues could publish the geoengineering policy statement including their press
release, without dealing with a conflicting view. The delay of completion of the statement of inadvertent weather modification also means it will not be available for
consideration prior to the Copenhagen meeting on climate in December. I suspect this was part of the reason to delay consideration of our draft statement on inadvertent
weather modification. This is another clear example of an inappropriate manipulation of a scientific organization for political reasons.
(Climate Science) Synthetic Petroleum Products from coal
Friends: Feel free to post your opinions over on the forum (self-register
for your free account if you haven't already done so). THE massive Gorgon liquefied natural gas project planned for Western Australia's Barrow Island continues to gather steam, with part-owner ExxonMobil completing a deal to
supply India with as much as $19 billion worth of offtake. Time to Influence Climate Legislation In just eight short months, the financial crisis that threatened to cripple the nation has been replaced in the spotlight by health care reform and climate change
legislation. Sorry Bob but there simply should not be any "climate legislation", nor any ethanol mandates either. Sod off, Swampy! Vestas
Wind Turbine protesters target Lord Mandelson's house 'for more green money' Protesters campaigning against the closure of the controversial Vestas wind turbine factory chained themselves to Lord Mandelson's London home just hours before he was due
back from holiday in Corfu. (Daily Telegraph) These twits are really good at throwing away taxpayers' money -- let 'em do it with their own! Vestas is doing fine on ridiculous government mandates
without plain giving them more profits from the taxpayers' purse. Government's
green energy plan may cost 17 times more than its benefits - The figures are buried deep in the Government's Renewable Energy Strategy paper produced last month. The Government's plans to increase the proportion of Britain's energy generated by "green" sources is set to cost between 11 and 17 times what the change brings
in economic benefits. How long till the lights go out? Thanks to its posturing politicians, Britain will soon start to run out of electricity. What should it do? August 10, 2009
“Green Hell” - A Review - Steve Milloy's new book is a
frightening story.... You might have noticed
that Al Gore has recently been saying some very immodest things about anyone who dares to disagree with his views. Of course, when someone like Mr. Gore says things like
that, it tells us more about his views than about those of his opponents. And what is the real agenda of Mr. Gore and his fellow-traveling greenshirts? If you want to find all of that scary information in one place, read “Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do To Stop Them,” by
Steve Milloy. Mr. Milloy is the founder and publisher of the web site JunkScience.com, and so has been in the forefront of observing the greens and their wide-ranging efforts to get
their tentacles into every facet, nook, and cranny of your life. And as Mr. Milloy notes, that agenda is frighteningly ambitious; it intends to force us all into rationing of just about everything (electricity, water, food – even
health and safety, and births), the forced-downsizing of our lifestyles, massive social re-engineering, and the altering of business in both its methods and its outcomes.
None of this is supposition or extrapolation; Mr. Milloy has compiled the pillars of this green-dystopian nightmare from the greens’ own statements. The green agenda is just the most recent recycling of a deeply misanthropic agenda – and the greens have adopted – from whole cloth – much of the prior agenda items
of earlier misanthropes. In the world of energy, the greens profess hatred of all carbon-based forms of energy – and want to end the use of oil, coal, natural gas, etc. as soon as possible as an
act of moral hygiene. However, the green energy agenda – like communism – is fatally-flawed with a large number of irreconcilable contradictions; these contradictions end
up amounting to trying to prevent everything. Mr. Milloy trenchantly observes that the greens are all for wind and solar power – until plans to actually build such facilities threaten (in the case of wind) to mar
the view and kill birds, or require (as in the case of solar) that vast regions of fragile desert be carpeted with paneling. Similarly, greens loved biofuels until efforts
were made at large-scale production – which diverted food to fuel, caused food shortages and sharply higher prices, and induced destabilization in the developing world. In
a similar way, greens were for hydro power before they were against it; when this carbon-free method of generating electricity was “discovered” (by greens) to involve the
flooding of large areas for reservoirs and such, the greens turned against hydro. The greens’ pathological hatred of motor vehicles remains as virulent as ever. One of the latest green-coercion plans is the wish to require mileage metering in all
vehicles, so that drivers can be taxed based on how many miles they drive – and if necessary regulated to “permitted mileages” and punished for exceeding mileage
quotas. Mr. Milloy describes the bizarre jihad against bottled water (a new green fetish), and the green schizophrenia about farming; in the latter case, greens can’t decide if
farming is good (the farmer is a “little guy”) or bad (farms use chemicals, and produce both run-off and greenhouse gases). This is an extension of the extremely
destructive and long-running campaign against DDT – even though we know from good studies that DDT can be used very well in small, targeted doses, and was never nearly as
dangerous as the late Rachel Carson implied. The green insistence on allowing no DDT use whatsoever is costing thousands of lives (mostly of children) every year. In a similar notion, the greens will soon (2012) have succeeded in forcing the elimination (in the United States) of Edison’s marvelous incandescent light bulb – to be
replaced by the ugly and dangerous compact fluorescent (CFL) bulbs. Not only do these bulbs give off a fatiguing and flickering light; they contain mercury (an element that
was diligently sidelined in recent years), and breaking one causes your house to become unsafe and contaminated – requiring a very expensive environmental clean-up. As Mr. Milloy, notes, perhaps the most disturbing thing about the greens is their furious efforts to silence any all dissenters – not just via “social pressure,” but
also via repeated calls for criminal prosecutions of those who dare to as much as disagree in word. (Skanderbeg, Red State) Equitable isn’t always ethical or compassionate If more medical professionals shared with the public what it’s like to care for patients covered by managed care plans, the reason most doctors find it incompatible with
medical ethics would be more widely understood. By controlling what care is available, managed care rations care and decides which lives are worth expending money to save.
But government rationing is quiet, behind the scenes and often invisible to the public. It isn’t to doctors who understand how it works. (Junkfood Science) Geezers With Pitchforks Vs. The AARP At a town hall last week in Dallas, an elderly "mob" with "manufactured" outrage questioned AARP's support for nationalized health care, asking:
"Do you work for us or do we work for you?" Beyond Beltway, Health Debate Turns
Hostile The bitter divisions over an overhaul of the health care system have exploded at town-hall-style meetings over the last few days as members of Congress have been shouted
down, hanged in effigy and taunted by crowds. In several cities, noisy demonstrations have led to fistfights, arrests and hospitalizations. Getting In
Their Faces For A Change The candidate who told his supporters "to argue with them and get in their face" now finds the shoe on the other foot. So they're taking names and encouraging
you to turn in your neighbors. Socialized
Medicine: Obama wants you to visit your Senators/Reps and tell them what you think (And who are we to pass up the opportunity???) At last Barack Obama has good news for angry voters Washington has changed overnight. Yesterday the Senate followed the House of Representatives’ flight from the city. On vacation? Certainly not. According to the official
House schedule, its members are on their “summer district work period”, a time off from legislating that the Senate calls its “state work period”. Translation:
members of both Houses will take some time off, and hear from constituents. With Congress’s approval rating at about 24%, members should get an earful. More on that in a
moment. U.S. healthcare: brownshirts and informers introduced After some time, I spent several hours studying what's happening in the U.S. politics. And the controversy surrounding the healthcare program looks pretty scary. Clinical Trials, Wrapped in Red Tape IT’S Christmas in August for hopeful scientists. The National Institutes of Health is now sending out its annual “priority scores,” the indicators of whether grant
requests will likely receive financing from the agency. And hearts are beating faster than ever, as the federal stimulus package has poured an additional $8.2 billion into
the institutes’ budget specifically for research. Does it matter what the doctor weighs? Some say it matters to patients that physicians practice what they preach. But heft and ill health aren't always synonymous. Is food the next civil rights battle? You may have noticed a flurry of news items based on a study by the Urban Institute titled "Reducing Obesity: Policy Strategies from the Tobacco Wars." Whole new spin on "shrink": Parents can help stop the obesity
epidemic, says psychologist TORONTO – Childhood obesity has quadrupled in the last 40 years, which may mean today's children become the first generation to have a shorter lifespan than their
parents, a leading obesity expert told the American Psychological Association on Saturday. Politics plays role in obesity trend As we busily export our democratic system to other nations, I think we might pause for a moment and examine its effects here at home. How quickly stupid ideas spread: How
fast food took a leaf out of tobacco's book As the Government reluctantly tackles the junk food industry, health experts say that just as low-tar cigarettes still cause cancer, a chocolate bar containing less fat is
still fattening. (Jill Stark, The Age) No, wait, it's just because you're lazy: Laziness
bad habits explain obesity crisis Britain has fallen into a "vicious circle of laziness" despite a £75 million government campaign to check rising obesity levels, according to a report out
today. Excellent: Paterson Eases Process for Repealing
State Rules ALBANY — Gov. David A. Paterson issued a sweeping executive order on Friday that would allow a handpicked group of top aides to repeal state regulations they deem
outdated or overly burdensome to businesses. New Battle on Vieques, Over Navy’s Cleanup
of Munitions VIEQUES, P.R. — The United States Navy ceased military training operations on this small island in 2003, and windows no longer rattle from the shelling from ships and
air-to-ground bombings. D'oh! Amount of
recycling sent for incineration increasing More rubbish that households have sent for recycling is being burned by councils, new figures have indicated. (Daily Telegraph) Good news from the waters of Chesapeake Bay is a rarity, especially when it concerns oysters — the basis of a once-flourishing but now nearly defunct fishery. Over the
years, the Chesapeake — a broad, shallow estuary — has become contaminated by agricultural and other polluted runoff from the dozens of rivers and creeks that feed it,
wreaking havoc on water quality and aquatic life. This, plus overfishing, has virtually destroyed a species that helped filter and cleanse the bay’s water. EU Seal Ban Seen As Threat To Newfoundland Villages TORONTO - Hundreds of villages in Atlantic Canada that depend on seal hunting for much of their livelihood are already feeling a sharp economic pinch from a European ban
on seal products that went into effect last month. (Reuters) Conservationists Angry At Swiss Wolf Cull ZURICH - The Swiss authorities on Friday defended granting permission for the hunting of three wolves that have killed dozens of sheep after fierce criticism from
environmentalists. Oh boy... Flying Frog, Smallest Deer Among Array of New Himalayan Species A flying frog, the world’s smallest deer and a green viper feature among 353 new species found in a decade of research into the eastern Himalayas. We are talking about regions with a vertical profile of more than 15,000 feet, so environmental lapse alone provides a temperature profile of about 55 °F
(30 °C), all without any climate change or transfer of energy. For air forced to rise over the mountainous region we are talking adiabatic lapse of more than 80 °F
(45 °C), so any critter carried up the mountains is going to find it a chilling experience. With such a vertical profile to choose from it is highly unlikely a
trivial increase in global mean temperature with perturb these denizens of a three dimensional world. In-vitro meat: Would lab-burgers be better for us and the planet? Meat is murder? Well, perhaps not for much longer. Just wait 'til the animal cranks finally realize billions of animals live fairly happy, protected lives only because humans eat them. How many
happily bounding spring lambs would there be if people didn't like chops? How many stock horses (and dogs) would be valued if there were no stock? Would there be chickens
without Kentucky Fried? Go on, eat organic food if you like, spend more than you would on ordinary food and dream that it somehow makes you healthier than you would be and the world more
ecologically sound, but find time to pray that not too many others emulate you. You Say Tomato, I Say Agricultural Disaster IF the hardship of growing vegetables and fruits in the Northeast has made anything clear, it’s that the list of what can go wrong in the field is a very long one. Oh my, we were afraid you were going to ask that. Because so many of the atmospheric processes are still being sorted out and quantified this is a non-trivial task. But
alright, here goes.
What we can do is plot some of the more common estimates -- note that these are something of a curve-fitting exercise on our part because we don't have the full papers and
workings at hand. Stay with us while we run through a couple of rough sketch graphs, following which we'll try a different approach to see if we can't narrow the
possibilities.
We'll
offer three of the more commonly used and/or discussed estimates for the amount of cooling Earth would experience for a hypothetical zero-CO2, cloud-free
atmosphere
Here these estimates are simply scripted up to produce the following graphs and the numbers are imprecise, merely adequate to give everyone a reasonable look at how carbon
dioxide fits into the picture.
Note also that there is still dispute over whether water would (does) act as a positive or negative "feedback" (multiplier effect) since water vapor and droplets
(clouds) affect both incoming Solar radiation and outgoing Earth radiation.
Our simple script is logarithmic (remember our example of adding more shades over a window) but does not allow for complete saturation of radiative wavelengths, likely
increases in evapo-transpirative cooling, increases in albedo (bright clouds reflecting more incoming solar radiation) nor any variation by latitude and so will progressively
overestimate potential warming from CO2 alone. No matter, it does quite well enough to demonstrate the principle.
You can see how much this little script has overshot the mark since Lindzen states explicitly that a doubling from 300ppmv to 600ppmv of atmospheric carbon dioxide would
result in only 0.5 °C warming. Rather obviously, Lindzen's calculations do not suggest a particularly large greenhouse influence on post-Industrial Revolution
temperatures and, significantly, this does not include clouds, so CO2 would really only be a fraction of the total effect shown (Lindzen states 0.22 °C if
calculated with 40% cloud cover).
Despite
our over-estimation of the numbers on the graph it should be apparent there is only moderate warming potential from carbon dioxide emissions. These have all been plotted
simultaneously so you can see the range of estimates for incremental change in temperature driven by greenhouse gases and below we show for a quadrupling of CO2-equivalent
greenhouse gas relative to pre-Industrial Revolution levels.
Since some people are not familiar with logarithmic effect, we'll just point out a few features from the above graphs. Note the diminishing effect in all cases -- the
first half of pre-IR greenhouse-driven temperature increment in each estimate is achieved by less than 20 parts per million carbon dioxide (20ppmv CO2), it then
took adding thirteen times as much again to repeat the performance (to 280ppmv). The estimated temperature increment range for a doubling of pre-IR CO2 (graphed as
300ppmv to 600ppmv) is just +0.6 °C to +1.5 °C and for a quadrupling (to 1200ppmv) +1.3 °C to +2.9 °C.
Let's try working backwards for a moment.
The Earth's greenhouse effect is commonly estimated at 33 °C and these calculations simply assume that to be true.
If water vapor accounts for 70% and clouds another 20% (making water 90% of total atmosphere greenhouse effect) then we have 10% left for carbon dioxide and the ubiquitous
"other" GHGs.
Lindzen's 3.53 °C cooling potential for complete removal of CO2 would then seem to fit the bill fairly adequately at around 10.7% of the total effect
(3.53/33), while there's really not room for the larger estimates. Note, however, that carbon dioxide is generally reckoned to account for between 4.2% and 8.4% of Earth's
net greenhouse effect because water vapor and clouds also behave differently at different concentrations and temperatures (we warned you this wasn't linear).
On the other hand, if we assume Charnock and Shine are closer to the mark then ~36% of Earth's greenhouse effect must be driven by CO2 (12/33). This is
intuitively unreasonable since water is both prolific and has absorption windows overlapping those of carbon dioxide to a large extent. Water covers more than 70% of the globe and the lower atmosphere over water tends to be relatively well supplied with water both as vapor and clouds.
Water is the dominant absorber in wavelengths expected in the warmer regions, such as in the tropics where water is hugely prolific and where significant
greenhouse warming occurs.
It simply does not seem reasonable to expect CO2 to preferentially absorb more than one-third of the available energy. This suggests (but does not prove) that Lindzen is likely to be the nearest estimate from those we've plotted above.
Note that if you discount all other possible drivers of global temperature change -- meaning that humanity has completely taken over from all natural effects that
were operating until that time (highly unlikely) -- then the estimate of Charnock & Shine neatly fits observed warming over the period.
If their massive estimate of net greenhouse effect from carbon dioxide is true then a worst case doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will still only
produce a total warming under 1.5 °C (and we're thought to be almost half-way there already).
This still does not suggest a major enhanced greenhouse catastrophe. We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. The Sun, Not CO2, Caused Ice Age Glaciers To Melt Increased
insolation 20,000 years ago caused deglaciation in the Norther Hemisphere, according to a new report in the August 7, 2009, edition of Science. Further more, it was
the onset of deglaciation of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which occurred between 14 - 15 thousand years ago, that was the source of sea-level rise at the beginning of the
Holocene warming. Such events are often associated with rising CO2 levels by climate catastrophists but the evidence says otherwise. The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) is typically defined as the most recent interval in Earth history when global ice sheets reached their maximum volume. This
is conventionally calculated from sea-level records but, according to Peter U. Clark et al. this is an overly simplistic approach. Sea-level records do not distinguish
between globally synchronous ice-sheet maxima and temporary regional ice-sheet maxima that can combine to produce apparent sea-level low points that can last for a thousand
years or more. In their report the author's describe their improved approach as
follows: We drew on 4271 14C ages and 475 terrestrial cosmogenic nuclide (TCN) ages that span the interval from 10,000 to 50,000 years
ago (10 to 50 ka) to constrain the timing of maxima in global ice-sheet extent. For all but the Barents-Kara and Greenland Ice Sheets, the spatial distribution of ages is
sufficient to evaluate regional variability in the timing of maxima for different sectors of individual ice sheets. Because ice-sheet extent scales with ice volume, our
constraints on regional variability in ice-sheet maxima allow us to evaluate the temporal evolution of individual ice-sheet contributions to global sea-level change.
Because mountain glaciers are highly sensitive to climate change, we used an additional 172 14C ages and 786 TCN ages to constrain
mountain-glacier fluctuations from five widely distributed regions of the world, allowing a more comprehensive assessment of the response of the cryosphere to climate
change. The sea-level change at a number of the sites studied reflected relative changes in sea-level and not the change on a global basis. This is because of the
variations in Earth's gravitational field, deformation of the planet's crust, and rotational effects on local sea levels driven by the shift of water mass from glacial ice to
the ocean. “In order to evaluate these effects, we used a state-of-the-art theory that includes a realistic glaciation phase to predict the RSL change at these far-field
sites,” states the report. From these up-to-date theoretical constraints a new model was built to predict the actual LGM. Using this improved approach the researchers found that the prediction for Barbados indicated a net sea-level fall of ~10 ft (~3 m). This was
attributed to “peripheral bulge dynamics and, to a lesser extent, the continental (lithospheric) levering effect dominate the anti-syphoning effect during the LGM.” In
contrast, the remaining four “far-field sites” were well outside the peripheral bulges, allowing anti-syphoning effects to cause a net sea-level rise of ~13 to 16 ft
(~4 to 5 m) rise in sea level at these sites. Showing how tricky calculating global sea-level changes from local changes can be, during the LGM test period the
differential sea-level change between Barbados and the other sites approached 32 ft (10 m). The model showed no change in overall ice volume and hence no change in
overall sea-level. Using insights gained from the model to construct a more accurate time-line for events during the LGM. From this time-line the researchers then examined
thee major forcings—high northern latitude insolation, atmospheric CO2, and tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures—to see what part they may
have played in the climatic changes during that time. The results are summarized in the figure below, taken from the report online. The vertical purple bar represents the time of the LGM as defined from the RSL data, whereas the vertical gray bar represents the earliest interval when
sea level began to fall to the LGM lowstand, corresponding to the time when the first ice-sheet LLGM were reached. (A) Summer energy for 45°N (red line, τ = 400) and
65°N (purple line, τ = 400). (B) 21 June–20 July insolation for 45°N (red line) and 65°N (purple line). (C) Atmospheric CO2 from the
Dome C ice core (light purple circles) and Byrd ice core (dark purple circles) (60). (D) The 500-year average NINO3 index from the Zebiak-Cane model forced with
orbital-scale solar variations (gray line) compared to SST records from the tropical Pacific [deep yellow, RC13-110; ruby red, ODP 846B; light orange, TR163-19; magenta,
MD98-2176; red, MD98-2181]. (E) The 20-year-resolution δ18O record from the Greenland NGRIP ice core (blue line) and the SD of that record
calculated with a centered, 3-ky sliding window (purple line). [see the Science article online for sources, sub. required] As a result of their analysis the researchers concluded that the responses of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres differed significantly. Furthermore,
the differing responses reveal how the evolution of specific ice sheets affected sea level and provide insight into how insolation controlled the deglaciation. Of the three
major forcings investigated it was change in insolation, the amount of radiant energy received from the Sun, that seems to be the driving factor in shifting from ice-house to
green-house conditions on Earth. Here is how the researchers put it: [O]ur geochronology for the LGM clearly demonstrates that only northern insolation led the termination and was thus the primary mechanism for triggering
the onset of Northern Hemisphere deglaciation. Moreover, the fact that ice sheets of all sizes, as well as Northern Hemisphere mountain glaciers, began to retreat at
approximately the same time (19 to 20 ka) suggests that the primary insolation control on initial deglaciation was through increased summer ablation, which can
substantially reduce the long response times of large ice sheets by enabling dynamical processes that lead to rapid mass loss. This investigation is an excellent example of how computer modeling of climatic conditions should be used. As stated in the paper: “Our constraints in
support of an extended LGM sea-level lowstand provide important insights into the origin of the carbonate δ18O signal measured in benthic
foraminifera (δ18Oc), which is often used directly as a proxy for sea-level change.” The model outputs were not being presented here as a
result or conclusion but rather as a way to gain insight into what might be happening. Armed with those insights, the authors were able to further analyze actual proxy
data and draw new conclusions. While the authors cautiously allow a role for increasing CO2 levels and tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures as amplifiers
of climate change, the fundamental conclusion is that changes in insolation was the primary forcing, whether caused by orbital variations (the Milankovitch Cycles) or other
factors. “Whether these changes in CO2 and SSTs were induced by deglaciation of Northern Hemisphere ice sheets or high southern latitude
insolation, however, remains an open question,” the paper concludes. In other words, though they don't want to diminish the role of carbon dioxide too much, they have no
conclusive idea of why CO2 levels increased following the change in insolation. Not being constrained by climate change political correctness I am
free to say that once again the Sun and orbital variation trumps CO2 levels. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth) Long debate
ended over cause, demise of ice ages – may also help predict future CORVALLIS, Ore. – A team of researchers says it has largely put to rest a long debate on the underlying mechanism that has caused periodic ice ages on Earth for the past
2.5 million years – they are ultimately linked to slight shifts in solar radiation caused by predictable changes in Earth’s rotation and axis. Ha! We wish we could figure Earth's future response to changes in radiative forcing from altered greenhouse gas levels but at present we can't
even determine the net sign of feedbacks within the system. Offline: We’ve gone temporarily blind The SOHO instruments are offline while new software commands are uploaded. As the main instruments are offline, the other CCD systems are being baked out (heated up to
clear dead pixels) From Spaceweather.com Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) is having a minor problem. SOHO’s white light solar telescope is temporarily offline while new commands and data tables are
uploaded to the spacecraft. Normal operations are expected to resume in a few days. Hence no updates on the state of the Sun. The Sun could have a sudden burst of activity and we’d never know. (Solar Science) Recycling the warming-hurricane myth; For
Florida insurance woes, no shortage of suspects to blame From climate change to lawmakers to a coastal development boom, why we are one active hurricane season away from a disaster that could doom the state's financial future?
