Archive for the ‘Climate’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Carbon dioxide idiocy – perhaps the EPA should make flatulence punishable

June 26, 2013

Reading Obama’s “Climate Plan” almost  drives me to despair at the idiocy of man!

Obama climate action plan

exhaust gas compositions

 

But only almost.

We have always had idiots and even evolution will not eliminate idiocy. And because like most “policy” statements from whoever is President of the United States, it is 90% rhetoric and 10% substance. He has enough weasel words in there to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline and he will not stop the burning of shale gas or the production of shale oil or the export of coal!! He will continue wasting money on nonsense and subsidising useless things which will prolong the lunacy for a little while.

Every living thing converts carbon to carbon dioxide  – the new pollutant. And the argument that it is a matter of scale does not hold. But perhaps we and all our animals can wear Carbon Sequestration masks? And maybe Obama could make flatulence punishable?

The oceans determine the carbon dioxide concentration and not man. I suppose that it will only be when the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere begins to fall – as it will within 2 decades  – that the lunacy might begin to end.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Academic misconduct, Alarmism, Climate, Energy | Comments Off on Carbon dioxide idiocy – perhaps the EPA should make flatulence punishable

Subsidies for renewables have only done harm

June 25, 2013

There is a place for solar and wind and tidal and wave energy.  But intermittent and unpredictable sources as these all are cannot be used to satisfy our base load demands. If used – when available – to augment our conventional sources (mainly fossil fuels, hydro and nuclear power) they can play a very useful role – eventually – in reducing the cost of producing power. But this presupposes that they are competitive with conventional production. And they can be in specific situations and especially in remote locations or where grid power is limited.

But subsidies have rarely enabled new technologies to become commercially viable. They tend to isolate and preserve the developers of the new technology from commercial pressures and are usually counter-productive.  By loading conventional fossil fuel sources with short-sighted and useless taxes and by providing hefty subsidies for building solar and wind power the electricity market has been distorted to a destructive and unsustainable extent. Two articles recently address the utter failure of the subsidy regime.

1. Agence-France Press June 23, 2013 00:31

Spanish downturn a disaster for green energy

Spain’s wind turbine manufacturers are laying off workers and farmers who installed solar panels are facing ruin as austerity policies afflict the long-coddled green energy sector.

Further cuts are expected this summer.

State subsidies to clean energy producers have already fallen by between 12 and 40 percent on average in recent years, industry analysts say.

They could fall by another 10-20 percent in a new energy sector reform expected mid-July, according to the Spanish media. …. 

In the middle of the last decade when the economy was enjoying strong growth, Spain put a cap on the price of green energies and provided “fairly generous” subsidies, said Carlos Garcia Suarez, expert in the sector at the IE Business School. …..

2. The Commentator, 21 June 2013

The ‘Great Renewables Scam’ unravels

In many parts of northern Europe, wind and solar projects may be highly visible facts on the ground. But the headline economic fact behind renewable energy is, and always has been, its sheer and blatant “unsustainability”.

Energy insiders have long known that the notion of ‘renewable energy’ is a romantic proposition – and an economic bust. But it is amazing what the lure of guaranteed ‘few strings attached’ government subsidies can achieve. Even the Big Oil companies bought into the renewables revolution, albeit mostly for PR reasons. Like Shell, however, many quickly abandoned their fledgling renewable arms. Post-2008, they knew, the subsidy regimes could not last. Neither was the public buying into the new PR message.

Now it was just a question of time before Europe’s world leading pioneers of solar and wind power, Germany and the UK, decided they had had enough of the self-inflicted economic pain. And all the signs are – as Germany’s solar sector just went belly up and the UK is made aware of how much every wind job actually costs – that the slow implosion of the renewables revolution is under way.

The plain fact is that installing solar panels, especially in the northern hemisphere, makes about as much economic sense as Iran heading up a UN Human Rights Commission (which it has done by the way). Equally, the viability of windfarms has always been the renewables industry’s worst kept secret.

