Daily Archives: March 22, 2011

Well yes, the world is warmer than when it was colder but…

Global temperatures ‘on the rise’

GLOBAL temperatures are on the increase, with a new study showing a rise of about half a degree celsius over the past 160 years.

An Australian National University (ANU) report on global temperature found a trend towards a rise in worldwide temperatures since 1850, with a steeper increase since the mid 1970s.

Professor Trevor Breusch, of the Crawford School of Economics and Government at ANU, studied three series of recorded global temperature data to look for clear evidence of a trend in global temperatures.

His original study was prepared for the Garnaut Review in 2008 – an independent study commissioned by the government on the impact of climate change on the Australian economy – and has since been updated with the latest data.

“There is sufficient evidence in the long run of temperature records to support the existence of a warming trend,” Prof Breusch said today. “From the 1850s to today it’s somewhere over half a degree (celsius) a century.

“The additional three years for which temperature data are now available were among the warmest on record.”

Prof Breusch said around the mid 1970s there had been an increase in the warming trend.

“There is no evidence of a weakening or reversing trend in more recent years, as suggested by some commentators,” he said.

Prof Breusch’s study did not explore the cause of the trend in temperature rises. (AAP)

Some of the statements about trends are worrisome - although there appears to have been a step change with the new millennium there doesn’t really seem to be a recent trend with current lower tropospheric temperatures having returned to the 30-year average:

We can show a surface temperature amalgam with a rising trend but can’t support the cited “increase in the warming trend” because it is the same as the trend earlier in the 20th century.

As far as the mid-troposphere is concerned, where the really big warming should theoretically take place under enhanced greenhouse – that’s basically nothing with some ENSO blips:

Denis G. Rancourt on the religion of global warming

On the gargantuan lie of climate change science

Based on a public event organized by the geography student association at Universite du Quebec a Montreal (UQAM).

By Denis G. Rancourt

In all of human history, what was believed and promoted by the majority of service intellectuals (high priests) in each civilization was only created and maintained to support the hierarchy and the place of the high priests within the hierarchy. To believe that the present is any different regarding any issue managed by our “experts”, whether in medicine, psychology, cosmology, economics, law and governance, population health or ecology, is pure distilled idiocy.

Never mind that the whole climate change scam is now driven by the top-level financiers newly eyeing a multi-trillion-dollar paper economy of carbon trading and that this is the reason it’s now a dominant mainstream media and corporate messaging presence [1].

Never mind that this paper economy of carbon trading will be the largest financial extortion enterprise since the invention of the US-centered military-backed global finance structure of predation itself.

Never mind that establishment scientists are service intellectuals who virtually never diverge from supporting power, who at best look for sanitized and hypothetical “problems” that do not threaten hierarchy and who feed their false self-image of relevance [2][3].

Never mind also the pathetic recent historical record of science with regard to identifying or solving public health and environmental problems [4][5][6].

Never mind all that. Take the red pill by considering the climate “science” fairy tale itself and examine its story elements.

Here goes, in five story-element steps.

Read on

UK finds green nonsense simply unaffordable

Budget constraints knock UK green policies off track

David Cameron may regret saying he wanted the coalition to be the “greenest government ever”. Not because he didn’t mean it, but because as ministers strive to keep to the tough spending allowances granted by the Treasury, it is an aim that seems to be slipping further and further away.

The last week has seen a slew of announcements that appear to signal a retreat by the government from its green ideals. Firstly, we had the cut to solar subsidies in the form of the feed-in tariff.

Officials at the energy department claim the changes to the feed-in tariff are primarily aimed at redistributing the money away from large-scale solar farms and towards households and small businesses, rather than cutting it. But if this was the case, the amount of money that had been cut from large producers would surely have been recycled in the form of higher subsidies for smaller ones.

Instead, what happened is that an overall £30m was cut from the solar subsidy budget. And it is no coincidence that the Treasury has asked for savings of £40m from this budget by 2014-15.