(Brandon Larrabee, Jacksonville News) A new paper has been accepted which documents a newly recognized relationship between a circulation pattern [the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO)] and hurricanes in the
Atlantic Ocean basin. This study illustrates again why a simple climate metric such as the global average surface temperature trend cannot inform us of hurricane
activity. Hurricanes depend on regional atmospheric and ocean conditions in their vicinity at any given time. This new paper offers promise of an improvement
in hurricane forecasts out to a couple of weeks in the future. The paper is Klotzbach, Philip J., 2009: On the Madden Julian Oscillation –
Atlantic Hurricane Relationship, Journal of Climate (accepted). The abstract reads “The large-scale equatorial circulation known as the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) has been shown to impact tropical cyclone activity in several basins around the
globe. In this paper, we utilize an MJO index created by Wheeler and Hendon to examine its impacts on tropical genesis and intensification in the Atlantic. Large differences
in frequency and intensity of tropical cyclone activity are seen, both in the tropical Atlantic as well as in the northwest Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico depending on the MJO
phase. Coherent changes in upper-and lower-level winds and relative humidity are likely responsible for these differences. Since the MJO shows potential predictability out to
about two weeks, the relationships discussed in this paper may be useful for short-term predictions of the probability of tropical cyclone activity in the Atlantic as a
complement to the already available longer-term seasonal predictions.“ (Climate Science) 'Weather variations, not global warming cause glacier melt' New Delhi: Himalayan glaciers, including the world's highest battlefield Siachen, are melting due to variations in weather and not because of global warming, Jammu
University scientists have claimed. Aimless twits: Britain's got protester talent: online
poll to choose eco target Last summer it was Kingsnorth coal plant. The year before, it was Heathrow. This year, the public will decide what the target of environmental protest should be, by voting
in what organisers of Climate Camp call Britain's Got Direct Action. Rent-a-mobs are bad enough but these numb nuts... "Come on guys, let's do something! Um... Duh... What should we do?" Once upon a time
protests were about something, a strongly felt something at that. Why not? Global
cooling blamed as bikini record attempt falls flat There was much disappointment at the Bikini Beach Bash 2 in Southend-on-Sea, England on Saturday. The gravy train's exotic stops: Lawmakers' Global-Warming Trip Hit Tourist Hot Spots
- Penguins, a Rocket-Propelled Airplane (and Tax Dollars) Also Involved WASHINGTON -- When 10 members of Congress wanted to study climate change, they did more than just dip their toes into the subject: They went diving and snorkeling at the
Great Barrier Reef. They also rode a cable car through the Australian rain forest, visited a penguin rookery and flew to the South Pole. Even after their holiday they still only voted 7:3 against Cap&Tax (3 of 6 Democrats voted for). Oh the Times, It’s
Still A-Changin’ The New York Times plays true to form with a
story today by Andrew Revkin: Climate Bill Success = Treaty Failure? A predictable impasse is growing over the climate bill
that Democratic leaders are trying to push through the Senate. To build sufficient support, it appears that the bill would have to include mechanisms punishing other
countries — implicitly large emerging economic powers led by China and India — if they don’t pursue emissions cuts, too. . . . The pincers on the president are tightened by another reality devolving from the nature of American democracy. No treaty can take effect here without the president’s
gaining the advice and consent of the Senate — a two-thirds vote of approval. It was that situation that essentially guaranteed that the last climate pact signed by the
United States, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, would never be sent to the Senate for ratification by
either President Bill Clinton or President George W. Bush. [NB: the link provided for the surprising reference to the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, on the National Center’s site
no less, was corrupt and I have provided what appears to be the intended cite] Remember that it took until near the end of President Bush’s sixth year in office for the Times to run a November 6, 2006, correction
acknowledging at last that its sniveling about W.’s refusal to sign Kyoto was, well, inaccurate — because Clinton had signed it. I had raised the point privately
to a particular NYT writer on several occasions prior to that date, but it seemed the blame-Bush shorthand just fit the narrative better. The Paper of Record
continued to maintain that Bush refused to sign Kyoto, and when it finally felt the pressure to more accurately describe the historical record, settled on saying that he
“withdrew” from (unsupportable and nonsensical) or “rejected” (devoid of substance or quantification) the treaty. Dead flat wrong: A Missed Opportunity on
Climate Change DURING the presidential campaign of 2008, Barack Obama distinguished himself on the economics of climate change, speaking far more sensibly about the issue than most of
his rivals. Unfortunately, now that he is president, Mr. Obama may sign a climate bill that falls far short of his aspirations. Indeed, the legislation making its way to his
desk could well be worse than nothing at all. That's the part that's so wrong -- adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere is a major benefit for the biosphere. Just because replenishing the
atmosphere's vital and depleted resource is an accidental byproduct of human progress doesn't make it any less of a positive for life on Earth. Even if you hate wildlife to
the point you don't want to see it benefit from human activity at least stop whining about the aerial crop fertilization that so assists feeding the human population.
Wasting effort, finance and hard-won energy resources reducing a major benefit is not merely stupid but criminal. Biodiversity boomed during global
warming DENVER, Aug. 7 -- A global warming span from 53 million to 47 million years ago strongly influenced the biodiversity of western North America, geologists said. Life's a bleach for Barrier Reef as climate changes THE Great Barrier Reef's gilt-edged importance to the Australian economy has been highlighted by new research into the potential financial cost of climate change to the
world heritage-listed wonder. Due to water temperatures? The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) stretches from Papua New Guinea to Gladstone running roughly parallel with the Queensland
tropical east coast. Surface water temperatures range from 14 °C in the southern end to 30 °C in the north -- corals are actually pretty temperature tolerant.
Moreover, large areas of coral reefs are actually air exposed at low tide and take considerable insolation without apparent harm. Finally, even in the case of no-wind
events (when the there are a lack of storms and the trades fail with ENSO phase) only the top meter or two of reefs are affected while submerged corals are protected by
cooler subsurface waters. Questions to ask at town hall meetings Americans are justifiably wary about Congress rushing to overhaul our healthcare system – 17% of our economy – with little debate, analysis or bipartisan input. They
worry that the legislation would dramatically affect their costs, free choice, doctor-patient relationships and access to quality care. Peter Foster: A
straight face on trade barriers - The U.S. trade representative kept a straight face as he slammed ‘domestic favouritism’ The leaders of the NAFTA nations — President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President Felipe Calderon — will hardly be meeting as “Three Amigos”
at their summit in Guadalajara tomorrow and Monday. EPA
DENIES SENATE REQUEST FOR COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF WAXMAN-MARKEY Administrator Refers Senators To Source ‘Independent of Political Appointees’ Still searching for the most expensive means possible of not addressing a non problem: UN
climate change deal needs more sacrifices by West, John Prescott warns Vital UN climate change talks in Copenhagen are likely to collapse unless rich nations agree a "social justice deal" built around equalising emissions per head
in each country, according to the former deputy prime minister John Prescott. Some good sense finally prevailing: Gov. Charlie Crist may cancel summit on climate
change - Gov. Charlie Crist said he wasn't sure if he would host another climate-change summit and is backing away from his cap-and-trade energy policy. TALLAHASSEE -- Gov. Charlie Crist is cooling to global warming. Eye-roller: Climate Change Seen as Threat to U.S.
Security WASHINGTON — The changing global climate will pose profound strategic challenges to the United States in coming decades, raising the prospect of military intervention to
deal with the effects of violent storms, drought, mass migration and pandemics, military and intelligence analysts say. All this on top of yet more studies demonstrating the greening of the Earth, contraction of deserts and rising crop yields. Yup, certain to be
destabilizing, all those improving conditions... Climate Depot's Inconvenient Rebuttal to 'National Security' Climate Argument Desperation time has arrived for the promoters of man-made global warming fears. As the science of man-made climate fears continues to collapse, new tactics are being
contrived to try to drum up waning public support. A series of inconvenient developments for the promoters of man-made global warming fears continues unabated, including new
peer-reviewed studies, real
world data, a growing chorus of
scientists dissenting (including more UN IPCC
scientists), open
revolts in scientific
societies and the Earth's failure
to warm. In addition, public opinion
continues to turn against climate fear promotion. (See "Related Links" at bottom of this article for more inconvenient scientific developments.) The heart of the claims made in the August 8, 2009 New York Times article by
John M. Broder are stated as follows: “Recent war games and intelligence studies conclude that over the next 20 to 30 years, vulnerable regions, particularly
sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and South and Southeast Asia, will face the prospect of food shortages, water crises and catastrophic flooding driven by climate change
that could demand an American humanitarian relief or military response.” The heart of the “national security” argument is merely a redux of the 1970's laughable scares about famines and resource scarcity. Those same baseless claims and fear
mongering arguments are simply being shamelessly updated with a military uniform. It is sad to see members of our armed forces wearing their uniforms promoting such
unsubstantiated and embarrassing drivel. (See: 'Just
When You Thought Global Warming Couldn't Get More Stupid, In Walks John Kerry': 'Of all the ridiculous arguments in support of climate legislation, national security has to
be the most idiotic') Climate Depot's Inconvenient Rebuttal to “National Security” Climate Argument By New York Times: (Climate Depot Editorial) Investigations for Thee but Not for Me? I have the Letter of the Day — from the Sunday Washington Times, responding to
what I hope sensible voices on Capitol Hill turn into a case study in being careful about what you wish for. Neo-Malthusian crap: Having Children Brings High Carbon
Impact Having children is the surest way to send your carbon footprint soaring, according to a new study from statisticians at Oregon State University. Increasing carbon availability is a massive boon to the biosphere, only life haters would seriously want to restrict its emission. Probably explains why
neo-Malthusians are enthusiastic supporters of this nonsense. Only the hysterical are not mentally ill: Shrinks
analyse climate change - August 07, 2009 Denial,
mistrust and uncertainty are among the key psychological reasons that the American public is still resistant to serious action on climate change, according to psychologists. A task force set up by an American Psychyological Association has been looking at the ‘psychological barriers’ to action on climate change and has presented its
findings at the APA’s annual meeting in Toronto. “What is unique about current global climate change is the role of human behaviour,” says task force head Janet Swim, Pennsylvania State University (press
release, report pdf). “We must look at the reasons people are not acting in order to understand how to get
people to act.” (Great Beyond) At
last, man-made climate change is a threat - engineered by the global-warming fanatics themselves The lunatic ambitions of the “man-made” climate change fanatics are reaching new heights. They also pose a serious danger to human survival – the very objective they
claim to champion. Among the latest Frankenstein proposals are “cloud ships” to generate more cloud and deflect the sun’s rays. This scheme envisages 1,900 wind-powered
ships cruising through the world’s oceans creating bad weather. Geoengineering To Mitigate Global Warming May Cause Other Environmental Harm Geoengineering techniques aim to slow global warming through the use of human-made changes to the Earth's land, seas or atmosphere. But new research shows that the use of
geoengineering to do environmental good may cause other environmental harm. In a symposium at the Ecological Society of America's Annual Meeting, ecologists discuss the
viability of geoengineering, concluding that it is potentially dangerous at the global scale, where the risks outweigh the benefits. (ScienceDaily) To the extent no one should be trying to cool the Earth we agree with them. Oh... 'Cloud
ship' scheme to deflect the sun's rays is favourite to cut global warming Ships with giant funnels which travel the world's seas creating more clouds to deflect the sun's rays could help cut global warming, say scientists. (Daily Telegraph) Profile: Bjorn Lomborg - The Danish scientist provoked fury with his
scepticism over global warming. Now he’s whipping up a different storm Single-handedly, Bjorn Lomborg caused global warming pundits to overheat beyond safety levels. The Danish heretic has been called a Nazi for his denial of the pundits’
cherished beliefs and his life has been threatened. But his latest crusade could make his own supporters explode. We've been known to call Lomborg a "dopey Dane" for his belief in gorebull warming -- this is doing nothing to have us revise our opinion.
Credit where credit is due: he does attempt to prioritize by value to humanity and has consequently declared gorebull warming unworthy of the dollars proposed for its care
and feeding. Buying a disaster: Climate
Change: Harry Reid Will Determine Carbon-Permit Allocations Siobhan Hughes reports: Congressman wants government GPS in cars - Proposes mileage-based gas tax that
would monitor travels An Oregon congressman says he wants to test having a government GPS unit in every car so a tax could be imposed on the miles driven. Australian Carbon Emissions Will Increase, Wong Says Australia’s government said the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions will continue to increase unless its proposed trading system aimed at reducing them is adopted. Actually, we're good with that :-) By the way, did you know carbon dioxide emissions are a proxy for living standards? What Wong states is that with the
ETS our standard of living will fall (some selling technique, eh?). Not going to happen -- but if it did we could make money selling indulgences... Carbon
scheme to boost markets AUSTRALIA'S proposed emissions trading scheme is almost certain to be rejected by the Senate this week, but its progress is being followed closely in international
markets. Another scam promotion: Climate change could heat up
economy, create jobs QUEBEC - Making Montreal Canada's carbon market is not just about buying and selling carbon credits, says Leon Bitton, vice president research and development of the
Montreal Exchange. Audit Needed on the Green Jobs Program A statement by Mr Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition, Australia. Pressure on Wong to split climate
bill PRESSURE is mounting on the Rudd Government to rescue its plan to boost Australia's use of clean energy as the Opposition and the Greens vowed to defeat Labor's key
climate change package in the Senate this week. No... it all needs to be junked. Suppose we came to your house one day and said, “Look over there at Ted — the guy with the Toyota Tundra in the driveway.” You look — yup, that’s Ted alright,
the guy who always seems to roll his eyes every time you drive by in your Prius with the Obama bumper sticker. No matter how gently but firmly you and your Greenpeace
neighbors admonish Ted, he simply won’t give up that Tundra for a subcompact. You don’t particularly like Ted. Electric car future may power a charging industry SAN FRANCISCO - As makers from Tesla to Nissan Motor Co jockey to dominate the next generation electric-powered cars, a fight on which companies will control the lucrative
market to fuel them is just getting started. Just another way of fueling your car with coal -- it's just that this means burning it in a power station and then selling you the electricity (probably
an improvement on the following but not by such a whole lot). This is a far better means, which is why rationers don't like it: Why? Boston Tries to Shed Longtime Reputation as
Cyclists’ Minefield BOSTON — In a city known for its aggressive drivers, flummoxing street layout, confusing rotaries and overall rudeness on the road, what is a cyclist to do? Road lice strangle the transport system, take up an inordinate amount of room and time and contribute exactly nothing as far as funding the transport
system goes (motorists pay draconian taxes of fuels, lubricants and tires while also having to pay license and registration fees). Considering how much they destroy the
efficiency of real road transport they shouldn't be allowed near the transport infrastructure without paying fees proportionate to the hazard and inefficiency they create,
say what -- a thousand times the license and registration fees of a four cylinder car? Then there's the extra medical expense of permitting suicidal lemmings on the road,
selfishly increase the health care burden for society... Are the Generating Alternatives to Coal-Fired Electricity Ready for Waxman-Markey Targets? Just over a month ago, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey energy tax.[1] Much of the debate focused on how much the bill will cost Americans. For
example, the Congressional Budget office claimed the cap and trade section of the bill would only cost $175 a year in 2020, but this claim has been thoroughly debunked. The
real question is how much confidence should we have in the modeling assumptions that the CBO and other modelers rely upon? (Institute for Energy Research) What a lot of nonsense: Panel Gives Mixed Review To U.S. Biofuel Rules WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency did a reasonable job in estimating the U.S. biofuel industry's role in causing greenhouse gas emissions overseas, but
some of the work was problematic, a scientific review panel concluded on Friday. There should not be any biofuel mandates nor subsidies at all. Don't burn agricultural land, just mine more carbon. Wind Promises Blackouts as Obama Strains Grid With Renewables President Barack Obama’s push for wind and solar energy to wean the U.S. from foreign oil carries a hidden cost: overburdening the nation’s electrical grid and
increasing the threat of blackouts. More sunbathing white elephants: China Starts Building First 10-GW Mega Wind Farm IUQUAN - China started construction of the country's first 10-gigawa wind power base in Jiuquan of northwest Gansu province on Saturday as Beijing seeks more clean power
to fuel its fast economic growth. (Reuters) In China wind generators not hooked to transmission lines or not producing electricity are said to be "sun bathing" -- looks like there's going
to be a great deal more of that "activity". Six years ago, President Bush proposed a grand plan to spend $1.2 billion on a “Freedom Car” that would run on (what else?) a “Freedom Fuel” — hydrogen. Thus
liberated from the yoke of foreign oil, Americans by the millions would someday be zipping around in contraptions powered by an inexhaustible gas. August 7, 2009
WHO sees first swine flu vaccines approved in Sept GENEVA - The development of new vaccines to combat H1N1 swine flu is on schedule and first regulatory approvals are possible in September, the World Health Organization
said Thursday. Fast-track flu vaccines don't reduce safety: WHO GENEVA - Procedures to fast-track approvals of new vaccines to combat H1N1 influenza do not reduce safety, the World Health Organization said on Thursday. Eventually? As in "over two years", maybe? What's the difference between that and "ordinary" seasonal 'flu? Iran bans Ramadan umra pilgrimage as swine flu spreads TEHRAN - Iran has banned Iranians from performing the umra pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia during the holy month of Ramadan to slow spread of swine flu in the country, a health
ministry official said Thursday. Some measures won't help prevent flu pandemic: report WASHINGTON - Closing schools, stopping large gatherings and other such measures are unlikely to do much to prevent the spread of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic, a team of
experts predicted on Wednesday. Ontario looks to link swine flu complications and obesity TORONTO — Ontario is looking at the possibility that morbidly obese people who contract the H1N1 virus are more likely to suffer serious complications or death, says the
province’s top public-health official. U.S. researchers find 'signature' of common virus WASHINGTON - Common viruses that cause colds and flu leave a distinctive signature in the blood, and U.S. researchers said on Thursday they had found a way to pin it down. Now we know -- tax and spend governments cause obesity: No Need To Tighten Your
Belt: Credit Crunch Will Worsen Obesity Epidemic Levels of debt have been associated with an increased risk of being fat. Researchers blame the trend on the high price of healthy food, and a tendency for people worried
by debt to comfort eat. (ScienceDaily) So, if the gum'mint, what always takes too much, slashes tax rates and leaves everyone with way more disposable income, the "obesity crisis"
will go away because more people will be able to afford healthy choices. Poll: Most Americans don't think they have a big weight problem WASHINGTON -- Despite government data that show a dramatic increase in obesity in the United States over the past 20 years, most Americans don't think they have much of a
weight problem, according to a new McClatchy-Ipsos poll. Hmm... that could change once they know that government is taxing them into bigger belt sizes -- see previous item. Probably the world's biggest class
action tort waiting right here -- no e-mail puns about weighty cases, please. Going for every representative who has advocated increased taxation and spending should mean
there's plenty of wealth for the class to sue for and certainly the big taxers have worked hard to set up tort-friendly courts -- what goes around comes around, eh? Once again, the U.S. government is busy producing a series of frenzied health "findings," making the case that the assorted health problems plaguing Americans
keep getting worse, they can’t be solved on an individual basis, and therefore it’s a collective problem that demands an aggressive intervention on the part of
bureaucrats through a series of central-planning policies. This article from the Wall Street Journal gives publicity to the government’s obsession with stamping out one
health issue in particular, obesity. A couple of snippets from the article claim, "Obesity and with it diabetes are the only major health problems that are getting worse in this country, and they’re getting worse rapidly," he said. These words were verbalized by Thomas Friedan, the new director of the CDC (Center for Disease Control). Obesity and diabetes are two of the government’s favorite
"wars," and this is because the epidemic of obesity, which tends to be a chief cause of diabetes in adults, can pave way for a series of centrally-planned food and
prescription drug policies that can be passed off, with minimal effort, as a collective cure to the masses. In fact, solving America’s fat problem, on an aggregate scale,
would provide government with wide-ranging powers over individuals and their day-to-day lifestyles. This has government officials – federal, state, and local – salivating
over the prospect of such an enormous level of control through policy-wonking and special interest baiting. (Karen De Coster, Lew Rockwell) We have just been reminded of this troublingly prescient piece: LIPIDLEGGIN’
-- F. Paul Wilson, 1978 [Editor's note: This story was first published in 1978 by F. Paul Wilson. Then it was probably considered rather "out there". Today it's a prescient look at what
is close to becoming a reality as the Food Police continually try to foist their "good-for-you" policies on individuals. We're pleased to bring this story to our
audience.] (Doing Freedom) You can hear this piece read on a Dave Hitt podcast. Right... Television Viewing Linked to Blood Pressure
Increases in Children Children who spend a lot of time watching television have higher blood pressure than those who watch less, even if the children are thin and get enough exercise, according
to new research. ... newscasts & political broadcasts are usually the viewing that most elevates my blood pressure but I find it hard to image these few young kids
are so influenced. Maybe they found the episode of Sesame Street particularly exciting? My kids particularly enjoyed the Count counting and Cookie Monster's consumption of
the letter of the day was considered hilarious when they were young -- probably sent their systolic pressure up too but hardly as much as a game of tag, ball or most of
their interaction with the adventure playground of the world around them. OSHA nominee: Certitude is his product President Obama last week announced his intent to nominate David Michaels to become administrator of the Office of Safety and Health Administration, and today The New York
Times hails Michaels' selection in an editorial, "A Champion for Workers' Safety." The Times observes that Michaels' nomination is "apt to provoke opposition
from some business interests" and offers advice: They should hold their fire. His emphasis on cultural change and involvement of workers in improving safety could help ease the polarization between business and labor.
And his emphasis on sound science could give everyone greater confidence that OSHA will make the right decisions. Would it be all right to at least express a little skepticism? (Point of Law) Turn Up the Heat in August: Help Defeat ObamaCare and Cap-and-Trade It may be true that August is just a month, but it’s also true that the longer we have to expose the real intentions and the economic ramifications of the Cap and Tax
and health care reform legislation on the table, the more afraid Ms. Pelosi, Senator Reid, and President Obama should be. (Freedom Works) Worried about baby bust? Study says births may rise WASHINGTON - Wealthy countries worried about their shrinking birth rates may have had their prayers answered. If they get just a little richer, birth rates should head up
again, U.S. researchers reported on Wednesday. But is that the result of immigration (people fleeing poorer regions and entering wealthier ones for employment or other opportunity)? Is it the result
of deliberate policy frameworks designed to encourage higher fertility (enhanced childcare and other benefits, "baby bonuses"...)? Some combination of the two?
Other factors altogether? Why "might" birth rates improve? Pine Beetles, Fire and Climate Change The forest around Grand Lake, Colo., is neither pretty nor, for the most part, green. Whole mountainsides are draped with dead trees bearing orange needles and bare
branches. The pine beetles have attacked, and people have responded with chainsaws, insecticides and anxiety about fire. Conventional wisdom suggests that decades of U.S. Forest Service policy of extinguishing all fires on public lands—also called “fire suppression”—have left
forests more prone to beetle attacks, and that these dead trees are more likely than live trees to erupt in wildfires. But the latest and best scientific research does not buttress conventional wisdom. The research suggests that the pine-beetle outbreaks coincide with warmer, drier
years. It finds no compelling evidence that once the dead needles have fallen from the trees (i.e. when the “red phase” disappears a few years after attack) dead stands
of pine are more likely than live stands to burn. Scientists also find no evidence that this outbreak is unprecedented over time spans of
several centuries, or that human fire-suppression has made western U.S. forests unusually prone to fire. (Roger Pielke, Jr.) The short answers to questions or issues raised are: --Yes, but that is of relatively minor importance in the context of the weather that drives fires in the Colorado subalpine zone. Our point is that fire history research
shows that the years during which large areas (i.e. many 10s of thousands of hectares) have burned in subalpine forests in Colorado are dependent on infrequent, extreme
drought. During those drought events, any increased fire hazard associated with beetle-killed trees is a minor contribution to the fire risk determined by weather
conditions. During extreme drought, fuel type (dead or alive) is a poor predictor of fire spread during the rare climate events under which vast areas of forest have burned
in the subalpine zone documented in our tree-ring fire history studies. Our published studies of fire behavior (frequency, extent and severity) after the extensive 1940s spruce beetle outbreak in northwestern Colorado and after the late
1990s mountain pine beetle outbreak in north-central Colorado do not show a significant increase in any of these fire behavior parameters in beetle-killed forests compared
to green forests. Again, this is because fire is strongly controlled by exceptional climate in Colorado’s subalpine zone. 4. Questions were implied about the role of past fire suppression in contributing to either current fire hazard or current bark beetle outbreaks. --The answers to these questions vary with forest type and elevation zone, and are discussed in detail in Romme et al. 2006. Most lodgepole pine stands in north-central
Colorado were in “age-susceptible” conditions for mountain pine beetle outbreak in the late 1990s because they originated after widespread fires during the second half
of the 19th century associated with warm-dry climate conditions linked to major climate drivers reflected in sea surface temperatures and teleconnections to
Colorado. The effectiveness of post-1910 fire suppression is much debated for Colorado subalpine forests, but there clearly is a strong relationship of 19th
century burning to current stand ages that are susceptible to beetle attack. Likewise, for current fire hazard in lodgepole pine and spruce-fir forests fire suppression is
a minor (but probably not negligible in some areas) factor relative to weather in creating high fire potential in these fire-prone ecosystems. --Decisions to thin forests in order to reduce fuels need to be directed to particular projects with specific objectives, and they must consider many social values
beyond the scope of research on fire hazard in relation to beetle kill. Some scenarios for proactive management are discussed in the Romme et al. 2006 report. I stress that
thinning trees in lodgepole forests close to homes is prudent, regardless of whether the trees are alive or dead. Projects aimed at reducing fire hazard through thinning of
forests in remote areas would be of questionable value, and, in fact I don’t believe land managers are recommending thinning in remote areas. Our published work on mountain pine beetle and spruce beetle outbreaks in Colorado does not attempt to attribute warming or beetle outbreaks to either natural sources of
climate variation or to AGW. We are developing longer records of mountain pine beetle and spruce beetle outbreaks (using tree rings) to statistically link past outbreaks to
climate drivers such as ENSO, PDO and the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation which are teleconnected to wildfire activity in Colorado. For fire history in subalpine forests (i.e. spruce, subalpine fir, and lodgepole pine) in Colorado our work based on tree-ring reconstruction of fire years shows strong
statistical linkages to ENSO, PDO and AMO over the past several centuries (Sibold & Veblen 2006, and Schoennagel et al. 2007). These linkages of wildfire activity (and
drought) are replicated by independent data sets for ponderosa pine fires in Colorado (Sherriff and Veblen 2008) and generally across western North America (Kitzberger et
al. 2007). The goal of our research has been to understand how variability in climate (including late 20th century warming) has affected bark beetle outbreaks,
wildfire activity, and non-beetle related tree mortality (Bigler et al. 2007, vanMantgem et al. 2009 Science). Supporting or refuting AGW is beyond the scope of our work,
but our findings support the view that recent warming is having a major impact on these ecological processes in Colorado. (Roger Pielke, Jr.) Novartis Attacks Signal New Animal Rights Activism ZURICH - Animal rights activists claimed responsibility on Thursday for burning down the holiday home of Novartis Chief Executive Daniel Vasella as Swiss police said a
second grave of his family had been desecrated. Not all scientists are on
the warming teat Nice to know that below the babble, some Australian scientists are getting on with the business: The sniper is an ever-present threat on the battlefield, and one that soldiers must always be on the lookout for. Now, a pioneering invention by Western Australia
firm Acacia Research is making that task easier. The Shot Location System (SLS) is a small, highly-adaptable device for detecting
and tracking sound sources, particularly gunfire. The SLS is a miniaturised set of acoustic sensors mated to a small processing package and GPS unit. The SLS, currently being trialled by units of the Italian army in
Afghanistan, is designed to swiftly locate sources of gunfire. The sensor and processing package, contained in a unit about 8cm square, is mounted on an Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV), a drone flown a kilometre ahead of ground forces. Any weapons fire is tracked and pinpointed, and the shooter’s location relayed to ground forces. It works by detecting both the sound of the gunshot and the crack of a supersonic bullet. It has multiple sensors, allowing it to compare the reading from each one and
triangulate the source of the shot. This enables it to provide a range, bearing and elevation to the shooter, as well as the type of weapon. If the sniper is using a
subsonic weapon to limit the firing noise, the SLS is still able to provide a bearing and elevation. The SLS and its sensors can also be mounted on a soldier’s helmet, allowing for rapid tracking of incoming fire if a drone is unavailable. Now that’s saving Australian lives. (Andrew Bolt) Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from
about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what
altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect --
perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect
(e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, “Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,” Journal
of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other "minor greenhouse gases." As an example of the relative
importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2. The
adjacent radiation absorption window graphic gives an idea of which molecules absorb various wavelengths.