And yet, aided by aggressive and heavily-funded green lobbies, leftist social engineers, appalling journalism, naive politicians and unscrupulous opportunistic renewable energy entrepreneurs, wind turbines and the photovoltaic industry quickly became established facts on the ground, giving the appearance of economic ‘viability’. Why else would government back them using our cash? …… 

… In Europe, Germany was a major green pioneer, especially regarding solar energy. The UK, being the windiest country in Europe, focused on wind power. In both countries, however – to mix metaphors – the wheels are fast coming off.

In June, the sun finally set on Germany’s solar sector with power companies, large and small, seeing their £21 billion investment in solar energy disappear into the ether. As one German commentator wryly observed: “the sun does send an invoice after all”.

By mid-June the German company Siemens announced it was winding down its solar division with a view to shutting down completely by next spring. Siemens had entered the solar thermal systems market when it bought the Israeli company Solel, believing market growth would be rapid. The gamble failed. Siemens lost around €1 billion.

In March, Bosch signalled its withdrawal from the solar cell and solar module market. Bosch board chairman Franz Fehrenbach, who had been behind the company’s push into solar energy since 2008 has further admitted that the German solar sector generally is “doomed to die”. Bosch will lose even more than Siemens, probably around €2.4 billion.

But it is the private investors who bore the full brunt of the loss as the former hot shots of the stock exchange, Germany’s SolarWorld and Q-Cells, among other solar companies, lost tens of billions in capital investment.

Meanwhile, in the UK, wind power is again making the headlines, but for all the wrong reasons. A new analysis of government and industry figures revealed that every UK wind industry job is effectively subsidized to the tune of £100,000 per year. In some cases it rises to £1.3 million per job. In Scotland, with its 230 onshore windfarms, the figure is £154,000 per job. Even if the highly optimistic maximum projection of 75,000 wind industry jobs by 2020 is realised the figure would only drop to £80,000.

But, as the Renewable Energy Foundation, a UK think-tank, has pointed out, to meet its EU obligation of providing 15 percent of its generated energy from renewable sources by 2020 – a ridiculously untenable goal – the lavish subsidies will need to rise still further to £6 billion per year. Neither do the figures take into account the cost to the country of an exodus of energy-intensive industries; a very real threat if green levies on energy bills continue to rise. European industry and power stations have already turned to burning millions of imported tonnes of American wood pellets in a desperate bid to keep costs down. And that, as has been reported, is to the detriment of fine forests in the US and a resultant impact on CO2 levels. ….

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Alarmism, Climate, Energy | Comments Off on Subsidies for renewables have only done harm

Global warming theory lacks a falsifiable hypothesis and climate policy lacks Conditions of Success

June 21, 2013

In Science – to be considered a science – it is the formulation of the falsifiable hypothesis that is critical and ought to determine the subsequent collection or generation of data.

A fundamental requirement before setting out a new policy or embarking on any new course of action should be to define the Conditions of Success (CoS) prior to starting. This is usually so in industry and business – usually explicit but sometimes implicit – especially where investment is to be made or resources are to be used in implementing the new course of action:

  1. What are the objectives to be achieved, and
  2. how will we be able to measure if we are on track.

1. A Falsifiable Hypothesis:

The “global warming” hypothesis is that humans are impacting global climate and specifically that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are causing – through direct and indirect effects – the global climate to warm. But this formulation is virtually impossible either to prove or to falsify. With the many hundreds – if not thousands – of parameters which impact the chaotic system which makes up our climate, it is almost impossible to either collect or generate data which can isolate the effects of just this one parameter.

The prevailing “belief” that this hypothesis is correct is based on being able to say that observed warming is not inconsistent with climate models which include the warming due to anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and that no better models exist. (The hiatus in temperature over the last 20 years is dismissed as being a “temporary” hiatus or due to some unknown effect – such as deep ocean take-up of heat – which is not included in the models). If no observation is permitted to falsify the hypothesis then this is merely a belief and a religion and not science.

However, the same global warming theory can easily be converted into a falsifiable hypothesis if it is formulated thus: “Increasing anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide have a significant warming effect on global climate”. This can then be subject to being proved false. The recent hiatus in global temperature then immediately leads to the conclusion that either

  1. the hypothesis is false, or
  2. the hypothesis must be modified to be
  3. “Increasing anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide may have a significant warming effect on global climate over long periods in excess of at least 50 years”

And then there is no longer any need for panic.

