Saturday, 18 November 2017

SEA LEVEL RISE - AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM THE EXPERTS

This article contains an important update on the question of sea level rise in Fiji and other low lying atolls. It confirms what has been noted before -- that sea level is in fact stable.

Friday, 17 November 2017

HAS OUR ENVIRONMENT MINISTER BEEN CAPTURED BY THE GREEN BLOB?

Here is an interesting piece from the excellent Matt Ridley. e asks the very question that was on my lips when I read of his recent pronouncements since taking up his new cabinet post. Of course he he is in favour of the Paris Agreement and the Climate Change Act. That is a pre-requisite to getting the job, but he also wants to ban the petrol/diesel engine and now he talks of setting up new green quangos. I despair!

Thursday, 16 November 2017

BONN CLIMATE CONFERENCE - THIRD WORLD DEMANDS MONEY NOW!

There can be no doubt that there is one over-riding reason for the climate change issue to have attracted such support from the Third World nations and that, of course is the expectation that they will receive lots of money from the developed world nations.

With more than half the schedule of climate change conference already over, frustration was beginning to show at the lack of progress on any of the key issues under discussion, including the issues of finance, loss and damage, and ‘pre-2020 actions’. Developing country negotiators lamented the fact that the United States, which has decided to pull out the Paris Agreement, was continuing to block any meaningful breakthrough on these issues and that other developed countries were not helping matters either.

“Other developed countries are hiding behind the United States on loss and damage and finance issues. And, I think they need to be called out on this. They need to be asked whether they would side with (US President) Donald Trump or with the vulnerable countries of the world and meet their responsibilities,” Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, echoing what many country negotiators were saying off the record.

A demand from the developing countries, asking for inclusion of ‘pre-2020 actions’ — a reference mainly to the obligations of the developed countries under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that has still three years to run — in the official agenda of the negotiations has still not been decided on, despite the expiry of two deadlines. The matter was to be decided on Saturday and then on Monday, but till evening on Monday consultations with various country groups was still continuing.

“Informal meetings (on ‘pre-2020 actions’) have been happening throughout the day. I am not sure whether there will be an outcome in the form of any decision by the end of the day today. Things are moving slowly, and there is hardly any significant progress on any important issue till now. But this is not the first time this is happening. We have seen such things at previous conferences as well. There are still four days to go and a lot happens on the last days,” an Indian negotiator said.

One major disappointment has been over the lack of any headway on issues related to finance, particularly that meant for loss and damages. Developing countries, especially the smaller island nations which also happen to be the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, have been demanding the setting up of mechanisms through which then can access financial help in the event of destruction caused by extreme weather events. This financial help needs to be in addition to the US$ 100 billion that the developed countries are obligated to provide every year from 2020 to help developing countries deal with climate change.

One of the options being discussed is to raise money through taxes on fossil fuel industry. “Countries are looking for money that is additional to the US$ 100 billion, because loss and damage is additional to the mitigation and adaptation needs. The US$ 100 billion was agreed upon long before the issue of loss and damages became part of discussions at these negotiations. The kind of money we are looking at … has to come by levying taxes on fossil fuel industry that has caused climate change in the first place,” Mohamed Adow, International Climate Lead at Christian Aid, said.
But the developed countries, mainly the US, have not been quite agreed to look
at this, suggesting instead that insurance might be a good way to deal with the problem. “On loss and damage and finance, they (the US) have been taking a pretty hard line and that has started to cause some real anger,” Meyers said.


Even on the US$ 100 billion commitment, the demand that developed countries spell out the roadmap and enhance the proportion of public finance in their contributions, has largely been stonewalled. “Developed countries have not come prepared to put any new money on the table or make new pledges. So we are not expecting any strong outcome on this. The best we can hope for, we think, is to get some assurance that next year they will demonstrate stronger commitment,” Tracy Carty of Oxfam said.

Wednesday, 15 November 2017

HUGE ROW IN OZ ABOUT CLIMATE TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS

Read it all here. It centres on the accuracy of new electronic thermometers compared to the old liquid in glass (mercury) thermometers. In Australia there seem to be a number of knowledgeable sceptics who are digging into the data and uncovering a number of inconsistencies. I wonder if there are similar inconsistencies here?  

Tuesday, 14 November 2017

CLIMATE COSTS NOW 35% OF ELECTRICITY BILLS

This piece gives the details of how this comes about. Perhaps this will resonate more with the public than the £400 billion total cost of the Climate Change Act, which seems so enormous that it becomes incomprehensible to an individual, whereas telling someone that over a third of their bill is caused by government policies on climate change is only too easy to understand. 

Monday, 13 November 2017

ELECTRIC CARS NOT AS GREEN AS YOU THINK

This piece in the Mail reminds readers that electric cars are not as green as some people think. With a wide circulation this is a timely reminder that government policy is not leading us to any green utopia.

Sunday, 12 November 2017

UPDATE ON THE CURRENT CLIMATE CONFERENCE IN BONN

The update below is from CFACT

What's missing at this year's big UN climate conference?

The American pavilion.

When President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the UN's Paris Climate Accord, he also cut back on the American presence in the UN process. Sure, the official State Department representatives are here, but the sideshow is tellingly absent.

In past years the U.S. put on big displays where NASA trotted out its “hyperwall” which stacks nine computer monitors for multimedia presentations. CFACT's friends may remember the time at COP 20 in Peru, when CFACT approached a group of Obama administration staff running the hyperwall. They were prepared to dismiss CFACT as “flat-Earther, climate deniers,” until they realized who had marched in at the head of our delegation and fell over themselves with respectful greetings. Colonel Walt Cunningham flew in space on Apollo VII, the mission that launched America's quest for the moon. Walt saw the curvature of the Earth first hand from the window of his command module. No flat-Earther he.

Walt has worked diligently to reform NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies which first James Hansen and now Gavin Schmidt made into a platform for presenting politicized views of climate science. A large number of astronauts and NASA veterans co-signed a letter demanding NASA knock off the propaganda.

At COP 23, at least, the propaganda spigot has been turned off.

Like last year's COP 22 in Marrakesh, President Trump remains the talk of the conference. Campaigners worked for years to bring America and its wealth under the UN climate regime. They were shocked when only a year later America broke free. What does this mean for their dreams of redistribution and control? They don't know, and in the long run, neither do we.

President Obama made a huge mistake when he signed onto the Paris climate agreement and Trump did the right thing getting out. The UN climate elite are doing all they can to drag us back in. They've enlisted a group of American politicians led by California Governor Jerry Brown and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who are on their way to Bonn to put on their own American climate show.
CFACT is your eyes and ears at the UN talks. We'll be speaking up and fearlessly laying out the facts as well.
Getting out of Paris was right.

Saturday, 11 November 2017

SLOWLY THE US EPA IS BEING CLEANSED OF ITS GREEN ACTIVISTS

This piece explains what is happening, and not before time. The real question is whether President Trump will have time to embed a new independent culture at the EPA before his time runs out. Also, will his eventual successor have the courage and the inclination to stick to this policy?

Friday, 10 November 2017

CO2 RESIDENCE TIME - A CRUCIAL FACTOR IN THE CLIMATE DEBATE

This piece looks at a new paper on this important subject. It is not as straight forward as some might think because the atmosphere is in constant flux with CO2 being absorbed at the same time as it is being  released. One important factor that I have not seen discussed is the role of rain which must constantly be washing the CO2 out of the air, just as it washes solid particles too, cleansing the air. When some scientists claim that CO2 remains in the air for hundreds, or thousands of years, I cannot believe that they really believe this. It seems quite likely that human emissions of CO2 are responsible for most of the current increase, but we know that not all the human emissions remain in the air. About half are removed by natural sinks like rain and plants. So, if our emissions were to drop we should expect to see the level in the air drop quite quickly. This is not what alarmists want us to believe, as it would mean that there was no long term problem.

Thursday, 9 November 2017

VOLCANIC MAGMA UNDER ANTARCTICA

This article looks at the discovery of volcanic activity under Antarctica and ponders whether this may explain some of the warming in certain parts there. Overall Antarctica is not warming, despite this volcanic activity.