Where the shaded portions completely span between 2 lines it indicates that particular wavelength is fully absorbed and the "window" is saturated (or said to be
"closed"). Once a window approaches saturation adding more gases with the same properties will do nothing exciting.
This point seems to cause a bit of confusion for some people so perhaps consider multiple shades on a window with each shade blocking half the light coming through. Pull
one shade and you reduce the light source by half, pull another and you block half the light coming through the first shade, etc.. The effect of each shade diminishes as you
keep adding more until eventually you get no additional effect - you have saturated or blocked the radiation window and it makes no real difference if you double or quadruple
the number of shades again.
There seem to be a few things that your informant forgot to tell you -- like carbon dioxide being an essential trace gas that underpins the bulk of the global food
web.
Estimates vary, but somewhere around 15% seems to be the common number cited for the increase in global food crop yields due to aerial fertilization with increased carbon
dioxide since 1950. This increase has both helped avoid a Malthusian disaster and preserved or returned enormous tracts of marginal land as wildlife habitat, land that
would otherwise have had to be put under the plow in an attempt to feed the growing global population.
Commercial growers deliberately generate CO2 and increase its levels in agricultural greenhouses to between 700ppmv and 1,000ppmv to increase productivity and
improve the water efficiency of food crops far beyond those in the somewhat carbon-starved open atmosphere. CO2 feeds the forests, grows more usable lumber in
timber lots meaning there is less pressure to cut old growth or push into "natural" wildlife habitat, makes plants more water efficient helping to beat back the
encroaching deserts in Africa and Asia and generally increases bio-productivity.
If it's "pollution," then it's pollution the natural world exploits extremely well and to great profit. Doesn't sound too bad to us.
Gracious no! Humans can only claim responsibility, if that's the word, for abut 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually, the rest of it is all natural
(you can see the IPCC representation of the natural carbon cycle and human perturbation here or a simple
schematic from Woods Hole here).
Half our estimated emissions fail to accumulate in the atmosphere, "disappearing" into sinks as yet undetermined. Humans' total accumulated carbon
contribution could account for perhaps a quarter of the total non-water greenhouse gases (that is, accounting for all the increase since the Industrial Revolution
regardless of source and irrespective of whether warming from any cause might result in an increase in natural emission to atmosphere -- we're simply claiming the lot as
anthropogenic or human-caused here).
Assuming that water vapor accounts for about 70% and clouds (mostly water droplets) accounts for another 20%, thus water in it's various forms is 90% of the total
greenhouse effect, leaving 10% for non-water greenhouse effect (we know we cited 95% above -- see "important distinction"). Of
this remaining 10%, mainly atmospheric carbon, humans might be responsible for 25% of the total accumulated atmospheric carbon, meaning 0.25 x 0.1 = 0.025 x 100 =
2.5% of the total greenhouse effect.
Well, not exactly, if it were such a simple accumulation we could easily determine exactly how much Earth would warm from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 (not
much) and certainly that would be an improvement on the silly figures bandied about.
Theoretically, in a dry atmosphere, carbon dioxide could absorb about three times more energy than it actually does. Clouds, in the absence of all other greenhouse gases,
could do likewise -- look at it as there already being "competition" for available suitable longwave radiation (energy these gases can absorb), if you like.
Readers should be aware that the temperature effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide is logarithmic (that means there is a diminishing response as you keep adding
more, like the additional window shade example we mentioned before).
If we consider the warming effect of the pre-Industrial Revolution atmospheric carbon dioxide (about 280 parts per million by volume or ppmv) as 1, then the first half of
that heating was delivered by about 20ppmv (0.002% of atmosphere) while the second half required an additional 260ppmv (0.026%).
To double the pre-Industrial Revolution warming from CO2 alone would require about 90,000ppmv (9%) but we'd never see it - CO2 becomes toxic at
around 6,000ppmv (0.6%, although humans have absolutely no prospect of achieving such concentrations). We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. Time for a new paradigm on climate change? There are two alternative ways to look at how science progresses. In one corner is the concept of the falsifiable hypothesis, credited to Karl Popper. Popper argued that
all science is based on hypotheses, which must be tested to destruction. Sound evidence which does not fit with the hypothesis must logically cause it to be rejected.
However, the other side of the same coin is that no hypothesis can ever be said to be proven. Over time, the body of evidence consistent with a successful hypothesis builds
up to the extent that it becomes regarded as a theory, for example the theory of General Relativity, or Tectonic Plate theory. Humans and Their CO2 Save the Planet! As the Senate considers the fate of the cap-and-trade bill, we should consider what it means for more carbon dioxide to be added to the atmosphere, something the bill
intends to prevent. There is a new paper that will appear soon [thanks to Marcel Crok for alerting us to it!]. It is James Hurrell, Gerald A. Meehl, David Bader, Thomas L. Delworth, Ben Kirtman, and Bruce Wielicki 2009: A
Unified Modeling Approach to Climate System Prediction. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, in press. The abstract reads “Demand for more accurate predictions of regional climate necessitates a unified modeling approach explicitly recognizing that many processes are common to
predictions across time scales. Applying and testing models with this approach has many benefits.” In the following, I comment on excerpts from the text: Excerpt: “There is a new perspective of a continuum of prediction problems, with a blurring of the distinction between short-term predictions and long-term climate
projections. At the heart of this new perspective is the realization that all climate system predictions, regardless of time scale, share common processes and mechanisms;
moreover, interactions across time and space scales are fundamental to the climate system itself. Further, just as seasonal to interannual predictions start from an estimate
of the state of the climate system, there is a growing realization that decadal and longer term climate predictions could be initialized with estimates of the current
observed state of the atmosphere, oceans, cryosphere, and land surface……The global coupled atmosphere-ocean-land-cryosphere system exhibits a wide range of physical and
dynamical phenomena with associated physical, biological and chemical feedbacks that collectively result in a continuum of temporal and spatial variability. The traditional
boundaries between weather and climate are, therefore, somewhat artificial…….The central unifying theme is that all climate system predictions, regardless of time scale,
share processes and mechanisms that consequently could benefit from initialization of coupled general circulation models with best estimates of the observed state of
the climate” Comment By Roger A. Pielke Sr.: This is not a new perspective. This viewpoint was reported on in detail in the report National Research Council, 2005: Radiative forcing of climate change: Expanding the concept
and addressing uncertainties. Committee on Radiative Forcing Effects on Climate Change, Climate Research Committee, Board on Atmospheric Sciences and
Climate, Division on Earth and Life Studies, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 208 pp. I also discussed this subject over a decade ago in Pielke, R.A., 1998: Climate prediction as an initial value problem.
Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 79, 2743-2746 The authors of the paper should have completed a more thorough review of the past literature. At least they finally recognize that climate is an initial value
problem! Excerpt: Fundamental barriers to advancing weather and climate prediction on time scales from days to years, as well as long-standing systematic errors in weather and climate
models, are partly attributable to our limited understanding and capability to simulate the complex, multi-scale interactions intrinsic to atmospheric, oceanic and
cryospheric fluid motions. Comment By Roger A. Pielke Sr.: If they are “partly attributable to our limited understanding”, what are our other barriers? The fundamental barrier is our limited understanding as to how the
real world climate system actually works. The examples presented in the Hurrell et al paper actually show how difficult this subject is. Excerpt: For climate predictions, the initial state of the atmosphere is less critical, and states separated by a day or so can be substituted. However, the initial states of
other climate system components become vital. For predictions of a season to a year or so, the SSTs, sea ice extent and upper ocean heat content, soil moisture, snow cover,
and state of surface vegetation over land are all important……..A good rule of thumb for prediction is that an upper bound on predictability corresponds approximately to
one lifecycle of the phenomenon being considered. Hence one could hope to predict a single convective element, cyclone wave, MJO cycle, ENSO warm event, or fluctuation of the
Atlantic MOC over its lifecycle, but not the second generation event. This rule of thumb is consistent with the climate system being a chaotic dynamical system with limited
predictability. Additional predictability, however, could arise from the slowly evolving components of the climate system. Comment By Roger A. Pielke Sr.: I agree with their summary, except that slowly evolving components also have long term variability. When they use phrases such as “rule of thumb” and “one
could hope”,this should alert the reader to very qualitative character of their view. This is another way to state that this is a hypothesis. Indeed, since we know
that climate undergoes sudden and significant shifts (e.g. see, see and
see), the concept of a “cycle” is an inaccurate way
to explain how the actual climate system works. In fact, the authors themselves write “the climate system [is] a chaotic dynamical system with limited
predictability.” Slowly evolving components can also result in a nonlinear response within the climate system. Excerpt: Although deterministic atmospheric predictability is limited to approximately two weeks (e.g., Kleeman 2007), on longer time scales at least two types of predictions
may be possible. The first is a prediction of the internal variability of the climate system based on an initialized state of the ocean, atmosphere, land and cryosphere
system…….In addition to the potential sources of predictability from the initial values of the system, predictability may also be derived from past and future changes in
radiative forcing. Comment By Roger A. Pielke Sr.: To the extent that the system is influenced by “the internal variability of the climate system based on an initialized state of the ocean,
atmosphere, land and cryosphere system”, there will also be a limit to the time period of skillful prediction. Also, what role does “past radiative forcing”
play in improving predictability? The effect of the past forcing is already in the initial conditions! Excerpt: For decadal and longer time scales, the problem of quantifying prediction skill becomes even more difficult, and the metrics will likely involve how the forecasts are
used in applications. Even if we could test long term climate models with all possible climate metrics proposed in the last decade of journal papers, we have no current
method to prioritize or weight their impact in measuring uncertainty in predicting future climate change for temperature, precipitation, soil moisture and other variables of
critical interest to society. Comment By Roger A. Pielke Sr.: This is an amazing admission. If “quantifying prediction skill becomes even more difficult” for decadal and longer time scales and that
“we have no current method to prioritize or weight their impact in measuring uncertainty in predicting future climate change for temperature, precipitation,
soil moisture and other variables of critical interest to society”, how is the proposed modeling approach to satisfy the “[d]emand for more accurate predictions
of regional climate” as written by the authors in their abstract? Thus, while I commend the authors for adopting a framework of climate modeling as an initial value problem, they are at
serious risk of overselling what they will be able to provide to policymakers. Some of the funds they are seeking for this effort could be more effectively
used, if they were spent on assessing risk and reducing the vulnerability of local/regional resources to climate variability and change and
other environmental issues. This is what is “of critical interest to society”. (Roger Pielke Sr., Climate Science) Hmm... Glacier melt accelerating, federal report
concludes - Reviewing five decades of data on three 'benchmark glaciers,' researchers say shrinking glaciers clearly result from global warming. Reporting from Washington -- Global warming has melted glaciers in the United States at a rapid and accelerating rate over the last half-century, increasing drought risks
and contributing to rising sea levels, the federal government will report today based on data from a 50-year study of glaciers in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. ... but why? According to the perpetually warmed-over GISS US temperature record (graphic below) at least the first half of the period of decline
accompanied cooling or at least no warming. No pleasing some people: Swiss Seek Pope's Blessing To Stop Glacier Melting ZURICH - After centuries of praying for a local glacier to stop growing, Swiss villagers are now seeking an audience with Pope Benedict to get his blessing for prayers
against the global warming that is causing it to recede. Concern on Carbon Costs of Camel Cull. A Statement by Mr Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition, Australia. More GIGO: Intel Puts Wasted PC Power To Work On Climate Fight A new Facebook application launched computing giant Intel lets idling computers work on a range of health and environmental research projects, including the world's
largest climate forecasting project. (Reuters) The best of times for
global warming skeptics It seems as if almost every day brings news of information and discoveries that bolster the skeptical opposition to the theory that global warming is dangerous and due to
human emissions of CO2. Enjoy Outgoing Greenpeace Head’s Interview Struggle It’s not often that a well informed interviewer asks challenging questions about climate alarmism and energy policy reality, especially on the BBC. All too
often the likes of Greenpeace are allowed to make absurd statements on science and policy unchallenged. Enjoy some ‘global squirming’ from the outgoing Executive Director
of Greenpeace International, Dr Gerd Leipold, whilst being interviewed on BBC News
HARDtalk by a clued up Stephen Sackur. Possibly my favourite part was where Leipold was forced to admit that Greenland’s ice wouldn’t melt by 2030, depite a
Greenpeace PR claiming that it could. His “I don’t read all the PRs” line had me rolling with laughter. Of course, CRN knows that it would take millennia to melt
Greenland, even if warming continues. As expected, Leipold attacked lifestyle, economic growth and energy use, which is what climate alarmism is really a shield for. I fear that only people in the UK will be able to see the interview via BBC iplayer here. In a HARDtalk interview broadcast 5 August 2009, Stephen Sackur talks to Dr Gerd
Leipold, Executive Director of Greenpeace International. When it comes to environmental campaigning, Greenpeace is a brand with global reach. It claims millions of supporters and an annual income of more than two hundred million dollars. But does it use its money and its influence wisely? Dr Gerd Leipold is the outgoing Executive Director of Greenpeace International. Stephen Sackur puts it to him that confrontational campaigning may not be the best way to win the argument over climate change. Hardtalk is shown on the BBC World News at 0330 (except Middle East, South Asia and Asia Pacific), 0830, 1430, 2030 and 2230 GMT (except Middle East and South Asia) HARDtalk is also broadcast on the BBC News channel at 0230, 0430 & 2330 (CRN) 'Citizen Army'
Carries Coal's Climate Message to Hinterlands Coal's biggest lobbying group is launching a $1 million campaign to win support from Senate Democrats, an effort that employs the same public relations firm ensnared by a
scandal over forged letters to Congress. Hmm... still a lot of alleged "outrage" over such a trivial incident (I call it trivial not because it is not dishonest but because it involves
so much less an offence than say, registering fake voters or even fabricating the excuse being used to justify the social engineering [destruction?] ACCCE is campaigning
against). The assault on society and particularly the world's poorest in the name of "protecting" an artificial statistic like "global mean temperature"
is truly criminal. Real Climate Enemies of Global
Warming It was only yesterday that I wrote that the climate change activists were their own worst enemies. It took only a day for more evidence of that to come forward. Global deal needs 'strong' 2020 targets: UN climate chief PARIS — The global climate treaty slated for completion by year's end will be crippled without "strong commitments" from rich nations on slashing CO2 emissions
by 2020, the UN's top climate official said Thursday. Can Cap-And-Trade Save Planet For Just 'Postage Stamp A Day'? How much will an American family pay to avoid catastrophic global warming via the House-passed Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill? (Garrett A. Vaughn, IBD) The Ugly Numbers for Global Warming
Legislation Once
again, class: Everyone wants to ensure our kids grow up in a clean environment. Some just want to bankrupt us while doing it, and some of us would prefer a more
logical route. For the second group, The Heritage Foundation has some figures and charts that provide a helpful look at the immense costs associated with the Waxman-Markey cap-and-tax
plan to forcibly cap carbon. According to the new report, “The Economic Consequences of
Waxman-Markey: An Analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009″ released today: For those interested, be sure to get more reading at “What Makes the Heritage Study
Different” (Chilling Effect) Good -- kill the stupid thing right now and let's attend to some real problems: 'Serious' Climate Talks Hinge On
U.S. Bill: Lawmaker CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts - The fate of a U.S. climate change bill will send signals to the rest of the world as to whether upcoming global climate talks will be
"serious or not," one of the bill's co-authors said on Thursday. (Reuters) Senators Issue Warning on Climate Bill A group of 10 moderate Democrats sent a letter to President Obama on Thursday saying that they
will not support any domestic climate change bill that did not protect American industries from competition from countries that did not impose similar restraints on
climate-altering gases. Senate Democrats Want Climate Bill to Protect Manufacturing In response to the senators' letter, a White House spokesman said in a statement that the president "believes that the most effective approach to maintaining a level
playing field is to negotiate a new international climate change agreement that ensures that all the major polluters take significant actions to reduce their greenhouse gas
emissions." (WSJ) Carbon Offsets: Scam, Not Salvation In the battle against climate change, most media attention has been paid to "cap-and-trade" schemes, under which countries set upper limits ("caps") on
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and allow companies to sell ("trade") unused emissions rights to other firms. However, there is a second path to global warming
salvation: Carbon offsets. (H. Sterling Burnett, PowerMag) Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Aug. 7th 2009 Another week draws to a close, which means another weekly round-up. Discover Greenwich’s dirty secret, Australia’s war on camels, what makes this the best time to be a
skeptic and why Americans should pay attention to Spaniards. (Daily Bayonet) Ol' Fullovit sure loves the sound of his own voice... Pacific
states seek urgent climate change action CAIRNS, Australia — The Pacific Islands Forum called on all nations Thursday to pledge a 50 percent cut in their emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050 at U.N. climate
change talks in December, bolstering appeals made a day earlier by seven of the region's most threatened islands. ... rumor has it he's angling for the position of UN Secretary General (they can have him, wrapped, if they want). PM won't be drawn on climate
change refugees AS PACIFIC nations plead for help dealing with rising sea levels and savage storms brought by climate change, Kevin Rudd has offered to help build sea walls and rehouse
those driven from their homes. As he must because there is no such entity. China Balks at Global Warming-Gas Capture Costs China, the world’s biggest carbon- dioxide polluter, is balking at the cost and effectiveness of extracting greenhouse gases from hundreds of coal plants and storing
them underground. Carbon dioxide is not an atmospheric pollutant and burying it is a really stupid idea. Coal Feet: Carbon Capture and
Storage Too Pricey, China Says Wow. Even though so-called clean coal is still embryonic, there’s increasing consensus in the U.S. that making it viable is crucial to meeting emissions goals and
keeping the lights on. Clean-coal technologies may imperil
water supply CONTROVERSIAL "clean coal" technologies could dramatically increase the amount of water used to produce electricity in Australia. It isn't that the CCS itself uses water but that the power station uses such a huge chunk of the power it generates just capturing and compressing the
carbon dioxide from its exhaust stream (even more energy is squandered transporting and injecting the liquefied CO2). This stupid scheme is a massive waste of
energy, all designed to achieve a massive waste of the world's most precious resource -- atmospheric carbon dioxide. Oh my... Carbon Market: Many Projects, Many Clouds COYOTE RIDGE NATURAL AREA, Colorado - Amanda Sutton looks over a wheat field in northern Colorado and sees a potential "carbon offset project" that could help
curb greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming. It has no comparison in importance, but like the Washington Post writers on Watergate, every time I write on the Australian carbon crisis I feel this will be my last
commentary on the subject. But every time I write, new information is put before me to encourage me to keep going. Carbon-Eating "Green" Cement Wins Funds For UK Firm LONDON - A British start-up company developing a cement that absorbs carbon dioxide has raised 1 million pounds ($1.7 million) to fund its work, underscoring the growing
interest in eco-friendly construction ventures. If they had any carbon sense at all they wouldn't be trying to reduce emissions. Is Shale Gas the
Climate Bill's New Bargaining Chip? Natural gas from shale formations is the new magic phrase in the oil and gas industry, as new technologies have led to stunning increases in potential resources and
anticipated profits. Low carbon technology vital to future UK energy security The move to a low-carbon economy will be as crucial to securing the future energy security of the UK as it will be to tackling climate change, it has been suggested. (LCE) That's essentially true -- no value either way. Russia's Putin In Energy Talks With Turkey ANKARA - Talks expected to boost Ankara's energy hub ambitions began on Thursday as Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin met with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan. Defend green jobs! Smash ungreen jobs! Environmentalists are defending jobs at
the ‘good’ Vestas wind-turbine factory while ignoring the sacking of workers at ‘evil’ Thomas Cook. Currently the dictionary defines double standards as ‘a set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to one than to another’. We need planes, trains and automobiles - Justifying high-speed rail as a way of
stopping people from flying is a perverse anti-travel argument. On Tuesday, the UK transport secretary, Andrew Adonis, announced plans to expand high-speed rail services in the UK. Yet his proposals seem to have less to do with
allowing people to travel with greater speed and comfort, and more to do with getting people off planes. Perversely, the Labour government is promoting a transport initiative
on anti-travel grounds. (Rob Lyons, sp!ked) August 6, 2009
The activist Left can't stand competition. Last week in Long Island, N.Y., opponents of the Democrats' government health care takeover legislation outnumbered Obama
supporters 10 to one. The Tea Party activists toted American flags and signs that read "WE CAN'T AFFORD FREE HEALTH CARE" -- prompting one foe to stalk into the
peaceful crowd, gesticulate wildly and shout unintelligible threats at the top of his lungs. Medical Papers by Ghostwriters Pushed Therapy Newly unveiled court documents show that ghostwriters paid by a pharmaceutical company played a major role in producing 26 scientific papers backing the use of hormone
replacement therapy in women, suggesting that the level of hidden industry influence on medical literature is broader than previously known. Toxic logic at Health Canada - Will
Canadians have to go to the U.S. to buy safe plastic toys? Politics has just won a quiet but critical victory over science at Health Canada, and put Canadian children at risk in the process. Federal Agency Plans Distracted Driving
Forum The secretary of transportation on Tuesday announced a plan for a “distracted driving summit,” an action that safety advocates say is a shift in the federal
government’s recognition of the dangers of behind-the-wheel multitasking. Looks like a reach: Social Stress
Sends Body Fat to the Stomach - In turn, that meant heart risks were raised, researcher says WEDNESDAY, Aug. 5 -- Social stress may cause the body to deposit more fat in the abdomen, which increases the risk of heart disease, a new study suggests. So, if this held for people then bosses, military officers, in fact any socially dominant individuals should sport six-packs while worker bees should be
blimps, right? So that's why the ranks are putting on the pounds! See, don't give them any orders
& they'll be fine ;-) Report urges separation of science and state Science and politics mix badly, a bipartisan report said Wednesday. It called for changes to federal agencies and expert panels to keep the subjects apart. Unfortunately politics intrudes on science a great deal but, in fairness, some scientists have rather inserted themselves into politics (look at gorebull
warming, for example -- virtually a science-free political zone masquerading as science and massively promoted by people claiming to be scientists). Another Bull's-Eye For Missile Defense If you missed the news, which isn't hard given how poorly these things are covered, our "unproven" missile defense proved itself again last week, when a U.S.
warship downed a simulated North Korean missile in flight. (IBD) S.E.C. Starts Crackdown on ‘Flash’ Trading The Securities and Exchange Commission has begun a widespread effort to crack down on stock trading techniques that regulators worry are giving sophisticated financiers,
armed with lightning-fast computers, an edge that everyday investors cannot match. Hmm... Earth's Biogeochemical Cycles, Once in Concert, Falling Out of
Sync Climate change, land-use patterns are culprits, scientists to report at Ecological Society of America conference Earth's water cycle is changing as result of global warming and other factors. August 4, 2009
What do the Gulf of Mexico's "dead zone," global climate change, and acid rain have in common? They're all a result of human impacts to Earth's biology,
chemistry and geology, and the natural cycles that involve all three. On August 4-5, 2009, scientists who study such cycles--biogeochemists--will convene at a special series of sessions at the Ecological Society of America (ESA)'s 94th
annual meeting in Albuquerque, N.M. They will present results of research supported through various National Science Foundation (NSF) efforts, including coupled biogeochemical cycles (CBC) funding. CBC is an
emerging scientific discipline that looks at how Earth's biogeochemical cycles interact. "Advancing our understanding of Earth's systems increasingly depends on collaborations between bioscientists and geoscientists," said James Collins, NSF
assistant director for biological sciences. "The interdisciplinary science of biogeochemistry is a way of connecting processes happening in local ecosystems with
phenomena occurring on a global scale, like climate change." A biogeochemical cycle is a pathway by which a chemical element, such as carbon, or compound, like water, moves through Earth's biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and
lithosphere. In effect, the element is "recycled," although in some cycles the element is accumulated or held for long periods of time. Chemical compounds are passed from one organism to another, and from one part of the biosphere to another, through biogeochemical cycles. Water, for example, can go through three phases (liquid, solid, gas) as it cycles through the Earth system. It evaporates from plants as well as land and ocean surfaces
into the atmosphere and, after condensing in clouds, returns to Earth as rain and snow. Researchers are discovering that biogeochemical cycles--whether the water cycle, the nitrogen cycle, the carbon cycle, or others--happen in concert with one another.