If the study of climate is ever to become science, the hypotheses will need to be revisited.

2. Conditions of Success

I am always somewhat perplexed that the global warming scare has led to the implementation of policies which – in not a single case – address the Conditions of Success. In no case of “decarbonisation” or carbon taxes or carbon credits or support for renewable energies is there any consideration of the measurements to be made to determine if the actions are having the desired effect.

It has been a blind rush into the support of solar and wind energy with no assessment of the increased electricity prices, the reduction of growth and the subsequent loss of jobs. In no country has there been a definition of the measurable results to be achieved along the way (except for measuring how much money was spent). Just the increase of the capacity of wind and solar power production has been taken to be a success though electricity prices have gone up sharply and no reduction of carbon dioxide concentration has been achieved. All the actions taken over the last 3 decades against the use of fossil fuels have had no impact whatsoever in reducing the rate of increase of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere.

In the US the unexpected advent of shale gas has led to a reduction of carbon dioxide emissions though the global emissions are higher than ever before. And yet the global temperature has been at a standstill for almost 2 decades!

Of course for politicians carbon taxes and the like have become merely a source of revenue where the scare of “global warming” is used as a label merely to prevent resentment against a new tax. These taxes are invariably decoupled from any effects on the changes to carbon dioxide concentration and on global temperature to be achieved.

All these “climate” policies which have produced no reduction of carbon-dioxide concentration or even a reduction in the growth rate and where global temperatures have also failed to increase now seem needlessly self-destructive.

“Climate change policies” will never be credible or of any value until the Conditions of Success for such policies are defined in advance of such policies being implemented.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Climate, Politics, Science | 1 Comment »

Carbon Cycle still has many uncertainties

June 20, 2013

How much of the increase in carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is due to the use of fossil fuels is not as certain as many would like to believe. The role of the oceans both in the emission and the absorption of carbon dioxide is far from being understood or quantified. Emissions due to fossil fuel combustion are of the same magnitude as just the error band surrounding the emissions from the oceans and  from the emissions due to transpiration. The primary sources of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are the oceans and transpiration. The assumption that these emissions are in balance with the absorption by the oceans and plant life is just an assumption based on an assumed equilibrium which is far from certain. I posted a few weeks ago

…. The general assumption is that about 40% of man-made carbon dioxide shows up as this increase with the remainder being absorbed by the enhanced action of sinks.

SOURCES AND SINKS OF CARBON DIOXIDE

The justification for this conclusion is supported by measurements of the falling proportion of  13C  in the atmosphere which is taken to signal the appearance of CO2 from fossil fuel emissions. …… 

The correlation of changes in δ13C with ENSO events and the comparison with a simple model of a series of cascades suggest that the changes in δ13C in the atmosphere have little to do with the input of CO2 emissions from the continuous use of fossil fuels.

Even though the combustion of fossil fuels only contributes less than 4% of total carbon dioxide production (about 26Gt/year of 800+GT/year), it is usually assumed that the sinks available balance the natural sources and that the carbon dioxide concentration – without the effects of man – would be largely in equilibrium.  (Why carbon dioxide concentration should not vary naturally escapes me!). It seems rather illogical to me to claim that sinks can somehow distinguish the source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and preferentially choose to absorb natural emissions and reject anthropogenic emissions! Also, there is no sink where the absorption rate would not increase with concentration.

Carbon dioxide emission sources (GT CO2/year)

  • Transpiration 440
  • Release from oceans 330
  • Fossil fuel combustion 26
  • Changing land use 6
  • Volcanoes and weathering 1

Carbon dioxide is accumulating in the atmosphere by about 15 GT CO2/ year. The accuracy of the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted by transpiration and by the oceans is no better than about 2 – 3% and that error band (+/- 20GT/year)  is itself almost as large as the total amount of emissions from fossil fuels. ….. 