Then on Tuesday, we had advance warning of two other moves in Wednesday’s Budget which will be viewed by environmentalists as regressive steps. (Financial Times)

Far too little, way too late

Interior touts support for coal, oil amid GOP attacks

The Interior Department on Tuesday rolled out plans to allow expanded coal production on federal lands in Wyoming’s Powder River Basin, marking the second time in two days the agency has touted its actions to expand domestic fossil-fuel development.

Tuesday’s announcement comes on the same day that Interior approved another deepwater oil-and-gas drilling permit and follows Monday’s decision to green-light a Shell Oil deepwater exploration plan.

The Obama administration is seeking to highlight its commitment to U.S. energy production at a time when allegations of undue restrictions have become a pillar of GOP political messaging.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, in announcing the coal plan Tuesday, touted the need for an “all-of-the-above” energy approach — the same phrasing Republicans employ when calling for more oil, gas, nuclear, coal and renewables development. (E2 Wire)

Anti-energy EPA going after fracking now?

The EPA’s Scientific Advisory Panel on Hydraulic Fracturing Peep Show

There is no ending to the energy wars that have become culture wars and they have infested even ostensibly technocratic agencies of the government that ordinarily should be held above ideology. Not so in the imagery-loaded EPA under the Obama Administration.

The agency’s latest foray is the establishment of a 22-member Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) Panel, referred to as “Panel for Review of Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan for Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources.” Now one would think that this is a noble undertaking but a look at the roster of the panelists, investigative approach, exclusivity and ramrod urgency would put this notion to immediate rest.

Certainly many of the review panelists are experts in their respective fields of ground water hydrology, toxicology, forestry, and public health, etc., but almost all have little to no experience in the well fracturing process and no understanding of current industry practices. The panel excludes outright any of the arguably most famous names on the subject: Holditch (author of 300 papers, author/editor of SPE Monograph on the subject), Meyer, Barree, Cleary, Smith (the creators of the four industry standard design softwares that could actually model fracture dimensions and fracture height) and myself, the author of 200 papers and five books on the subject. Presumably publications on the subject would be against the candidacy of these individuals as panelists, an outrageous presupposition that their technical prowess would render them to be industry shills.

The almost surely intentional absence of industry participation, except for briefly orchestrated public testimony, is to say the least, curious. Coupling the absence of industry experts with the study plan itself provides even greater insights. (Michael J. Economides, Energy Tribune)

Read more at ET

Lawrence Solomon discusses radiation hormesis

Lawrence Solomon: Japan’s radioactive fallout could have silver lining

Low exposure to the Nagasaki atomic blast resulted in longer lifespans

The immense suffering that the Japanese are enduring in the aftermath of their earthquake and tsunami is now compounded by torment over radiation releases from the Fukushima nuclear plant.

While the torment is understandable, based on the reported amounts of radiation released, it is uncalled for. The evidence from Japan’s populace — inadvertent guinea pigs in the largest radiation experiment ever, in the aftermath of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 — indicates that fears over radiation can be overblown.

Those who survived the immediate atomic blasts but were near Ground Zero died at a high rate from excess exposure to radiation. The tens of thousands more distant from Ground Zero, and who received lower exposures to radiation, did not die in droves. To the contrary, and surprisingly, they outlived their counterparts in the general population who received no exposure to radiation from the blasts.

These findings come from the Atomic Bomb Disease Institute of the Nagasaki University School of Medicine, which has been analyzing the medical records of survivors continuously since 1968. The voluminous records — based in part on the free twice-a-year medical examinations that 83,050 registered Nagasaki survivors received — provided the researchers with a database of 2.5 million examination items to mine. To determine how the survivors fared, the researchers compared the survivors with Japanese men and women of the same age who had not been exposed to radiation. (Financial Post)

SPPI’s Monthly C02 Report, January 2011

From SPPI

THE TRAGIC EVENTS of March 2011 in Japan, with the loss of some 50,000 lives as a result of perhaps the worst tsunami to strike the islands since records began, produced the usual crop of wild, nonsensical, irresponsible statements from climate extremists blaming the catastrophe on manmade “global warming”, which had nothing to do with it.

Continue reading

CO2 Science Volume 14 Number 12: 23 March 2011

Editorial:
Trends in Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Characteristics: How have they been impacted by changes in observation and measurement techniques over the years?

Journal Reviews:
The Impact of Urbanization on Indian Monsoon Rainfall: What is it? … and what does it imply about our ability to assess the correctness of climate model predictions of the effects of global warming on rainfall?

The Response of Norwegian Sea Temperatures to Solar Forcing: How large is the response? … and how tight a fit is it?

Why Plants Sometimes Migrate Downhill as Temperatures Rise: It may be a matter of moisture.

Effects of Warming on a Tallgrass Prairie of the U.S. Great Plains: Do they hinder or enhance its productivity?

The Water Use Efficiency of Tropical Dry-Forest Trees: How has it changed in response to the increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration that has been experienced over the past four decades?

Effects of Elevated CO2 on Defensive Compounds in Bt-Transgenic and Non-Transgenic Cotton: How does the former affect the latter? … and what are the implications for the future?

Ocean Acidification Database:
The latest addition of peer-reviewed data archived to our database of marine organism responses to atmospheric CO2 enrichment is Bladderwrack [Fucus vesiculosus]. To access the entire database, click here.

Plant Growth Database:
Our latest results of plant growth responses to atmospheric CO2 enrichment obtained from experiments described in the peer-reviewed scientific literature are: Rice (Ziska et al., 2010) and Soybean (Sicher et al., 2010).

Medieval Warm Period Project:
Was there a Medieval Warm Period? YES, according to data published by 952 individual scientists from 552 research institutions in 43 different countries … and counting! This issue’s Medieval Warm Period Record comes from North End of Makassar Strait, Indo-Pacific Warm Pool. To access the entire Medieval Warm Period Project’s database, click here.

Major Report:
Carbon Dioxide and Earth’s Future: Pursuing the Prudent Path: Ten of the more ominous model-based predictions of what will occur in response to continued business-as-usual anthropogenic CO2 emissions are compared against real-world observations. (co2science.org)

Gosh, businesses won’t pay green extortion after they’re forced out of business?

German Nuclear Firms May Stop Green Payments: Report

Germany’s nuclear operators may scrap payments of 300 million euros ($425.3 million) this year into a fund subsidizing green energy after they had to close plants for safety checks, a newspaper reported on Monday.

Sueddeutsche Zeitung, citing company sources, said last week’s enforced shutdown of reactors built before 1980 for security checks in light of the nuclear crisis in Japan, had prompted the four German operators to consider stopping the payments.

The contributions are part of a package of conditions tied to a deal with the government last September, which lengthened the lifespans of the nuclear power stations in return for a fuel element tax, additional security measures, and the green fund.

It is intended to collect 300 million in each of 2011 and 2012 and 200 million a year in 2013 through to 2016, supporting the planned transition of Germany’s energy sector toward a higher renewables share.

The paper said the four companies, E.ON, RWE, Vattenfall Europe and EnBW were angry about latest enforced closures of a total seven plants, two of which had been closed already, for three months at least.

As they had promised the payments in the expectation that plants could run longer, they now did not intend to pay for lost production time, it said.

It cited the Berlin Finance Ministry as insisting on the payments, saying non-compliance would represent a breach of contract. (Reuters)

UK spared levy for idiotic scheme

Levy for carbon capture projects dropped

Consumers will no longer face the prospect of a new levy on their bills to raise billions of pounds for “carbon capture and storage” projects under a decision set to be announced on Budget day.

Ministers are keen for Britain to become a world leader in the fledgling technology, which involves capturing carbon dioxide from fossil fuel power plants and burying it in caverns deep underground.

In last autumn’s spending review the government announced it had set aside £1bn for at least one CCS pilot scheme, saying it would use either a levy on bills or public money to fund at least three further projects in the future – at the cost of another £3bn. The decision would be made by the spring, it said.

A levy has now been ruled out, according to several sources, as the coalition shies away from imposing fresh costs on the British public at a time of severe austerity. (Financial Times)

See our climate features page for items on why CCS is a horrendously expensive waste of effort and energy.

Not enough accessible carbon fuel for CAGW?

Guest Post By James Ward By Could Peak Oil Trump Climate Change?

I was sent the guest post below which readers may be interested in. The open review process for his paper is quite an interesting approach.

Guest blog post: Dr James Ward 11th March, 2011 [his bio is at people.unisa.edu.au/james.ward]

Could Peak Oil trump Climate Change?

We have just had a discussion paper published in Hydrology & Earth System Sciences (HESS-Discussions), an open access journal that is freely accessible. Apart from the free accessibility, there are two interesting points that readers of Roger Pielke Sr’s blog may find interesting about this paper.

Point 1. The topic. Put bluntly, there’s not enough carbon fuel for dangerous global warming. We have put forward a comprehensive review of the peer-reviewed literature on peak oil, as well as peak coal and natural gas, and on the basis of this literature, we conclude that the most likely IPCC scenarios are the low emissions (B1 and A1T) scenarios. The upper scenarios (A2 and A1FI) are at odds with the latest fossil fuel studies and should be disregarded, and even the mid-range scenarios (A1 and B2) are looking increasingly unrealistic. Our paper goes into some detail (via a hydrological case study) about how this revelation could greatly reduce both the severity and the uncertainty attached to long-range climate change predictions for water resources. The conclusions would be equally applicable to other fields considering long-term climate change impacts (e.g. ecology, health).

Read on at Roger Pielke Sr.’s Climate Science

Threat posed by the EPA and saving Californians from themselves

EPA Global Warming Regulations Could Send Economy Back Into Recession, Report Says

Regulation of greenhouse gasses by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could reverse the very modest economic recovery and even send it back into a recession, a report from the National Center for Public Policy Research finds.

“These regulations,” author Dana Joel Gattuso wrote, “will have a more severe impact on energy costs, U.S. jobs, household income, and economic growth than cap-and-trade legislation would have had. Furthermore, the regulations could reverse the economy’s direction toward recovery and push us back into an economic slump.”

Continue reading

No, Steven, your job is to keep gas prices low…

Chu: My Job is to Take the Pain Out of High Gas Prices

Reduced demand in Japan combined with uncertainty in Libya has caused short-term instability in the price of gasoline globally, but it’s nearly impossible to mitigate the long-term effects without changes in energy policy, President Obama’s point-man on the topic said Sunday.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who in 2008 called for ramping up gas prices to those comparable to Europe in order to coax Americans toward green energy, said that as head of his department, he’s working on “developing methods to take the pain out of high gas prices.” (FoxNews.com)

The Administration needs to stop promoting foreign energy sources and equipment suppliers and get on with the job of encouraging (at least not obstructing) domestic supply, transport and refining capacity.

Lots of navel-gazing post Fukushima

Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power

Japan’s disaster would weigh more heavily if there were less harmful alternatives. Atomic power is part of the mix (George Monbiot, Guardian)

Moonbat goes nuclear

Chris Huhne: Nuclear power may become less attractive option for UK

Chris Huhne says he still backs government’s ‘three-pronged’ energy approach but Fukushima could make nuclear unviable (Guardian)

Medias’ absurd fear mongering less effective than some expected:

Continue reading

Wind can be so embarrassing…

Iberdrola Halts U.S. Wind Farm After Suzlon Turbine Blades Fall to Ground

Iberdrola SA (IBE), the biggest producer of renewable energy, halted power production at a 150-megawatt wind farm in Rugby, North Dakota, after the blades of a Suzlon Energy Ltd. (SUEL) S88 generator fell from their mount.

The plant was suspended after the March 14 accident while Spain’s Iberdrola and Suzlon of India investigate the causes, according to an Iberdrola spokesman who asked not to be named in line with company policy. No one was hurt and there is no indication of when electricity production may resume. (Bloomberg)

I thought this might be worth a picture so I started searching – no, not for “Beano”- I got as far as “wind turbine failure” and look at a sampling of what come up – these are just the first 10 pics:

Continue reading