Biogeochemical cycles are "coupled" to each other and to Earth's physical features. (Press release) ... we need lots of money to study how people are breaking things so we can scare you into ... giving us lots more money to, uh, save you, yes,
that's it, save you. The Vegetarians International Voice for Animals (Viva) claims that consumers should be informed if any of their home electricity is being generated by what it described as
the "macabre" recycling process. Pandering to the enemy: Kimberly-Clark Joins Greenpeace To Protect Forests WASHINGTON - Paper products giant Kimberly-Clark Corp joined forces with Greenpeace on Wednesday, pledging to conserve forests by getting wood fiber from environmentally
responsible sources. Wouldn't you think a consumer company would have sense enough to at least keep quiet about providing aid and comfort to rabid misanthropists even if they
are stupid enough to do so? What idiots! India Gets Caught Short as Sugar Prices Soar LONI KALBHOR, India — Sanjay Gujar’s family has raised sugar cane for generations. But last year, after sugar prices fell by more than 40 percent, he replanted his six
acres here in the sugar bowl of India with bananas. Not to any great extent. The Sun, being much hotter than Earth, emits high energy, shortwave radiation while in response Earth emits longwave radiation. The cooler the
portion of the Earth or atmosphere, the lower energy intensity, longer wave radiation is emitted (that old white hot, yellow hot, red hot thing).
Greenhouse gases are generally transparent to incoming solar radiation (they let most solar radiation through) and opaque to Earth's radiation (they absorb and
transfer the Earth's infrared radiation by a variety of means). That said, oxygen and ozone do absorb incoming Ultraviolet (UV) radiation (<0.3µm) and water, ozone,
oxygen and, to a tiny extent, carbon dioxide also absorb a small amount of incoming shortwave below the 3 micron (µm) wavelength range (see
graphic) and it is mostly the UV absorption by ozone that causes warming in the stratosphere above the tropopause.
The tropopause is the boundary between the troposphere (which is based at the earth's surface and has temperature that decreases with height, extending about 10-50Km or
6-30 miles above the surface) and the stratosphere (which is a stable region of very low levels of vertical mixing above the troposphere).
A
representation of relative emission wavelengths can be seen on the following graphic.
Greenhouse gases do not really "trap Earth's heat" but could be fairly described as delaying the energy transfer from Earth to space. ("Trapping heat"
implies that the energy is stuck in the system forever, which is a false notion.) Greenhouse gases do not emit energy in the same bandwidth in which they absorb energy and
thus emissions from carbon dioxide are not absorbed by carbon dioxide.
While energy may be delayed on its inevitable journey back to space, it will eventually be emitted regardless of the number of intervening stages.
Absolutely not. We'll look at both terms below.
That's a different thing altogether. Change is what the climate is always doing and is the result of our planet's orbital eccentricities, axial wobble, solar brightness
variation, cosmic ray flux, etc.. There are also plausible terrestrial drivers of climate change too, including super volcanic events and tectonic movement, but these are not
in the realm of anthropogenic (manmade) effects and so we won't looking at them here.
The global mean temperature over which there has been so much obsession is only one part of climate (for example, how wet or dry the climate happens to be is probably of
far greater significance than a simple mean temperature). In fact it's not even clear that a global mean temperature is a particularly useful metric. Nonetheless Earth's
apparent temperature is the cause of great angst at present so it will remain our immediate focus for that reason alone.
This
first graphic meets the criteria of being simple, specifically includes water vapor and clouds as both absorbers and emitters (remarkably few greenhouse graphics do so) and
is reasonably proportionate.
Big note here -- we were unable to find useful graphics adequately expressing convection, which, as we highlighted before, keeps the planet more than 60 °C cooler
than would otherwise be the case.
The
next graphic provides an indication of the infrared component of the planetary radiation budget. Note that these are expressed as percentages and that the 100% incoming and
outgoing solar energy balance is not the whole story -- there is additional energy transfer in progress between the atmosphere and surface, and surface and atmosphere.
This is the natural greenhouse effect that makes life as we know it possible on Earth. (Don't worry if you don't quite follow the numbers, we'll provide a "map"
view below.)
The
following is from Earth’s Annual Global Mean Energy Budget
(Kiehl and Trenberth, 1997). This is expressed in Watts per square meter (Wm-2) and tells the same story of the incoming 342 Wm-2 = outgoing (235 + 107
Wm-2). Note that there is relatively little direct reflection and radiation from surface to space but significant exchange via the atmosphere. Note further that
the surface receives almost twice the energy from the atmosphere as it does directly from the sun. The exchange between surface, atmosphere and surface is what is meant by
greenhouse effect. (Some might prefer viewing this simplified Earth energy budget)
It might also help novices to conceive of the atmosphere and the natural greenhouse effect as a kind of metaphorical energy flow control valve. There is a lot of energy
bouncing around but the amount of energy entering the system and the amount leaving is fairly tightly constrained. The atmosphere is acting as a kind of check valve, slowing
the loss of energy to space but the net incoming (324 + 168 Wm-2) = net outgoing (390 + 78 + 24 Wm-2).
While greenhouse is the "what," "global warming" really refers to the "how much."
Since Arrhenius began speculating a century ago about low CO2 levels and ice ages the hypothesis of temperature relation to atmospheric carbon dioxide has
drifted in and out of scientific focus. At present it is the focus of a great deal of attention.
Populist overuse and abuse has largely rendered the term "global warming" meaningless and what is really meant
is "enhanced greenhouse". Yes, this is another term but don't worry, we'll explain this one easily and quickly.
"Enhanced greenhouse" means the additional delay in energy loss to space induced by the fraction of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released by humans
before those gases are removed from the atmosphere by breakdown and/or biological activity. We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. Oh dear... Comment: Why China needs
help cutting its emissions IN DISCUSSIONS over how to avoid dangerous climate change, two numbers are especially prominent: 450 parts per million and 2 °C. These are, respectively, the upper
"safe" concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the upper "safe" limit of average global temperature increase. The fear is that if we exceed
either, the climate will pass an irreversible tipping point. (Julian Hunt, New Scientist) This superstitious claptrap is from a professor of climate modelling at University College London and a former director-general of the UK Meteorological
Office. Explains a lot. Um... no. Psychological Barriers Hobble Climate Action WASHINGTON - Psychological barriers like uncertainty, mistrust and denial keep most Americans from acting to fight climate change, a task force of the American
Psychological Association said on Wednesday. In fact it's simple physics that prevents "climate action" -- we can't knowingly and predictably adjust it, period. Is the Climate Problem in Our Heads? A task force assembled by the American Psychological Association hopes to spur more research on the role of the human mind in shaping the behaviors resulting in rising
greenhouse-gas emissions as well as on traits that can impede an effective response to global warming and similar slow-building environmental risks. In response to Andy's rhetorical opening, yes it is. There is no reason to believe people could physically detect the statistical construct of a
long-term drift in globally-averaged mean temperature amidst the noise of locally changing ambient temperature. What's more, no one actually lives at "globally
averaged" and hence it is possible no one ever experiences the global mean. McCain Echoes Hansen: Waxman-Markey is a ‘Farce’ (The Civil War widens among climate alarmists) “[The Waxman-Markey] 1,400-page bill is a farce. They bought every industry off—steel mills, agriculture, utilities…. I would not only not vote for it. I am
opposed to it entirely, because it does damage to those of us who believe that we need to act in a rational fashion about climate change.” - Senator John McCain to Stephen Moore, Wall Street Journal, August 1-2, 2009, p. A9. “The truth is, the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. It is an exceedingly inefficient way to get a small reduction of emissions. It is less
than worthless….” -James Hansen, “Strategies to Address Global Warming,”
July 13, 2009. The death of federal climate legislation in 2009 will not only be because traditional Republicans and conservative Democrats said “no”. It will also be because true
believers like Senator John McCain realize that politicized cap-and-trade is all pain and no gain. A scorched earth economic policy that does not meaningfully
address a feared “scorched earth” to come is worse than no policy at all. Consider the conversation between Stephen Moore and Senator McCain in
last weekend’s Wall Street Journal: Since Mr. McCain was the co-sponsor of the McCain-Lieberman bill last year to limit CO emissions through a cap-and-trade system, I ask him about the climate change bill
that passed the House last month and he surprised me with his opposition. “I believe climate change is real . . . but this 1,400-page bill is a farce. They bought every
industry off—steel mills, agriculture, utilities,” he says. So you wouldn’t vote for the House bill? “I would not only not vote for it,” he laughs, “I am opposed to it entirely, because it does damage to those of us who
believe that we need to act in a rational fashion about climate change.” And compare this to what NASA scientist, climate alarmist, and Al Gore confidant James Hansen has said
about the original version of Waxman-Markey: “Governments are retreating to feckless ‘cap-and-trade,’ a minor tweak to business-as-usual…. “Why is this cap-and-trade temple of doom worshipped? The 648-page cap-and-trade monstrosity that is being foisted on the U.S. Congress provides the answer.
Not a single Congressperson has read it. They don’t need to – they just need to add more paragraphs to support their own special interests. By the way, the
Congress people do not write most of those paragraphs—they are ‘suggested’ by people in alligator shoes.” And Dr. Hansen later spanked harder on the final bill: “The alternative approach is Cap & Trade, or perhaps more honestly Tax & Trade, because a ‘cap’ increases the price of energy, as a tax or fee does. Other characteristics of the ‘cap’ approach: (1) unpredictable price volatility, (2) it makes millionaires on Wall Street and other trading floors at public expense,
(3) it is an invitation to blackmail by utilities that threaten ‘blackout coming’ to gain increased emission permits, (4) it has overhead costs and complexities,
inviting lobbyists and delaying implementation. The biggest problem with [cap and trade] is that it will not solve the problem. It may slow emissions, but because of the long lifetime of atmospheric CO2, slowing the
emissions does little good. As long as fossil fuels are the cheapest form of energy they will be used eventually. There is no hope that cap and trade can get us back to 350
ppm CO2. Hansen also addressed his critics on the Left who are politically stuck with Waxman-Markey: Some environmental leaders have said that I am naïve to think that there is an alternative to cap-and-trade, and they suggest that I should stick to climate modeling.
Their contention is that it is better to pass any bill now and improve it later. Their belief that they, as opposed to the fossil interests, have more effect on the
bill’s eventual shape seems to be the pinnacle of naïveté. The truth is, the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. It is an exceedingly inefficient way to get a small reduction of emissions. It is less than
worthless, because it would delay by at least a decade or two the possibility of getting on a path that is fundamentally sound from economic and climate preservation
standpoints. And Hansen will not kow-tow to the Administration: Officials in the Obama administration privately admit that the science demands much more rapid emission cuts than Waxman-Markey would yield, but they say that their
hands are tied by a recalcitrant Congress. Is that so? Has President Obama provided direction or guidelines for what he expects from Congress? Waxman-Markey–aka the Enron Revitalization Act of 2009– is in deep trouble because it fails to either help the economy
(the ‘green jobs’ myth) or address alleged climate change. Its death will be bipartisan. (Robert Bradley, Master Resource) A Climate Bill That Doesn't Burn Coal In late June, the House passed legislation to cut U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases by 80 percent by 2050. The measure passed after its authors -- House Energy and
Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey, D-Mass. -- won the backing of an unusual coalition of electric
utility companies, large industrial firms, farm groups and environmentalists. The only good climate bill is the one we don't have... ever. China insists West
must go further to tackle climate change China has insisted that rich countries should commit to large cuts in their emissions of greenhouse gases, while declining to put a ceiling on its own emissions. (Daily
Telegraph) China Keen To See CO2 Emissions Peak -Top Diplomat BEIJING - China is keen to halt growth in its greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but lifting tens of millions out of poverty must remain its primary goal, the
country's climate change ambassador said on Wednesday. Given that carbon dioxide emissions are markers of economic activity we have no doubt at all that China is keen to see them reach their maximum
attainable level in the shortest possible time. China Sees Progress on Climate Accord, but Resists an
Emissions Ceiling BEIJING — China’s envoy to global negotiations on climate change expressed optimism on Wednesday that a new agreement to reduce greenhouse gases would be reached this
year, and he said that his nation’s efforts to curb carbon pollution already had produced results that he called “second to none.” Sheesh! Ban sales of poorly insulated homes, says Energy Saving
Trust Owners of poorly insulated homes should not be allowed to sell or rent them until they have invested in energy efficiency measures, the Government’s advisory body on
domestic energy use says. Emission cuts will exact toll on families Japan's efforts to achieve its midterm goal of curbing greenhouse gas emissions will cost each household ¥77,000 a year, according to an estimate released Wednesday by a
government panel. Eye-roller: Help Pacific or face the consequences, Australia told AUSTRALIA must help its Pacific neighbours deal with climate change now or face a future stuck in the middle of constant regional conflict, the United Nations Asia-Pacific
development chief has warned. Svensmark has a new paper and it is a doozy: Cosmic ray
decreases affect atmospheric aerosols and clouds (full text PDF). The major conclusion: “A link between the Sun, cosmic rays, aerosols, and liquid-water clouds appears to exist on a global scale…” This paper confirms 13 years of discoveries that suggest a key role for cosmic rays in climate change. It links observable variations in the world’s cloudiness to
laboratory experiments in Copenhagen showing how cosmic rays help generate atmospheric aerosols. This is important, because it confirms the existence of a sun-earth atmospheric modulation mechanism for clouds and aerosols. It is seen in an event called a Forbush
Decrease, which A Forbush decrease is a rapid decrease in the observed galactic cosmic raycoronal mass ejection (CME). It occurs due to the magnetic field of
the plasma solar wind sweeping some of the galactic cosmic rays away from Earth. Here is what the Oulu Neutron Monitor plot looked like during such and event on May15th,
2005: When the CME hit Earth, the magnetic field of the CME deflects the Galactic Cosmic Rays and the secondary particle flux (Neutrons) decreases. In this graph there is also
another Forbush decrease visible, which was caused by another, not that powerful flare, which CME passed Earth a few days before this event. See more from CosmicRays.org Now at last, a linkage has been established on earth showing such
events affect cloud cover and aerosols. (WUWT) See also the cosmic ray charts posted by Michael Ronayne over on the forum. Recently Dr. Reynold Stone of The University of the West Indies in Trinidad and Tobago was
informed that his comment on a paper by Tom Peterson was not accepted. He was informed the following by the JGR Editor of the rejection. As a former Chief
Editor of the American Meteorological Society’s journals Monthly Weather Review and the Journal of Atmospheric Science, such a Comment would not have been rejected for
the reasons the Editor stated. While it would be useful to look at new data up to the present, the analysis presented by Dr. Stone does not suffer in any way from that issue.
The rejection of this Comment impedes effective scientific discussion of this climate issue. I will alert Tom Peterson to this post and give him an opportunity to reply as a guest weblog. (Roger Pielke Sr., Climate Science) Global Warming: Is It for Real? WASHINGTON — Last spring, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued an alarming report. Since the early warmist debate denials by Gore, Hansen, the U.N., the E.U., the Democrat Caucus, the Obama Administration, etc.; a competent cadre of open-minded,
scientific investigators have come forth with numerous alternative causes and effects of global climate change. Faithful far beyond partisan political posturing, the
scientific method requires the elimination of any cause-and-effect theory with but one repeatable, peer-reviewed contradictory finding. Climate science discoveries did not
stop with pompous debate denier declarations. (Paul Taylor, Examiner) Permafrost Could Be Climate's Ticking Time Bomb Researchers conduct fieldwork to track permafrost melting in Alaska and gain insight about the release of carbon into the atmosphere No, not really, in fact there is evidence permafrost is quite persistent even at significantly higher temperatures. Moreover, there is no reason to
believe greenhouse effect can be significantly enhanced over what it is now. Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Wall! As President Ronald Reagan famously called upon Mikhail Gorbachev to do to the Soviet Union’s oppressive policies toward Eastern Europe and elsewhere, President Barack
Obama should tear down the wall of taxation, regulation, and government-sponsored litigation that prevents American free enterprise from creating the domestic energy
production that our nation needs Will Russia Drill Off Florida's Coast? As Russian attack submarines patrol our eastern seaboard, Moscow signs a deal to help Castro's Cuba drill for oil off the Florida coast. In Moscow and Havana, the cry is
"Drill, Comrade, Drill!" (IBD) Air America: What’s Its Carbon Footprint? Oh, those national
legislators. They’re soooooo intellectually honest and concerned with using taxpayer money wisely. Oh, sorry, back to reality now. This one’s gonna burn your biscuits. Roll Call is reporting House Democrats threw in
some extra money in our defense budget to buy politicians a nifty set of Gulfstream private jets for their own use: Last year, lawmakers excoriated the CEOs of the Big Three automakers for traveling to Washington, D.C., by private jet to attend a hearing about a possible bailout of
their companies. But apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air travel: At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three
elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress. The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: about $65 million) as part of an ongoing upgrade of its passenger air service. But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and specified
that they be assigned to the D.C.-area units that carry Members of Congress, military brass and top government officials. Because the Appropriations Committee viewed the additional aircraft as an expansion of an existing Defense Department program, it did not treat the money for two more
planes as an earmark, and the legislation does not disclose which Member had requested the additional money. There’s really nothing to say except: wow. It took Republicans quite a while to become this corrupt. Democrats have managed to embarrass themselves much faster (maybe
they’re just smarter). But here’s a question: If global warming is such a damn dire threat that we have to rush through 1,000+ page cap-and-tax legislation without even reading the bill
itself, is it a good use of taxpayer money or supposedly precious carbon emissions to give Gulfstreams to Nancy Pelosi? Another question: Couldn’t that money have been better spent on military equipment, or … shock … not spent at all? (Chilling Effect) My Favorite Renewable Energy Concept: The
Solar Updraft Tower There are many different ways that you can extract usable energy from sunlight, and they all have their advantages and disadvantages. Historically, the biggest
disadvantage has been cost when compared to more traditional sources of energy, such as coal-fired power plants. For if solar power was an economical and practical
alternative to other forms of energy generation today, it would already be deployed on a wide scale. I think it is only a matter of time before renewable energy sources become more cost competitive. The question is which methods make the most sense. My favorite idea is
the ‘Solar Tower’ (or ‘solar updraft tower’, or ‘solar chimney’), an artists rendering of which is shown below. While most people have never heard about it, the Solar Tower design was implemented on a small scale in Spain
years ago to test the concept. More recently, a privately-funded company called EnviroMission has been
working toward the construction of one or more 200 megawatt power plants in the Australian Outback. The company has also been actively pursuing plans to build power plants in
China and Nevada. The design appeals to me because it harnesses the weather, albeit on a small scale. Specifically, it collects the daily production of warm air that forms near the ground,
and funnels all of that warm air into a chimney where turbines are located to extract energy from the rising air. It’s a little like wind tower technology, but rather than
just extracting energy from whatever horizontally-flowing wind happens to be passing by, the Solar Tower concentrates all of that warm air heated by the ground into the
central tower, or chimney, where the air naturally rises. Even on a day with no wind, the solar tower will be generating electricity while conventional wind towers are
sitting there motionless. The total amount of energy that can be generated by a Solar Tower depends upon two main factors: (1) how much land area is covered by the clear canopy, and (2) the total
height of the tower. EnviroMission’s baseline design has included a glass canopy covering up to several square miles of desert land, and a tower 1,000 meters tall. Such a
tower would be the tallest manmade structure of any kind in the world, although more recently EnviroMission has been talking about several smaller-scale power plants as a
more cost-effective approach. Since the design is proprietary, details have remained secret. Since the Solar Tower is based upon physical processes that people like me deal with routinely in our research, I can immediately see ways in which the efficiency of the
design can be maximized. For instance, a third major factor that also determines how much energy would be generated is the temperature difference between the power plant’s
surroundings and the air underneath the canopy. After all, it is that temperature difference which provides the energy source, since warm air is less dense than cool air, and
so ‘wants’ to rise. This means that you could increase the power plant’s output by building it where the sand is quite reflective (bright), and then covering the ground under the canopy
area with black rock — say crushed lava rock — which would then get the hottest when the sun shines on it. One of the advantages of a Solar Tower over using photovoltaic cells to generate electricity is that the Solar Tower keeps generating electricity even after the sun goes
down. Because the ground under the canopy stays warm at night, it continues to warm the air while the land around the canopy cools much more rapidly. This maintains a
temperature difference between the canopy-covered air and the plant’s surroundings, which translates into continued energy generation at night. Additionally, the Solar
Tower does not require the huge volume of water that coal-fired plants use. From what I’ve read, the Solar Tower is potentially cost-competitive with coal-fired power plants, but the investment in infrastructure is large, and there is still some
uncertainty (and therefore investment risk) involved in just how efficient Solar Towers would be. If the government insists on providing subsidies for renewable energy, I think Solar Towers might be one of the best investments of the public’s money. But the last I
knew, the U.S. Department of Energy was not actively pursuing the Solar Tower technology. I have no idea whether government involvement would help or hurt the private efforts
of EnviroMission. Ultimately, the technology needs to be sustainable from a cost standpoint, and when that point is reached it is best if the government stays out of the way. But just from a political standpoint, I think the Obama administration would benefit by pursuing Solar Towers as a national goal to reduce our dependence on foreign
energy. If electricity in the sunnier parts of the country was cheap enough, then plug-in hybrid cars would become more popular there as well, which would reduce our
dependence on foreign oil. A very cool computer-generated video tour of an EnviroMission Solar Tower design can be viewed here
(be sure to turn the sound up!). As the video shows, a Solar Tower 1,000 meters tall would also provide quite a tourist attraction. (Roy W. Spencer) Here's an idea: Let's give $50,000 to anyone looking to upgrade to a brand-spanking-new, environmentally friendly home. All we ask in return is that you burn your previous
residence into a heap of smoldering cinder. Texas Wind Power: The Numbers Versus the Hype Texas has repeatedly been lauded as a leader in wind power development. Some of that attention is deserved. In 2008, the state installed nearly 2,700 megawatts of new wind
capacity. If Texas were an independent country, it would rank 6th in the world in terms of total wind power production capacity. August 5, 2009
As someone who was once rushed to a hospital in the middle of the night, because of taking a medication that millions of people take every day without the slightest
problem, I have a special horror of life and death medical decisions being made by bureaucrats in Washington, about patients they have never laid eyes on. With "controlling costs" a primary goal of Obamacare, and half of all medical costs coming in the last six months of life, "rationed care" takes on a
new meaning for us all. "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom." We have heard that many times. What is also the price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections. If everything
that is wrong with the world becomes a reason to turn more power over to some political savior, then freedom is going to erode away, while we are mindlessly repeating the
catchwords of the hour, whether "change," "universal health care" or "social justice." What are they going to do… make us? There is nothing to fear. It’s not like the government will install 24-hour surveillance
cameras into our homes to make sure we’re behaving correctly, that parents are feeding their children properly and children are eating their vegetables,
doing their homework and going to bed on time. It’s not like government guards will be sent to carry
out home checks. It’s not like the government will target tens of thousands of people for having bad behavior and place them in sin bins to improve their sinful
behavior. It’s not like we’ll have to sign good
behavior contracts which set out our duties for good behavior and if we refuse, we could lose our homes, have our children seized by the government, be fined and
imprisoned.