Two new papers – in completely different fields – highlight the uncertainty in carbon dioxide emissions from the oceans and from plant and animal life:

1. Interannual variability in sea surface temperature and fCO2 changes in the Cariaco Basin,  Y.M. Astor et al, Deep-Sea Res. II (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.01.002i

The Hockey Schtick: A new paper published in Deep-Sea Research finds the ocean is a net source of CO2 to the atmosphere, the opposite of claims by climate alarmists that the ocean removes CO2 from the atmosphere. According to the authors, “At the [research] site, the ocean is primarily a source of CO2 to the atmosphere, except during strong upwelling events.” The paper also notes, “Astor et al.(2005) observed the interactions between physical and biochemical parameters that lead to temporal [over time] variations in fCO2 [CO2 flux from the] sea, finding that even during periods of high production, the CO2 flux between the ocean and the atmosphere decreased but remained positive, i.e. CO2 escaped from the ocean to the atmosphere.” 

The paper corroborates prior work by Salby, Humlum et al, Frölicher et al, Cho et al, Calder et al, Francey et al, Ahlbeck, Pettersson, and others demonstrating that man-made CO2 is not the driver of atmospheric CO2. This new work confirms the primary source of atmospheric CO2 is out-gassing from the oceans, which is due to decreased solubility with increased temperature.

2. Michael S. Strickland, Dror Hawlena, Aspen Reese, Mark A. Bradford, and Oswald J. Schmitz. Trophic cascade alters ecosystem carbon exchange. PNAS, 2013 DOI:10.1073/pnas.1305191110

EurekAlert: …. The study, conducted by researchers at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, comes out this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It looks at the relationship between grasshoppers and spiders—herbivores and predators in the study’s food chain—and how it affects the movement of carbon through a grassland ecosystem. Carbon, the basic building block of all organic tissue, moves through the food chain at varying speeds depending on whether it’s being consumed or being stored in the bodies of plants. However, this pathway is seldom looked at in terms of specific animal responses like fear from predation. …… 

….. The study found that the presence of spiders drove up the rate of carbon uptake by the plants by about 1.4 times more than when just grasshoppers were present and by 1.2 more times than when no animals were present. It was also revealed that the pattern of carbon storage in the plants changed when both herbivores and carnivores were present. The grasshoppers apparently were afraid of being eaten by the spiders and consumed less plant matter when the predators were around. The grasshoppers also shifted towards eating more herbs instead of grass under fearful scenarios.

At the same time, the grasses stored more carbon in their roots in a response to being disturbed at low levels when both herbivores and carnivores were present. In cases where only herbivores were present, the plants stored less carbon overall, likely due to the more intense eating habits of the herbivores that put pressure on plants to reduce their storage and breathe out carbon more. These stress impacts, then, caused both the plants and the herbivores to change their behaviors and change the composition of their local environment.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Alarmism, Climate, Science | Comments Off on Carbon Cycle still has many uncertainties

UK Davey prefers “cutting off his nose to spite his face”

June 19, 2013

Ed Davey’s name calling of non-believers was widely reported :

Speaking on Tuesday in Brussels during a during a CBI/EU Corporate Leaders Group event, Davey warned the consequences of inaction in the face of record emission levels were severe, calling on the European Union to adopt a 50% carbon reduction target by 2030.

Davey's nose

Davey’s nose

“There will always be those with a vested interest in the status quo. Who seek to create doubt where there is certainty,” he said. “And you will always get crackpots and conspiracy theorists who will deny they have a nose on their face if it suits them.”

Considering the millions of jobs lost as a direct consequence of subsidising intermittent renewable energy and distorting the market through carbon credits and the like, Davey is clearly one who prefers

“cutting off his nose to spite his face”

“Cutting off the nose to spite the face” is an expression used to describe a needlessly self-destructive over-reaction to a problem and I can think of few things as needlessly self-destructive as the the demonisation of carbon dioxide. 

And even without a nose Davey will continue breathing out 3 – 4% carbon dioxide with every breath!!!

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Climate, Politics | Comments Off on UK Davey prefers “cutting off his nose to spite his face”

Coping with climate change drove innovation

June 18, 2013

When and how innovation occurs sometimes seems random and the corporate world has long pursued the creation of “environments” in which innovation can flourish. And while the very definition of what counts as innovation can be debated, it seems to me that it is a changing environment rather than a static environment which is a key ingredient. And it could well be that the greater the change to be handled then the very necessity of coping with that change could be the “mother of all innovation”.