Wednesday, 8 November 2017

SEA LEVEL RISE SCARE - LATEST UPDATE

This piece offers a good look at the arguments relating to whether sea level rise is a serious problem or simply a long term issue. The alarmist argument comes from computer modelling whereas the actual data seems to suggest it is more of a long term issue.

Tuesday, 7 November 2017

CLIMATE NUTS CALL FOR DICTATORSHIP TO BRING IN STRINGENT CO2 REDUCTIONS

These people are far more dangerous than the imaginary climate disaster they keep banging on about. This article looks at the latest outburst by one climate fundamentalist. Luckily for the rest of us he is not going to be able to get his way due to the little matter of overthrowing democracy, and I doubt he and his small band of eco-loons is powerful enough.

Monday, 6 November 2017

US EPA NEVER SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED THE SCIENCE IN ITS CO2 ENDANGERMENT FINDING

Scott Pruitt is right: the US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) never seriously considered the science used in its 2009 GHG/CO2 endangerment finding. That is the conclusion of  Dr Alan Carlin. You can read his thorough and well argued narrative here on his excellent blog. Alan is  a sceptical former Sierra Club activist and USEPA senior analyst, so he is well qualified to give his opinion.

Here is an excerpt from an interview with EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt: “So it really draws down into [this] question: Did this Agency engage in a robust, meaningful discussion, with respect to the Endangerment that CO2 poses to this Country? And I think by any definition about process they didn’t.” —Scott Pruitt in interview with Justin Worland of Time Magazine, as reported on October 20, 2017 and transcribed here

Sunday, 5 November 2017

HERE'S A "MUST SEE" VIDEO

Sadly Bob Carter is no longer with us, but his legacy of great videos live on and I recently re-discovered this one. It is only about 30 minutes but it packs in so much useful information that I thought I would share it with you. If only the mainstream TV companies would show it to the populous it could open their eyes and stimulate so much independent thought.  

Saturday, 4 November 2017

THE RELIGIOUS FOLLOWERS OF GLOBAL WARMING

It is often said that belief in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) is more akin to a religion than to science, and I tend to agree with this. This essay about how climate science is taught in schools is very long and tedious, but what can be ascertained by reading it is that the author is so utterly convinced in her cause that she simply is unable to countenance that there could be any other side to it than her interpretation. She totally rejects that teachers should acknowledge or give credence to doubts.

Yet it is plainly obvious to most adults who study this subject that there are plenty of perfectly legitimate concerns, some of which are raised by the IPCC themselves. The primary one is the degree of warming which the IPCC say can be from 1.5 to 4.5 degrees C for a doubling of CO2.  Once someone has understood that then everything else is put into question.

A bright child would pick up on this and think, if there is such a wide variation, then how much else is in doubt? A little reading will soon find that there are learned and much respected science professors such as Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer who can make out a good case for the 1.5 degrees C to be even lower in which case the warming will be no more than has been experienced in the 20th century. Once trust has been undermined then the teacher will lose respect and the pupil will become more sceptical.

That is the dilemma facing the climate activist. If they are too hard-line in their approach they risk being discovered as being too doctrinaire and may be accused of indoctrinating their pupils. On the other hand if they admit the flaws in the hypothesis that risks undermining the urgency that is claimed to be needed to combat it.    

Friday, 3 November 2017

AIR POLLUTION - LET'S TAKE A RATIONAL LOOK

There has been a lot of very scary headlines recently about air pollution. This one for example. Once again some great research by Paul Homewood has put this into perspective - see this piece . Of course any pollution poses a risk, but nature itself produces much of it and there is no escape from it. Those who are ill and have no tolerance have to be very careful and use masks etc. For most of us here in the West are living in the most unpolluted air in the past hundred years or more with levels of pollutants so low that they would have been undetectable just a few decades ago. Further reduction in human-caused pollution will have to be balanced against the cost to us all in the availability of affordable personal transport. 

Thursday, 2 November 2017

GERMANS FORCED TO SELL ELECTRICITY AT A LOSS AS STRONG WINDS OVERDRIVE TURBINES

This account looks at the electricity market madness caused by too much reliance on wild and unreliable wind in Germany. Most of the time the poor Germans have to pay a high price for their electricity, but apparently they are now producing a large excess when there are strong winds and so they have to pay some consumers to accept it, though what they can do with more electricity than they need is a question I cannot answer. Read the link for further details.

Wednesday, 1 November 2017

WIND FARMS WOULD NEED TO COVER THE WHOLE OF SCOTLAND TO POWER UK ELECTRIC VEHICLES

This Express article looks at the implications of Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon's, announcement that Scotland is to stop selling new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2032, eight years before England. It is an impossible pledge to make, but then she is not going to be in power to see it through.

Tuesday, 31 October 2017

THE ENDEMIC CLIMATE CHANGE CULTURE HERE IN THE UK

Yesterday I attended a Southern Water Stakeholder Workshop, by invitation as a local councillor. I did so in order to be better informed about the latest innovations in the water industry and to give my feedback on the future plans of the private company to tackle its various challenges. Top of its list of challenges is, guess what? Of course, it is climate change!

Here is a link to the report which runs to 47 lavishly illustrated pages. The section on climate change is from page 11 to 13 for anyone who is interested. It was written by a firm of consultants called MWH. What it reveals is how completely and utterly these businesses have absorbed the doctrine of human caused climate change. It was not as if the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the merits of the climate change hypothesis, so there was no point in my standing up to decry it - anymore than if I was to denounce the existence of god in a wedding service. Many attending a wedding may not believe in the religious aspects, but sit through it as a duty. Similarly there may be some in my workshop who have serious doubts about the climate hypothesis, but, like me, they want to find out if the waste water system is going to be more effective.

Just to pick out one of the worst excesses in the report. " Above all, the global climate is increasingly volatile.  2017 is forecast to be amongst the hottest on record.  In 2016, CO2 concentrations breached the scientifically and symbolically important 400 parts per million level, widely regarded as a potential trigger point". -  I don't no where to start here. First there is no evidence of increasing volatility in the global climate. There are and have always been extreme weather events. As for 400ppm of CO2 being a "trigger point", this is complete nonsense without any scientific merit at all. It is simply a round number.

Monday, 30 October 2017

THE COST OF TRYING TO COOL THE PLANET (AND FAILING!)

Here is the speech from Benny Peiser in the Cambridge Union debate on the motion, This House would rather cool the planet than warm the economy’. Benny, who is director of the GWPF opposed the motion and his speech contains a lot of excellent arguments. Well worth reading.

Sunday, 29 October 2017

OCEAN COOLING CONTINUES THROUGH SEPTEMBER

This report gives the details.  September NH temps almost erased a three-month climb; even so 9/2017 is well below the previous two years.  Meanwhile SH and the Tropics are setting new lows for this period.  With current reports from the El Nino 3.4 grid sector, it seems likely October will go even lower, with downward moves across all oceans.

Saturday, 28 October 2017

BBC GIVE EX POLITICIAN ED DAVEY FREE REIN TO MAKE DODGY CLAIMS ON RADIO

This article explains the hypocrisy at the BBC who only a few days ago issued an apology for allowing Lord Lawson to make a slight error on air have now allowed Ed Davey to indulge in wild speculation on the same Today programme - but of course his words were in support of the government's climate change policy, whereas Lawson was undermining it.  

Friday, 27 October 2017

UK CONSUMERS ARE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR ELECTRICITY SAYS REVIEW

This report explains how our electricity bill should be changed to try and reverse the escalating costs that consumers are faced with.
Professor Helm, who carried out the review, believes the legacy costs from the Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs), Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) and Contracts for Difference (CfDs) are a “major contributor” to rising prices and suggests ring-fencing and placing them in a “legacy bank”.
He says they should be charged “separately and explicitly” on customer bills and industrial customers should be exempt.

UPDATE
More on this here.


Thursday, 26 October 2017

SCIENCE BECOMING MORE SCEPTICAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE ALARM

This piece looks at the way science has moved to a more sceptical position in 2017. The tide appears to be turning, if this is the case it is a welcome development

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

NEW REPORT ON UK ELECTRICITY HIGHLIGHTS CONCERN OVER RELIANCE ON IMPORTED SUPPLIES

The key conclusions from the report by the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) include that:

• Interconnector capacity will almost quadruple by 2030, allowing 20% of UK electricity to be imported from Europe.