It’s not like teachers will report us to
the government if the school believes parents haven’t followed the contract. It’s not like our neighbors
will spy for the government and report bad behaviors and bad habits like drinking or failing to follow the government-prescribed proper eating plan. No,
nothing like that could ever happen in this day and age. That would be right out of Nineteen Eighty-Four and that was a novel, not a government blueprint. 1984 is an anguished lament and a warning that vibrates powerfully when
we may not be strong enough nor wise enough nor moral enough to cope with the kind of power we have learned to amass....— Walter Cronkite in the forward of the reprint
of 1984 by George Orwell
WHO keeps 2 billion estimate of likely H1N1 cases GENEVA - The World Health Organisation stuck on Tuesday to its statement that about two billion people could catch H1N1 influenza by the time the flu pandemic ends. Inadequate vitamin D levels common in US children NEW YORK - Most US kids aren't getting enough vitamin D, a report in Pediatrics shows, raising their risk of weak bones and, possibly, heart disease. Oh my... Sherri Shepherd Blames
Cookie Monster For U.S. Obesity Problems; Muppet Has No Comment It's a slow news week. Exhibit A? During yesterday's "Hot Topics" segment of The View, the panel got into a huge fight over none other than Cookie
Monster. Things got a bit testy as Whoopi Goldberg and Sherri Shepherd discussed an upcoming healthy eating PSA on Sesame Street, in which Cookie Monster, the show's lovable,
ravenous blue dessert fiend, is taught about the benefits of smart food choices. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and a polite, well-educated stalk of broccoli try to teach the Monster a lesson in dieting. But is this really necessary? Sherri Shepherd thinks so, apparently blaming Cookie Monster for the poor dietary habits of our nation's youth. Whoopi's answer? "Bull! It's a puppet!" Check out the all-important spat below ...
Call us crazy, but is Cookie Monster even fat? It looks to us like he balances out his love of tasty snacks with an exercise regimen. He can be a tad rude, yes, but who
among us hasn't devoured a dessert and left a shower of crumbs in its wake? It's all about moderation, kids. Why can't you have a cookie but not 73 in one sitting? Besides, all this will do is anger Cookie Monster. Before, he focused on the Cookie
aspect; do you really want to be around when the Monster comes out? And where does it stop? Will Oscar be put on Prozac? Will Elmo next be barred from speaking in the third person, to cure the country's self-centeredness? Damn, it's easy being green when someone else pays bill STUPIDITY can be expensive. In fact, we've just been told it's cost us another $400 million. Ambrose: Organic food worse than global warming? Go on, eat organic food if you like, spend more than you would on ordinary food and dream that it somehow makes you healthier than you would be and the world more
ecologically sound, but find time to pray that not too many others emulate you. Organic food and unhealthy snobbery - People don’t eat organic for its
nutrients, but because they want to distinguish themselves from the junk-scoffing hordes. Last week, the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) published two reviews comparing the nutritional content and health benefits of organic and conventionally grown foods. It
found that organic food was not significantly healthier than normal grub. For many people the results confirmed that organic food is a con; for pro-organic campaigners it was
simply evidence of a ‘cancerous conspiracy’ in government circles in favour of conventional farming and industrialised food. Brazil CTC, BASF To Develop Drought-Tolerant Cane SAO PAULO - Brazil's Sugarcane Technology Center and Germany's BASF said on Tuesday they will jointly develop a genetically modified sugarcane with yields up to 25 percent
higher than those currently available. No. The term "greenhouse effect" is unfortunate since it results in a false impression of the activity of so-called "greenhouse gases." An actual
greenhouse works as a physical barrier to convection (the transfer of heat by currents in a fluid) while the atmosphere really facilitates convection, so the impression of
actual greenhouse-like activity in the Earth's atmosphere is incorrect.
For a description of physical greenhouses see Sue Ann Bowling's ASF piece here.
This does seem to cause some confusion so, to highlight the distinction between actual greenhouses and Earth's inaccurately named greenhouse effect simply note that
greenhouse temperatures are maintained by controlling the mixing of air inside and outside the greenhouse (if it's too warm in the greenhouse you open a top and bottom window
and let convective action displace warmed air with cool) while Earth's atmosphere is surrounded by the near-vacuum of space.
So, real greenhouses work mainly by modulating convection while the 'greenhouse effect' works by modulating radiation -- not the same thing at all.
No, for the same reason that they don't behave like an actual greenhouse, they simply do not behave as a barrier to convective activity and so aren't "like a
blanket."
No, it's necessary to maintain a habitable planet.
Our moon, lacking greenhouse effect, makes a kind of comparison even though lack of atmosphere makes it uninhabitable regardless of temperature. The moon's mean surface
temperature by day is 107 °C (380 K, 225 °F) and by night drops to -153 °C (120 K, -243 °F). The Lunar surface temperature increases about
260 °C from just before dawn to Lunar noon. Lack of greenhouse effect makes the lunar surface far more hostile. It's estimated that the Earth's surface would be about -18 °C (0 °F, 255 K) with atmosphere and clouds but without the greenhouse effect and that the
(we'll call it "natural") greenhouse effect raises the Earth's temperature by ~33 °C (59 °F).
We should note that devoid of atmosphere Earth would actually be a less-cold Theoretically, if the planet's surface cooled by radiation alone, then the greenhouse-induced surface temperature would be much warmer, about 350 K (77 °C).
Atmospheric motion (convective towers carrying latent and sensible heat upwards and large scale circulation carrying it both upwards and polewards) circumvent much of the
greenhouse effect and significantly increase the "escape" of energy to space, leaving Earth's surface more than 60 °C cooler than a static atmosphere would
do.
Additionally, greenhouse gases are only able to absorb radiation in very specific electromagnetic frequencies and Earth does not radiate limitless amounts of energy in the
appropriate bandwidths. This means there is "competition" for available energy and significant greenhouse potential is unrealized ( for example carbon dioxide could
absorb more than 3 times the energy it currently does in the atmosphere were it not for competition from clouds and water vapor, clouds alone could absorb 50% of available
energy but manage to capture just 14% and so on...).
So, despite there being far more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere than required to achieve the current greenhouse effect, something which has been true since before humans
discovered fire, evapo-transpiration and thermals transport heat higher in the atmosphere where radiation to space is increased. This is why Earth's average surface
temperature remains about 15 °C (288 K) rather than about 77 °C (350 K).
Ah! Someone who remembers their science classes eh? Well, you got us. Reference works sometimes list the planet's mean surface temperature as 16 °C (289 K, 61 °F);
often 15 °C (288 K, 59 °F) is mentioned and yes, these are about the expected temperatures by calculation -- in the 1960s and 1970s numbers as high as 65 °F
(18 °C, 291 K) were popular but we haven't seen those for some time. Here we run into a little bit of a problem, however -- taking the Earth's temperature is no trivial task. In fact, even defining precisely what we mean by the absolute
surface air temperature is challenging. Current global temperature anomalies (the amount of warming or cooling reported) are estimated against an expected average of 14 °C
(287 K, 57 °F) -- the guess-timated mean temperature over the period 1961-1990. The fact that we use particular temperatures as reference points against which we relate contemporary changes does not make these temperatures "correct"
or optimal. They are no more optimal or locally relevant than say, Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), simply used for the same purpose, as a common reference point. Noon GMT has
little relevance to Los Angelinos, for example, who are unlikely to time their lunch to suit Greenwich Observatory and an imaginary globally averaged temperature has
relevance only if you happen to live at "globally averaged". Climate models, frequently viewed with unwarranted confidence as accurately representing Earth's climate, actually produce
a range of stable or "unforced" expected mean temperatures ranging from between 11 °C and 12 °C to almost 17 °C. We'll look at more greenhouse facts over coming days. Oh no! Water atlas the world's
crystal ball on rainfall Australian scientists who have predicted Earth's future rainfall have provided a "crystal ball" of sorts for drought-weary farmers. The danger is some people might actually believe and act on this garbage as though it actually held some predictive ability. Climate models have exactly
zero known predictive skill. Comment
By The UK Met Office On Their Seasonal Weather Predictions The UK Met Office has a post dated July 31 2009 on their website titled “Our
summer forecast“. It was motivated by unfavorable press coverage with respect to their poor forecast performance for this summer (e.g. see
on ICECAP). My weblog also commented on their poor 2008/2009 winter forecast skill in several posts (e.g. see). Unfortunately, rather than admitting to their poor seasonal forecasts, they make excuses. They write “The media spotlight has been on our summer forecast in the last week and here we clarify some of the misconceptions about the recent routine update to our forecast
for this summer.” They admit the shortcomings, “We acknowledge that the weather we have seen through July has been disappointing, especially after the fine weather through June and the heatwave at the end of June
and beginning of July” but then state “At no time did the Met Office state that Summer 2009 would be hot and dry throughout or forecast a ‘scorcher’”. They make the excuse that “Seasonal forecasting is a developing area of meteorology and, although these forecasts are nowhere near as accurate as our short-term forecasts, they do demonstrate
some skill in predicting what may happen for a season ahead — if they are looked at over a number of years.” Here is what the UK Met Office actually wrote on April 30 2009 with
respect to the summer 2009 forecast, “The coming summer is ‘odds on for a barbecue summer’, according to long-range forecasts. Summer temperatures across the UK are likely to be warmer than
average and rainfall near or below average for the three months of summer……Although the forecast is for a drier and warmer summer than average it does not rule out the
chances of seeing some heavy downpours at times. However, a repeat of the wet summers of 2007 and 2008 is unlikely.” Multi-decadal global climate predictions are necessarily more difficult than seasonal prediction because there are more climate forcings and feedbacks which
become important on longer time scales (e.g. see). The repeated failures of the UK Met Office seasonal
predictions should, therefore, be a wake up call to policymakers that we really do not understand the climate system as well as is claimed by the IPCC and the UK Met
Office. In the pursuit of “seamless climate prediction” promoted by Tim Palmer and colleagues (see),
they clearly have a lot of further work to do. (Roger Pielke Sr., Climate Science) Check the language in this rubbish: UN and Google
Create Climate Change Mapping Resources In January 2009, only 41% of US voters believed that global warming was caused by fossil fuel emissions and other man-made causes. According to a recent Rasmussen national
report, the majority of those surveyed over the phone believed that global warming was part of a natural planetary trend that will reverse itself over time. In a panic to
sway public perception and environmental decision making, the United Nations Climate Change Secretariat recently teamed up with Google to create a Greenhouse Gas Map
detailing man's environmental pollution. The map is a color-coded Google Maps mash up that pulls national greenhouse gas inventory and Kyoto Protocol data to display
toxic emissions in industrialized nations. The tool was created in anticipation of the UN's Climate Change Conference to be held at the end of this year. Far from pollution atmospheric carbon dioxide is an essential trace gas, without which there would be no green plants. Babies' breath contains a
dozen times stronger concentration of carbon dioxide than the atmosphere and probably at least 5 times what humans could push the atmosphere to even if we burnt every scrap
of fuel on the planet today, so babies' breath is a toxic emission? A simple look demonstrates the map shows no "lethal levels" of carbon dioxide whatsoever. Gosh
these guys are clueless. The only thing they got right is the UN being "In a panic to sway public perception and environmental decision making". But wait! They do believe baby emissions are dangerous: Baby
emissions fuel global warming Estimates of the carbon legacy of bringing a child into the world suggest that the green choice may be to stop at two kids (The Guardian) Growing body of evidence shows anthropogenic CO2 plays no measurable role' From CO2 Science Volume 12 Number 31: 5 August 2009 Guest Editorial by Tom Segalstad: In a paper recently published in the international peer-reviewed journal Energy & Fuels, Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh (2009), Professor of Energy Conversion at The
Ohio State University, addresses the residence time (RT) of anthropogenic CO2 in the air. He finds that the RT for bulk atmospheric CO2,
the molecule 12CO2, is ~5 years, in good agreement with other cited sources (Segalstad, 1998), while the RT for the
trace molecule 14CO2 is ~16 years. Both of these residence times are much shorter than what is claimed by the IPCC. The
rising concentration of atmospheric CO2 in the last century is not consistent with supply from anthropogenic sources. Such anthropogenic sources account
for less than 5% of the present atmosphere, compared to the major input/output from natural sources (~95%). Hence, anthropogenic CO2 is too small to be
a significant or relevant factor in the global warming process, particularly when comparing with the far more potent greenhouse gas water vapor. The rising atmospheric CO2
is the outcome of rising temperature rather than vice versa. Correspondingly, Dr. Essenhigh concludes that the politically driven target of capture and sequestration of
carbon from combustion sources would be a major and pointless waste of physical and financial resources. Medieval
Warm Period Record of the Week: Subject Index Summary: Plant Growth Data: Journal Reviews: Global Temperatures: Driven by ENSO?: To what extent has the global temperature record of the last half-century
been driven by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation phenomenon? ... and what does the answer suggest about the validity of IPCC temperature projections? Tropical Climate Variability: Does it behave in the way climate alarmists claim it does? The Impact of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on a Major Oceanic N2-Fixing
Cyanobacterium: It's a big deal; and it has beneficial consequences for earth's biology and climate. The Fate of Coastal Wetlands in a Warming and CO2-Accreting Atmosphere: Are they destined
to be submerged by rising sea levels, as glaciers and polar ice sheets melt at ever-increasing rates? (co2science.org) Bleached Coral Reefs Bounce Back Bleached
and dying coral reefs are often held up as proof that global warming is laying waste to Earth's ecosystems. Now come reports that a number of reefs around the world are being
brought back from the dead by dedicated oceanographers and conservationists. “The results are more than just promising; they are beautiful,” says Baruch Rinkevich, a
marine biologist at the National Institute of Oceanography in Haifa, Israel. But how can these reefs recover in the face on ongoing global warming? Either global warming has
reversed course or the bleaching of reefs wasn't due to global warming in the first place. In Jamaica, the Philippines, Japan, Singapore, Thailand, and Zanzibar people are busy rebuilding reefs that have seen better days. Mineo Okamoto, a
specialist in marine assessment techniques at Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, has been working to restore Sekisei Lagoon in Japan's Okinawa prefecture.
Back in 1993 this remote coral lagoon was in pristine condition but, according to a report in Science, “Okamoto sensed that change was coming from global warming,
with its threat of more-frequent bleaching events, and rising ocean acidification, which is caused by the uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and weakens corals.” In 1997 and 1998 an El Niño followed by a La Niña warmed the eastern Pacific to the point that the algae that live symbiotically with coral deserted
their hosts. Without the zooxanthellae algae to provide nutrients coral colonies starved and bleached out. The 1997-98 El Niño event, which lasted for over a year, also
produced record-high sea surface temperatures throughout the Indian and western Pacific oceans, which caused some of the most extensive coral bleaching ever seen. The
bleaching event killed an estimated 16% of corals worldwide (see “Warmer
Waters More Deadly to Coral Reefs Than Pollution”). Sekisei Lagoon's northern edge was hit hard. But the interior and southern rim suffered only minimal damage, which enabled coral to recolonize bleached
sections without human intervention. To help the damage portions of the lagoon recover, Okamoto has been placing grooved ceramic disks in locations where they can serve as
shelter for coral larvae when the reef corals spawn. Once the immature coral starts growing on the disks, they are used to recolonize damaged portions of the reef. Around the
world similar efforts at reef restoration are underway with promising results (see “Bringing
Coral Reefs Back From the Living Dead”). While we can all applaud the efforts of conservationists like Okamoto, something seems out of place here. According to the climate change crowd, global
warming was supposed to be an unremitting march to destruction—an ever warming climate brining with it scorched lands and ravaged oceans. How is it that more than a decade
after the big bleach-out in 1998 the reefs are recovering, many on their own (see “Heat-resistant
Corals Ignore Climate Change Threats”). The article in Science directly blames human activity, sediment and El Niño for the coral's plight, with references to
global warming tacked on at the beginning and the end. This leads to the conclusion that global warming is mentioned more out of reflex or political correctness than any true
causal relationship. Since the publication of a paper in the Journal of
Geophysical Research, which found that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures, more and more scientists are
questioning the IPCC global warming dogma. Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland, John McLean, of Applied Science Consultants in Victoria, and
Bob Carter, from the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, found that combining the ENSO with the effects of sporadic volcanic eruptions accounted for 80%
of recorded global temperature change in recent decades. CO2 and other anthropogenic global warming forcings become bit players on the global scale. “The surge in global temperatures since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean that made warming El Niño conditions more
likely than they were over the previous 30 years and cooling La Niña conditions less likely” says corresponding author de Freitas. Those who study coral directly attribute
the bleaching of reefs to ENSO moderated temperature changes, so why throw in a reference to global warming? Perhaps to garner more research funding or to curry favor with
the climate change establishment. Why do ecologists and conservationists always blame humanity for any change in the environment, particularly destructive change? It is because they have a
myopic view of nature, believing it to be static and unchanging. The only way to explain disruptive change in their world view is to blame humanity. But that is not how
nature works. To quote from Dr. Roy Spencer: They can not conceive of nature changing all by itself, even though evidence of that change is all around us. Like the more activist environmentalists,
their romantic view of a peaceful, serene natural world ignores the stark reality that most animals on the Earth are perpetually locked in a life-or-death struggle for
existence. The balances that form in nature are not harmonious, but unsteady and contentious stalemates. Nature visits all manor of destruction on its creations: floods, hurricanes, forest fires, tsunami, and mud slides caused by torrential rains. And these
are just the most common, add earthquakes, volcanoes, ice ages and the occasional rogue asteroid. Change happens in nature, often violently, for without desolation there can
be no renewal, no empty niches for new species to evolve into. Hardship is nature's perpetual gift to every living thing. Yes, temperature can and does cause coral bleaching, but that doesn't imply global warming. If science wants something that can plausibly be blamed on
increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, acidification seems a more likely contributing factor. No doubt other human activity also harms the notoriously sensitive coral reefs as
well. But think about this for a moment—coral became the primary builders of ocean reefs sometime after the Permian-Triassic Extinction event some 251 million years ago.
Since then they have weathered a number of other lesser extinctions and episodes of rapid global warming. Ice ages and warm periods have come and gone and the coral reefs
remain. In fact, Paul Blanchon et al.
have published important new research on “Rapid sea-level rise and
reef back-stepping at the close of the last interglacial highstand” the journal Nature. Investigating ancient coral beds in the northeast Yucatán peninsula,
Mexico, researchers claim to have documented a period of rapid sea-level rise—a catastrophic increase of more than 5 centimeters per year over a 50-year stretch. This
occurred around 121,000 years ago during the Eemian interglacial, the warm period before our own Holocene. The sudden increase in sea-level resulted in the death of the
existing reef because the sea rose too fast for the coral to build their foundation up toward the surface. Once the sea-level stabilized again, the same group of corals
established a new reef farther inland and 10 feet higher in elevation, a process known to geologists as backstepping. The Eemian was some 2°C warmer than current global temperatures and clearly coral managed to avoid extinction under those conditions. In the larger scheme
of things, coral is able to roll with the changes, adapting to new conditions, something mankind should take note of. This is not to say that any individual coral or reef is
immortal, clearly they are not. Though some researchers may refuse to believe that nature would harm the creatures they love, the periodic devastation of reef ecosystems is
just another part of nature's cruel cycles. As an outcome of global
warming, bleached coral is a red herring. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth) The WRIly-named World Resources Institute promotes deliberate wasting of the world's greatest resource: Summary
of S. 1502: The Carbon Storage Stewardship Trust Fund Act of 2009 S. 1502 would establish a program managed by the Department of Energy to create a trust fund to ensure prompt compensation for any damages from the geologic storage of
carbon dioxide. Importantly, the bill also identifies the transfer of responsibility for stewardship of a geologic site to the Federal or State government following the
receipt of a site closure certificate. Site closure certification and legislative clarity in the responsibility for post-closure stewardship activities were among the
recommendations proposed in Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage. (WRI) Funny how greens are anything but -- no carbon dioxide, no chlorophyll, no green plants. Increased carbon dioxide, more green plants and more food for
the rest of the food chain that begins with them -- basically more life on Earth. Why do greens hate life? Trees grow better when not starved of CO2? Amazing... Higher Carbon
Dioxide May Give Pine Trees A Competitive Edge Pine trees grown for 12 years in air one-and-a-half times richer in carbon dioxide than today's levels produced twice as many seeds of at least as good a quality as those
growing under normal conditions, a Duke University-led research team reported Aug. 3 at a national ecology conference. Don't let politicians and journalists hijack science In the past 2 days I've written two articles setting out my position as a 'lukewarmer,' one who believes that global warming does exist and will have an effect, but that
the effect won't be catastrophic. You can read them here and here. Oh dear... Global warming 'could put billions in
conflict' Billions of people will be in conflict as they migrate from parts of the world made uninhabitable by climate change unless global warming is tackled, a leading economist
said. National Security Not a Good Argument for Global Warming Legislation The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill has engendered tremendous controversy. Concerns abound about the legislation's adverse economic consequences as well as skepticism of
its affects on world climate trends. Faced with mounting opposition, the bill's supporters are increasingly making the case that creating a new law is a national security
imperative. They are wrong. Just kill it! For Senate, a Climate of Competing
Interests - Groups Press Agendas Before Environmental Legislation Begins to Take Shape Environmentalists want a tighter cap on emissions. Electric utilities want a looser one. The nuclear industry wants loan guarantees for new reactors. The AARP wants low
electric bills for seniors. NGOs in push to control summit NON-GOVERNMENT organisations are pushing to dominate the agenda of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders summit in Cairns, which starts today. Letter
Report on the Orbiting Carbon Observatory A National Research Council committee is conducting a study on how well greenhouse gas emissions can be measured for treaty monitoring and verification. The committee's
analysis suggests that NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO), which failed on launch in February 2009, would have provided proof of concept for spaceborne technologies to
monitor greenhouse gas emissions, as well as baseline emissions data. This letter focuses on the capabilities of an OCO and currently deployed satellites that measure
atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) and their potential role in monitoring and verifying a greenhouse gas treaty. (NAP) Right... U.S. Climate Bill Costs Low For Households: EIA WASHINGTON - The climate change bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would raise annual energy costs for U.S. households less than $150 in 10 years,
significantly lower than some industry estimates, according to a draft report from the Energy Information Administration. To significantly reduce carbon emissions energy prices must rise significantly, no? Insignificant rise in energy cost then insignificant reduction
in carbon emissions (not a difficult concept, surely). So what is their purpose in slightly increasing energy taxation? Not that I actually believe the cost increase
would be as low as 20% -- carbon would have to trade very cheaply for that to be true. Obama energy policies will hike prices by 20% Barack Obama recently claimed — incorrectly — that he had yet to sign a bill that raised taxes, but the worst burdens will avoid the clear label of taxation. A new
study by the Energy Information Administration, an arm of the Department of Energy, determines that the cap-and-trade bill passed by the House in June would hike energy costs
to consumers by 20% by 2025. It also finds that the bill would not actually reduce so-called greenhouse-gas emissions in the near term: (Ed Morrissey, Hot Air) Future-Present Imperfect Imperative The English language is just not equipped with the verb tenses required to report environmental news stories easily. Where’s the tense that would allow environment
reporters to write stories about predictions about the future as if they are occurring in the present, for example? As it is, such ’scientists predict that climate change
is happening now’ stories have to be carefully constructed so that the switches between future and present tenses don’t spoil the flow of the piece and get in the way of
the all important message about the ravages of climate change. We’ve written about them before. Another popped up on the BBC at the weekend. A funny thing happened on the way to saving the world’s poor from the ravages of global warming. The poor told the warming alarmists to get lost. 'GDP means Green Domestic
Product' The Congress Party's former brand manager's new ministerial office is decorated with lots of green plants and Thanjavur paintings. A bright blue kingfisher replica is
perched on his window sill. Coffee table books on glaciers, Brazil and forests add even more colour as Jairam Ramesh , mininster of environment and forests, switches on his
laptop, preparing to answer questions from Narayani Ganesh : South Africa: Rich nations must pay on climate change PRETORIA, South Africa — Developing countries won't consider the next round of climate change talks successful unless rich nations set aside money to help them address
global warming, South African officials said Tuesday. How Green Is Your Crystal Ball? - The National Academy of Sciences tries to predict America's
energy future. Again. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently dusted off its 30-year-old crystal ball and gazed into the future of American energy use. Its findings were released last
week in report titled America's Energy Future: Technology and Transformation. The experts on the panel are slightly stoic and guardedly optimistic. In 10 to 25
years—"with a sustained national commitment"—they say, the U.S. will be able to achieve "energy-efficiency improvements, new sources of energy, and
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions through the accelerated deployment of existing and emerging energy-supply and end-use technologies." Carbon captures UK imagination BRITAIN is a case study in the urgency and agony of climate change politics. Well duh! Missed Green Targets Could Cost Britain Dearly: Lawmakers LONDON - Britain's government is in danger of missing its own targets on cutting public sector greenhouse gas emissions and taxpayers could end up paying for the failure,
an influential group of lawmakers said on Wednesday. Green failures 'may hit taxpayer' The failure of government departments to cut their carbon emissions could hit taxpayers, MPs have warned. The chief economist of the International Energy Agency says the world is running out of oil. We've been told that for the last 150 years. The only thing we're running out
of is the will to drill. Funny "smart meter" piece: France
to punish energy savers Since President Sarkozy has put France in the forefront of the international campaign to reduce carbon emissions, this little news item is rather piquant. We won't bother with the "Told ya..." Wong
faces revolt over GreenPower plan IN A move that could cost the Federal Government’s GreenPower scheme public support, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has asked a state government
agency and energy suppliers to stop telling customers that using GreenPower will ‘‘make a real difference’’ to the environment. China, U.S. Offer No Quick Boost To Solar Slump LOS ANGELES/HONG KONG - Investors are banking on fresh government incentives in the United States and China to help pull the solar sector out of its slump, but it will be
next year before demand from those markets even begins to make a dent in the global glut of solar panels. (Reuters) `Cash for clunkers' effect on pollution? A blip WASHINGTON — "Cash for clunkers" could have the same effect on global warming pollution as shutting down the entire country — every automobile, every
factory, every power plant — for an hour per year. That could rise to three hours if the program is extended by Congress and remains as popular as it is now. They are not even talking about "pollution", just carbon dioxide. August 4, 2009
No American can ever say they didn’t know… An ongoing debate has been unfolding among the public and medical professionals about whether the healthcare reform bill really requires mandatory counseling for every
senior that will steer them to make advance healthcare decisions that could end their lives sooner, perhaps in order to lower healthcare costs. Billions to fight obesity at issue - Health
care measure's wellness provision stirs debate on savings As one house of Congress moves toward a September vote on offering insurance to millions of Americans, the other is wading into a controversy over whether such coverage
should include billions of dollars aimed at keeping people well. Obesity is a poor gauge for detecting high cholesterol levels in children With the epidemic of childhood obesity in the United States, there is concern that overweight and obese children need to be screened for chronic medical conditions,
including high cholesterol levels. Actually body fat is a marker of... body fat and cholesterol is a marker of, um... nothing that anyone knows of. Lack of Study Volunteers Hobbles
Cancer Fight Not long ago, at a meeting of an advisory group established by Congress to monitor the war on cancer, participants were asked how to speed progress. Malaria may have come from chimps - study WASHINGTON - Malaria may have jumped to humans from chimpanzees much as AIDS did, U.S. researchers reported on Monday in a study they hope could help in developing a
vaccine against the infection. Fighting a Bitter Prescription ISTANBUL — One of the most vibrant cities in the world, renowned as a crossroads between East and West, Istanbul has benefited hugely as the hub of a major trade route.