I suspect that some of the most fundamental innovations have been driven by the need not just to survive but also to thrive in “rapidly” changing and threatening environments. And climate change where “rapid” would mean several hundred if not thousands of years would also have been a powerful driver. One advantage in the stone age would have been that humans would have focused on coping with the change as it unfolded and not wasted too much effort in trying to control the climate.

A new paper addresses how climate change could have driven innovation in the stone age centered around the discovery and establishment of new refuges.

Ziegler, M. et al. Development of Middle Stone Age innovation linked to rapid climate change, Nature Communications 4, Article number: 1905.

Abstract: The development of modernity in early human populations has been linked to pulsed phases of technological and behavioural innovation within the Middle Stone Age of South Africa. However, the trigger for these intermittent pulses of technological innovation is an enigma. Here we show that, contrary to some previous studies, the occurrence of innovation was tightly linked to abrupt climate change. Major innovational pulses occurred at times when South African climate changed rapidly towards more humid conditions, while northern sub-Saharan Africa experienced widespread droughts, as the Northern Hemisphere entered phases of extreme cooling. These millennial-scale teleconnections resulted from the bipolar seesaw behaviour of the Atlantic Ocean related to changes in the ocean circulation. These conditions led to humid pulses in South Africa and potentially to the creation of favourable environmental conditions. This strongly implies that innovational pulses of early modern human behaviour were climatically influenced and linked to the adoption of refugia.

PhysOrg reviews the paper:

According to a study by the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, the University of Cardiff and the Natural History Museum in London, technological innovation during the Stone Age occurred in fits and starts and was climate-driven. Abrupt changes in rainfall in South Africa 40,000 to 80,000 years ago triggered the development of technologies for finding refuge and the behaviour of modern humans. This study was recently published in Nature Communications.

Archaeological and genetic evidence suggests that modern humans (the modern form of Homo sapiens, our species) originated in Africa during the Stone Age, between 30,000 and 280,000 years ago. The latest  in southern Africa have shown that technological innovation, linked to the emergence of culture and modern behaviour, took place abruptly: the beginnings of symbolic expression, the making of tools from stone and bone, jewellery or the first agricultural settlements.

An international team of researchers has linked these pulses of innovation to the climate that prevailed in sub-Saharan Africa in that period.

Over the last million years the  has varied between  (with great masses of ice covering the continents in the northern hemisphere) and interglacial periods, with changes approximately every 100,000 years. But within these long periods there have been abrupt climate changes, sometimes happening in the space of just a few decades, with variations of up to 10ºC in the average temperature in the polar regions caused by changes in the Atlantic . These changes affected rainfall in southern Africa.

The researchers have pieced together how  varied in southern Africa over the last 100,000 years, by analysing  deposits at the edge of the continent, where every millimetre of  corresponds to 25 years of sedimentation. The ratio of iron (dissolved from the rocks by the water during the rains) to potassium (present in arid soils) in each of the millimetre layers is a record of the sediment carried by rivers and therefore of the rainfall throughout the whole period.

The reconstruction of the rainfall over 100,000 years shows a series of spikes that occurred between 40,000 and 80,000 years ago. These spikes show rainfall levels rising sharply over just a few decades, and falling off again soon afterwards, in a matter of centuries. This research has shown that the climate changes coincided with increases in population, activity and production of technology on the part of our ancestors, as seen in the archaeological records. In turn, the end of certain stone tool industries of the period coincides with the onset of a new, drier climate.

The findings confirm one of the principal models of Palaeolithic cultural evolution, which correlates technological innovation with the adoption of new refuges and with a resulting increase in population and social networks. For these researchers, the bursts of demographic expansion caused by climate change in southern Africa were probably key factors in the origin of modern humans’ behaviour in Africa, and in the dispersal of Homo sapiens from his ancestral home.

 

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Anthropology, Climate, Development, Humans, Innovation | Comments Off on Coping with climate change drove innovation

Global cooling in the cretaceous shifted the global carbon cycle

June 17, 2013

A new paper in Nature Geoscience showing that global cooling is as significant as global warming.