• Interconnectors can be a useful way of delivering secure and cheap supplies across Europe, given they can be used to import and export. But in Britain’s case it is increasingly one-way traffic.  In the 12 months to March 2017, the UK imported 17.22 TWh but only exported 2.78 TWh.

• There are concerns about growing reliance on imported electricity from Europe as surplus supplies there decline. This is particularly the case in light of the German elections. Germany is already decommissioning its nuclear plants. If the Greens form part of the governing coalition, as is likely, they will demand the closure of fossil-fuel plants.

• The more reliant Britain becomes on energy imported from Europe, the more vulnerable we become to disruptions in supply, to sudden price spikes, or a wider tightening of capacity which pushes up prices. (This is already set to happen.)

• This imported electricity also has an unfair competitive advantage, as it is not subject to the GB Carbon Price Floor or transmission charges faced by British generators.

• Indeed, rather than cutting carbon emissions, Britain is to some extent “offshoring” them – closing down our own coal fired power plants but continuing to buy energy from Europe which is likely to have come from plants of the same type.

All in all our electricity supply appears to be dodgy to say the least. All this is going to rebound on the government, pushing voters into the arms of our very left-wing Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn, which is another looming disaster that could have been avoided.

Tuesday, 24 October 2017

DATA FIDDLED TO GET A BAN ON CHEMICAL WEEDKILLER

This piece looks at the scandal around glyphosate (roundup) weedkiller and the attempt to get it banned. It is worth noting that none of this has been shown on any mainstream news channel here in the UK, though there was plenty of space to mention a spurious report on the decline of insects. 

Monday, 23 October 2017

UK ELECTRICITY FIRMS BEING DRIVEN OUT BY GOVERNMENT

This article explains the pressures facing the main electricity firms. There is the role out of smart meters, reputed to cost around £6 billion, then there is the prospect of coping with a massive expansion of electric vehicles and now the government's proposed cap on prices. Oh, and then there are all the green taxes to pay for the renewable (or should I say unreliable?) energy. Who would want to invest in the electricity industry in the UK today?

Sunday, 22 October 2017

THE WORLD BANK FAILS THE POOR

This piece explains how Donald Trump and the Global Warming Policy Foundation are both highlighting the failure of the World Bank to help third world countries to use the most cost-effective fuels to get power to their people.  Of course the reason is that they want to force them to develop using wind and solar energy, rather than coal or gas. In other words they are prioritising a hypothetical problem that might affect generations far into the future over the urgent needs of the poor people of today.  

Saturday, 21 October 2017

THE FAILURES OF GREEN ENERGY

This article looks at the shortcomings of green energy by studying the example of Minnesota where $15 billion has been spent on wind farms to replace electricity that already was being produced by coal, nuclear and natural gas plants.

Minnesota’s colossal investment in wind energy has been a total failure, in its own terms–a failure for which the state’s consumers and businesses have paid dearly. Historically, Minnesota enjoyed the advantage of relatively cheap electricity. Generally, electricity prices were around 18% lower in Minnesota than the national average.  Since then the billions spent on windmills and transmission lines has led to this cheap electricity advantage disappearing. In fact, 2017 is the first year on record in which the price of electricity in Minnesota is above the national average

Friday, 20 October 2017

FIRST OFF SHORE WINDFARM RETIRES - LESSONS MUST BE LEARNT

looks at the lessons that should be learnt from its performance. Here is one important paragraph:

"The secret of the fossil fuel success in the world economy is the high calorific value of the fuel. A ton of coal costing £42.50 produces of the order of 2000 kWh of electricity in a new coal-fired power plants (up 30% from older plants). This sells for £400 wholesale, with an energy return on energy invested (EROEI) of 10:1. A therm of natural gas costs £0.40, and produces 30 kWh of electricity, which sells for £6, representing an EROEI of 15:1.  Fuel-less technologies do not have this advantage."

Thursday, 19 October 2017

PETITION TO US EPA CHIEF TO REVOKE CO2 ENDANGERMENT FINDING

This post looks at the letters sent to US EPA chief, Scott Pruitt, urging him to revoke the endangerment finding for carbon dioxide which underpins so many other policies to clamp down on uses of fossil fuels. 

Wednesday, 18 October 2017

PUBLIC INDIFFERENT TO CLIMATE NEGOTIATIONS, SAYS SURVEY

This report gives the background to this headline. I am inclined to agree with commenter, jeandemeung, who writes of the Paris agreement to limit CO2 emissions:

"First, there were no binding commitments. This is a huge strike against it right there, the only way the commitments, such as they are, would have been met would have been if they were binding.

Second, the biggest and fastest growing emitters made no commitments to reduce, even within the voluntary and good will nature of the agreement.

Third, all the studies done since have come to the same conclusion, that the result of the agreement, even if fulfilled to the letter, will have no measurable effect on global warming. Tiny fractions of a degree C are usually quoted."

What he is saying makes sense, in that the Paris agreement will (if you believe that urgent and draconian action is essential to save the planet) be too little to have any effect.

Jean then goes on to say: "This may have had something to do with the fact that the world's biggest polluter (China) was not prepared to sign up to making any reductions. An example which will have encouraged the entire developing world, and which is a significant indicator that actually the Chinese political and intellectual establishment are not persuaded that there is any real problem. I don't think there is any evidence the Russians are either for that matter, nor the Indians.

Lets be more constructive, admit the failure, and ask what sort of international event it would take to reverse the public indifference.

Surely it would be a really draconian agreement? Surely it would be one where all governments signed up to binding, real tonnage reductions. And these should be very large, they should be ones that will only be possible with very big and visible lifestyle changes. Like, for instance, closing down the automobile industry and investing heavily creating an environment in which work and leisure can take place using public transport.

One in which the biggest emitter talks to its people, tells them that economic growth of the kind they have enjoyed so far has come to an end, and that they must all work together on a different kind of great leap forward, and go back to the bicycle."

So Jean believes a much more draconian agreement is needed. But this has no chance of happening as the leaders of these countries either do not believe it is a real or urgent problem, or they know that they could not sell such an agreement to their people.

All the surveys show that, even though a significant number of people claim to believe that urgent action is needed, they are not prepared to make major changes to their lives to achieve it. That is the reality.


Tuesday, 17 October 2017

AUSSIES TO DUMP CLEAN ENERGY TARGET

This post explains the reasoning. This is excellent news on top of President Trump quitting the Paris agreement. It is, perhaps, the start of cracks appearing in this scientific fraud. There is still a long way to go, but it shows that when governments make decisions that adversely impact peoples lives by hiking electricity prices, for example, they soon find the pressure mounting to reverse those decisions. This is particularly true when there is an opposition party ready to offer an alternative.

Monday, 16 October 2017

UK TAXATION POLICY POST 2020 - DOMINATED BY CLIMATE CHANGE

This piece gives the details of the policy that gives a clear though only sketchy indication that electricity sector policy will move towards carbon taxation post 2020. £1.2 billion will be spent “to make cycling and walking the natural choices for shorter journeys”. The government is actually considering an annual “Green Great Britain Week” which will, the Strategy tells us:
Focus on climate and air quality issues across the UK
Share the latest climate science
Demonstrate our progress and successes on climate action
Highlight and promote economic opportunities arising from clean growth especially to international investors 

I think it may be that before long people will come out to protest as their energy price increases start to become more obviously due to government policy. 





Sunday, 15 October 2017

PRESIDENT TRUMP APPOINTS A CLIMATE SCEPTIC TO TOP WHITE HOUSE JOB

This article explains the details. Although progress in unravelling all this climate alarmist bureaucracy seems very slow, at least it is heading in the right direction. If only we in the UK had made half as much, but, sadly there is no one in a position of power here to stop the mad dash for high energy prices.

Saturday, 14 October 2017

RELAX ABOUT SEA LEVEL RISE

Jo Nova has an excellent index on her blog and under the heading of "sea  level" there are a number of excellent posts which will bring you up to speed with this aspect of the global warming narrative. The general message is in the title of this post.



Friday, 13 October 2017

TWO BIG CRACKS IN THE CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA EDIFICE IN ONE DAY

This article puts the case for major setbacks for climate alarmism. While no doubt these are serious setbacks, there is still some way to go. Nevertheless it is welcome news and it helps to stiffen the sinews of those in front-line politics who might otherwise be too timid to put their true views in the public domain. 

Thursday, 12 October 2017

USA EPA TO SCRAP CLEAN POWER PLAN

This article gives the details. At last the EPA is on the side of the people.  My hope is that if this goes ahead other governments may follow, but it's not guaranteed.

More details here.

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

CAN YOU HELP A STUDENT WITH HIS CLIMATE CHANGE SURVEY?

The following email came into my councillor's inbox on Monday, so, of course I took part.

Dear Councillor,

I am a PhD Student at Northumbria University, currently researching under the title of "Climate Change Perception, Reaction and Engagement in the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies: the case of youth participation”. My research would benefit greatly with input and opinions from councillors within the local government sector. I was hoping if you had some spare time you would be willing to complete a questionnaire. The questionnaire should only take roughly 10 minutes to complete, it follows all the Data Protection Laws, and only over 18 year olds can complete it.

The Questionnaire Link: here

If you are able to, why not help this research student with his PhD. I am sure he would welcome the views of others who are not councillors.

Looking at the title of his project I was surprised to see that it was about "the case of youth participation" in climate change (even though he says the survey is only open to those over 18) and yet he had asked the views of councillors, most of whom are far beyond the youth category, sadly. I suspect that my answers were not what he was expecting. I ticked the box at the end, saying that I would like to see his finished survey results. If I get them I will put them on the blog.


Tuesday, 10 October 2017

COLDEST EUROPEAN WINTER OF THE 21ST CENTURY PREDICTED

Here is the article giving this prediction which I am merely reporting. We will all be able to see how good a prediction this was in a few months time. 

Monday, 9 October 2017

AUSSIE CLIMATE SCEPTICS WEAR DOWN THE BoM

This article highlights the dogged way in which climate sceptics in Australia are keeping up the pressure on the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) to come clean over their data. Thanks to the campaigners and press backing, the BoM have been forced to answer some awkward questions. Progress is slow, but at least the public are beginning to see that there are serious issues over the integrity of the data. If only a similar light could be shone on our own Met Office. 

Sunday, 8 October 2017

WORLD WIND SPEEDS ARE SLOWING DOWN SINCE 1960 SAY SCIENTISTS

This article gives the details of this little known phenomenon. "Stilling" as it is called has important effects, the article explains. Of course some suggest that climate change may be behind the drop due to changing patterns in the way air circulates around the planet. Others say it could be due to ageing wind speed instruments producing inaccurate results. It sounds like there is much more research to be done - requiring more government funding no doubt!

Saturday, 7 October 2017

DECEITFUL CAMPAIGN BY UK OFFSHORE WIND LOBBY TO INFLUENCE MPS LEADS TO COMPLAINT

This piece explains how the claims of a reduction in the price of electricity from offshore wind farms is untrue. In most cases the prices paid for electricity from the UK’s offshore wind fleet have not fallen at all, and though there were small cuts to subsidies for new offshore projects built from 2015 on, this amounted to a reduction of around 5%.  The ads at Westminster station are deliberately misleading MPs and the wider public into thinking that existing wind farms have been cutting their prices by 50%.

Friday, 6 October 2017

USA EPA TO PROPOSE REPEALING THE CLEAN POWER PLAN

This piece provides the details. The Clean Power Plan, or CPP, was challenged in court by 27 states after Obama’s administration launched it in 2015. It is currently suspended by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which set a deadline of Friday for a status report from the EPA on how it plans to proceed.

Thursday, 5 October 2017

COMMON SENSE ON GW FROM A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING PHYSICIST

This 30 minute video is delivered in a very understated manner but it contains a lot of simple truths.  It was delivered by Ivar Giaever , born in 1929, who is a Norwegian-American physicist who shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1973. He is not a climate scientist, but he raises a lot of issues that need to be given more consideration.


Tuesday, 3 October 2017

"PLAN B" CLIMATE ALARMISTS WANT TO FORCE 100% EMISSIONS CUT BY 2050 ON UK

This article reveals yet more lunacy from a small group of climate alarmists here in the UK calling themselves "Plan B", including the former chief scientist to the government, Prof Sir David King. "Ministers should tighten the UK's official climate change target - or face the courts", the government's former chief scientist has said. I wish he could have his day in court, if only the government took a different view, but I fear they actually agree with him and so will probably simply amend the current 80% target to 100%. What could be easier than that? I particularly liked this: "The science has clearly hardened since the Climate Change Act was agreed," said Tim Crosland, a former government lawyer. Jonathan Crow, Attorney General to Prince Charles, and a former senior Treasury lawyer, would be the man to argue the case in court.

Perhaps some sceptics should take the government to court instead to try and get them to reduce the target. Let's abolish the target altogether and call it "Plan C" for common sense.  Far from the science hardening, the fact is the recent evidence is that warming has been a lot lower than predicted and the expected future warming is also expected to be lower. Not only that, but also other nations are not reducing their emissions in line with our present target. In fact the biggest emitters are planning to increase their emissions for the next decade or more. Any cuts that we make would be wiped out by the likes of China and India in one year. 

Monday, 2 October 2017

GREAT BARRIER REEF DAMAGE GREATLY EXAGGERATED

This article refers to the exaggerated statements by alarmists and how recent studies now contradict them. What we are seeing, yet again, is an attempt to get the public to support punitive measures to restrict the use of fossil fuels by making out that the damage they are causing is far worse than is the case. The more these attempts are found out the less support they will get. It is a classic story of the boy who cried wolf. 

Sunday, 1 October 2017

JUDGES DECISION MAY FORCE TRUMP TO REVERSE ENDANGERMENT FINDING

This piece sets out the reason why the President may have to act. Despite the 20-year non-warming, which clearly shows that the models are worthless for prediction, the Federal Appeals Court in Washington recently blocked a new natural gas pipeline’s regulatory approval. This ruling encourages Greens to keep thinking they can regulate gas and oil production and transport into oblivion.

Saturday, 30 September 2017

AT LAST - THE GOVERNMENT IS STARTING TO NOTICE THE HARMFUL EMISSIONS FROM BURNING WOOD

This article explains how particles of soot are increasing in UK cities as more people are switching to wood-burning stoves to heat their homes. Having encouraged the take-up of these stoves to cut emissions of CO2 our government is now waking up to the pollution they cause. Yet more foolishness in a pointless attempt to save the planet.

Friday, 29 September 2017

EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO PROTECT US FROM EXTREME WEATHER - OR REDUCE CO2?

This piece looks at the alternative to spending $ billions on reducing CO2 emissions. It is making  our cities more resilient to extreme weather. It is a very important consideration and most people who were asked this question would (with a little forethought) select the one that offered real protection, as opposed to something that offered pie in the sky. I leave the reader to decide which is which!

Thursday, 28 September 2017

PREDICTIONS OF CONTROLLING BEHAVIOUR OVER SMART METERS COMING OUT IN UK

This Daily Mail article shows the behaviour of our power companies in their quest to get us to change over to smart meters. All this is so predictable. When the majority have been hooked the rest will become subject to even more coercive tactics. So don't give in.

Wednesday, 27 September 2017

BOOSTS FOR CLIMATE SCEPTICS

This article explains how climate sceptics are beginning to win the scientific arguments against climate alarm. Gradually the alarmists are being forced to concede that their models have exaggerated the degree of warming. 

Tuesday, 26 September 2017

GREEN ACTIVISTS DECLARE WAR ON PIPELINES

This piece looks at the increasingly desperate and dangerous methods being employed by eco-fanatics to try and disrupt the flow of fossil fuels in the USA. Lt us hope the forces of law and order can prevail as this is also a method that could be adopted by the Muslim fundamentalists crowd too. 

Monday, 25 September 2017

AUSSIE CLIMATE SCEPTICS GET SERIOUS ABOUT CHALLENGING ALARMISM

This piece shows the large "advertisement" in a major Australian newspaper paid for by climate sceptics. I wonder if or when we shall see anything similar in the British press? 

Sunday, 24 September 2017

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTIONS?

This article attempts to explain the contradictions at the heart of the climate change hypothesis. What I want to know is, how long can they keep this pretence going?

Saturday, 23 September 2017

GERMANY'S $800 BILLION MERKEL-MADE CLIMATE DISASTER

This article looks at how the Germans are paying three times the price of USA electricity and yet 40% of it comes from coal. At a cost of $800 billion it's a wonder that Merkel has any chance of getting re-elected, yet she has. Clearly the opposition are missing something

Friday, 22 September 2017

DON'T BET ON THE GOVERNMENT RETURNING TO SANITY ON CLIMATE

This article is by UK Labour MP, Graham Stringer, who as a trained scientist has long been sceptical of the climate change hypothesis. He has been attacked for his stance and even though the climate scientists have revised their opinion on the need for immediate action (slightly), he does not expect any change of direction.

Thursday, 21 September 2017

PATRICK MOORE'S BACKGROUND AND HIS GREAT LECTURE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Patrick Moore was a leading figure in the Greenpeace organisation and he now gives talks where he opposes many of the things they now advocate. In this lecture he explains his journey and why he now believes that banning fossil fuels is wrong. It is a very interesting lecture, well delivered. A real tour-de-force.

Wednesday, 20 September 2017

ELECTRIC CARS ARE STILL A LONG WAY OFF FOR MOST OF US

This piece looks at the reality of the introduction of electric vehicles in the UK. In short it will take a lot longer than the 2040 year announced by the government, otherwise we will have chaos. For a start there are nowhere near enough charging points available, and even if there were there is insufficient capacity in the grid to power them. Also there is a lot of resistance by the public to buy them for a whole number of reasons including cost, fear of being left stranded with a flat battery being two.

The public will need a lot of persuading. I expect we will see a gradual ban on non-electric cars being allowed into cities as well as increased taxes on petrol and diesel. That will change hearts and minds, as well as a gradual drop in the number of petrol stations. Bu I still think it will be at least 2050 before fossil fuelled cars become a rare sight - that is if the government does not change its mind before then as global warming becomes even more of a sick joke.  

Tuesday, 19 September 2017

GLOBAL WARMING "NOT AS BAD AS WE THOUGHT", SAY SCIENTISTS

This piece in today's Mail explains the latest thinking of these climate alarmist scientists. Are they getting their excuses in early, knowing that their previous predictions are now so way out that they know they will be rumbled? I note they seem to think that China is slowing down its emissions much faster than predicted. The sounds like a pretty weak excuse as world emissions are still continuing to rise. How long before they have to admit they were completely wrong? Perhaps another decade will force their hand.

More comment on this story at the GWPF

And a good summary on JoNova's website

Monday, 18 September 2017

SMART METERS - MORE GRIEF COMES TO LIGHT

This piece gives a good overview of the issues. Basically the government are desperate to get the public to install these meters. They claim it's to "help them cut their bills", but the truth is that the likely savings are minimal, whereas the cost of installing them is £420 per house.

This article gives more details. At the end of the article is a piece about the smart meters project being way behind target. The article mentions "an end to estimated billing" and "real-time information" being sent from these meters. What they don't say is that this is likely (almost certain) to lead to real-time pricing and automatic switching off of smart appliances. These meters will lead to customers finding it virtually impossible to check their bills and lay them open to being over-charged. Before this can happen the government need the majority of people to sign up. Let's hope they continue to be wary of this "big brother" project, disguised as a money-saving scheme.  

Sunday, 17 September 2017

TRUMP SAYS "NO CHANGE" ON PARIS AGREEMENT

This headline may seem as though he is changing his mind on quitting the Paris climate accord, but in reality nothing has changed. He always said he would look at substantial renegotiation to give the USA much better terms, but this was never a realistic option. Donald Trump has proved himself to be a man of his word and I believe he will see this through, despite the enormous pressure he is under to change his mind.

ARE OCEAN CYCLES BEHIND CLIMATE CHANGE?

This report gives us the evidence for this hypothesis. It is a serious alternative to the tenuous idea of human induced climate change.

Saturday, 16 September 2017

IS THERE A COOLING UNDERWAY? THIS VIDEO-MAKER THINKS SO

This video sounds a very alarmist tone, but not for global warming. It is giving us all the signals for the opposite. If he is right it will not be pleasant for us, but at least it should see the end of talk of an impending disaster from global warming. It would be interesting to see the warmist alarmists eating humble pie.

Friday, 15 September 2017

BEWARE BEFORE YOU SWITCH TO AN ELECTRIC CAR

This article from the Mail reports  a worrying (though not surprising) development in the slowly unfolding electric car fiasco. Energy companies are now wanting to use "smart technology" to be able to switch off the home car charging system in times of high demand, and/or the introduction of high tariffs at times of high demand. No doubt the government will also use this technology to add new taxes to recoup the losses from falling petrol and diesel sales.

Thursday, 14 September 2017

DANGEROUS CLIMATE CHANGE IN 2019

This video is very well presented and makes a convincing case.  

Wednesday, 13 September 2017

BRILLIANTLY EXPRESSED ARTICLE ON THE INTOLERANCE OF CLIMATE ALARMISTS

Bias and intolerance - from the Scientific Alliance

While many people pay lip service to objectivity and provide evidence in support of their assertions, true objectivity is very rare. Science is supposedly a body of knowledge assembled dispassionately by researchers looking at all available evidence in a totally unbiased way. This, at least, is the utopian vision encapsulated by Karl Popper, who argued that any scientific hypothesis should only be regarded as valid until falsified (for which even a single verifiable piece of evidence is sufficient).

All very straightforward, but such a purist view of science ignores the facts that scientists are human and evidence is often open to interpretation. Despite the attraction of Popper’s views, the philosopher who surely more clearly covers the reality of scientific progress is Thomas Kuhn, who argued that knowledge advances via a series of paradigm shifts. In simple terms, one version of received wisdom is replaced by another only when a sufficient body of evidence has accumulated for a change in the consensus view to occur.

The unfortunate downside of this reality is that dissent is often not tolerated by the scientific establishment until new evidence or a different interpretation of existing evidence becomes simply too compelling to ignore. Influential scientists build their reputations by breaking new ground when they are young but, by and large, plough the same furrow for the rest of their careers while entrenching themselves as experts in their field (with apologies to anyone who thinks that is an extended metaphor too far…).

A new paradigm may take decades to become established, needing the expert arbiters of the old one to retire before the next generation acquire the status of defenders of the new truth. Having spent one’s life researching and promoting one view of reality, it goes against human nature to give in gracefully and – in effect – admit that your career was spent going down a blind alley.

With this in mind, it becomes more and more difficult to defend science as the path to true knowledge but, even as practised by researchers with all the normal human frailties, the scientific method remains the best guide we have. The alternative is to promote personal theories based on no evidence at all or, at best, supported by the flimsiest of correlation or circumstantial evidence (beware the weasel words ‘linked to’, for example).

The problem with some hypotheses is that they are difficult to falsify, largely because solid evidence is hard to come by. A classic case is climate change. Trying to be objective (while recognising the difficulty of this), the current paradigm is that average global temperature is rising at an unprecedented rate because the increasing level of greenhouse gases (primarily carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere (mainly driven by human use of fossil fuels and agriculture) is causing a positive feedback process. Unless drastic action is taken, the argument goes, this will cause temperatures to increase to a level that will have dire consequences for our species and others.

In fact, very few people would argue with the fact that, all things being equal, the steady increase in atmospheric CO2 will tend to increase average temperatures. The crux of the controversy on the issue is the extent of this rise and the knock-on effect on weather extremes, sea level etc. Put like that, it sounds a bit like the modern equivalent of the apocryphal theological argument about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but with rather more serious real world consequences.

The dispute has become bitter indeed, with defenders of the current paradigm tarring anyone who questions the received wisdom with the brush of ‘denialism’. Their influence is such that, in the case of the BBC, anyone critical of the paradigm is effectively banned. Of course, as the defender of free speech and balanced argument, the Beeb would beg to differ with this interpretation: they argue that what has become known as the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis (CAGW) is, in effect, now unassailable truth.

To be fair to this venerable institution, they share this view with most of what can be called the Establishment, which these days is overwhelming Left-leaning and liberal. For whatever reason, there are very few people in this part of the political map who question the paradigm or, indeed, will tolerate others who do the questioning. For many who may have their doubts, the power of groupthink is often enough to steer them back towards the straight and narrow. After all, who wants to be ostracised from the group?

In August Al Gore (oh so nearly 43rd President of the United States) gave an interview on BBC Radio 4 to promote his new film, An Inconvenient Sequel. In this, he is apparently guilty of claiming that record temperatures, flooding and rising sea levels were proof of the argument he made in An Inconvenient Truth that climate change would bring an increase in extreme weather events. For this, he was taken to task by Lord Lawson, erstwhile Chancellor of the Exchequer under Margaret Thatcher and now chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

This air time for a known sceptic of the extent and impact of warming predicted by proponents of the CAGW hypothesis was a welcome sign of tolerance of alternative positions, albeit a rather rare one. However, the BBC chose to follow this up with a report on its website about Anger over ‘untrue’ climate claims. Lord Lawson was hauled over the coals in particular for questioning Mr Gore’s claim that "climate-related extreme weather events have grown far more numerous and far more destructive".

Two high-profile scientists who broadcast on the Beeb made strong criticisms. Professor Brian Cox said it was "irresponsible and highly misleading to give the impression that there is a meaningful debate about the science", while Jim al-Khalili said via Twitter "For @BBCr4today to bring on Lord Lawson 'in the name of balance' on climate change is both ignorant and irresponsible. Shame on you. There should be NO debate anymore about climate change. We (the world minus Trump/Lawson et al) have moved on."

I have to say that I find this very worrying. We should expect false arguments to be exposed by debate and questioning rather than simply suppressed in a way akin to the ‘no platforming’ of people in other fields whose views may be controversial. Unfortunately, in the case of climate change, there is a danger that the Scientific Establishment might be seen to be censoring critics because their own arguments are not as watertight as they say.

This should only encourage dissenters to make their voices heard. At the end of the day, free debate, backed up by credible arguments, is the only way to advance our understanding, and those brave enough to put their heads above the parapet should be praised rather than condemned and ignored. Without a good understanding of the problem, we cannot develop an optimal solution.

Tuesday, 12 September 2017

AUSSIE CLIMATE RECORDS - A CATALOGUE OF ERRORS

Here are the details of the many incidents of errors in the Australian climate data compiled by their Bureau of Meteorology. It is amazing that all the errors are in one direction - to make the warming seem higher. 

Monday, 11 September 2017

SUNSPOTS MAKE AN UNEXPECTED RETURN

This article explains what is happening with our star.

Sunday, 10 September 2017

PRESENT HURRICANE SEASON IN CONTEXT

This article puts the current hurricane season in the context of past years and finds that it is not even in the top ten. Any strong hurricane is a deadly phenomenon, but the idea that reducing CO2 will reduce them in numbers or severity is mere fiction, a foolish pipe-dream,

UPDATE
This article on WattsUpWithThat gives some good points to show how much climate alarmists like Michael Mann have distorted the evidence.

Also This piece explains the reasons why these hurricanes behaved as they did, and why there is nothing unique about them.

Saturday, 9 September 2017

USA PROFESSORS SPEAK OUT FOR FREEDOM TO THINK INDEPENDENTLY

Below is a letter which proposes that students should think for themselves, to which we should all add "here, here".

Sixteen college professors signed a letter urging students to respect everyone’s right to think and speak for themselves.
August 29, 2017
We are scholars and teachers at Princeton, Harvard, and Yale who have some thoughts to share and advice to offer students who are headed off to colleges around the country. Our advice can be distilled to three words:
Think for yourself.
Now, that might sound easy. But you will find—as you may have discovered already in high school—that thinking for yourself can be a challenge. It always demands self-discipline and these days can require courage.
In today’s climate, it’s all-too-easy to allow your views and outlook to be shaped by dominant opinion on your campus or in the broader academic culture. The danger any student—or faculty member—faces today is falling into the vice of conformism, yielding to groupthink.
At many colleges and universities what John Stuart Mill called “the tyranny of public opinion” does more than merely discourage students from dissenting from prevailing views on moral, political, and other types of questions. It leads them to suppose that dominant views are so obviously correct that only a bigot or a crank could question them.
Since no one wants to be, or be thought of as, a bigot or a crank, the easy, lazy way to proceed is simply by falling into line with campus orthodoxies.
Don’t do that. Think for yourself.
Thinking for yourself means questioning dominant ideas even when others insist on their being treated as unquestionable. It means deciding what one believes not by conforming to fashionable opinions, but by taking the trouble to learn and honestly consider the strongest arguments to be advanced on both or all sides of questions—including arguments for positions that others revile and want to stigmatize and against positions others seek to immunize from critical scrutiny.
The love of truth and the desire to attain it should motivate you to think for yourself. The central point of a college education is to seek truth and to learn the skills and acquire the virtues necessary to be a lifelong truth-seeker. Open-mindedness, critical thinking, and debate are essential to discovering the truth. Moreover, they are our best antidotes to bigotry.
Merriam-Webster’s first definition of the word “bigot” is a person “who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.” The only people who need fear open-minded inquiry and robust debate are the actual bigots, including those on campuses or in the broader society who seek to protect the hegemony of their opinions by claiming that to question those opinions is itself bigotry.
So don’t be tyrannized by public opinion. Don’t get trapped in an echo chamber. Whether you in the end reject or embrace a view, make sure you decide where you stand by critically assessing the arguments for the competing positions.
Think for yourself.
Good luck to you in college!
Paul Bloom
Brooks and Suzanne Ragen Professor of Psychology
Yale University
Nicholas Christakis
Sol Goldman Family Professor of Social and Natural Science
Yale University
Carlos Eire
T. Lawrason Riggs Professor of History and Religious Studies
Yale University
Maria E. Garlock
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Co-Director of the Program in Architecture and Engineering
Princeton University
David Gelernter
Professor of Computer Science
Yale University
Robert P. George
McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions
Princeton University
Mary Ann Glendon
Learned Hand Professor of Law
Harvard University
Joshua Katz
Cotsen Professor in the Humanities and Professor of Classics
Princeton University
Thomas P. Kelly
Professor of Philosophy
Princeton University
Jon Levenson
Albert A. List Professor of Jewish Studies
Harvard University
John B. Londregan
Professor of Politics and International Affairs
Princeton University
Michael A. Reynolds
Associate Professor of Near Eastern Studies
Princeton University
Jacqueline C. Rivers
Lecturer in Sociology and African and African-American Studies
Harvard University
Noël Valis
Professor of Spanish
Yale University
Tyler VanderWeele
Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Director of the Program on Integrative Knowledge and Human Flourishing
Harvard University
Adrian Vermeule
Ralph S. Tyler, Jr. Professor of Constitutional Law
Harvard University

Friday, 8 September 2017

THE PROBLEM FOR POLITICIANS LAID BARE

This post gives the details of the problem, which is that although many of the public claim to believe that climate change is a problem, they are not prepared to pay much to have renewable energy. So, as soon as the cost of energy starts to hurt them in the pocket they are likely to turn out the politicians who caused this. It must be a real dilemma for them.

Thursday, 7 September 2017

FISH ARE ABLE TO COPE WITH pH CHANGES

This article gives the details of this study. The good news is that fish seem able to cope with any likely changes that might occur to pH. This is no great surprise as the pH of sea water varies by quite a wide margin across the various seas and oceans and even within them.

Wednesday, 6 September 2017

NEW STUDY CLAIMS THAT CO2 CAUSED RAPID WARMING 56 MILLION YEARS AGO

Here is an interesting article that attempts to equate a period of rapid warming in the past (56 million years ago) with the situation today where CO2 levels are increasing, as they apparently were then. The article does not give all the details needed to prove their case, in fact it raises quite a few questions. The first is, how can they be certain that it was not the warming which caused the CO2 level to rise rather than the CO2 which caused the warming? The article states that the ocean temperature was 10 degrees C warmer than now, which would mean that the oceans would dissolve much less CO2, meaning that atmospheric levels would be much higher. Also the level of CO2 at that time was believed to be much higher than now and the temperature was also much higher and yet there was no runaway warming. It peaked at about 5 degrees of increase and then reduced.   

Tuesday, 5 September 2017

WILL THE UK CONVERT TO HYDROGEN GAS?

This article looks at the idea and the drawbacks. The main drawback is the enormous cost which the government will be reluctant to admit. Another concern is the added risk of leaks and explosions. All this to save a relatively small amount of CO2 emissions which would make an undetectable change to global temperatures.

Monday, 4 September 2017

WAS HARVEY MORE INTENSE BECAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING?

This article discusses this important question. It is important because it is implied in a huge number of articles and new items, almost subliminally. In fact we have been so sensitised to this that many will instinctively think it even if nothing is said. Those that "believe" in climate change automatically link every episode of severe weather to it in their mind. This is just what the promoters of this hope for. Luckily the IPCC have explicitly said there is not sufficient evidence for a link, but I would not be surprised to find them shifting their position by the time of the next report. If only the press and the TV would report the evidence and not just the hype. Sadly hype sells papers. 

Sunday, 3 September 2017

ARCTIC SEA ICE UP 25% SINCE 2012, GREENLAND 50% ABOVE NORMAL

This article gives the details to show that in recent years the trend of ice retreat has changed.  We now appear to be seeing signs to back up the hypothesis of a new cooling trend, possibly linked to a sunspot minimum like the earlier Maunder Minimum between 1645 and 1715 which was linked to the mini ice age. 

Saturday, 2 September 2017

BACKLASH AGAINST OFF-SHORE WIND IN NEW YORK

This article looks at what is happening. At last people are seeing what is happening and doing things to stop it.

Friday, 1 September 2017

NO INCREASE IN FLOODING IN N. AMERICA AND EUROPE - NEW STUDY


G.A. Hodgkins et al., Journal of Hydrology, September 2017

“The results of this study, for North America and Europe, provide a firmer foundation and support the conclusion of the IPCC that compelling evidence for increased flooding at a global scale is lacking.” 


Fig. 2. Monthly distribution of floods with ≥25 year return periods for 1204 study gauges from 1961 to 2010, by major Köppen-Geiger climate for North America on the left in green and Europe on the right in blue. Monthly values are percent of total number of floods with > 25 year return periods for each Köppen-Geiger climate.

G.A. Hodgkins et al., Climate-driven variability in the occurrence of major floods across North America and Europe, Journal of Hydrology, Volume 552, September 2017, Pages 704-717

Abstract

Concern over the potential impact of anthropogenic climate change on flooding has led to a proliferation of studies examining past flood trends. Many studies have analysed annual-maximum flow trends but few have quantified changes in major (25–100 year return period) floods, i.e. those that have the greatest societal impacts. Existing major-flood studies used a limited number of very large catchments affected to varying degrees by alterations such as reservoirs and urbanisation. In the current study, trends in major-flood occurrence from 1961 to 2010 and from 1931 to 2010 were assessed using a very large dataset (>1200 gauges) of diverse catchments from North America and Europe; only minimally altered catchments were used, to focus on climate-driven changes rather than changes due to catchment alterations. Trend testing of major floods was based on counting the number of exceedances of a given flood threshold within a group of gauges. Evidence for significant trends varied between groups of gauges that were defined by catchment size, location, climate, flood threshold and period of record, indicating that generalizations about flood trends across large domains or a diversity of catchment types are ungrounded. Overall, the number of significant trends in major-flood occurrence across North America and Europe was approximately the number expected due to chance alone. Changes over time in the occurrence of major floods were dominated by multidecadal variability rather than by long-term trends. There were more than three times as many significant relationships between major-flood occurrence and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation than significant long-term trends. […]

5. Conclusions

Reference hydrologic networks isolate catchments where climate has been the principal driver of streamflow change by minimizing other drivers, such as regulation, diversions and urbanisation. The relationship between floods and climate change is more difficult to discern where catchments have been altered, making attribution to any single driver uncertain.

Trends over time in the occurrence of major floods (exceeding 25, 50, and 100 year return periods) in North America and Europe were evaluated for 1961–2010 and 1931–2010. All gauges drain catchments that are considered by local and national experts to be minimally affected by catchment alterations. Trend testing of major floods required the grouping of gauges. The 1204 gauges that met study criteria for 1961–2010 and the 322 gauges for 1931–2010 were grouped by continent, Köppen-Geiger climate and catchment size. The number of significant trends for 246 groups of gauges was approximately the same as would be expected by chance alone.

There were more than three times as many groups of gauges with significant relationships between the number of annual major floods and annual values of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation than expected due to chance. Catchment size was important to the results; there were significant negative relations between floods and the AMO at large (>1000 km2) North American catchments and significant positive relations at medium (100–1000 km2) European catchments. The opposite relations between European and North American major flood occurrence and the AMO are consistent with previous work on general wetness and dryness related to the AMO. There were no significant relationships, for any group of catchments, between major flood occurrence and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

The results of this study, for North America and Europe, provide a firmer foundation and support the conclusion of the IPCC (Hartmann et al., 2013) that compelling evidence for increased flooding at a global scale is lacking.

Generalizations about climate-driven changes in floods across large domains or diverse catchment types that are based upon small samples of catchments or short periods of record are ungrounded. Networks of streamflow data from minimally altered catchments will provide an essential foundation for future efforts to understand the complex temporal and spatial dynamics of major floods.

Full paper

Thursday, 31 August 2017

MET OFFICE FIDDLES DATA TO CONTRIVE NEW BANK HOLIDAY TEMPERATURE RECORD

This post gives the details of a shocking revision of the temperature record by the UK Met Office in a blatant attempt to produce a new record temperature for the UK August Bank Holiday.  When one looks at the evidence there seems to be only one explanation which is that they want to produce "evidence" to back up the assertion that the planet is warming, however tenuous it is. This seems to be the cause celebre and it needs to be given prominence.

Wednesday, 30 August 2017

UK OIL REFINING - IS IT THE END?

 This report suggests that it is very likely if we move to electric vehicles in large numbers over the next two decades. Personally I still think it is doubtful if this will happen unless the government bring in some extra "incentives", such as much higher taxes on petrol. 

Tuesday, 29 August 2017

THE REAL CATASTROPHE - 600 MILLION AFRICANS WITHOUT ELECTRICITY

This article gives the details and explains why they are going to use coal to get their electricity. How can very wealthy Westerners like Al Gore claim that climate change is the most dangerous threat when so many others in the world are living such a meagre existence is beyond me.

Monday, 28 August 2017

EDUCATION GIVES WAY TO INDOCTRINATION

This article (which I only just came across) gives an insight into how education is being changed. It would appear that, in science, students are simply being fed with one-sided propaganda instead of being taught to look at the facts and come to their own conclusions. Very sad!

Sunday, 27 August 2017

BIOMASS CAUSES MORE SMALL PARTICLE POLLUTION THAN CARS

This piece explains how the public have enthusiastically taken up wood-burning stoves, encouraged by the government, even though they give out far more pollution than cars. What is going on? 

Saturday, 26 August 2017

AN INCONVENIENT DECEPTION

Here's a good rebuttal to Al Gore's new effort. It is by Roy Spencer who is one of the leading scientists working on the UAH satellite temperature data. The link is to an excellent summary by Paul Homewood who is, rightly, getting a lot of credit for his tireless work to combat the distortions and exaggerations put out by people such as Gore.

Friday, 25 August 2017

COAL MAKES A COMEBACK IN THE USA

This piece explains how the rule changes made by president Trump have breathed new life into the USA coal industry. Even exports to the UK have more than doubled. 

Thursday, 24 August 2017

ARCTIC ICE TRENDS - AN IN DEPTH LOOK AT HISTORIC VARIATION

This post shows that our knowledge of the Arctic is very incomplete and that if we are able to look back beyond 1979 when the first satellite data became available we see that the ice quantity has varied much more than many people have assumed. Today's levels are far from being unique, or worrying.

Wednesday, 23 August 2017

COMPARING NATIONAL ELECTRICITY PRICES

This piece has comparison tables and explains why some nations have much higher prices than others. The ones which rely on wind and solar fare the worst, in general, though taxation also plays a part.

Tuesday, 22 August 2017

USA CLIMATE REPORT REHASHES AND EXAGGERATES IPCC REPORT

U.S. Climate Policy -- Get Ready For The Next Round Of HypeFox News, 15 August 2017

W. David Montgomery

Preparations are well underway in the liberal media to make August 18 a milestone in the history of climate policy.  That is the date when a special U.S. government report on the state of climate science by authors from 13 federal agencies, known as the U.S. Global Change Research Program, is due to be released. 

But if August 18 does become a day to be remembered, it will be as a much-hyped political event, not a scientific one. The substance of the USGCRP report apparently only rehashes, at great length, research that was assessed even more exhaustively in the Fifth Assessment Report or FAR, published in 2013 by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The report’s claim of progress is supported by lists of advances in climate science since 2013, but the major conclusions of the report are no different from the FAR and are based on the same materials.  Over and over, the report states that support for its conclusions comes from the FAR.

What is different is that the well-known research findings -- well known to experts, anyway -- are summarized in the USGCRP document in a way that makes them appear newer, stronger and more alarmist than they really are.

The New York Times stoked the hype by claiming on August 7 that it had unearthed the report from where it was being hidden by Trump Administration doubters, when in truth drafts of the report were readily available and posted for public comment.

In summary, there is little new about climate science in the report, and nothing at all new about attribution of past warming and extreme weather events to human activity, projections of future warming and its effects, or potential for catastrophic changes.

Then the Times became excited about how the report would finally force the administration to admit the reality of climate change.  The Times even embedded a video of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in one article, with the heading “A draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies directly contradicts statements by Scott Pruitt, the E.P.A. administrator, that human contribution to climate change is uncertain.” But the USGCRP report itself recognizes and describes the uncertainty of climate science, which all involved except the Times editors understand.

The headline and editorial writers are having a wonderful time inventing claims about how novel and definitive the report will be. They are aided and abetted by selective summarizing of key sections of the report.

For example: “Attribution” is the term applied to efforts to determine how much of the observed increase in global average temperature since 1950 is caused by human activity, principally carbon dioxide emissions and land use change.

The upcoming report claims there has been substantial progress in attribution research since the IPCC covered this topic extensively in 2013.  At that time, the IPCC declined to give a single number for the share attributable to human activity.  The definitive statement of the IPCC was that more than half of observed warming was attributable to human activity.

In contrast, the USGCRP report claims that human activity was responsible for 100 percent of observed warming.

This major rewording comes despite the fact that the USGCRP report relies exclusively on the FAR for its calculations of the human share of warming.   Nor does the report cite new evidence that would justify its shock-value conclusion.
The new summary judgments are made subjectively by the authors of the report, who are all government employees working on climate research or academics supported by government climate funding.  I question why these authors chose to make the scarier statement when they could have relied on the IPCC report to settle the attribution question.

This pattern is repeated through the major findings.  Summary statements are phrased to give the impression of greater certainty and larger impacts than either the text of the report or the earlier FAR support.

For example, the report highlights a statement about decreases in surface soil moisture in the United States but leaves for the reader to unearth the statement that “Little evidence is found for a human influence on observed precipitation deficits.”

In other words, the report admits that there is low confidence in attribution of drought on a global scale to human influence on climate.

As another example, the report discusses how changes in the El Nino weather phenomenon and in ocean currents have contributed to recent extreme weather events. But then the USGCRP report admits that there is little evidence of human influence on past changes in either El Nino or ocean currents.

The discussion of projected impacts of warming is wide open to selective quotation because it frequently starts with a broad statement of a tendency and then admits that it is impossible to say how large the effect will be.   For example, the statement that sea level rise will increase flooding due to coastal storms is later qualified by the statement that there is “low confidence in the magnitude” of the increase in flood risk.

Likewise, the upcoming report highlights a statement that extreme temperatures in the U.S. are likely to increase “even more” than average temperatures, but a description of the beneficial effect of fewer severely cold days and fewer cold waves is left hidden in the text.

The agencies’ report also gives emphasis to the possibility of unanticipated and impossible-to-manage changes in the climate system in the next century.   This is a topic likely to attract editorial attention, but a closer reading of the text reveals that highlighted risk is only speculation about a physical possibility.

In its discussion of specific examples, such as a catastrophic change in ocean circulation patterns, the report emphasizes predicted risks that the FAR concluded were minimal through the rest of the century.

Given the uproar over President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, statements in the report about that topic are also likely to be widely quoted.  Here the report is subtle in how it summarizes findings about the importance of that agreement.

It states that “successful implementation of the first round of Nationally Determined Contributions associated with the Paris Agreement will provide some likelihood of meeting the long-term temperature goal [of] 2oC.”

That could suggest to a reader that the Paris Agreement was well on its way to achieving the goal, but the study cited in the report concludes that the Paris Agreement only increases the probability of achieving the target from zero to eight percent.

In other words, the odds of global temperature increases staying below 2oC remain at 12 to 1 against, even with the Paris Agreement.

The report raises the stakes for the Paris Agreement by describing the 2oC goal as “what scientists have referred to as the guardrail beyond which changes become catastrophic.”

Nothing in the USGCRP report or the FAR supports calling 2oC a guarantee of no harmful effects or a trigger that ensures catastrophe if it is exceeded.  Moreover, the very study cited in the discussion of the Paris Agreement found that there was no scenario for the Paris Agreement that gave better than a 50-50 chance of staying below 2oC.

One claim in the USGCRP report is not about climate but about research activities, and it is quite understandable.  It is that there have been major advances in climate science since 2013.  The USGCRP is a target in the 2018 budget, and reporting recent achievements sends the message that cutting the USGCRP budget will shut off the progress.

Monday, 21 August 2017

GLOBAL OCEAN COOLING CONTINUES


Science Matters, 10 August 2017

Ron Clutz

July Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) are now available, and we can see further ocean cooling led by plummeting temps in the  Tropics and SH, continuing the downward trajectory from the previous 12 months.
 

 
HadSST is generally regarded as the best of the global SST data sets, and so the temperature story here comes from that source, the latest version being HadSST3.

The chart below shows the last two years of SST monthly anomalies as reported in HadSST3 including July 2017.
 

 
In May despite a slight rise in the Tropics, declines in both hemispheres and globally caused SST cooling to resume after an upward bump in April.  Now in July a large drop is showing both in the Tropics and in SH, declining the last 4 months.  Meanwhile the NH is peaking in July as usual, but well down from the previous July.  The net of all this is a slightly lower Global anomaly but with likely additional future cooling led by the Tropics and also SH hitting new lows for this period.

Note that higher temps in 2015 and 2016 were first of all due to a sharp rise in Tropical SST, beginning in March 2015, peaking in January 2016, and steadily declining back to its beginning level. Secondly, the Northern Hemisphere added two bumps on the shoulders of Tropical warming, with peaks in August of each year. Also, note that the global release of heat was not dramatic, due to the Southern Hemisphere offsetting the Northern one. Note that Global anomaly for July 2017 matches closely to April 2015.  However,  SH and the Tropics are lower now and trending down compared to an upward trend in 2015.

We have seen lots of claims about the temperature records for 2016 and 2015 proving dangerous man made warming.  At least one senator stated that in a confirmation hearing.  Yet HadSST3 data for the last two years show how obvious is the ocean’s governing of global average temperatures.

The best context for understanding these two years comes from the world’s sea surface temperatures (SST), for several reasons:
  • The ocean covers 71% of the globe and drives average temperatures;
  • SSTs have a constant water content, (unlike air temperatures), so give a better reading of heat content variations;
  • A major El Nino was the dominant climate feature these years.