But the benefit of being at such a key location also brings the burden of care—that goods passing through should be safe and legal. It was therefore appropriate that in
Istanbul I met with pharmaceutical experts trying to stop the lethal trade in counterfeit drugs. U.S., Canadian forests fall to beetle outbreak MEDICINE BOW NATIONAL FOREST, Wyoming - From the vantage point of an 80-foot (25 meter) tower rising above the trees, the Wyoming vista seems idyllic: snow-capped peaks in
the distance give way to shimmering green spruce. I have long been critical of the progressive-era ideal of the scientific (and therefore, supposedly non-biased, non-political) management of the economy in general, and of
natural resources in particular. The view that certain things — including wildlife and wildlands — were too important to the well-being of the nation to be left to the
vagaries and seeming randomness of a market that "no one" controlled and "no one" (meaning one person or group of persons) really understood. Progressives
continue to believe such things should be put under the control and management of experts, bureaucrats with no political axe to grind who are accountable to no external
special interests — who are unswayed by the siren song of the voting booth or the lure of filthy lucre. US scientists study huge plastic patch in Pacific LOS ANGELES - Marine scientists from California are venturing this week to the middle of the North Pacific for a study of plastic debris accumulating across hundreds of
miles (km) of open sea dubbed the "Great Pacific Garbage Patch." Scientists discover deepest coral
reefs off Britain The deepest coral reefs off the coast of Britain have been explored for the first time revealing ancient coral, colourful fish, deepwater sharks and even species that were
previously unknown to science. (Daily Telegraph) The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the
Agri-intellectuals I’m dozing, as I often do on airplanes, but the guy behind me has been broadcasting nonstop for nearly three hours. I finally admit defeat and start some serious
eavesdropping. He’s talking about food, damning farming, particularly livestock farming, compensating for his lack of knowledge with volume. Michelle Obama's toxic veggie
nightmare: White House organic garden polluted with sludge When First Lady Michelle Obama planted an organic vegetable garden on the White House lawn in March 2009, she hoped to both set an example of healthy eating and to grow
tasty edibles for her daughters and husband. But Michelle's organic dream has been dashed by a nasty toxic legacy lurking in the soils of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It turns
out that a previous Presidential gardening team had used sewage sludge for fertilizer. Raise a glass to the science of beer - As the Great
British Beer Festival opens in London, a scientific look at the drink that helped shape the nation He is the stock in trade of cartoonists and comics – that lonely figure, tie askew, sitting at the bar, contemplating fate while gazing into a pint of beer. Should you
find yourself in this situation, short of company, you could do a lot worse than stare into your own glass, for it is there that you will find a microcosm of the world around
you. (Daily Telegraph) Saturation chamber experiments with carbon dioxide tell us that, all other things being equal, doubling pre-Industrial Revolution CO2 levels should yield
about 1.2 °C warming -- not radical physics and not usually an argument starter. Worries about catastrophic global warming assume a positive feedback from water vapor. In skeptic circles these positive feedback numbers are known as "marvelous
magical multipliers". Bear in mind positive feedback from water vapor is not entirely implausible since a warmer atmosphere can certainly support more water
vapor and generally warmer temperatures could increase both evaporation and plant transpiration leading to more available water vapor. The situation is complicated by how any additional water vapor might form clouds and the efficiency with which the atmosphere limits water vapor levels through
precipitation -- what goes up eventually comes down as rain, snow, etc.. Moreover, the type of clouds formed, their latitude and their altitude determine whether these
clouds primarily affect incoming solar shortwave radiation or outgoing earth longwave radiation or some combination thereof. We've shown
you before how a simple 1% change in albedo (Earth's reflectivity) can yield over 1 °C change in expected mean temperature. The IPCC gives a range of warming estimates. You will regularly see the "median estimate" of 3 °C for a doubling of atmospheric carbon
dioxide (2xCO2). So how do they get that 3 °C from an assayed doubling value of 1.2 °C? Easy, they do it with the water vapor feedback we
mentioned earlier and it works like this: Feedback (F) = 1/(1-f) where f is the fraction of the initial input fed back as an additional input in the first round of a recursive process. Huh? OK, positive feedback means that if we put 1 unit of (in this case) heat into something (the atmosphere) and we have 60% feedback (0.6 = 60%) then we get 1/(1-0.6) = 2.5
units' effect. Using the agreed 1.2 °C for 2xCO2 and the IPCC's favorite guess of 60% positive water vapor feedback yields 1.2/(1-0.6) = 3 °C for
2xCO2. Don't worry, we'll put a form in for you to play with various feedback levels, both positive and negative, so you can see their effect. With climate models returning a range from 1.5 °C to 6 °C warming for the varied scenarios, the choice of feedback factor is
obviously important and, as you get adventurous with the form below, you'll see just how important. That range is equivalent to 2xCO2 with anything
from 20% to 80% positive feedback, with the IPCC's favorite figure equal to 60%. There are no real-world observations to support this or any other positive
numbers. Go ahead, try a few numbers, we'll continue below the form when you are ready. Response from 2xCO2 with varied feedback To use the form below simply alter the estimated feedback factor and click "Recalculate". Valid range is from -99.99% to 99.99%. The results may surprise you. What is really happening? Is Earth responding to enhanced greenhouse with positive feedback, no feedback or negative feedback? How do we tell whether any of these
guesses are more reasonable than others? Actually there are a few ways. Firstly, by checking the IPCC's own forcing estimates we see that from all guesses of anthropogenic influences (land clearance, soot, various greenhouse gases...),
coupled with a small increase in solar output, variously attributed but thought to account for 20%-40% of 20th Century warming, we should already have
experienced warming at least the equivalent of doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide. The IPCC suggests net warming to 2005 of about 0.75 °C but we have not
seen the 1.2 °C warming equivalent of 2xCO2 in the absence of any feedbacks at all. This suggests that if there are any feedbacks then they are negative
in sign since the warming is smaller than expected without feedback. Secondly, Earth warms almost 4 °C from January to July each year (due to continental configuration and axial tilt) so we should see water vapor feedback
and enhanced greenhouse sufficient to delay the equivalent cooling from July to January with net year on year warming. Eventually this should eliminate freezing winters
altogether, even if over a few thousand years (obviously this has not occurred in the current interglacial). Nor does a "super El Niño event" superimposed over
this annual effect cause any such sustained feedback (we've looked at this before). Greenhouse hysterics and wannabe world governors claim water vapor feedback is strongly positive while empirical measures of the world around us demonstrate any
feedback effect is actually negative. With currently available measures the 60% proportion appears to be correct but the IPCC has the sign of the feedback
wrong. Go ahead, try the negative figure (-60.0) in the form above. Surprise! Suddenly the books balance and we have a representation of how the world is actually
working, complete with the numbers we believe we have actually measured. Let's try another form, this time with an added variable to adjust atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Valid range is from 280 to 2800 ppmv (from pre-Industrial to 10 times
that level of atmospheric CO2 and more than 5 times current levels). Professor Roger Pielke Sr. has previously examined What
Fraction of Global Warming is Due to the Radiative Forcing of Increased Atmospheric Concentrations of CO2? and we certainly have no reason to argue with his breakdown
of IPCC's numbers. We believe a negative feedback estimate of 60% (-60%) or more yields a fair facsimile of warming attributable to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide
and is in general agreement with Pielke's calculations. We see no reason to assume it will not continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Try this form and see how little effect eliminating carbon dioxide emissions can really have. Possible response from varied CO2 levels only. We can succumb to superstition, race to abandon modernity, ration energy and limit human endeavor or we can stop shouting to try to frighten away the thunder storm,
continue human development and lift billions more out of poverty and privation. Not so long ago we shot for the moon and knew we could do anything. Now some would have us shoot ourselves in the energy supply and do nothing. Are we really prepared to flush the global economy and throw the world's poorest under a bus on the strength of marvelous magical multipliers whose existence remain
hypothetical and whose effect cannot even be observed in the real world? Or should we rather concentrate on providing affordable electricity to the developing world? That's the choice the Western world is struggling with now. How would you like your Senators to vote? STILL No Tropical Storms? Must Be Global Warming So, where are all of the news stories about the fact we’ve had no tropical storms yet this year? As can be seen in the following graphic, as of this date in 2005 we
already had 8 named storms in the Atlantic basin. And tomorrow, August 4, that number will increase to 9. In 2005 we were even told to expect more active hurricane seasons
from now on because of global warming. Of course, even though it is interesting that the 2009 tropical season is off to such a slow start, it may well have no significance in terms of long-term trends. But the
lack of news coverage on the subject does show the importance of unbiased reporting when it comes to global warming. Let me explain. Let’s say we really were in a slow, long-term cooling trend. What if the media decided they would only do news stories when there are record high temperatures or heat
waves, ignoring record cold, and would then attribute those events to human-caused global warming? This would end up making the public fearful of global warming, even if the
real threat was from global cooling. The public expects – or used to expect – the media to report on all sides of important issues, so that we can be better informed on the state of the world. There have
always been high temperature records set, and there have always been heat waves. In some sense, unusual weather is normal. It might not happen every day, but you can be
assured, it will happen. But reporting on heat-related events while ignoring cold temperature records or events that do not support the claims of global warming theorists,
will lead to a bias in the way the public views climate change. Of course, someone might come along and claim that global warming has disrupted tropical storm activity this year, and so an unusually quiet season will also be claimed as
evidence of global warming. This has already happened to some extent with cold weather and more snow being blamed on global warming. But when the natural climate cycle deniers reach that level of desperation, they only appear that much more ridiculous to those of us who have not yet lost our ability to
reason. (Roy W. Spencer) Too funny: Higher annual rainfall tipped AUSTRALIA'S annual rainfall will increase by an average 8.4mm by 2099, according to results from computer models that have been brought under the one roof for the first
time. About a quarter of an inch? They can't tell within a few inches from year to year and they claim to figure Australia's net average rainfall to within
one-eight of an inch in 90 years... Nicola
Scafetta Comments on “Solar Trends And Global Warming” by Benestad and Schmidt On July 22 2009 I posted on the new paper on solar forcing by Lean and Rind 2009 (see).
In that post, I also referred to the Benestad and Schmidt 2009 paper on solar forcing which has a conclusion at variance to that in the Lean and Rind paper. After the publication of my post, Nicole Scafetta asked if he could present a comment (as a guest weblog) on the Benestad and Schmidt paper on my website, since
it will take several months for his comment to make it through the review process. In the interests of presenting the perspectives on the issue of solar climate
forcing, Nicola’s post appears below. I also invite Benestad and Schmidt to write responses to the Scaftta contribution which I would be glad to post on
my website. GUEST WEBLOG BY NICOLA SCAFETTA Benestad and Schmidt have recently published a paper in JGR. (Benestad, R. E., and G. A. Schmidt (2009), Solar
trends and global warming, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D14101, doi:10.1029/2008JD011639). This paper criticizes the mathematical algorithms of several papers that claim that the temperature data show a significant solar signature. They conclude that such
algorithms are “nonrobust” and conclude that “the most likely contribution from solar forcing a global warming is 7 ± 1% for the 20th century and is negligible for
warming since 1980.” By using the word “robust” and its derivates for 18 times, Benestad and Schmidt claim to disprove two categories of papers: those that use the multilinear regression
analysis [Lean and Rind, 2008; Camp and Tung, 2007; Ingram, 2006] and those that present an alternative approach [Scafetta and West, 2005, 2006a, 2006b, 2007, 2008]. (See the
references in their paper.) Herein, I will not discuss the limitation of the multilinear regression analysis nor the limits of Benestad and Schmidt’s critique to those papers. I will briefly focus
on Benestad and Schmidt’s criticism to the papers that I coauthored with Dr. West. I found Benestad and Schmidt’s claims to be extremely misleading and full of gratuitous
criticism due to poor reading and understanding of the data analysis that was accomplished in our works. Let us see some of these misleading statements and errors starting with the less serious one and ending with the most serious one: 1. Since the abstract Benestad and Schmidt claim that they are rebutting several our papers [Scafetta and West, 2005, 2006a, 2006b, 2007, 2008]. Already the abstract
is misleading. Indeed, their criticism focuses only on Scafetta and West [2005, 2006a]. The other papers used different data and mathematical methodologies. 2. Benestad and Schmidt claim that we have not disclosed nor detailed the mathematical methodology and some parameters that we use. For example: a) In paragraph 39 Benestad and Schmidt criticize and dismiss my paper with Willson [2009] by claiming that we “did not provide any
detailed description of the method used to derive their results, and while they derived a positive minima trend for their composite, it is not clear how a positive minima
trend could arise from a combination of the reconstruction of Krivova et al. [2007] and PMOD, when none of these by themselves contained such a trend).” However, the
arguments are quite clear in that paper and in the additional figures that we published as supporting material. Moreover, it is not clear to me how Benestad and Schmidt
could conclude that our work is wrong if Benestad and Schmidt acknowledge that they have not understood it. Perhaps, they just needed to study it better. b) In paragraph 41 Benestad and Schmidt claim that: “It is not clear how the lagged values were estimated by Scafetta and West [2006a]“.
However, in paragraph 9 of SW06a it is written “we adopt the same time-lags as predicted by Wigley’s [1988, Table 1] model.” So, again, Benestad and Schmidt just needed
to study better the paper that they wanted to criticize. c) In paragraph 48 Benestad and Schmidt claim that: “over the much shorter 1980-2002 period and used a global surface temperature from the
Climate Research Unit, 2005 (they did not provide any reference to the data nor did they specify whether they used the combined land-sea data (HadCRUT) or land-only
temperatures (CRUTEM).” However, it is evident from our work SW05 that we were referring to the combined land-sea data which is properly referred to as “global
surface temperature” without any additional specification (Land or Ocean, North or South). We also indicate the webpage where the data could be downloaded. d) In paragraph 57 Benestad and Schmidt claim that: “The analysis using Lean [2000] rather than Scafetta and West’s own solar proxy as
input is shown as thick black lines.” However, in our paper SW06a it is crystal clear that we too use Lean’s TSI proxy reconstruction. In particular we were using
Lean 1995 which is not very different from Lean 2000. Benestad and Schmidt apparently do not know that since 1978 Lean 1995 as well as Lean 2000 do not differ significantly
from PMOD because PMOD was build (by altering the published TSI satellite data) by using Lean 1995 and Lean 2000 as guides. Moreover, we also merge the Lean data
with ACRIM since 1978 to obtain an alternative scenario, as it is evident in all our papers. The discontinuity problem addressed by Benestad and Schmidt in merging two
independent sequences (Lean’s proxy model and the ACRIM) is not an issue because it is not possible to avoid it given the fact that there are no TSI satellite data before
1978. 3. In Paragraphs 48-50 Benestad and Schmidt try to explain one of our presumed major mathematical mistakes. Benestad and Schmidt’s states: “A change of
2*0.92 W/m2 between solar minimum and maximum implies a change in S of 1.84 W/m2 which amounts to 0.13% of S, and is greater than the 0.08% difference
between the peak and minimum of solar cycle 21 reported by Willson [1997] and the differences between TSI levels of the solar maxima and minima seen in this study (~1.2 W/m2;
Figure 6).” Benestad and Schmidt’s are referring to our estimate of the amplitude of the solar cycle referring to the 11-year modulation that we called A7,sun
= 0.92 W/m2 in SW05. Benestad and Schmidt are claiming that our estimate is nor reasonable because in their opinion according to our calculations the change of TSI
between solar maximum and solar minimum had to be twice our value A7,sun , so they write 2*0.92=1.84 W/m2, and this would be far too large.
However, as it is evident from our paper and in figure 4a in SW05 the value A7,sun refers to the peak-to-trough amplitude of the cycle, so it should not be
multiplied by 2, as Benestad and Schmidt misunderstood. This is crystal clear in the factor ½ before the equation f(t)= ½ A sin(2pt) that we are referring to and that
Benestad and Schmidt also report in their paragraph 48. It is hard to believe that two prominent scientists such as Benestad and Schmidt do not understand the meaning of a
factor ½! So, again, Benestad and Schmidt just needed to think more before writing a study that criticizes ours. 4) Finally, Benestad and Schmidt’s paper is full of misleading claims that they are reproducing our analysis. Indeed, Benestad and Schmidt’s paper is
self-contradictory on this crucial issue. In paragraph 85 Benestad and Schmidt claim that they “have repeated the
analyses of Scafetta and West, together with a series of sensitivity tests to some of their arbitrary choices.” However, in their paragraph 76 Benestad and
Schmidt acknowledge: “In our emulation, we were not able to get exactly the same ratio of amplitudes, due to lack of
robustness of the SW06a method and insufficient methods description.” It is quite singular that Benestad and Schmidt claim to have repeated our calculation, at the
same time they acknowledge that, indeed, they did not succeed in repeating our calculation and, ironically, they blame us for their failure. It is not easy to find in the
scientific literature such kind of tortuous reasoning! In fact, the reason why Benestad and Schmidt did not succeed in repeating our calculation is because they have misapplied the wavelet decomposition algorithm known as the
maximum overlap discrete wavelet transforms (MODWT). This is crystal clear in their figures 4 where it is evident that they applied the MODWT decomposition in a cyclical
periodic mode. In other words they are implicitly imposing that the temperature in 2001 is equal to the temperature in 1900, the temperature in 2002 is equal to the
temperature in 1901 and so on. This is evident in their figure 4 where the decomposed blue and pink component curves in 2000 just continue in 1900 in an uninterrupted
cyclical periodic mode as shown in the figure below which is obtained by plotting their figure 4 side by side with itself: Any person expert in time series processing can teach Benestad and Schmidt that it is not appropriate to impose a cyclical periodic mode to a non stationary time series
such as the temperature or TSI records that present clear upward trends from 1900 to 2000. By applying a cyclical periodic mode Benestad and Schmidt are artificially
introducing two large and opposite discontinuities in the records in 1900 and 2000, as the above figure shows in 2000. These large and artificial discontinuities at the two
extremes of the time sequence disrupt completely the decomposition and force the algorithm to produce very large cycles in proximity of the two borders, as it is clear in
their figure 4. This severe error is responsible for the fact that Benestad and Schmidt find unrealistic values for Z22y and Z11y that significantly
differ from ours by a factor of three. In their paragraph 50 they found Z22y = 0.58 K/Wm-2, which is not realistic as they also realize later, while we
found Z22y = 0.17 K/Wm-2, which is more realistic. This same error in data processing also causes the reconstructed solar signature in their figures 5 and 7 to present a descending trend minimum in 2000 while the Sun was
approaching one of its largest maxima. Compare their figures 4a (reported above), 5 and 7 with their figure 6 and compare them also with our figure 3 in SW06a and in SW08!