‘Atlantic cooling associated with a marine biotic crisis during the mid-Cretaceous period’. A McAnena, S Flogel, P Hofmann, JO Herrle, A Griesand, J Pross, HM Talbot, J Rethemeyer, K Wallmann and T Wagner.  Nature Geoscience, DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1850, published on: 16th June 2013

From Newcastle Univeristy’s press release:

Global cooling as significant as global warming

A “cold snap” 116 million years ago triggered a similar marine ecosystem crisis to the ones witnessed in the past as a result of global warming, according to research published in Nature Geoscience.

The international study involving experts from the universities of Newcastle, UK, Cologne, Frankfurt and GEOMAR-Kiel, confirms the link between global cooling and a crash in the marine ecosystem during the mid-Cretaceous greenhouse period.

It also quantifies for the first time the amplitude and duration of the temperature change.  Analysing the geochemistry and micropaleontology of a marine sediment core taken from the North Atlantic Ocean, the team show that a global temperature drop of up to 5oC resulted in a major shift in the global carbon cycle over a period of 2.5 million years.

Occurring during a time of high tectonic activity that drove the breaking up of the super-continent Pangaea, the research explains how the opening and widening of new ocean basins around Africa, South America and Europe created additional space where large amounts of atmospheric CO2 was fixed by photosynthetic organisms like marine algae. The dead organisms were then buried in the sediments on the sea bed, producing organic, carbon rich shale in these new basins, locking away the carbon that was previously in the atmosphere.

The result of this massive carbon fixing mechanism was a drop in the levels of atmospheric CO2, reducing the greenhouse effect and lowering global temperature.

This period of global cooling came to an end after about 2 million years following the onset of a period of intense local volcanic activity in the Indian Ocean.  Producing huge volumes of volcanic gas, carbon that had been removed from the atmosphere when it was locked away in the shale was replaced with CO2 from the Earth’s interior, re-instating a greenhouse effect which led to warmer climate and an end to the “cold snap”.

The research team highlight in this study how global climate is intrinsically linked to processes taking place in the earth’s interior at million year time scales. These processes can modify ecospace for marine life, driving evolution.

Current research efforts tend to concentrate on global warming and the impact that a rise of a few degrees might have on past and present day ecosystems.  This study shows that if global temperatures swing the other way by a similar amount, the result can be just as severe, at least for marine life.

 

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Climate, Science | 1 Comment »

Another GIGO report: Climate change overseas will threaten UK food supplies

June 17, 2013

A good GIGO (Garbage in, garbage out) report is one which can generate a whole family of garbage reports with the results from one being used as the input for the next and so on ad infinitum. An excellent GIGO report is one which earns a small fortune for its author while keeping the stench concealed.

This time the GIGO report is by PWC. It is based on a string of  questionable assumptions:

  1. that global warming (euphemistically “climate change”) will happen,
  2. that extreme weather will happen in some vulnerable food producing countries
  3. that it will lead to increased food prices
  4. which will lead to export “protectionism” by those countries,

leading – surprise, surprise –  to food exports to the UK being threatened.

Given the assumptions it does not take much intelligence to reach the desired conclusion. No doubt PWC produced some very pretty images and graphs. This rubbish is considered “research” by Roger Harrabin of the BBC. I have never known PWC do anything for free and this particular report was apparently commissioned by Defra (UK, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). The usual profit margin on such a report would be at least 150% and with gullible civil servants as the clients could be closer to 1000%). I have no doubt that Defra had briefed PWC on the conclusions to be reached.  (PWC like their other “big 4” brothers are blind to fraud when committed by their clients and expert at producing – and justifying – whatever conclusion is desired by them).

Climate change abroad will have a more immediate effect on the UK than climate change at home, a report says.

Research by consultants PWC for Defra says the UK is likely to be hit by increasingly volatile prices of many commodities as the climate is disrupted.

It warns that global production of some foodstuffs is concentrated in a few countries.

These are likely to suffer increasing episodes of extreme weather.

The report says there will be opportunities for the UK from climate change but these are likely to be far outweighed by problems. The opportunities include the ability to export British know-how and reduced shipping costs if the Arctic becomes ice-free. The Arctic looks likely to be a big business opportunity; research estimates suggest that it is likely to attract more than £64bn of investments over the next decade.