See figure below where I compare Benestad and Schmidt’s figures 6 and 7 and show that the results depicted in their Figure 7 are non-physical. Because of the severe and naïve error in applying the wavelet decomposition, Benestad and Schmidt’s calculations are “robustly” flawed. I cannot but encourage
Benestad and Schmidt to carefully study some book about wavelet decomposition such as the excellent work by Percival and Walden [2000] before attempting to use a complex and
powerful algorithm such as the Maximum Overlap Discrete Wavelet Transform (MODWT) by just loading a pre-compiled computer R package. There are several other gratuitous claims and errors in Benestad and Schmidt’s paper. However, the above is sufficient for this fast reply. I just wonder why the
referees of that paper did not check Benestad and Schmidt’s numerous misleading statements and errors. It would be sad if the reason is because somebody is mistaking a
scientific theory such as the “anthropogenic global warming theory” for an ideology that should be defended at all costs. Nicola Scafetta, Physics Department, Duke University (Climate Science) Are
sunspots changing and will that take us to an Ice Age? The answer to the title question is really, nobody knows. But there are some indications that the sunspot activity is not only reduced but has also changed in ways that
may indicate a further reduction of the sunspots including having none. First a little note on the status of the major scientific societies in the US. What do these two
disparate facts have to do with each other? Let's see. (Kirtland Griffin, Examiner) No? Duh! Elephant seals adapted fast to climate
change - Species moved when ice sheets formed, retreated thousands of years ago Elephant seals traveled surprisingly far when ice retreated from part of the Antarctic mainland about 7,500 years ago, according to a new study. Critters adapt? Maybe that's how come we still have critters after all the changes Earth has been through in the past... First Comes Global Warming, Then An Evolutionary Explosion In a matter of years or decades, researchers believe, animals and plants already are adapting to life in a warmer world. Some species will be unable to change quickly
enough and will go extinct, but others will evolve, as natural selection enables them to carry on in an altered environment. (Carl Zimmer, Yale Environment 360) Gorebull warming shrinks trees? Big Trees Decline in Yosemite Trees are getting smaller in Yosemite National Park, and climate change may be the cause, according to the United States Geological Survey. A virtual world land of fruits and nuts... the mind boggles: Report:
California must adapt to changing climate SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Even if the world is successful in cutting carbon emissions in the future, California needs to start preparing for rising sea levels, hotter weather
and other effects of climate change, a new state report recommends. Is a Warmer World a Sicker World? As scientists piece together how climate impacts disease, strange patterns are emerging: mosquito outbreaks can follow drought, shorter migrations can make butterflies
sick, and more birds (not fewer) can ward off West Nile virus. (Conservation Magazine) Virtual world pests: Climate change to encourage coffee pest: study NAIROBI - Rising temperatures in the tropics due to climate change are likely to encourage the proliferation of the coffee berry borer, one of the crop's most devastating
pests, a study released on Monday showed. Neandertals
At Risk Of Causing AGW Extinction Another gem from the August issue of Scientific American, a few pages after David Appell’s climate double-entendre titled “Stumbling
Over Data“: it’s time now for Kate Wong’s “The
Mysterious Downfall of the Neandertals“, given the pride of cover to discuss the most up-to-date theories about the disappearance of those “bygone humans”
around 28,000 years ago. Here’s a detail of one of the theories: [...] the isotope data reveal that far from progressing steadily from mild to frigid, [between roughly 65,000 and 25,000 years] the climate became increasingly
unstable heading into the last glacial maximum, swinging severely and abruptly. With that flux came profound ecological change: forests gave way to treeless grassland;
reindeer replaced certain kinds of rhinoceroses. So rapid were these oscillations that over the course of an individual’s lifetime, all the plants and animals that a
person had grown up with could vanish and be replaced with unfamiliar flora and fauna. And then, just as quickly, the environment could change back again. [...] What else goes extinct then with our barrel-chested, stocky-limbed cousins in the space of a few sentences? Let’s see: unprecedented climate change; global warming
endangering polar bears; life on Earth threatened by wild climate swings; collapsing global ecosystems; disappearing coral reefs; upcoming biodiversity crisis; etc etc etc. Not only that…if our direct ancestors’ “somewhat wider range of cultural adaptations provided a slightly superior buffer against hard times“, why would
those characteristics fail us now, their direct descendants more than 280 centuries later? Unless of course we force ourselves to admit that our forefathers were wiser than us, stuck as we are into asking our so-called leaders to stop
the solar cycle, or elicit volcanic eruptions… (OmniClimate) Wonder what'll happen when Andy finally realizes what a crock this all is: Nobel
Halo Fades Fast for Panel on Climate Change Two years ago, an international scientific panel seized worldwide attention by reporting that human activity was warming the planet in ways that could greatly disrupt
human affairs and nature. 'Climate will change our ways of doing science' - Claims 'long term thinking can be dangerous' [Climate Depot Editorial Note: Dr. Calvin should consider heeding the wisdom of Dr. Richard
Lindzen. See: MIT
Climate Scientist Lindzen: 'Ordinary people see through man-made climate fears -- but educated people are very vulnerable' - July 6, 2009 ] Who’s
a climate scientist? Depends on which side you’re on. I was interested to read an item in today’s Climate Wire about a new report by “a prominent Australian
scientist.” Andrew Macintosh of the Australian National University has “spent months modeling 45 different climate change scenarios” and concluded
that the target recently agreed by leaders of G-8 nations to limit the global mean temperature increase to two degrees Centigrade could not be met with policies currently in
place or being considered. What caught my attention in this story was the description of Macintosh as a prominent climate scientist. That’s how computer modelers are routinely described by
the global warming alarmists, and the mainstream communications media routinely accept this description. Climate modelers may have all sorts of qualifications and be
absolutely brilliant at using computer models, but those qualifications do not necessarily include knowing much about climatology or meteorology or related fields, such as
physics, oceanography, geology, chemistry, biology, etc. Since I’d never heard of the prominent Professor Macintosh, I decided to look him up on the internet. I was surprised to find that he’s not a computer modeler at
all! He’s a lawyer! And his position at ANU is Associate Director of the Centre for Climate
Law and Policy. He does have a diploma in environmental studies on top of his 1998 bachelor of commerce and law degree, but he won a prize for environmental law, so
that’s probably what he concentrated on while earning his diploma in 2001. (Myron Ebell, GlobalWarming) Claims skeptics 'spread propaganda disguised as science' - Touts his Masters Degree [Climate Depot Editor's Note: Satterfield and
other promoters of man-made climate fears are reaching desperation
time as new peer-reviewed
studies, the growing number
of scientists, real
world data and public opinion
continue to turn against them. Satterfield is such a “believer” in man-made climate fears that he approvingly
cites the works of Joe (global warming may have casued the Minnesota bridge
collapse) Romm of Climate Progress and NASA's James Hansen. It appears Satterfield has joined with other recent frustrated “believers” in man-made climate fears. See:
'Find ways to exaggerate': Nobel Prize-winning economist wishes for 'tornadoes'
and 'a lot of horrid things' to convince Americans of global warming threat! - July 14, 2009 ] No, no, no! Gorebull warming is not to be "addressed" but fought with reality: Broad
action on climate needed to achieve cuts WASHINGTON — If global warming is to be addressed without breaking people's pocketbooks, no single answer will do the job, a research group tied to the electric utility
industry says in a new study that concludes the problem must be attacked from many directions. Recently I happened to speak with a utility CEO who sighed to me that, well, even if cap-and-trade dies in the Senate, my trade association (the Edison Electric Institute)
tells me that EPA coming after us with new rules is a real threat at the end of the day — we're best off just cutting some deal with Congress. Oh... Interview: America turns
red, white and green The US's stance on climate change has shifted beyond recognition. President Barack Obama's science adviser John Holdren tells Graham Lawton how the US will put its house
in order, secure a deal at the make-or-break summit in Copenhagen, and lead the world's fight against dangerous climate change (New Scientist) Climate Bill
Demands Pile Up for Boxer, Kerry Headed Into Summer Break The Senate breaks at the end of this week for a monthlong summer recess, but not before the Environment and Public Works Committee takes one more swing at the legislative
debate over climate change that promises to sizzle through the fall. Commentary | Cap and trade would raise the cost of living for everyone Based upon questionable statistics instead of causal science, the cap-and-trade bill passed by the U.S. House has the potential to make America a second-world country. Climate change: new study for ag With the debate over climate change seeming to heat up daily, the 25x’25 Alliance and a team of University of Tennessee economists have announced they will conduct an
in-depth analysis of the impacts of global warming on U.S. agriculture and forestry. Nope. The only sound response is for everyone to say: "No". Timmons: An ‘Anti-Energy’ Bill Is the Wrong Approach
Today When the Senate takes up legislation that attempts to address climate change next month, everyone should be clear the debate is really about an energy bill — or more
accurately, an “anti-energy” bill. So Now Solomon Split the Baby? Here we go with EEI again. I see how Sen. Tom Carper (D., Dela.) — a member of the key Environment and Public Works and Finance committees — defended the House cap-and
trade rationing scheme's allocations and questioned any Senate effort to tinker with the . . . ahem, EEI-approved language. SCENARIOS: Fate of climate change bill in Congress WASHINGTON - The fate of U.S. climate control legislation is in the hands of the Senate, where it faces an uphill climb. Democratic leaders hope to put it to a vote in
October. Barnaby Joyce targets Labor on 'ridiculous' ETS BUSINESS groups and the Coalition have leapt on evidence of internal Labor unease over the potential of Kevin Rudd's emissions trading scheme to wipe out jobs in resources
and energy. Nick Minchin calling for delay in carbon bill LIBERAL Senate leader Nick Minchin is pushing for the Rudd Government to delay finalising the carbon emissions trading scheme until next February -- long after the
December climate change summit in Copenhagen. ‘Cash for Clunkers’: One Dealer’s Tale Update | 3:53 p.m. As Matthew L. Wald reports today, the White House is vowing that the federal “Cash for
Clunkers” program, which offers car owners a credit worth up to $4,500 to trade in their old gas guzzler and get a new, more fuel efficient vehicle, will go on despite
quickly running through its $1 billion in funds. (Update: The House has approved another $2 billion to keep the program going, with the Senate expected to take up the
matter next week.) For dealers, the confusion continues. Adam Lee, a co-owner of Lee Auto Malls, one of the largest car dealerships in Maine,
told Green Inc. in an e-mail message this morning that “we are having all sorts of problems.” In Mr. Lee’s description: 1. We have not had one application accepted without it being rejected numerous times. 2. We have 9 people at 5 dealerships working full time on this, it should take one person. 3. We have over 100 waiting to be paid and have not been paid on one yet. 4. They changed the rules part way through. 5. It is a mess. In a follow-up telephone interview, Mr. Lee also said that the environmental benefits — a driving force behind the creation of the program — were for many customers
merely a side benefit. Most people, he said, just wanted to get a good deal when they exchanged an old car for a new one. “I don’t think that I could say that demand has exploded for the Prius because of this,” Mr. Lee said. He also argued that if the program could have been structured to do much more for the environment, by allowing people whose cars get 22 miles per gallon or less (rather
than the current limit of 18) to trade them in. Also, he said, the minimum mileage for new vehicles could have been higher — say, 28 miles per gallon (above the current
22). “Right now you can get $3,500 for increasing your fuel economy from 18 to 22,” Mr. Lee said. “Well, that stinks.” (Green Inc.) Video: The (Vaguely
Disturbing) Death of a Clunker The Cash for Clunkers program is stupid for a lot of reasons. Not only is it just another tax-payer bailout of the But one of the most asinine parts of the plan is that they take old cars, many of which were being used as functional day-to-day transportation the day before, and destroy
them. A perfectly good and useful machine destroyed for political reasons. In a normal world, you take your trade-in to the dealer, he buys it from you, and then he resells it at the auto auction. It is the most efficient allocation of resources
for the product. In this case, the government buys your trade-in and, instead of using it for its full value, it destroys the vehicle. Don't get me wrong, I won't stay awake at night worrying about inanimate objects, but there seems to be something unsettling about this state sanctioned
"autocide." From The Truth
About Cars. Does this Volvo look like it should be destroyed? (Bill Dupray, Examiner) Electric Car Maker Expects Market to Heat Up Nissan on Saturday night introduced the Leaf, a battery-powered four-door hatchback with a range of 100 miles and a top speed of 87 miles an hour. The Japanese automaker
described the Leaf, which is scheduled to be available in the United States market in the latter half of 2010, as the first real-world electric car. Well, what else can you do with 'em? Chucking
"Green" Smart Cars into Canals U.S. refiners see shakeout under climate change bill WASHINGTON - Ailing U.S. oil refiners could face a crippling period of contraction under a House-approved climate change bill, making the country more dependent on
imported refined products. A sustainable future for coal? - A new scheme pioneered
beneath the Firth of Forth is "flash-frying" coal underground to provide a green source of energy. Coal has become the ugly sister of power sources, condemned as old-fashioned, ultra-polluting and excessively costly to mine, given that we have exhausted the most easily
accessible supplies. US needs 45 more nuclear reactors by 2030-study LOS ANGELES, Aug 3 - In order to meet lofty climate goals, the U.S. power industry should by 2030 build 45 more nuclear power reactors, cleaner coal power plants, and cut
electricity consumption 8 percent, a power industry study issued on Monday showed. Death Knell For Nuclear Power? A Senate vote to kill funding for the spent fuel repository in Nevada shows the Democratic Party and this administration aren't serious about energy independence, economic
growth or environmental protection. Many environmental groups are fundamentally opposed to the notion that nuclear power is a renewable form of energy — on the grounds that it produces harmful waste
byproducts and relies on extractive industries to procure fuel like uranium. Sage grouse unlikely focus of Wyoming wind wars CARBON - They used to mine coal in the abandoned town of Carbon. Now this patch of southern Wyoming is a battleground in the debate over what many hope will be the clean
energy source of the future: wind power. What
Does Renewable Energy Look Like? If you’ve looked for a comparison in land areas needed for different power sources, I would be willing to bet that you found a lot of numbers and zero pictures. In
order for you to gain a valuable perspective on the amount of land area needed for different energy sources, I feel that a graphical presentation would be more of an eye
opener. In order to do this, I’ve enlisted the help of Google
SketchUp. Let’s begin… (I’ve included the calculation, justification, and references of these numbers at the end of this blog entry.) (Carrington Dillon, Clean Energy Insight) India to enforce energy efficiency in climate fight NEW DELHI, Aug 3 - India will make energy efficiency ratings a must for electric appliances, including airconditioners and refrigerators, from January, stepping up
domestic efforts to fight climate change, officials said. India CO2 credit revenue sharing plan stirs unease SINGAPORE - Plans by India to force renewable energy developers to share up to half their carbon offset revenues could prove complex to administer and deter investment,
carbon market participants say. The Food, Energy and Environment ‘Trilemma’ At the 2009 Bio World Congress on Industrial Biotechnology, held in Montreal last week, industry players and scientists found themselves pondering two seemingly
contradictory concerns. August 3, 2009
History suggests that we are likely to experience a much bigger, second wave of H1N1 influenza pandemic in the fall. Four experts discuss different
areas that will play a role in the public health response. E.R.'s May Be the First Victims By ERIC TONER By JAMES C. KING Jr. By MARK GENDREAU Prepare for a Vaccine Controversy By ARTHUR ALLEN Et tu, WSJ? The Fat of the Land - A soda pop tax and
government health care won’t cure obesity. If America is at war with obesity, then obesity is winning. Three out of 10 adults are obese—72 million people with a condition associated with diabetes, heart disease,
some cancers and other chronic illnesses. The belt-busting American waistline is becoming as much a political as public health question—and if some politician hasn’t
already introduced the No Buffet Left Behind Act, he will after this week’s big “Weight of the Nation” report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Weight of the Nation — “We have a plan” If anti-obesity news coverage has seemed to get a shot in the arm the past few days, you might want to know why. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s
Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity has literally given it an injection of media stories, even down to free graphics and banners, with its inaugural obesity
conference, Weight of the Nation, held in Washington, D.C. on July 27-29th. I'm seeing a theme here: Fat troops 'unfit for
Afghanistan' Britain's war effort in Afghanistan is being hindered by a number of frontline troops too fat to fight, according to a leaked Army memo. German Soldiers Too Fat, Official Report Says Some 40 percent of German soldiers are overweight, according to a parliamentary report presented on Tuesday. The report also says German military personnel smoke to much. Who new Maccas was an insidious pinko subversion organization, dedicated to making our fine fighting troopers into lard butts too fat to deploy? Another dubious WHO claim: Breastfeeding could save 1.3 million
child lives: WHO GENEVA - Teaching new mothers how to breastfeed could save 1.3 million children's lives every year, but many women get no help and give up trying, the World Health
Organization said on Friday. Lengthy travel may not increase blood clot risk NEW YORK - You've seen all of the warnings about blood clots forming on long plane trips if you sit still, but a new study suggests that such inactivity may not actually
increase the risk of clots. Threats to ultra-high-field MRI A new European directive designed to prevent workers from being exposed to high magnetic fields could potentially have a severe impact on research into magnetic resonance
imaging, warns Denis Le Bihan (Physics World) Hmm... Are
wind farms a health risk? US scientist identifies 'wind turbine syndrome' Living too close to wind turbines can cause heart disease, tinnitus, vertigo, panic attacks, migraines and sleep deprivation, according to groundbreaking research to be
published later this year by an American doctor. Much as I'm not a fan of wind farms I have to admit I'm really dubious about a lot of these claims. Green Jobs: Fast-tracking Economic Suicide Creating ex nihilo – literally, out of nothing – used to be a theological concept, God’s prerogative. Today it seems, President Obama and certain Western politicians
claim to possess the ability to do it. Against all the laws of economics and the marketplace, President Obama and others believe they can create millions of “green” jobs
ex nihilo, literally, out of thin air, via cap and trade. Why Washington shouldn't run Detroit Question everything – even environmentalism A new book on the importance of being sceptical about received wisdom and simplistic spindoctoring mysteriously leaves out one area of life where scepticism is thoroughly
frowned on today: climate change. (Rob Lyons, sp!ked) Too little, far too late: Go-ahead to clear land RESIDENTS in fire-prone areas across Victoria will be free to remove trees and native vegetation near their homes under a State Government strategy designed to avoid a
repeat of February’s deadly Black Saturday bushfires. Greenie stupidity kills and sickens a lot of people. Save people and the planet, plant a greenie. USDA to expand testing to reduce E. coli in beef WASHINGTON - The U.S. Agriculture Department said on Friday it will increase testing parts of steaks and other meat cuts used to make ground beef as the government steps
up efforts to reduce the spread of E. coli bacteria in food. Poisoned, naturally: Health
bean has one problem: it kills, say authorities A bean that is finding popularity because of its low GI properties can be deadly if not prepared in the correct way, authorities have warned. For goodness sake don't let science influence you Charlie: Prince
of Wales prepares for an organic dispute Heralded as the definitive study into the supposed health benefits of organic food, the inquiry by the Government's watchdog has failed to convince the Prince of Wales.
(Daily Telegraph) Canadian groups dispute green light for GM corn MONTREAL -- Canadian consumer and environmental groups protested on Thursday the government's decision to allow the sale of a genetically modified corn. Forbush events confirm cosmoclimatology Recall that cosmoclimatology of Henrik Svensmark and others postulates that the galactic cosmic rays are able to create "seeds" of low-lying clouds that may cool
the Earth's surface. A higher number of cosmic rays can therefore decrease the temperature. The creation of the cloud nuclei is caused by ionization and resembles the
processes in a cloud chamber. The
Importance Of Regional Climate Forcings This post provides a brief overview of why regional climate forcings are first order in terms of affecting atmospheric circulation patterns which
are the reason for such weather events as droughts, floods, tropical cyclones and so forth. A global average radiative forcing, such as emphasized in the 2007
IPCC report, fails to capture these forcings, and indeed, obscures their significance. Examples include (with excerpts from the papers) 1. Feddema et al. 2005: The importance of land-cover change in simulating future climates., 310,
1674-1678. “Although land-cover effects are regional and tend to offset with respect to global average temperatures, they can significantly alter regional climate outcomes
associated with global warming. Beyond local impacts, tropical land-cover change can potentially affect extratropical climates and nearby ocean conditions through atmospheric
teleconnections.” 2. Marland, G., R.A. Pielke, Sr., M. Apps, R. Avissar, R.A. Betts, K.J. Davis, P.C. Frumhoff, S.T. Jackson, L. Joyce, P. Kauppi, J. Katzenberger, K.G. MacDicken, R.
Neilson, J.O. Niles, D. dutta S. Niyogi, R.J. Norby, N. Pena, N. Sampson, and Y. Xue, 2003: The climatic
impacts of land surface change and carbon management, and the implications for climate-change mitigation policy. Climate Policy, 3, 149-157 “Recent studies suggest that changes in the surface energy budgets resulting from land surface change can have a profound influence on the Earth’s
climate…………….” “Having observed that local and regional changes in climate may be as important as changes in the global mean climate, we suggest that attention be given to devising
a regional climate change potential (RCCP) to encapsulate the effect that specific human actions have on the redistribution of energy within the Earth’s climate system.” 3. Pitman, A.J., N. de Noblet-Ducoudré, F.T. Cruz, E.L. Davin, G.B. Bonan, V. Brovkin, M. Claussen, C. Delire, L. Ganzeveld, V. Gayler, B.J.J.M. van den Hurk, P.J.
Lawrence, M.K. van der Molen, C. Müller, C.H. Reick, S.I. Seneviratne, B. J. Strengers, and A. Voldoire, 2009: Uncertainties in climate responses to past land cover change:
first results from the LUCID intercomparison study, Geophys. Res. Lett., doi:10.1029/2009GL039076, in press. [“Land-Use and Climate, IDentification of robust impacts”
(LUCID)] (see) “Seven climate models were used to explore the biogeophysical impacts of human induced land cover change (LCC) at regional and global scales. The imposed LCC led to
statistically significant decreases in the northern hemisphere summer latent heat flux in three models, and increases in three models. Five models simulated statistically
significant cooling in summer in near-surface temperature over regions of LCC and one simulated warming.” 4. McAlpine, C.A., J. Syktus, J.G. Ryan, R.C. Deo, G.M. McKeon, H.A. McGowan, and S.R. Phinn, 2009:A continent under stress: interactions, feedbacks and risks associated
with impact of modified land cover on Australia’s Climate. Global Change Biology, in press. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01939.x (see) “The consequences of ignoring the effect of LUCC on current and future droughts in Australia could have catastrophic consequences for the nation’s environment,
economy and communities” 5. Takata, K., K. Saito, and T. Yasunari, 2009: Changes in the Asian Monsoon Climate During 1700-1850 Induced by Pre-Industrial Cultivation. PNAS,(in press). (see) “Pre-industrial changes in the Asian summer monsoon climate from the 1700s to the 1850s were estimated with an Atmospheric General Circulation Model (AGCM) using
historical global land cover/use change data reconstructed for the last 300 years. Extended cultivation resulted in a decrease in monsoon rainfall over the Indian
subcontinent and southeastern China, and an associated weakening of the Asian summer monsoon circulation. The precipitation decrease in India was marked, and was consistent
with the observational changes derived from examining the Himalayan ice-cores for the concurrent period. Between the 1700s and the 1850s, the anthropogenic increases in
greenhouse gases and aerosols were still minor; also, no long-term trends in natural climate variations, such as those caused by the ocean, solar activity, or volcanoes, were
reported. Thus, we propose that the land cover/use change was the major source of disturbances to the climate during that period.” 6. 2002 Science paper entitled “Climate Effects of Black Carbon Aerosols in China and India” (subscription required) by S. Menon, J. Hansen, and L.
Nazarenko and Y. Luo. (see) “In recent decades, there has been a tendency toward increased summerfloods in south China, increased drought in north China, and moderate cooling in China and India
while most of the world has been warming. We used a global climate model to investigate possible aerosol contributions to these trends. We found precipitation and temperature
changes in the model that were comparable to those observed if the aerosols included a large proportion of absorbing black carbon (”soot”), similar to observed amounts.
Absorbing aerosols heat the air, alter regional atmospheric stability and vertical motions, and affect the large-scale circulation and hydrologic cycle with significant
regional climate effects. ” 7. Matsui, T., and R.A. Pielke Sr., 2006: Measurement-based estimation of the spatial gradient of aerosol
radiative forcing. Geophys. Res. Letts., 33, L11813, doi:10.1029/2006GL025974. “This paper diagnoses the spatial mean and the spatial gradient of the aerosol radiative forcing in comparison with those of well-mixed green-house gases (GHG).
Unlike GHG, aerosols have much greater spatial heterogeneity in their radiative forcing. The heterogeneous diabatic heating can modulate the gradient in horizontal pressure
field and atmospheric circulations, thus altering the regional climate.” These example illustrate why the IPCC assessments must be broadened to include the diversity of heterogenous human climate forcings. (Roger Pielke Sr.,
Climate Science) Climate Change Timeline – 1895-2009 For at least 114 years, climate “scientists” have been claiming that the climate was going to kill us…but they have kept switching whether it was a coming ice
age, or global warming. Worse still, notice that in 1933 they claim global warming has been going on for 25 years…the entire 25 years they were saying we were entering an ice age. And in 1974,
they say there has been global cooling for 40 years…the entire time of which they’d been claiming the earth was getting hotter! Of course NOW they are talking about the
earth “warming for the past century”, again ignoring that they spent much of that century claiming we were entering an ice age. The fact is that the mean temperature of the planet is, and should be, always wavering up or down, a bit, because this is a natural world, not a climate-controlled office.
So there will always be some silly bureaucrat, in his air-conditioned ivory tower, who looks at which way it’s going right now, draws up a chart as if this is
permanant, realizes how much fear can increase his funding, and proclaims doom for all of humanity. (NowYouKnow) Is this a parody? 88 months and counting - Is the Vesta case
merely a symbolic blip, or something more interesting? Dim hope can be found in this dismal affair Picture the scene. It's the beginning of the second world war. Germany's industrial war machine is in full production and Hitler is advancing across Europe. Back in
England, the government decides that the cost and planning complications of building tanks and aircraft are just too great and lets the factories – who would be willing to
build if there was a demand for them – close. In compensation, it offers the firms a grant from an already existing budget to carry out research and development. Is it possible Simms really sees a parallel between the threat posed by Hitler's war of domination and the trivial change in a mere statistic -- one that
no person can feel as experienced change as global mean temperatures drift by perhaps one one-thousandths of a degree per year? Why is it so difficult to get straightforward answers to three simple questions about climate change? Senator Steve Fielding, an engineer who understands the distinction between facts and fanciful computer models, recently posed three questions regarding climate change to
Minister Penny Wong. The Minister, through her Department of Climate Change, provided answers
to those questions based largely on advice from Professor Penny Sackett (Chief Scientist of Australia) and Professor Will Steffen (ANU Climate Research Centre). The “answers” often evaded the issues raised by Senator Fielding, and mostly discussed peripheral, if related, issues. The answers also shifted the usual goalposts,
arguing, for example, that global average atmospheric temperature was not a desirable measure of global warming – despite its consistent use by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) for more than 15 years. Rather, the Department now wants to use ocean heat content as their prime measure. A measured scientific audit of the Minister’s replies to the three climate questions was provided later by Senator Fielding’s four independent
scientific advisers. Meanwhile, The Australian published an independent attempt to answer Senator Fielding’s questions by Professor
Neville Nicholls. Professor Nicholls’ answers are as misleading as the Department of Climate Change’s were beside the point. We wonder why it is so difficult for straight answers to be given to a few simple and direct questions. The regular scientific obfuscation that occurs regarding global
warming issues is surely a major reason for the confusion that exists on the issue amongst public and politicians alike. Senator Fielding’s three questions (edited for brevity), Professor Nicholls’ answers and our comments are as follows: (Willie Soon and David R. Legates, Quadrant) Weather records are a state
secret The IPCC's computer models have proved just as wrong in predicting global temperatures as the Met Office has been in forecasting those mild winters and heatwave summers,
says Christopher Booker. (Daily Telegraph) "People who are hiding something have something to hide." The naughty child hurriedly tries to brush the crumbs from the stolen cake under the cushion. Fraudulent executives of a failing corporation hold night-time
document-shredding parties. Politicians appoint committees of inquiry, but ensure that the vital factors are not within their remit. Since the crime that had “the primal
eldest curse” human instinct has been to bury the bodies. So, what are we to make of the panicky erasure of previously
publicly available files at the CRU? In the pre-computer days, science and engineering students were taught how to keep log books, with the admonition “when writing it up always remember it might one day
become a document in legal evidence.” Knowledge in the private domain may be treated as private property and subject to protection by patent. It is also sometimes necessary
that publicly funded research is kept secret; in defence, for example. The progress of science as a whole, however, depends on the wide dissemination of knowledge and its exposure for checking of validity and reproducibility. In the case
under discussion, weather information has been gathered at enormous public expense and has been used to justify not only a truly gargantuan outlay from augmented taxation but
also the disruption of everyday life. In these circumstances it is difficult to see the validity of any claim to a need for secrecy. The public is entitled not only to have
access to any data produced at its cost but also to have them available for checking by independent scientists. The high-handed disdain with which such fundamental principles
and rights have been discarded would be disturbing in any context, but the thought that it arises from a confidence in protection from high places is even more alarming. So, CRU, what have you got to hide? (Number Watch) Above-average fire year follows lean years As I sit typing this column, I smell smoke. The molecules of fire-killed black spruce trees and tundra plants have wafted from a mushroom cloud on the Tanana Flats into
the buildings on the campus of the University of Alaska Fairbanks. With three quiet fire years behind us, 2009 is a noticeable fire year. Sahara Desert Greening Due to Climate Change? Desertification, drought, and despair—that's what global warming has in store for much of Africa. Or so we hear. The above is news to UNEP, however: Global climate change affects desert climate Global climate change, the directional change induced by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (to be distinguished from longterm or short-term climate variations
not caused by global-scale human impact on the climate system) also affects deserts. Deserts warmed-up between 1976 to 2000 at an average rate of 0.2-0.8ºC/ decade - an
overall increase of 0.5-2ºC (Table 3.1), much higher than the average global temperature increase of 0.45ºC, which has been attributed to the increase in atmospheric
concentrations of greenhouse gases (IPCC 2001). Global warming is expected to induce an overall increase in rainfall; but high latitudes are projected to warm more than the
mid- and low-latitudes, resulting in more rainfall in higher latitudes linked to reduced rainfall in subtropical ones. Indeed, in most deserts within the subtropical belt,
rainfall has already been decreasing in the last two decades (Table 3.1). (UNEP) [em added] The models agree? Oh well, then: Australian Weather Bureau Sees El Nino By Sept-Nov SYDNEY - Australia's Bureau of Meteorology on Friday predicted that an El Nino weather system in the Pacific Ocean would be established by September-November at the
latest. But wait! It's much, much worse! New
El Niño threatens world with weather woe - Forecasters say this one is brewing up to be the second-strongest on record A new El Niño has begun. The sporadic Pacific Ocean warming, which can disrupt weather patterns across the world, is intensifying, say meteorologists. Darwin’s grandson proved right over fishy physics Darwin Year is now in full swing but the great evolutionary biologist was not the only member of the Darwin family to propose a scientific explanation for the behaviour of
animals. His grandson — a British physicist, also called Charles — developed the novel idea that swimming marine life play a significant role in ocean mixing, an
important process for distributing nutrients around the world’s oceans. Now, the Darwin family have yet another reason to celebrate this year, as a pair of researchers in
California claim to have verified experimentally the theory of Charles Darwin Junior. Hmm... that's a lot of mixing. Shrinking Sheep, Kidney Stones and Bear Attacks We
have all heard the litany of woes about to befall mankind due to global warming: failing crops, spreading deserts, increased storm activity, rampant disease, and so forth.