What is particularly irritating is that conclusions from one GIGO report are then used as input again and again producing a chain reaction of further garbage reports.

The report warns that as the climate changes, there will be pressure for the UK to increase its aid budgets (already under threat from back-bench Conservatives).

The report is a follow-up to the recent UK Government Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) which assessed domestic threats and opportunities and the Foresight study into international climate change.

It is based on the UN’s “medium CO2 emissions scenario” which is broadly aligned with the 2C maximum temperature increase – a target that is unlikely to be met. That means the study is on the optimistic side, it says.

The paper draws on research from Chatham House describing climate change as a multiplier of other threats.

Oh Dear!

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Alarmism, Behaviour, Climate, UK | 3 Comments »

Better to build a roof than to try and stop the rain (or the sun)

June 16, 2013

Climate change is happening.

Of course it is. When was it ever not so?

It will be cooling at times and warming at others but for around 85% of all the time humans have been around we have lived in glacial conditions. Interglacials are the exceptions and not the rule. Yet humans have thrived. Not just by surviving the glacial times but by continuing to develop even during the glacials, Wasting time and energy and vast sums of money on trying to curb the emissions of carbon dioxide has been a blight on development for the last 3 decades. Just in Europe it has come at the expense of around 15 million jobs.

It essentially panders to the political and religious idea that “human development is inherently bad”. In that sense the “Green Movement” and the subsequent growth of enviro-fascism have taken the place of Marxist ideology. They have filled the vacuum left behind as the fall of Communism has spread. They didn’t begin that way. As local movements to clean up air and water and our immediate environments they performed a timely, neccessary and very useful function. But then they became ambitious. Local movements were hijacked by the marxists without a home. Former marxists in non-Communist countries needed a cause. They remained disaffected and had to find a new home. They now had to go Global. Local causes which were the strength of environmentalism were replaced by Global causes.  Global causes were manufactured by inventing impending global catastrophes. All the disaster scenarios had to have growth and development (and by inference – capitalism) as the culprit. Not in Russia or China or other former Communist countries where they were too busy becoming entrepreneurs. And so the carbon dioxide myth took hold and and fossil fuels became the whipping boy.

This interglacial will end.

Fossil fuels and their continued and increased use (and there is enough gas for at least 1000 years) will be critical for human development as and when the next glacial comes along. It is only by adapting to whatever climate change occurs  – not by trying to stop climate change – that the human condition will continue to improve.

It is better to build a roof than to try and stop the rain or the sunshine. But the global warming hierarchy will continue their posturing and their futile dances to try and control the climate.

Montreal Gazette:

Adapting to – not just fighting – climate change is taking the heat out of global warming talk

Efforts to curb global warming have quietly shifted as greenhouse gases inexorably rise.

The conversation is no longer solely about how to save the planet by cutting carbon emissions. It’s becoming more about how to save ourselves from the warming planet’s wild weather.

It was Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s announcement last week of an ambitious plan to stave off New York City’s rising seas with flood gates, levees and more that brought this transition into full focus.

After years of losing the fight against rising global emissions of heat-trapping gases, governments around the world are emphasizing what a U.N. Foundation scientific report calls “managing the unavoidable.”

It’s called adaptation and it’s about as sexy but as necessary as insurance, experts say.

It’s also a message that once was taboo among climate activists such as former Vice-President Al Gore. …… 

…. Now officials are merging efforts by emergency managers to prepare for natural disasters with those of officials focused on climate change. That greatly lessens the political debate about human-caused global warming, said University of Colorado science and disaster policy professor Roger Pielke Jr.

It also makes the issue more local than national or international.

“If you keep the discussion focused on impacts … I think it’s pretty easy to get people from all political persuasions,” said Pielke, who often has clashed with environmentalists over global warming. “It’s insurance. The good news is that we know insurance is going to pay off again.” ….. 

And even from New Zealand comes a commentary that when “even the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand is no longer beating the drum. That’s when you know the cause is dead”.

National Business Review:

Global warming ends with a whimper

It’s a good news column today: the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand has seriously down-rated the worry about global warming. That’s one less thing that need make us miserable.