But these are not the most frightening side effects of global warming. Indeed, the IPCC's list only scratches the surface of the prophecies of doom and despair. Among the
predicted results of a warming climate are smaller livestock, an increase in kidney stones, more frequent bear attacks and a host of other maladies and misfortunes.
While the dire predictions of the IPCC are bad enough on their own, a number of other sources have jumped in to add a next level of predicted disasters
built on the IPCC's foundation of future woes. Among the most common is a prediction of future armed conflict. A US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, chaired by
Senator John Kerry, was advised that crop failure, water shortages, and rising ocean levels will displace millions people and inevitably drag the US military into conflict if
global climate change goes unchecked. Retired Navy Vice Adm. Lee F. Gunn, president of the American Security Project, and other military specialists warned that rising sea
levels could swamp critical US military bases in the Indian Ocean and even the headquarters of the Atlantic Fleet in Norfolk, Va.
“Addressing the consequences of changes in the Earth’s climate is not simply about saving polar bears or preserving the beauty of mountain glaciers,”
Gunn told the panel. “Climate change is a threat to our national security.” These warnings seem to be predicated on a 1 meter (39 inch) rise in the ocean level, and some
sources predict as much as a 2 meter rise over the next 100 years. However, this is very unlikely since models of glacial flow in present-day ice sheets show that a probable maximum
value for sea level rise in the next century is 80 centimeters or less. According to a paper
by W. T. Pfeffer, J. T. Harper, and S. O'Neel, which appeared in the September 5, 2009, eddition of Science had this to say about sea level increase:
We consider glaciological conditions required for large sea-level rise to occur by 2100 and conclude that increases in excess of 2 meters are physically
untenable. We find that a total sea-level rise of about 2 meters by 2100 could occur under physically possible glaciological conditions but only if all variables are
quickly accelerated to extremely high limits. More plausible but still accelerated conditions lead to total sea-level rise by 2100 of about 0.8 meter. The high end consensus estimate of sea-level rise (SLR) by 2100—0.18 to 0.6 m—that was published in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) Fourth Assessment is lower than that and many of the more extreme predictions require a complete collapse of the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), something not
considered probable within the next 1000 years (see “Potential
Sea-Level Rise Reevaluated”). More recent data from the University of Colorado show no sea level increase over the past decade (see climatesci.org)
and a paper from American Geophysical Union fall meeting in 2006 states
“Hydrographic observations demonstrate an apparent cooling of the ocean since 2002, which would imply up to a 2 mm drop in thermosteric sea level.” Nations may still
march to war in the future but the cause is unlikely to be rising sea levels.
Of course war is not the only atrocity man visits on his fellows, no less an expert than CNN founder Ted Turner has his own predicted results for not
taking drastic action to correct global warming: “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We'll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of
the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals.” While there are documented cases of cannibalism under conditions of extreme
food shortage I doubt that this is a plausible scenario, Hollywood zombi movies not withstanding. Still, if Mr. Turner invites you to dinner I'd think twice about accepting. One more plausible side effect of increased global temperature is animal downsizing. Ecologists have suggested that animals will shrink in size as a result
of global warming. This is based on the assumption that bigger creatures will have more problems losing heat. As reported in chapter 4 of The
Resilient Earth, “Unprecedented Climate Change?,”
there is evidence in the paleo-record that creatures did shrink in size during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) some 55 million years ago. Of course the PETM
represents a period of real rapid global warming and the odds against human greenhouse gas emissions causing such an event are astronomical (see “Could
Human CO2 Emissions Cause Another PETM?”).
Not withstanding the orders of magnitude difference between current warming rates and those of the PETM, a new paper in Science has reported that
Soay sheep living on the island of Hirta, in the St. Kilda archipelago of Scotland, are getting smaller. According to Bergmann’s rule, which says that species size
increases the farther away they live from the tropics, a warming climate should cause a diminution in the size of animals. This is based on the volume to surface area ration
of creatures which rises with size and makes it harder for large creatures to shed excess heat. Arpat Ozgul et al. argue in their paper, “The
Dynamics of Phenotypic Change and the Shrinking Sheep of St. Kilda,” that a warming climate is causing Soay sheep to shrink despite efforts to breed larger animals:
Environmental change, including climate change, can cause rapid phenotypic change via both ecological and evolutionary processes. Because ecological and
evolutionary dynamics are intimately linked, a major challenge is to identify their relative roles. We exactly decomposed the change in mean body weight in a free-living
population of Soay sheep into all the processes that contribute to change. Ecological processes contribute most, with selection—the underpinning of adaptive
evolution—explaining little of the observed phenotypic trend. Our results enable us to explain why selection has so little effect even though weight is heritable, and why
environmental change has caused a decline in the body size of Soay sheep. The paper's claim is that the shrinking sheep are not responding to genetic selection—meaning that natural selection is not acting to breed a smaller
species of animal—but rather as a physiological response to changing environmental conditions. Unfortunately, the Soay sheep study only covers the past 20 years and does
not report if the sheep were growing larger during the decades of cooling climate that preceded the 1980s. There is also no mention of other changes in the sheep's
environment such as food sources or predation. It has been shown that isolated populations, like those found on islands, do tend to grow smaller. Pigmy elephants are found on
Borneo and other places where large size isn't necessarily a positive survival trait. All things considered I rather doubt that this study is definitive or its results
universally applicable. The risk of shrinking livestock is only one of many unlikely side effects of global warming. Not so long ago a widely reported paper
in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences linked greenhouse gas emissions to poison ivy. It seems that like many plants, poison ivy vines grow faster and
bigger as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rise. If mankind survives the poison ivy crisis the Sustainablog
lists a number of other negative impacts: In addition to large-scale humanitarian crises, climate change will have effects you may not have heard about, including So stock up your wine cellar and your supply of antihistamines, and watch out for grouchy, sleep deprived bears, the climate is a-changin'. Since climate
has varied by as much in the past as the worst predicted credible changes due to global warming, both grapes and bears are probably not going to be placed in great peril. In
fact, wine grapes seem to react to increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere much as poison ivy does. According to a study
in the European Journal of Agronomy by Bindi et al. grapes dote on the stuff. Artificially boosting CO2
levels for a collection of 20-year-old grapevines, the researchers reported, “elevated atmospheric CO2 levels had a significant effect on biomass components (total and
fruit dry weight) with increases that ranged from 40 to 45% in the 550 ppm treatment and from 45 to 50% in the 700 ppm treatment.” Bindi et al. concluded that “the
expected rise in CO2 concentrations may strongly stimulate grapevine production without causing negative repercussions on quality of grapes and
wine.” It is possible that wine quality will improve rather than decline. As for allergies, mine seem to change from year to year and differ by season and location. I doubt that global warming will have as much impact as the
variability that already occurs naturally. A worse affliction is waiting to assail those not laid low by the increase in allergens, however—kidney stones. As reported
in the American Geophysical Union's Geophysics in the News: Urologists found that global warming is contributing to an increase in the occurrence of kidney stones in come locations. The "kidney-stone
belt" includes Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North and South Carolina and Tennessee. These states have seen an increase in temperature
and therefore residents are more likely to feel the effects of dehydration—one of the causes of kidney stones. Researchers speculate that by 2050, global warming will
cause up to two million cases of kidney stones. Possibly, the observed increase in kidney stones is because more people have taken up running, jogging and other outdoor physical activities and are not
always staying properly hydrated. People have lived in very hot climates since time immemorial without suffering a plague of stones so perhaps the problem is one of education
and not climate change. Besides, it seems logical that the more temperatures rise the more time people will spend indoors. If you want a full report on the improbable outcomes of global warming the site that takes first place has got to be the Center for American Progress's “The
Top 100 Effects of Global Warming.” These folks make chicken little look like a starry eyed optimist. Here are a few items from their list of climate induced hardships: And that is just a sample. My favorite? A “Bulgarian Hooker Shortage.” It's true, brothel owners in Bulgaria are blaming global warming for staff
shortages. According to the UK Metro website, Petra
Nestorova, who runs an escort agency in Sofia, said: “We have hired students, but they are temps and nothing like our elite girls.” Top that, Green Peace. The point of all this silliness is that all of these dire predictions are more than far fetched, they are ludicrous. Global warming fear mongering has
turned into a sport anyone can play. The best rumors are those with what sounds like a touch of science behind them, even if that “science” turns out to be bogus. When
Hailey's Comet was predicted to return to earthly skies in 1910 pandemonium broke out all over the world. Charlatans sold gas masks to protect from “comet vapors” and all
sorts of strange phenomena were attributed to the comet's passing. The fear mongers have traded comets for global warming but the lies are as inventive as ever. Only the
gullible accept the doomsday predictions of the climate change alarmists, to the peril of us all. Be safe, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. (Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth) Response
to Conor Clarke, Part I Last week Conor
Clarke at The Atlantic blog , apparently as part of a running argument with Jim Manzi, raised four substantive issues with my study, “What
to Do About Climate Change,” that Cato published last year. Mr. Clarke deserves a response, and I apologize for not getting to this sooner. Today, I’ll address the
first part of his first comment. I’ll address the rest of his comments over the next few days. (Indur Goklany, Cato)
Cherry
Picking Climate Catastrophes: Response to Conor Clarke, Part II Conor
Clarke at The Atlantic blog, raised several issues with my study, “What
to Do About Climate Change,” which Cato published last year. One of Conor Clarke’s comments was that my analysis did not extend beyond the 21st century. He found this problematic because, as Conor put it, climate change would
extend beyond 2100, and even if GDP is higher in 2100 with unfettered global warming than without, it’s not obvious that this GDP would continue to be higher “in the year
2200 or 2300 or 3758”. I addressed this portion of his argument in Part I of my
response. Here I will address the second part of this argument, that “the possibility of ‘catastrophic’ climate change events — those with low probability but
extremely high cost — becomes real after 2100.” (Indur Goklany, Cato) We're supposed to legislatively control tectonic plate movement now? Don't
desert us, say sinking Pacific islands THREE of Australia's biggest non-government organisations are hosting competing visits by Pacific Islanders to urge Kevin Rudd to do more to combat climate change - and
especially rising sea levels. (The Australian) But, with power :-) Climate change deniers claim
they're censored. What hypocrites Anthony Watts, sceptic and scourge of climate change science, has used copyright laws to censor an opponent (Moonbat) Apparently moonbat thinks very highly of Anthony Watts' power and reach ;-) Actual story below: On Climate, Comedy, Copyrights, and Cinematography The good news: there’s new and exciting opportunities opening themselves to us. The bad news; some people are hilariously unquestioning. (WUWT) Oh, good grief! Firm forged letters to lawmaker on climate bill WASHINGTON — A Washington grassroots lobbying firm has acknowledged forging anti-climate bill letters purporting to be from a local NAACP chapter and a Latino advocacy
group to a Virginia lawmaker, and a congressional committee said it was launching an investigation. While many may be tempted to shrug and say fighting a fraudulent problem with a fraudulent response is not a big deal we disagree vehemently. This kind
of stupidity does more harm to the factual case than all Al's nonsense and propaganda. So much so that our first reaction was that it must be sabotage by the misanthropy
brigade. Mind, the reaction of the warmers is ludicrous, as noted by Chris Horner, below: So, per the WSJ's Environmental Capital blog,
it seems that someone at the grassroots lobbying firm Bonner & Associates forged some letters to Members asking them to vote against the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade
energy rationing legislation which is based on the claim that the earth is alarmingly warming and computer model projections that it will get warmer still. Bill co-author and Special Global Warming Committee (really) chairman Ed Markey is shocked, shocked that someone would engage in subterfuge on this issue, and vows a
congressional investigation. Pause. Surely you remember Markey's outrage over those falsehoods, frauds and far, far worse underlying his legislation's express premise. Like the "Hockey Stick"
swindle? His fulmination over Gore's phony claims which were outed by the UK High Court? The fraud at University of Albany relating to a key, apparently fabricated data set
relied upon by the IPCC for its claims? NASA repeatedly being caught in funny business with data, only to have the gremlins get back into the system and re-monkey the numbers
after they've been corrected? Over taxpayer-funded surface temperature stations being moved from fields to parking lots, over air conditioning units and even barbeque
grilles (and the data being used by NASA for it's sexed up claims)? About EPA claiming that CO2 poses an "endangerment" to human health and the environment,
demurring on the idea that it would perform its own research of the matter saying it outsourced that function to the IPCC (seriously), which, uh, says right
there on its website that it conducts no research? You shrieked to the heavens over Team Gore smearing Roger Revelle in his grave, chasing Will Happer and Sherwood
Idso out of government jobs, and their Doppelgangers' current assault on EPA whistleblower Alan Carlin, didn't you? And about torturing children so that they report
nightmares, refuse water and even get committed after melting down from being told they're contributing to an ongoing ecological crisis? About physical attacks and death
threats against skeptic scientists for the crime of speaking out about science? Right? Yeah, nary a whimper because, you know, that's all chump change. I suppose I could go on. Like, maybe, write a book titled "Red
Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed" (talk about ammo for a special committee). Please, congressman. Spare us your dudgeon. (Chris Horner, American Spectator) Do they really believe this nonsense? U.S. must "adapt" to
changing climate - Obama aides WASHINGTON - The United States must prepare for unstoppable climate changes that will have a major impact on farming, industry, recreation and government services, Obama
administration officials said on Thursday. It's anybody's guess what planet WaPo is on: Warming
Relations - Despite lingering disagreements, the U.S. and China are making noteworthy progress on climate change. YOU WOULDN'T know it by the intense focus on health-care reform and on race over the past two weeks, but during about that same period Washington and Beijing made strides
to bridge their divide over reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Just last week, China and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding that commits them "to
respond vigorously to the challenges of energy security, climate change and environmental protection through ambitious domestic action and international cooperation."
That might sound like feel-good diplo-speak, especially when there's a dearth of details in the rest of the memorandum. But when you consider where relations had been before,
the events of the past two weeks have been promising. (Washington Post) So far off the planet he can't find Earth? Who Lost the Earth? When Richard Nixon first visited China back in 1972, his journey seemed far longer than the seven thousand miles that actually separate Washington from Beijing. He was
bridging the gap between two worlds separated for a generation. Just When You
Thought Global Warming Couldn’t Get More Stupid, In Walks John Kerry Of all the ridiculous arguments in support of global warming legislation, this one has to be the most idiotic. John Kerry is leading a panel to determine how global
warming threatens national security. What did they find? Well, that’s a little tough to pin down. All we get is vague and absurd warnings like “Crop devastation, melting
glaciers, water shortages and displaced people will drag the military into conflict…” So – you guessed it – we must act now “to save the world!” If we don’t,
these “climate conflicts” will melt the rainbows and make bunnies cry. LINK
(Daily Instigator) Oh boy... Senate
Democrats Tie Climate Effort to National Security Senate Democrats are increasingly relying on the connection between global warming and national security as they craft legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Look at the bizarre line they are running: Quincy
businesses oppose Cap and Trade, Hare submits op-ed UPDATE: U.S. Rep. Phil Hare (D-Rock Island) has submitted an op-ed explaining why he supports "Cap and Trade" legislation. Hare's op-ed is appearing in the State
Journal Register and his office sent it to QuincyNews.org and other media outlets Thursday morning. (Bob Gough, QuincyNews.org) Has a "green job" ever actually been defined? I'd certainly be interested in any legal definition, which must exist since lawmakers regularly
report the number of said green jobs their actions (and our cost) will create. Make up your mind -- are you talking about pollution or greenhouse gases, the two are not the same: Can
U.S. Plan Entice Polluters into Early Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions? The landmark American Clean Energy & Security Act (ACES, or "Waxman-Markey," as it's commonly called after its sponsors, Henry A. Waxman of the Energy and
Commerce Committee and Edward J. Markey of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee) passed the U.S. House of Representatives late last month, and its counterpart bill is set
to go before the Senate in mid-September. Traders Call For EU Response To Carbon Tax Fraud LONDON - Britain's exemption of carbon emissions credits from value-added tax (VAT) is just a temporary fix for a tax fraud that will just resurface in other European
Union countries, traders said, calling for an EU-wide response. OREM, Utah -- Although the so-called "cap-and-trade" bill currently being considered in Congress will likely take a backseat to health care reform and possibly
even a second economic “stimulus” package this summer, convenience and petroleum industry executives continue to be wary of the Democrat-sponsored climate change
legislation. India wants climate change pact at Copenhagen NEW DELHI — India insisted Friday it wanted to reach a global agreement on fighting climate change at the upcoming UN summit in Copenhagen but reiterated its opposition
to binding carbon emission cuts. India To Assess Climate Gain; Pump Millions In Forests NEW DELHI - India will spend some $200 million to protect its forests and will announce how much carbon emission is being captured by its green cover, the environment
minister said on Friday. India will not make emissions cuts NEW DELHI, July 31 (UPI) -- India is toughening its stand against binding obligations to make absolute cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, the country's environment minister
said Friday. US keeps changing goalpost on climate change: India New Delhi, Jul 31 Hitting out at the US for painting India as an "intransigent actor" in the fight against climate change, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh
today accused Washington of consistently changing goalpost in the fight and termed it as "height of hypocrisy". RELEASE OF INDIA’S SUBMISSIONS TO UNFCCC ON CLIMATE CHANGE As part of the international negotiations on climate change, India has expressed its views on several issues, in particular the issues affecting developing countries. It
has also put forward proactive submissions to the UNFCCC on various issues. India has submitted twelve (12) papers during 2008 and 2009 which encapsulate India’s views on
the relevant topics in the course of the negotiations. A booklet covering these views have been released here today by Shri Jairam Ramesh, Minister of State for Environment
and Forests (I/C). (Press Information Bureau, Government of India) Gov seizes on report they bought? Government seizes on ANU climate change report The Federal Government says a study backs its warning World Heritage-listed sites including the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu National Park and the Sydney Opera House are
threatened by climate change. And look who they bought of from: <chuckle> Raupach, Church, Griggs, Lynch, Pitman, Hoegh-Guldberg, Karoly and Steffen... rounded up the whole gang of Aussie-based warming hysterics,
eh? Climate change poised to feed on itself Fifteen of Australia's top climate experts explain how we know humans are altering the atmosphere and why we must act now. (SMH) Abandon modernity or the bush gets it: Climate threat
to heritage sites THE Federal Government has warned that Australian icons such as the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu National Park, the Tasmanian wilderness, Carlton Gardens and the Sydney
Opera House could be damaged irreparably if the Coalition fails to support Labor’s emissions trading scheme. What will an ETS do for Australia’s
Environment? AN historic piece of legislation, The Carbon Pollution Reduction Bill, currently rests on the Senate table which, if passed, will have a huge impact on Australia’s
economic and social future. The legislation will next be considered on August 13th. If passed what will this mean for the Australian environment? (Jennifer Marohasy) More tree-planters won’t do
the trick How many more green non-jobs will Kevin Rudd have to announce
to make up for the real jobs he plans to kills? INTERNAL Labor Party pressure on Kevin Rudd over the job-killing potential of his Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is growing, with NSW Treasurer Eric Roozendaal
warning the CPRS will lead to ”extreme losses” in the
electricity and coal industries. UPDATE And to think this economic vandalism is being done on the astonishing assumption that the world is still warming, and that Rudd’s plan can help stop it, despite the fact
that Australia’s emissions are a fraction of a
fraction of a fraction of greenhouse gases: UPDATE 2 If we’re dumb enough to kill good jobs, we don’t deserve to keep our own cash: FOREIGN companies stand to net billions of dollars in assistance payments from the federal government under Labor’s proposed emissions trading scheme, the
Australian Greens say. The Greens have released research showing more than
$11 billion in commonwealth assistance will flow to companies that are either wholly or partially foreign owned in the first five years of the scheme. (Thanks to readers David, John and Randall. One update has now been moved to another entry above.) UPDATE 3 The Climate Sceptics announce another protest: If you are concerned the Emissions Trading Legislation being voted on in Canberra on 13th Aug will not have any effect on climate and in fact be a waste of money,
then please join us. We are
organising a protest against the ETS on Aug 13th in front of Parliament house. We will assemble at 9.30 am on Federation Mall behind Old Parliament House, then march up
to the precinct in front of Parliament House… The theme will be “Man Made Climate Change is Bull” and a quiet bull is being organised to be at the event. Bring a
Placard or two in line with the theme. Barnaby Joyce will be one of the speakers. (Andrew Bolt blog) Partly correct: 'Cure worse than the disease' Carbon credits -a system to mitigate the growth of greenhouse gases - won't work, an economist warns. He wants a carbon tax that would not only cost less, he says, but
would finance 'an energy technology revolution' (Kevin Dougherty, The Gazette) In fact any effort to "address global warming" is worse than not doing so. Why? Because the effects of rising amounts of the essential
trace gas carbon dioxide deliver a net benefit to the biosphere (green plants grow better and with reduced water requirement). There is no gain to be had spending money to
reduce all plant growth, wildlife habitat and food crops. There is significant harm in limiting people's energy supply and increasing their costs for no purpose other than
limiting the supply of essential plant food. There is no gain here but there is significant pain. Why do it? Australian Labor Increases Pressure For Carbon Laws SYDNEY - A national conference of Australia's ruling Labor Party strongly endorsed government laws for carbon trading on Saturday, cheering Climate Change Minister Penny
Wong as she outlined plans to put a price on pollution. Which is exactly why the damn fools must be stopped. Carbon Trading and Dinner: A Note from Barnaby
Joyce IT has become apparent that there is a general lack of understanding in the community about exactly what an emissions tradings scheme (ETS) is. People may understand the
sentiment that surrounds it but they don’t really understand how it works and how it will affect them… WASHINGTON -- What's in a name? A bit of deception when it comes to the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Better "Drill Baby, Drill" then, eh? And crank up those unconventionals, too: Warning:
Oil supplies are running out fast - Catastrophic shortfalls threaten economic recovery, says world's top energy economist The world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their
peak production, a leading energy economist has warned. Big price rise for WA users of renewable energy EXCLUSIVE: The cost of renewable energy will rise significantly tomorrow with WA customers paying nearly twice what they paid six months ago. China Energy Intensity Down 3.35 pct In First Half BEIJING - A decline in China's energy intensity, or the amount of energy it uses to produce each unit of national income, picked up pace in the first half of 2009, the
country's top economic planner said on Sunday. |