The down rating is huge. Green co-leader Russel Norman in his speech to this month’s annual conference never once mentioned global warming. He busied himself instead taking potshots at John Key and the late Sir Robert Muldoon.

The Green Party did have a climate change conference the following week but Mr Norman’s keynote speech lacked any of the usual end-of-world prophecy and knee-jerk call to de-industrialise. His concern was the pedestrian one that New Zealand is failing to meet its international obligations.

There was no hellfire and no brimstone.

When Jeanette Fitzsimons was co-leader global warming was the greatest-ever threat to the planet. It dwarfed all other environmental worries. It was the granddaddy of them all. Global warming threatened to destroy the biosphere and Ms Fitzsimons was forever calling an urgent and radical reduction in the burning of fossil fuels. …… 

….. But the shift on global warming with the Greens is significant. We are safe in concluding that they no longer regard global warming as the greatest threat to the planet. It would, I think, merit a mention in a leader’s annual speech to the Greens if it were. A fast-approaching environmental armageddon would be top of mind, not the constitutionality of parliamentary legislation, and not Peter Dunne’s emails.

So, hallelujah. The polar bears can continue to float about on their ice floes, millions of environmental refugees won’t wash up on our shores, malaria won’t be making an unwanted appearance in New Zealand any time soon, our beachfront properties are safe and there is no need to feel guilty driving past that bus stop.

It was always going to end with a whimper, not a bang. The scare was so big, so dominating, so accepted, that it could not be sustained. Unless, of course, it was true. It’s now not possible to maintain the huff and puff that the media and politics need to keep the headlines running. …..

……. They have been the first to shut up about it. The argument is no longer that global warming has “paused” for 17 years but rather that even the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand is no longer beating the drum. That’s when you know the cause is dead.

After all, Mr Norman was still backing Marxism-Leninism long after Mikhail Gorbachev had given up on it. 

 

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Alarmism, Behaviour, Climate, Environment, Weather | 3 Comments »

Why averaging climate models is meaningless

June 14, 2013

This comment/ essay by rgbatduke on WUWT is well worth reading and digesting.

“this is a point that is stunningly ignored — there are a lot of different models out there, all supposedly built on top of physics, and yet no two of them give anywhere near the same results!”

A professional taking amateurs to task!

(Note! See also his follow-up comments here and here.  rgbatduke would seem to be Professor R G Brown of Duke University?)

rgbatduke says:

Saying that we need to wait for a certain interval in order to conclude that “the models are wrong” is dangerous and incorrect for two reasons. First — and this is a point that is stunningly ignored — there are a lot of different models out there, all supposedly built on top of physics, and yet no two of them give anywhere near the same results!

This is reflected in the graphs Monckton publishes above, where the AR5 trend line is the average over all of these models and in spite of the number of contributors the variance of the models is huge. It is also clearly evident if one publishes a “spaghetti graph” of the individual model projections (as Roy Spencer recently did in another thread) — it looks like the frayed end of a rope, not like a coherent spread around some physics supported result.

Note the implicit swindle in this graph — by forming a mean and standard deviation over model projections and then using the mean as a “most likely” projection and the variance as representative of the range of the error, one is treating the differences between the models as if they are uncorrelated random variates causing >deviation around a true mean!.

Say what?

This is such a horrendous abuse of statistics that it is difficult to know how to begin to address it. One simply wishes to bitch-slap whoever it was that assembled the graph and ensure that they never work or publish in the field of science or statistics ever again. One cannot generate an ensemble of independent and identically distributed models that have different code. One might, possibly, generate a single model that generates an ensemble of predictions by using uniform deviates (random numbers) to seed
“noise” (representing uncertainty) in the inputs.

What I’m trying to say is that the variance and mean of the “ensemble” of models is completely meaningless, statistically because the inputs do not possess the most basic properties required for a meaningful interpretation. They are not independent, their differences are not based on a random distribution of errors, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the errors or differences are unbiased (given that the only way humans can generate unbiased anything is through the use of e.g. dice or other objectively random instruments).

(more…)

Tags:, ,
Posted in Alarmism, Climate | Comments Off on Why averaging climate models is meaningless

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »