At home with the insane

Do the oceans show global warming?

2009-05-10T20:59:00.000-07:00

Short answer, not so much recently. Science Bits has an interesting post on the oceans as a calorimeter. This is a question the IPCC refuses to confront in any scientific way.

Climate Depot

2009-04-11T08:09:00.000-07:00

Check out Climate Depot by Marc Morano, this guy manages to find new information in a well discussed topic. He's like the Drudge of climate.

Renewable energy policies lead to waste

2008-11-23T19:28:00.000-08:00

Knowledge Problem discusses Frequent negative power prices due to renewable energy:

What is with all of the negative power prices in the West region of ERCOT?

In the first half of 2008, prices were below zero nearly 20 percent of the time. During March, when negative prices were most frequent, prices were below zero about 33 percent of the time. After mostly taking the summer off, negative power prices were back to near 10 percent in October.

This seems a little crazy. During these negative price periods, suppliers are paying ERCOT to take their power. Consumers (at least at the wholesale level) are getting paid for using power, and the more power consumers use the more they get paid. These prices are a big anti-conservation incentive. You could, as a correspondent put it to me, build a giant toaster in West Texas and be paid by generators to operate it.

Interesting and good analysis! While there is some waste going on due to wind power overkill in Texas, it has nothing on the waste caused by Congress' ethanol requirements, the WP has an article about the US flex fuel fleet:

The federal government has invested billions of dollars over the past 16 years, building a fleet of 112,000 alternative-fuel vehicles to serve as a model for a national movement away from fossil fuels.

But the costly effort to put more workers into vehicles powered by ethanol and other fuel alternatives has been fraught with problems, many of them caused by buying vehicles before fuel stations were in place to support them, a Washington Post analysis of federal records shows.

Not really all that surprising, but it still sucks to learn about massive waste of money. The thing is, even if the flex fuel fleet was done right, there would still be minimal benefit.

Oreskes' shoddy science

2008-11-09T20:03:00.000-08:00

Roger Pielke Jr. takes down Naomi Oreskes' latest op-ed article in his latest blog post, Lies Posing as History. Oreskes is most famous for a study, mentioned many times by Al Gore, claiming no papers in a survey disagreed with the consensus position on climate change, this article was questionable as well. I think its now safe to ignore anything Oreskes publishes in the future.

New Climate Blogs

2008-10-12T08:19:00.000-07:00

A few new climate blogs have recently appeared, check them out:

Digital Diatribes of a Random Idiot

The Air Vent

Solar Science

The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE

IPCC Prediction Skill

2008-09-01T04:25:00.000-07:00

If you haven't been paying attention, Lucia at the Blackboard has been checking IPCC predictions against temperatures to see if they falsify on a monthly basis. In short, the IPCC central tendency is currently falsifying. This is not surprising, as the BBC Reported:

So far modellers have failed to narrow the total bands of uncertainties since the first report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1990.

Almost 20 years with no real progress has to hurt. Relatedly, Climate Skeptic and Jennifer Marohasy defend (by invoking Roger Pielke Sr) the use of shorter periods of time to check the IPCC's work.

Recent Global Warming News

2008-08-29T04:57:00.000-07:00

Some interesting global warming/green news:

Geothermal Probe Sinks German City: But only two weeks after contractors drilled down 460ft to extract heat from below the earth, large cracks have appeared in buildings as the town centre subsided about a third of an inch (8mm). - This is one reason why geothermal will probably never gain wide acceptance, the other being earthquakes.

93% of Home Buyers Won't Pay more for Green Home Features: 93% of all home buyers, both nationally and in the NY Metro area, ARE NOT willing to PAY MORE for green or energy efficient features when building a home. - They are willing to buy features that will pay off over the long run though, its just basic economics.

Bangladesh Gained 1,000 Square Kilometers Recently: As AFP, BBC, and others report, satellite images combined with old maps have revealed that the country has gained 1,000 squared kilometers since 1973 (more than 1 percent of the Czech Republic) and it seems to be continuing gaining landmass, roughly 20 squared kilometers per year. - This despite the alarming sea level rise predicted by the IPCC! In fact, Bangladesh is usually one of the countries cited as being screwed due to sea level rise.

Peter Foster has an amusing anecdote about consensus science, linked by A dog named Kyoto.

Love Global Warming compares the area of the recent Big Sur Fire Burn to ANWR.

Climate Skeptic details Great Moments in Alarmism, testing Hansen's early predictions against actual temperatures.

Sea Ice

2008-08-27T04:44:00.000-07:00

A couple interesting posts on sea ice, Arctic Ice has Expanded 30% since 2007, and a post from Climate Skeptic explaining that the Antarctic Peninsula is only 2% of Antarctica and is in no way indicative of the rest of the continent. When Steve McIntyre discovered a GISS Temp error that resulted in the US temps being adjusted downward 0.25F, one of the big alarmist rebuttals was that it didn't matter since the US was about 3% of world land area.

Now we have people claiming that random areas of melting ice are a sign of global warming, despite the fact that we're talking about small areas overall and melting ice does not necessarily signal global warming, other factors may be at play, namely weather and soot.

If you find the subject of ice melting interesting, you must follow Climate Audit's Sea Ice Threads for the latest updates, just find the latest one and start reading.

Climate Blogs

2008-08-26T04:21:00.000-07:00

Climate Skeptic has a list of Climate Blogs That Don't Necessarily Accept "the Consensus".

IPCC and bad science

2008-08-25T04:12:00.000-07:00

Bishop Hill has a great summary of a bit of IPCC hockey stick controversy in the Caspar and the Jesus Paper. While the every thoughtful Climate Skeptic has a somewhat related post: A Quick Thought on "Peer Review"- where he compares climate science with a social science based on:

Bad statistical methodology (a hallmark, unfortunately, of much of social science)
Emphasis on peer review over replication
Reliance on computer models rather than observation
Belief there is a "right" answer for society with subsequent bias to study results towards that answer

I believe 3 of the 4 can be found in the Amman and Wahl paper discussed by Bishop Hill!

Blog Update

2008-08-24T11:53:00.000-07:00

I spent a bit of time fixing up and updating the blog list and links on the right side of the blog, if you know a blog I missed, leave a comment!

Celebrities Go "Green"

2008-08-24T10:35:00.000-07:00

I just love stories about celebrities thinking they're green and telling the world about it. From Planet Gore:

Sheryl Crow:

The singer wants to put her designs on the eco-fashion world. Sheryl has teamed up with Western Glove Works and plans to create a denim-based collection. When it comes to fashion, this eco-chick already goes green. She's known to donate bags and bags of unworn clothes to her local secondhand shop every six months.

How is buying clothes that you never wear and then donating them "green?"

From Climateer Investing:

Celine Dion and water go way back - let’s not forget that her biggest hit was about the tragic watery deaths of 1,517 people in the freezing North Atlantic.
So with a relationship like that, you’d think that Celine Dion would be allowed to use as much water as she liked. Celine Dion certainly thinks so - she’s been singled out as the biggest consumer of water in her Florida county, using 6.5 million gallons in a year.

I don't even think she lives in Florida! Doesn't she stay in Las Vegas to do her show?

Interestingly, Gore Won't Ask Wealthy Start to Save Planet, how does that make sense if you think he believes it is important to prevent global warming?

Climate change: Natural ups and downs

2008-06-28T22:30:00.000-07:00

From Nature:

The effects of global warming over the coming decades will be modified by shorter-term climate variability. Finding ways to incorporate these variations will give us a better grip on what kind of climate change to expect.

Climate change is often viewed as a phenomenon that will develop in the coming century. But its effects are already being seen, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently projected that, even in the next 20 years, the global climate will warm by around 0.

More information is available from Jennifer Marohasy, surprisingly, Real Climate argues that this is consistent with global climate models once you figure in uncertainty.

How to get your climate model included in IPCC

2008-05-25T08:48:00.001-07:00

The requirements for inclusion of your GCM (global climate model) into IPCC are as follows:

* be full 3D coupled ocean-atmospheric GCMs,
* be documented in the peer reviewed literature,
* have performed a multi-century control run (for stability reasons)and
* have participated in CMIP2 (Second Coupled Model Intercomparison Project).

You will notice that any sort of skill or quality is not needed. This is also true of the CMIP2 project. No hindcasting must be such and such accurate, no anything.

Why would you run things this way? If I was running the IPCC I would add criteria that require the models to meet various quality baselines (ie within 50% of global temperature 1980-2000) before inclusion. I wouldn't care how they met my baselines, just that they did. Until you do that, you can not improve upon your predictions.

Wind power growth and outages in Texas

2008-02-29T19:32:00.000-08:00

Knowledge Problem links:

Operators of the Texas power grid scrambled Tuesday night to keep the lights on after a sudden drop in wind power threatened to cause rolling blackouts, officials confirmed Wednesday.
At about 6:41 p.m., power grid operators ordered a shutoff of power to so-called interruptible customers, which are industrial electric users who have agreed previously to forego power in times of crisis. The move ensured continued stability of the grid after power dropped to alarmingly low levels.

This comes right after the NY Times has an article about Texas wind, noting:

After breakneck growth the last three years, Texas has reached the point that more than 3 percent of its electricity, enough to supply power to one million homes, comes from wind turbines.

They run into power supply problems with a mere 3% of their power coming from wind?

Green Hypocrites 2007

2007-12-09T09:32:00.000-08:00

Steve Milloy has a top 10 list of the greenest hypocrites of 2007, the top two:

1. Al Gore’s Inconvenient Lifestyle. While the former veep and nouveau-$100 millionaire jets around the world squawking about the “planet having a fever” and demanding that we all lower our standard of living, his own personal electricity use is 20 times the national average, including an indoor pool costing $500/month to heat.

While Gore deflected criticism of his inconvenient electric bill during March congressional testimony by saying he purchased “green” electricity, the truth is, he didn’t start doing so until 2007.

2. Google’s Sky Pig. A photo-op of Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin plugging-in a hybrid car was part of the search engine giant’s June announcement promising carbon neutrality by 2008. But how this PR-fluff squares with the so-called “Google party jet” — Page and Brin’s gargantuan personal Boeing 767, which burns about 1,550 gallons/hour — is any one’s guess.

Check out the rest of the top 10.

Scafetta and West 2007

2007-11-27T18:26:00.000-08:00

Climate Audit summarizes a recent article by Scafetta and West:

Basically they use a phenomenological approach. So instead of taking the reconstructed TSI values, plug them into a model, and find that indeed the Sun has only a minor influence (like Ammann et al. did in their PNAS paper of March 6, 2007 | vol. 104 | no. 10 | 3713-3718 ), they make no prior assumption on the total Solar forcing. They just assume, mostly rightly, that the Sun was the main driver of climate variability. Then from the solar reconstruction and the temperature reconstruction, they deduce which model of solar forcing best matches the two together.

Read up if you find this sort of stuff interesting. The Reference Frame and Jennifer Marohasy also chime in.

Roger Pielke Sr. back at it

2007-11-27T18:18:00.000-08:00

The blog, Climate Science, by Roger Pielke Sr. has returned. More informed opinions regarding the science of global warming are always welcome.

Not surprising news for Inconvenient Truth

2007-10-14T19:20:00.000-07:00

Inconvenient truth stretches the truth, Kerplunk and A Dog Named Kyoto are on it:

A High Court judge today ruled that An Inconvenient Truth can be distributed to every school in the country but only if it comes with a note explaining nine scientific errors in Al Gore’s Oscar-winning film.

Some are still defending the film, but the errors are identified now, lets all admit that and move on.

Record low arctic sea ice

2007-10-04T21:29:00.000-07:00

Both Jennifer Marohasy and The Reference Frame report on the NASA release on the recent record low sea ice conditions at the north pole this year:

In a news release from NASA Monday, a group of scientists have determined that unusual winds caused the rapid decline (23% loss) in winter perennial ice over the past two years in the northern hemisphere. This drastic reduction is the primary cause of this summer's fastest-ever sea ice retreat in recorded history which has lead to the smallest extent of total Arctic coverage on record.

Nothing about global warming there. Jennifer also notes the record maximum sea ice extent in the south:

Just when you thought this season's cryosphere couldn't be more strange .... The Southern Hemisphere sea ice area narrowly surpassed the previous historic maximum of 16.03 million sq. km to 16.17 million sq. km.

And the recent Antarctica conditions do not follow climate models:

A February 2007 study reveals Antarctica is not following predicted global warming models. Excerpt: “A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models."

Basically the sea ice this year is not exactly following the global warming script.

Silencing the global warming critics

2007-09-30T19:50:00.000-07:00

Jennifer Marohasy and The Reference Frame cover the resignation of the Virginia State Climatetolist, Patrick Michaels. "I resigned as Virginia state climatologist because I was told that I could not speak in public on my area of expertise, global warming, as state climatologist." The technical firing of the State Climatologists who aren't preaching doom and gloom about global warming is something that if was happening in the reverse, there would be widespread outrage. When its someone who isn't an alarmist, its not a big story.

NASA fudges the numbers again

2007-09-18T18:12:00.001-07:00

NASA is caught again fiddling with the temperature numbers without notification and once again Steve McIntyre is on top of it. NASA has come clean since, but their reasons for the changes are unclear and undocumented, not exactly scientific:

Hansen said that the difference between 1998 and 1934 was “statistically insignificant”. But business accountants are familiar with situations where a lot of attention is paid to numbers that may be “statistically insignificant”. I’ll give you an example. For a large corporation, the difference between a small profit and a small loss can be “statistically insignificant”, but there is a big difference in how they are perceived by the public. In some cases, unscrupulous corporations (and you can think of a few, including the most famous recent U.S. bankruptcy) will do whatever they can in terms of deferring expenses or recognizing revenue to change a reported loss into a reported profit. Accounting changes are a red flag to analysts for brokerage companies; there may be “good” reasons but the analyst needs to be right on top of the situation and they will be VERY unimpressed if a company tries to slip a change in without reporting it.

Maybe NASA scientists can learn a thing or two from the business world in the future.

Carbon offsets gone wrong

2007-09-09T09:05:00.000-07:00

Farmers evicted for offsets, then cut down the trees when they go back, offsets gone wrong, once again:

Planting trees in Mount Elgon National Park in eastern Uganda seemed like a project that would benefit everyone. The Face Foundation, a nonprofit group established by Dutch power companies, would receive carbon credits for reforesting the park's perimeter. It would then sell the credits to airline passengers wanting to offset their emissions, reinvesting the revenues in further tree planting. The air would be cleaner, travelers would feel less guilty and Ugandans would get a larger park.
But to the farmers who once lived just inside the park, the project has been anything but a boon. They have been fighting to get their land back since being evicted in the early 1990s and have pressed their case with lawsuits.

Last year, when the courts granted three border communities an injunction against the evictions, the farmers took it as permission to clear the land they consider theirs. Now a stubble of stumps - all that's left of the trees meant to absorb carbon dioxide - dots the rows of newly planted maize and budding green beans.

Hattip: Jennifer Marohasy

Oprah, another eco-hypocrite

2007-09-09T09:00:00.000-07:00

Climateer Investing has: Oprah on Global Warming which includes pictures of her $50 million house and $47 million private jet.

Again about those offsets

2007-09-05T21:28:00.000-07:00

At least they're just taking your money:

Co-producer Lesley Chilcott used an online calculator to estimate that shooting the film used 41.4 tons of carbon dioxide and paid a middleman, a company called Native Energy, $12 a ton, or $496.80, to broker a deal to cut greenhouse gases elsewhere. The film's distributors later made a similar payment to neutralize carbon dioxide from the marketing of the movie.

It was a ridiculously good deal with one problem: So far, it has not led to any additional emissions reductions.

Oops.

About those offsets...

2007-09-05T21:25:00.000-07:00

Climate Care celebrates the fact that it encourages the Indian poor to use their own bodies rather than machines to irrigate the land. Its website declares: ‘Sometimes the best source of renewable energy is the human body itself. With some lateral thinking, and some simple materials, energy solutions can often be found which replace fossil fuels with muscle-power.’ (2) To show that muscle power is preferable to machine power, the Climate Care website features a cartoon illustration of smiling naked villagers pedalling on a treadle pump next to a small house that has an energy-efficient light bulb and a stove made from ‘local materials at minimal cost’. Climate Care points out that even children can use treadle pumps: ‘One person - man, woman or even child - can operate the pump by manipulating his/her body weight on two treadles and by holding a bamboo or wooden frame for support.’ (3)

Feeling guilty about your two-week break in Barbados, when you flew thousands of miles and lived it up with cocktails on sunlit beaches? Well, offset that guilt by sponsoring eco-friendly child labour in the developing world! Let an eight-year-old peasant pedal away your eco-remorse…

Not what most people had in mind when buying offsets I'm sure.

Hattip: Megan McArdle

An inconvenient fact for Leonardo

2007-08-29T22:20:00.000-07:00

Patrick Moore, a cofounder of Greenpeace seems to have his head on his shoulders about climate change, much more than can be said about many. He takes on information from Leonardo DiCaprio's movie, the 11th hour with these facts:

There is a misconception that cutting down an old tree will result in a net release of carbon. Yet wooden furniture made in the Elizabethan era still holds the carbon fixed hundreds of years ago.

Although old trees contain huge amounts of carbon, their rate of sequestration has slowed to a near halt. A young tree, although it contains little fixed carbon, pulls CO2 from the atmosphere at a much faster rate.

Deforestation, primarily in tropical forests, is responsible for about 20 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. This is occurring where forests are permanently cleared and converted to agriculture and urban settlement.

It is unsurprising that a hollywood piece on global warming goes too far. What is surprising here is a member of the environmental movement publicly speaking out against the alarmism presented in the movie.

Hansen responds with attacks

2007-08-23T20:49:00.000-07:00

James Hansen of NASA has lashed out at those who don't buy into his view on climate change without questions. The Bush administration is known for the politicization of science, Hansen's behavior fits in with that nicely. This was brought about due to the press covering briefly the error in US surface temperature data discovered after 7 years by Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit. Steve McIntyre and others (more here here and here) respond to Hansen so much better than I could, so I'll leave it at that.

Global warming starting for REALS in 2009

2007-08-15T21:38:00.000-07:00

American Thinker has the lowdown on the new Science journal article:

Here's the Reuters story

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Global warming is forecast to set in with a vengeance after 2009, with at least half of the five following years expected to be hotter than 1998, the warmest year on record, scientists reported on Thursday." (italics added)
Here is Science magazine's own summary: "Next Decade's Climate."

"Rising greenhouse gases are changing global climate, but during the next few decades natural climate variations will have a say as well, so researchers are scrambling to factor them in." [italics added]

Notice that the editors of Science repeat the global warming party line, but emphasize the news: Climate modelers are finally "scrambling to factor in" natural variation. That's funny. You would have thought that model-builders would have done that ages ago. You mean they were only doing greenhouse predictions, and ignoring all the rest?

The media seems to pick the most alarmist articles to push, the most alarmist articles are logically the ones with the weakest science. The media would probably do better at convincing more people if they just stuck to solid scientific articles.

2000 not so hot anymore

2007-08-08T20:57:00.000-07:00

Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit discovered a Y2K error in the GISS temperature dataset. Upon fixing, it changes their rankings of the hottest year considerably. The GISS will probably make further adjustments to the adjustments, so we'll see where it all falls out, but right now the 2000-2006 US temperatures are looking ~0.15C cooler than they were and the US warming trend has dropped some due to the correction. Credit must be given to Steve for his diligence in auditing various climate related information.

I've said this before and I still believe it to be true, if this error caused a 0.15C cool bias instead of a warm bias, I'm betting it would have been discovered much sooner due to more critical examination of unexpected cool results compared to less examination of warm results. Regardless it will be entertaining to see how this plays out in believer blogs and the press.

Business as usual at the GW alarmist factory

2007-08-07T21:08:00.001-07:00

Roger Pielke Jr. claims Peter Webster (of Holland and Webster) denied him data from their much publicized hurricanes are increasing due to warmer seas study. Pielke indicates he holds some hope for the eventual release of the dataset, but until then he outlines several problems with his (Pielke's) reproduction of their data, which he details in his post. This sort of secret data but trust our results tactic from Webster is really unacceptable for scientific publications and the journals should step up and put a stop to it.

Reporting global warming

2007-08-06T18:50:00.000-07:00

American Thinker uncovers a global warming propaganda factory:

I have often wondered how the media are in such lock step on Global Warming. Well, I wonder no more. Recently, I came across a website for the Society of Environmental Journalists (SEJ). http://www.sej.org/ This website is veritable tool box for any budding reporter assigned to the global warming beat. If you're an editor at the Palookaville Post, all you have to do is send your cub reporters to this site and they'll have everything they need to write an article that fits the template and action line perfectly.
...
The site is largely a compendium of links to global warming promoters. Many of the links use adjectives like prestigious, best respected, and reputation unrivaled to burnish their credibility. The so-called deniers on the other hand are described with adjectives like, highly polemical, outright false, and deceptive partisan attack dogs. The description of the Competitive Enterprise Institute is especially derisive, citing the often leveled false accusation that they are the tool of Exxon Mobil. And this is journalism at its finest?

This is not surprising at all, the science reporting on global warming has gotten poorer and poorer, some of it may be due to a wider range of reporting on the subject, but even the top levels of reporting are generally poor.

This week Newsweek, with its Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine article gets it wrong in the title and conclusion, not to mention numerous other mistakes and half-truths throughout the article. The term deniers is inaccurate as very few, if any prominent skeptics, deny any warming is happening and is caused by humans. In the conclusion, the article picks out weather events to show proof of global warming "This summer, Texas was hit by exactly the kind of downpours and flooding expected in a greenhouse world, and Las Vegas and other cities broiled in record triple-digit temperatures." If the Newsweek team of editors can't get an accurate title and conclusion together its not surprising that other publications do even worse. Lubos Motl links to responses to the Newsweek piece from Marc Morano, Noel Sheppard, and Amy Ridenour.

A Layman's Guide to Anthropogenic (Man-Made) Global Warming

2007-07-22T12:29:00.000-07:00

Coyote Blog put some effort into: A Layman's Guide to Anthropogenic (Man-Made) Global Warming, I haven't read much of it yet, but it seems reasonably intelligent and avoids the completely stupid arguments that some people who don't like global warming make (so far).

Why do we have so many climate models?

2007-07-21T21:36:00.000-07:00

Kerplunk asks the question I've been asking for a while now:

If 'the science is settled' then why does the United Nations' IPCC need 17 climate models when just one should do?

Obviously, you don't need a bunch of extra models around if you've figured it all out. Some of the extra models may be slight variations to keep funding going for the particular institution that runs the model. However, if you look at the results, many of them vary widely.

They are overselling models, and additionally, they are using them to cover up unexplained things. For example, you will hear that Antarctica is cooling, on realclimate they will say, that is what the models predicted:

"there are very reasonable explanations for the recent observed cooling, that have been recognized for some time from model simulations."

others disagree:

"Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet."

Both are unclear about which model is doing what, or how many, probably because they don't know precisely themselves the differences between the models or what they are all predicting. Right now the many types of models are being used to hedge bets on global warming effects. Some people paying attention have caught on, but far too few.

Climate modeling forcasts

2007-07-19T20:37:00.000-07:00

Duff & Nonsense covers the latest global climate model criticism:

The latest attack, although I must emphasise that the authors of the attack remain strictly neutral on the question of whether the globe is warming or not, is aimed solely at the methodology employed in making forecasts.
...
In our audit of Chapter 8 of the IPCC’s WG1 Report, we found enough information to make judgements on 89 out of a total of 140 forecasting principles. The forecasting procedures that were described violated 72 principles. Many of the violations were, by themselves, critical."

The thing that bothers me, and I'm sure many others about this is that this will not be acknowledged, either the guy bringing this forward will be attacked or dismissed. There won't be any sort of serious attempt to discuss the issues he raises.

Green in name only (GINO)

2007-07-17T20:42:00.000-07:00

Rebecca Keeble, program manager for Humane Society International, writes in the Daily Telegraph:

ONLY one week after Live Earth, Al Gore's green credentials slipped while hosting his daughter's wedding in Beverly Hills. Gore and his guests at the weekend ceremony dined on Chilean sea bass - arguably one of the world's most threatened fish species.

Also known as Patagonian toothfish, the species is under pressure from illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing activities in the Southern Ocean, jeopardising the sustainability of remaining stocks.

To be fair to Gore, he's really concentrating so much on climate change now he probably doesn't have time to keep up with which fish are okay to eat and which fish are not.

UPDATE: Telegraph has issued an update which says Al Gore's toothfish was from a well managed sustainable fishery! Credit where credit is due, he did his homework here.

The land surface temperature record con't

2007-07-16T21:32:00.000-07:00

Paul Biggs at Jennifer Marohasy's blog:

Well, possibly a more interesting title than ‘Is the near surface temperature record robust?’ All of the above, plus more besides, can affect the readings at temperature stations. Anthony Watts has been collecting photographs of the USHCN climate stations. He is now up to ‘How not to measure temperature, part 22.’ He has two websites Watts up with that? and surfacestations.org

Obviously, in order for surface temperature measurements to accurately reflect temperature trends, all non-climatic influences must be removed. Initially, Anthony examined the fact that Stevenson screens that house the temperature sensor used to be painted with whitewash, but have been painted with latex paint since 1979. He has purchased 3 Stevenson screens, one has bare wood, one is painted with whitewash, and the other with latex. The initial results were posted here. The latest results will be available in about a week’s time.

It'll be great to see some quantification from Anthony Watts. I expect the attacks to begin in earnest soon, so far we haven't seen much hysterics. Its rather amazing how much more attention anyone criticizing any piece of information (small or large) that supports global warming gets than anything supporting it. I've wondered what this bias will do to the field over time. For example over at Climate Audit in this thread we have University professors spending hours attacking and harassing 15 year old for questioning global warming.

Questions on climate change

2007-07-16T21:02:00.000-07:00

American Thinker discusses some of the latest developments concerning global warming:

The last issue of SCIENCE is waffling like mad on the global warming fad, warning its readers that it may not be so settled a question. Under the headline "Another Global Warming Icon Comes Under Attack," SCIENCE writer Richard Kerr writes: "...a group of mainstream atmospheric scientists is disputing a rising icon of global warming, and researchers are giving some ground." ...

"Robert Charlson of the University of Washington, Seattle, (is) one of three authors of a commentary published online last week in Nature Reports: Climate Change. ... he and his co-authors argue that the simulation by 14 different climate models of the warming in the 20th century is not the reassuring success IPCC claims it to be."

Many people have been saying this for years, its nice to see some more mainstream attention.

Greenland icesheet once more

2007-07-14T12:02:00.000-07:00

Science Daily:

"Ancient Greenland was green. New Danish research has shown that it was covered in conifer forest and, like southern Sweden today, had a relatively mild climate."

I wonder what Hansen would say? This disagrees with one of his big predictions, that the Greenland ice sheet will melt quickly and add feet to the sea level increase as temperatures rise. Impact Wire also has comments on the subject.

Ice sheets stable

2007-07-08T21:36:00.000-07:00

The researches report: Antarctica ice sheets are stable:

An ice sheet in Antarctica that is the world's largest - with enough water to raise global sea levels by 200 feet - is relatively stable and poses no immediate threat, according to new research.

And it turns out Hansen may be wrong as Eske Willerslev publishes in the journal Science, Greenland icesheet is more stable than previously thought.

An international team of scientists, drilling deep into the ice layers of Greenland, has found DNA from ancient spiders and trees, evidence that suggests the frozen shield covering the immense island survived the earth's last period of global warming.

The findings, published today in the journal Science, indicate Greenland's ice may be less susceptible to the massive meltdown predicted by computer models of climate change, the article's main author said in an interview.

Good news for the average person.

Eco hypocrites

2007-07-08T12:14:00.000-07:00

Climateer Investing invents a great new phrase and calls out Rolling Stone owner Jann Wenner:

Moreover, according to another Wenner source, the Gulfstream isn't his only emissions-intensive vehicle. He also recently purchased a GMC Yukon Denali—an SUV whose fuel efficiency is on par with that of the Hummer—and also keeps a pair of snowmobiles at his place in Sun Valley, Idaho. Snowmobile engines are notoriously dirty, producing as much pollution in a day of use as a typical car does in 100,000 miles.

Bad press, but not nearly as bad as Madonna got in the WP:

"If you want to save the planet, I want you to start jumping up and down!" Thus Madonna revealed her plan to combat global warming.

Ouch!

Hattip: Planet Gore.

IPCC climate model forecast accuracy

2007-07-08T11:58:00.000-07:00

A couple of posts on a report that indicate IPCC AR4 climate model "forecasting" has been oversold, Ambit Gambit and Jennifer Marohasy touch the surface:

"Who would have thought that the climate models used as the basis of IPCC greenhouse forecasts would violate 72 of 89 principles of forecasting. That's the claim from forecastingprinciples.com a site run by J. Scott Armstrong, Professor of Marketing at the Wharton Business School, University of Pennsylvania.

and Climate Audit, as usual, digs deeper:

Given that the Report was commissioned at an enormous cost in order to provide policy recommendations to governments, the response should be reassuring. It is not. The forecasts in the Report were not the outcome of scientific procedures. In effect, they present the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing.

You won't hear the IPCC say that. Read the whole CA post to learn more.

Live earth, starting in the CO2 hole

2007-07-07T11:02:00.000-07:00

Daily Mail:

The most conservative assessment of the flights being taken by its superstars is that they are flying an extraordinary 222,623.63 miles between them to get to the various concerts - nearly nine times the circumference of the world. The true environmental cost, as they transport their technicians, dancers and support staff, is likely to be far higher.

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations.

Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year.

Ouch- that Madonna picture is horrible! Not to mention the part about the emissions. They are of course counting on carbon offsetting, which anyone who is paying attention knows have serious issues:

some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place.
Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway.

Hattip: Instapundit.

Update: Pajamas Media: "the Gore concerts could produce more carbon dioxide than was produced by all of Afghanistan in 2006." and Planet Gore shows that Madonna is a climate change role model: "On her tour last year, Madonna produced an estimated 485 tons of carbon dioxide in four months" Gateway pundit has more hypocracy.

Urban Heat Islands

2007-07-06T19:49:00.000-07:00

Climate Science responds to recent criticism regarding research into urban heat islands and the potential effects on global warming. It is a little disappointing, but completely expected, that once some questions are raised about data quality, realclimate goes on the attack and downplays the results by using numerous straw man arguments that no one is claiming to be true.

Al Gore is wrong?!?

2007-07-03T21:26:00.001-07:00

Chicago Sun Times, Alarmist Global Warming Claims Melt Under Scientific Scrutiny:

Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.
For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame."

Many more examples of Gore's falsehoods are given in the article.

Democrats vs. Automakers

2007-07-02T22:03:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore explores the Democrat's anti-Detroit campaign:

"We estimate the Big Three could meet the 35 mpg standard only by dramatically reducing sales of large SUVs and pickups by 60 percent, while improving car fuel economy by about 34 percent and truck fuel economy by 25 percent," writes Brian Johnson, an auto analyst with Lehman Brothers.

I've wondered when the autoworker unions would wake up and see that Democrats have been no friends of theirs recently.

A gassy problem

2007-06-29T18:54:00.000-07:00

NBC reports:

The United States Department of Agriculture has released reports stating that when you smell cow manure, you're also smelling greenhouse gas emissions.

That will be the focus of new research that might happen right here in the Southern Tier.

Umm yeah. Not that I'm disputing it, but how long did it take them to come up with this? The reporter goes on:

The main focus of the grant-funded research in New York State would be to tarp off areas where farmers dump cow manure, commonly called manure lagoons. Researchers would then prevent those gases from entering the atmosphere, measure how many units are produced, and farmers would receive cash incentives, called "Carbon Credits," for each unit produced.

Okay, so they're going to tarp off piles of manure and then what... Wait? The methane is completely foiled by the tarp and heads underground? Or is it consumed somehow if it is not allowed to escape? I am not a tarp expert, but I'm just thinking, they're really not all that good at holding a gas. $20 million to put a couple tarps over a pile of crap?

American Thinker and Gore's assault on reason

2007-06-29T18:45:00.000-07:00

American Thinker has an essay countering Gore's book, Manmade Global Warming: the Real Assault on Reason.

As fear of impending doom plays such a crucial role in hysteria-building, it's no wonder that AGW has been blamed for everything from lighthearted Costa Rican Frog Die-Offs Australian cockroach migration Swedish beetle-infestation, Great Britain's puffin decline a rise in hay fever staff shortages at Bulgarian brothels to deadly serious outbreaks of Malaria, Dengue Fever, West Nile Virus and Cholera, the killer Indian Ocean tsunami, and even this week's Lake Tahoe wildfires

In fact, when U.N Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon wrote a WaPo piece this month actually blaming the genocide in Darfur on AGW, his was, not all that surprisingly, not the first.

Take the time to read it all.

Al Gore, smarter than the rest of us

2007-06-27T21:14:00.000-07:00

The Independent:

The failed presidential candidate claims that the stronger scientific consensus he knew was about to emerge meant "we in the US were about to shift into high gear in addressing the climate crisis".

He just knew, this attitude is probably why he's not President. People generally don't like to be talked down to and be told how much smarter someone else because they figured out it out quicker, even climate scientists. The article goes on to state:

During his tenure as vice president, America's carbon dioxide emissions shot up far faster than at any time in modern history - by 15 per cent, compared to just 1.65 per cent during President Bush's first term.

I believe thats what we here in blogland call a BUUURRRRRNNNNNN.

EU energy costs double the US

2007-06-26T18:22:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore reviews EU electric utility rates,

Western Europe’s average kw/h cost of 19.5 cents! France is the cheapest thanks to its heavy reliance on nuclear energy, but still clocks in at 16 cents kw/h. Germany, with its mix of nuke, coal, and wind is staggering under 25 cents per kw/h. And the biggest renewable energy user? The dream of U.S. pols from Reid to Schwarzenegger? That would be Denmark clocking in at an eye-popping 32 cents per kw/h.

and gas prices:

Just back from a week in France carting a family of four around in the Senate Democrats’dream car. With gas at $7 a gallon, French cars average 42 mpg - in the ballpark of the 36 mpg that Senate leaders just mandated for U.S cars by 2020 (up from the current 24.5 mpg).

On average, these are about double the cost of US rates.

Truth is inappropriate at the IPCC

2007-06-26T18:06:00.001-07:00

Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit has noted many odd things the IPCC does, however, this one might just take the cake. The IPCC (presumably the lead authors) truncated a temperature reconstruction at 1960 because after that the truth was "inappropriate." The Briffa series is the green line, both graphics were taken from climate audit to make them easier to see.

The truth, which IPCC thinks is inappropriate.

What the IPCC deems appropriate.

Whats going on lately?

2007-06-23T09:00:00.000-07:00

I've had little time for updates lately, let me run down some things that have caught my eye recently:

Gust of Hot Air explores the comedy that is the claim the Darfur was caused by global climate change.

Roger Pielke Sr. lays out a very clear example of IPCC bias.

China says it is all our fault for their increased emissions due to us buying their goods. "The developed countries move a lot of manufacturing industry into China. A lot of the things you wear, you use, you eat are produced in China," he said at a regular news briefing. "On the one hand, you shall increase the production in China, on the other hand you criticize China on the emission reduction issue." The reason companies moved there is because of lax environmental and labor regulation, so of course its our fault!

Michael Hill at the WP discusses who would win with global warming, "Northern homes could save on heating fuel. Rust Belt cities might stop losing snowbirds to the South. Canadian farmers could harvest bumper crops. Greenland may become awash in cod and oil riches. Shippers could count on an Arctic shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific. Forests may expand. Mongolia could see a go-go economy."

Blame Canada

2007-06-14T21:24:00.000-07:00

Yahoo News:

Even Canada's thinly populated Arctic regions can play a role in curbing global warming, by reducing soot from dirty, old cooking stoves which are blackening snow and making it melt faster.
It's one problem on a list of many outlined by researchers at the universities of California and Colorado. They urged Canadians to filter smoke stacks, reduce ship traffic and burn fuels out in their entirety to minimize dirty waste.

In a study examining the impact of burning fossil fuel in snow-covered northern climes, the scientists said grubby snow contributes to global warming because it absorbs more heat from the sun, and melts faster.

Its not just Canadians creating the soot, soot travels far and wide on the wind. The places with the dirties coal plants? China and other third world countries. Diesel fuel also generates a considerable amount of particulates, which is the reason why the US has limited its use, unlike the EU, where a good portion of their private car fleets are diesel.

Developing country emissions

2007-06-13T20:59:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore says if developing countries want a pass on emissions, then developed countries should get compensation for discoveries the third world has benefited from. This is a decent argument, but I have another take on it.

For years everyone used lead in gasoline, it was the cheapest additive out there and gave a significant boost to octane. Eventually, we started to notice negative effects of using so much lead, so we found alternatives and phased it out. This was all before my time, now that I am somewhat grown and driving, I do not demand to use leaded gasoline like my parents and grandparents did for its superior performance, I know the lead is harmful. No one in their right mind thinks I have the right to use lead in my gasoline. In fact, I would not use it even if I had the option.

When China argues they are allowed to reach first world CO2 emissions levels, they are making an argument similar to the guy who demands lead in his gasoline because his parents got to take advantage of it. Now they can argue about the science, that would be different, but once they concede on that, then their argument changes.

Poor quality control

2007-06-11T21:39:00.000-07:00

Watts Up With That? has a new update detailing yet another poor site. What is the worst possible place he will find a GISS thermometer? They've been pretty bad already, barbecues, roofs, parking lots, air conditioning vents, but its hard to believe they've found the worst of the lot in the first month. What will next month hold?

Two interesting links

2007-06-09T07:55:00.000-07:00

The Reference Frame points out that on average May was 0.35 degrees cooler than January, did you notice?

Climateer Investing covers more folly in California regarding solar power rebates:

Then an installer asked, "How many applications for new solar home installations have you received?"
"More than 1,000," said the earnest young PG&E representative.
"How many have been deemed 'completed'?"
This was a good question, because unless a new system is deemed "completed," the homeowner cannot turn it on. That means the installer must wait for his check.
The young PG&E representative answered honestly, if undiplomatically ...
"None," he said.

Thats all for now, have a good weekend!

Big Surprise, DiCaprio gives Gore a hypocrisy pass

2007-06-08T22:55:00.000-07:00

Global Warming Hysteria:

“Don't shoot the messenger,” DiCaprio said. “This person is trying to relay a message to the public and the way that he travels should not be splayed out like that.” According to DiCaprio, Gore should get a hypocrisy pass. And so should he.

Actually, he shouldn't. Why do we think it is news when we find out a male priest sleeps with men? Because, they go around telling people it is immoral and will have consequences. Same for Gore. I could go on and on about this, but its simple, both are hypocrites, anyone who believes otherwise is a fool.

Cap and trade criticism

2007-06-08T22:52:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore quotes one good reason to not support a carbon cap and trade plan:

The supposed market solution relies upon bureaucrats coming up with a quota for every plant in the country based on their emissions history and an estimate of how much they can cut. It's reminiscent of some old Communist five year plan with government telling the private sector what it is capable of and should achieve, why is this considered the capitalist approach?

Unintended consequences

2007-06-06T21:49:00.000-07:00

Freakonomics discusses the unintended consequences of Ireland charging to dispose of trash per weight:

The idea of the new charges was to encourage the public to “reduce, reuse and recycle” packaging and other household waste. However, it actually encouraged people to burn their domestic refuse rather than pay waste charges to the local councils. There’s no way of knowing just how many people followed this (illegal) course of action, but some of them threw flammable liquids on the home incinerator and needed referrals to burns specialists.

Someone should have seen the trash burning part coming. Unintended consequences have become a recurring theme as nations try to fight climate change. If we're not destroying rain forest for biofuel or paying efficient factories to shut down while inefficient third world factories increase production, we're promoting trash burning (and greenhouse gas emissions) and other environmentally questionable strategies.

The climate change web

2007-06-05T20:40:00.000-07:00

Articles of interest that I have no time to discuss:

Planet Gore: Average hybrid buyer makes $100K and we subsidize these guys.

Pelosi discovers climate change in Greenland, vows to stop flying a private jet weekly. Not really, the private jet is still on.

US Emissions fell 1.3% in 2006, despite a lack of any sort of plan. Since 2000, the US has cut emissions more than the EU.

Climate Audit continues investigating the shenanigans going on at surface temperature stations.

Cafe Hayek links a trailer exposing (more) environmentalist hypocrisies.

Maybe try doing something?

2007-05-28T19:17:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore comments on a George Will column:

George Will has another trenchant column on the politics of “global warming” today, noting that “Democrats could demand that the president send the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate so they can embrace it.” Yes, they could, but they won’t. President Bush could “transmit” the document to the Senate seeking a vote, which he won’t.

This is exactly right. The constant cries that we should be doing more only work for so long, eventually the Democrats and those that want to do more, need to have a plan. The current status quo is probably the best thing for all of us. Eventually though, you'd think the Democrats would have to throw some sort of bone to their green constituents. Lets hope the current situation holds out for at least a while longer.

Historical CO2 increases lag temperature increases

2007-05-28T19:11:00.001-07:00

Sciencebits talks more about the 800 year lag between CO2 increases and temperature increases in the historical record:

To the dismay of Al Gore, the answer is that this graph doesn't prove at all that CO₂ has any effect on the global temperature. All it says is that there is some equilibrium between dissolved CO₂ and atmospheric CO₂, an equilibrium which depends on the temperature. Of course, the temperature itself can depend on a dozen different factors, including CO₂, but just the CO₂ / temperature correlation by itself doesn't tell you the strength of the CO₂→ΔT link. It doesn't even tell you the sign.

Read the whole thing. The only answer I've heard so far explaining this is that it is due to "feedback" (search real climate) and then hands are waved and most go on pretending it is not important to current climate understanding.

The surface Temperature Record

2007-05-28T19:03:00.000-07:00

Those who follow climate change science know that the surface temperature record is weak, my first exposure to it was John Daly's (not the golfer) work. Now Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit and Anthony Watts at Watts up With That? have picked it up and are continuing to expose the shody records. Check out their latest entries which show, even in California, there are still many quality problems at temperature monitoring sites.

Climate modeling progress

2007-05-17T19:50:00.001-07:00

Planet Gore outlines the breakthroughs made in climate modeling:

In a recent post Iain highlights that the current UN IPCC estimate for the global temperature impact of a doubling of CO₂ is 1.9⁰C – 5.4⁰C, or on average about 3.7⁰C. The big issue that was highlighted that could produce a lot of error is how the models handle clouds.

What’s really amazing is that in 1975, Syukuro Manabe was the lead author for a landmark paper called "The Effects of Doubling the CO2 Concentration on the Climate of a General Circulation Model." in the Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. Their estimate for the impact of a doubling of CO₂: 3.5⁰C. The authors warned that "it is not advisable to take too seriously" the specific numbers they published. The big problem: clouds.

This is what $10 billion of government investment in technology gets you? I estimate $1 billion a year for 10 years, which is probably a very generous estimate.

global warming and the taxpayer

2007-05-17T19:42:00.000-07:00

Works and Days discusses the disconnect between the moral left and average folk (for lack of a better term). This is one aspect of the left I never really understood, for years they fight hard for the little guy, now along comes global warming and it trumps that without a second thought? Yeah, the poor get a bone thrown their way every now and then, but what is getting more attention, universal health care or global warming? The Democrats don't even really care about the minimum wage bill they crafted, it sits idle currently. Will their voters catch on? We will see.

Quick Links

2007-05-15T18:27:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore says Steve Jobs nails it when he says "I think your organisation particularly depends too much on principle and not enough on fact," Jobs said to the Greenpeace representatives. "You guys rate people based on what people say their plans are in the distant future, not what they are doing today. I think you put way too much weight on these glorified principles and way too little weight on science and engineering."

In Climate Science, Roger Pielke examines the recent extreme heatwave paper and is not impressed, "Equally disturbing (or it should be to anyone who values scientific credibility) is that a peer reviewed journal elected to publish this paper in this form in which untested predictions for decades into the future were presented, yet the global and regional model could not even skillfully simulate recent climate. The publication of such clearly scientifically flawed research conclusions raises questions on whether the journal (in this case the American Meteorological Society Journal of Climate) is engaging in advocacy rather than being a balanced arbitrator of peer reviewed papers. Publishing predictions which are not tested, is not science." I noticed that most of the green blogs didn't run with the story, perhaps they are smarter than the major newspapers that did.

Roger Pielke also wonders if diesel particulate pollutions, which has measurable health effects, will trump global warming in the post titled Has the IPCC produced a hydra? We will see what happens.

Global Warming Hysteria catches some greeny admitting they go green for the money. Finally, an honest one!

Emotionalizing Climate Change

2007-05-11T22:22:00.000-07:00

Der Spiegel has an article titled:

EMOTIONALIZING CLIMATE CHANGE
Is the IPCC Doing Harm to Science?

The problem is that the IPCC is not a political group whose goal is to exert pressure, but a scientific institution and panel of experts. Its members ought to present their results and analyses dispassionately, the way pathologists or psychiatrists do when serving as expert witnesses in court, no matter how horrible the victim's injuries and how deviant the perpetrator's psyche are.

Peter Weingart, a sociologist of science from Bielefeld, a city in northwest Germany, believes that the climate experts' lack of distance has something to do with their training. Scientists usually learn only to reflect on the results of their work, not on their role within the social decision-making process. As a result, they join forces with politicians who share their views. And in this way they do harm to science.

Read the whole thing, it seems to present both sides of the issue well.

Global warming?

2007-05-10T20:19:00.000-07:00

The Reference Frame has a post up detailing some of the latest climate change developments:

Christy, Norris, Spencer, Hnilo (ADSABS) have studied the temperature of the lower troposphere in tropics (-20...+20 latitude) during the 1979-2004 period in their article in Journal of Geophysical Research (2007).

They used two sources, UAH (University of Alabama in Huntsville) and RSS (Remote Sensing Systems). The nighttime trend is 0.12 K/decade while the daytime trend is 0.07 K/decade - a strange difference indicating that an adjustment may be needed.

The whole post is excellent.

Planet Gore

2007-05-10T20:14:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore has some interesting posts up over the past months, that I'll quote the best parts, but I encourage you to check the entire posts and the entire blog out:

What does Obama drive?

Now that he us under Secret Service protection, this greenest of green politicians takes a motorcade of at least two armored Chevy Suburban SUVs (EPA est. fuel economy: 15 mpg – likely less for the armored version) wherever he goes.

Poor, poor rent-seekers

About half-way through making a windfall profit estimated at 5 billion euros (with a fluctuating dollar, let's call it an even, still quite understated $6 billion USD) since 2005 from selling carbon credits given to them for free by their governments, European utilities are fretting over the potential cost of extending the Emissions Trading Scheme that's been so good to them through Kyoto's 2008-2012 period. Swedish-German utility Vattenfall estimates the cost at up to 1 billion euros a year over the course of Kyoto's five-year plan

The Times on Global Warming: Where Do I Begin?

There is an old joke in Britain that a factotum announces to the Prime Minister, “Sir, the press is here, and also the gentleman from The Times.” The point of the story was that The Times was classing up the joint just by walking in the door. In the contemporary era I guess the point would be that they’ve given up reporting the news and just started writing short stories

Is best-selling Toyota a Green victory?

In 1985, Toyota sold under a million vehicles in the U.S. - 96 percent of them small cars. Today, at 2.5 mil in sales, only 28 percent of its fleet are small cars, while 20 percent are large vehicles (SUVs). Toyota may be Green, but trucks make the green.

Consensus

2007-05-10T20:05:00.000-07:00

Global Warming Hysteria:

Here's a little insight into how the "global consensus" on climate change is formed. The Times of London reports that "tackling global warming need not cost the Earth, a panel of UN scientists said today. In the third in a series of reports, the IPCC said that keeping the rise in temperatures to within 2 degrees C would cost only 0.12 per cent of annual gross domestic product if governments exploited new technologies to cut greenhouse gas emissions."

So who authored this rosy, "scientific" scenario?

"It's a low premium to pay to reduce the risk of major climate damage," Bill Hare, a Greenpeace adviser who co-authored the report, told Reuters news agency after the culmination of marathon negotiations.

You can Google Bill Hare and confirm that he is a Greenpeace rep.

This is not the type of person we've been told is making up the IPCC reports which confirm consensus, in fact, we've been told it is a group of well meaning scientists with no motives or interest in distorting the truth. I guess that was a lie.

Carbon credit subsidies going to China

2007-05-09T21:26:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore:

Clean Energy Takes Funds to the Cleaners [Peter Suderman]
According the New York Times, out of the $4.8 billion raised through a carbon credit credit scheme designed to fund clean energy in poor nations, $3 billion went to China, which, these days, is not exactly a mouse in the world economy. And what's more, some of the funds are going to projects that are profitable even without the subsidies.

Doesn't sound like the best idea in the world.

Solar power follies in California?

2007-05-09T21:15:00.000-07:00

LA Times reports officials are "dumbfounded" that they created a new rule that makes solar power more expensive than it already is:

Solar installation firms, environmentalists and government officials are dumbfounded that the much-lauded solar program has had such a rough start.

Then they go on and find this peach of a person:

"These are very real problems," said Bernadette Del Chiaro, a lobbyist for Environment California. "Nobody foresaw the outcome would be a whole set of consumers basically priced out of the market."

Poor people are a whole set of consumers basically priced out of the market, subsidy or no, but they don't count for anything in California anyway, so lets not even think about them.

The reason no one wants solar anymore is you have to switch to this rate plan:

Edison charges summer time-of-use rates that range from 29.7 to 35.9 cents per kilowatt-hour between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays. It drops to a range of 16.3 to 18.6 cents per kilowatt-hour from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. weekdays and all weekend days and holidays, according to documents filed with the PUC.

17 cents per kwh sounds high even by California standards. No wonder no one is signing up. Overall thats probably a good deal for the CA tax payers. CA officials are working on fixing the problem.

These will cost you.

What we know

2007-05-09T21:08:00.000-07:00

Jim Manzi has an interesting global warming article here that I missed the first time around:

The summary further implies that if we double the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO₂) in the atmosphere, the IPCC is 90 percent onfident that we will cause further warming of 3° C /- 1.5°C.

But what do these statements of confidence really mean? They are not derived mathematically from the type of normal probability distributions that are used when, for example, determining the margin of error in a political poll (say, /- 5%). IPCC estimates of “confidence” are really what we would mean by this word in everyday conversation—a subjective statement of opinion. This is a very big deal, since bounding the uncertainty in climate predictions is central to deciding what, if anything, we should do about them.

Check it out!

We're just getting started

2007-05-06T13:56:00.000-07:00

The NYT is already tired of it:

These days you would have to be a fool or a lobbyist to dismiss global warming and natural resource issues.
But is it possible that all this marketing is cheapening the cause?
Must every hotel, restaurant, shampoo, detergent and beverage that is environmentally responsible talk so much about it? Yuban “sustainable development” coffee. Paul Mitchell “protecting our planet for generations to come.” Levi’s Eco jeans.
How much green-standing can we stand? It’s enough hot air to melt Antarctica.
In no time, an inconvenient truth has become an obnoxious one.

So am I, but I think we're just getting started, we're not even to the stage where we actually do something yet.

Links

2007-05-06T11:22:00.000-07:00

the reference frame has an interesting post on a few climate change topics:

Michael Mann didn't like Alexander Cockburn's essay in which Cockburn correctly compares carbon permits and indulgences - well, your humble correspondent might have been the first person who called the permits "indulgences". At least, it was an independent invention :-) because I had to find the word "indulgence" in a Czech-English dictionary.

Check it out!

Has anyone called Al Gore yet?

2007-05-05T09:02:00.000-07:00

BlueClimate:

New research indicates that global warming may increase wind shear over the tropical Atlantic which would be expected to affect hurricane intensity and formation. ScienceDaily has the story .
Climate model simulations for the 21st century indicate a robust increase in wind shear in the tropical Atlantic due to global warming, which may inhibit hurricane development and intensification. Historically, increased wind shear has been associated with reduced hurricane activity and intensity.
The study also identifies regions, like the western tropical Pacific, where global warming is expected to cause a favorable environment for the development of hurricanes.

Expect this study to be quickly denied and quickly forgotten.

EU targets to damage rain forest

2007-05-05T08:54:00.000-07:00

Telegraph:

European union green fuel targets will accelerate the destruction of rainforests in South-East Asia and threaten the habitat of endangered species, such as the orang-utan.
In March EU leaders agreed to set a binding climate change target to make biofuel - energy sources made from plant material - account for 10 per cent of all Europe's transport fuels by 2020.
But the European Commission has admitted that the objective, which aims to cut carbon dioxide emissions, may have the unintended consequence of speeding up the destruction of tropical rainforests and peatlands in South-East Asia - actually increasing, not reducing, global warming.

What is the logic behind this? Save the earth from global warming by clearing the rain forests? Good luck.

Hat tip: Global Warming Hysteria

Slamming Green Celebs

2007-05-05T08:48:00.000-07:00

Someone finally points out the stupidity of green celebrities. Watch the video here.

On China again

2007-04-23T19:14:00.000-07:00

People continue to cover for China while it keeps on polluting with the best of us, Planet Gore:

It's now official that China will overtake the US as the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases later this year, not 2010 as was thought. ...

Ned Helme, president of the Washington-based Center for Clean Air Policy, a nonprofit group that has been working with China on its plans to curb greenhouse gases, said it is "a myth" that China is ignoring global warming. A combination of efforts to modernize its industries and power plants and to impose tougher automobile-efficiency standards, he said, will provide reductions roughly equal to U.S. President George W. Bush's plan to slow the growth of U.S. emissions by 2010.
But I thought the President wasn't doing anything. If he's not, then neither is China, surely?

Why cut China slack that the US doesn't get? Because the illusion that China will eventually work with us must be preserved or a big argument for doing something goes out the window.

Alberta turns to natural gas

2007-04-23T19:02:00.000-07:00

Financial Post:

Alberta expanded into windpower generation aggressively since deregulating its electricity industry eight years ago. With more than 4% of its power coming from wind farms in the southern part of the province, it is the national leader in the green-energy source.
But the growth turned out to be too much of a good thing and the provincial grid operator, Alberta Electric System Operator, slapped a ban last April on the construction of any more wind farms until the reliability issues are resolved.

4% wind installed and they have reliability problems? Sounds low, but it illustrates the point, currently, you can't depend on renewable energy for significant amounts of power.

Salmon dying for some global warming

2007-04-23T18:53:00.000-07:00

Kodiak Daily Mirror:

Fish and Game pink salmon harvest projections are down from previous years because of last year’s cold winter and spring.
Sockeye salmon are also subject to problems with freezing and cold weather, Brennan said.
Kodiak Island’s two salmon hatcheries also have had problems because of the cold weather. Colder-than-usual water slows the development of the fish.
“They grow slower and don’t mature very quickly,” Brennan said. “We don’t have any way in our hatcheries to warm the water.”

Please forgive the title, but I couldn't resist. Weird how we don't hear about the wildlife problems associated with cold weather, but polar bears are all over the news.

Happy Earth Day!

2007-04-22T07:46:00.000-07:00

The planet has already been saved however, Instapundit:

THE PLANET IS SAFE: The Eco-Socialites are on the case. But not too much:

Still, she has no plans to reduce the family’s significant carbon footprint by, say, selling the Manhattan second home. “I’m not a perfect person,” she said. “I’m not the greenest woman in America.” And there was scant indication that other guests, most of whom, presumably, knew their way up the steps of a private jet, were contemplating major lifestyle cutbacks. Glancing about the room, Ms. Barnett said, “We aren’t all going to move to one-bedroom apartments.” . . . She plans to practice conservation, to a point. Energy-saving light bulbs are fine — for the utility closet, perhaps. In other rooms, “they don’t give a very pretty light,” she said.

That's for the little people.

You don't need to worry about a thing.

Why sheep love real climate

2007-04-21T08:43:00.000-07:00

Prometheus has a semi-interesting tale of typical hijinx going on at Real Climate:

Based on my most recent interaction, the folks at RealClimate seem less interested than ever on an open exchange of views on scientific topics. But I guess that is what might be expected when one points out that the they are spreading misinformation.

Read the rest of it. I know a lot of people that often play the Real Climate trump card, if you read it on Real Climate, it trumps everything else anyone could ever come up with. Once you see this pattern, you might as well leave them be, because nothing can convince them any different. Nevermind the fact that Real Climate frames arguments as well as anyone, always sounds more authoritative than the evidence shows, and edits out comments they don't like.

Solar power not so great

2007-04-18T19:58:00.000-07:00

NY Times:

With a $2,000 federal tax credit and generous rebates from states like New Jersey and California, it has never cost less to install a solar power system.

And it still makes no economic sense. You might want photovoltaic solar panels to generate your own electricity out of a belief that you will save the planet. But, as is the case with hybrid vehicles, you certainly should not do it to save money.
An online calculator (www.findsolar.com/index.php?page=rightforme) created by solar power advocates and the Department of Energy demonstrates just how hard it is to justify the switch.
For instance, a homeowner in New Jersey whose electric bill is an above-average $100 a month could buy a system for about $54,000, it says. After the state rebate of $18,468 and the $2,000 federal tax credit, the system would cost $33,532.

Don't buy into the hype, its not a good deal for most people.

Canadian seal hunters trapped by ice

2007-04-18T19:53:00.000-07:00

Oh the irony! SF Gate:

Canadian Coast Guard icebreakers smashed through a massive expanse of ice off Newfoundland's northeast coast Wednesday in a bid to free about 100 seal hunt vessels.

About 15 vessels were in danger of having the Atlantic ice pierce their hulls, said Department of Fisheries and Oceans spokesman Phil Jenkins. The thick, moving ice poses the danger of sandwiching and cracking the boats.

Only $78 per seal? I'm surprised a green group just doesn't get together and buy out the entire group, they're making $20 million before expenses, give them $5 million and they'd probably all stay home.

China out (duh)

2007-04-17T20:26:00.000-07:00

The Toronto Star:

China aims to nearly halve by 2020 the amount of greenhouse gases it emits for every U.S. dollar of its economy, but will reject strict caps for decades, according to a copy of a national global warming assessment shown to Reuters.
Beijing has been reticent about what the world's number-two carbon emitter – the United States is number one – would be prepared to do to tackle global warming.
The Chinese report shows officials believe warming is a serious threat but suggests they do not want to take preventive steps that hobble economic growth.

They totally had me fooled a few days when they agreed to participate in talks, NYT:

During a visit to Tokyo last week, China’s prime minister, Wen Jiabao, announced that his country was prepared to take part in negotiations on a new agreement limiting global warming emissions, to replace Kyoto Protocol provisions that expire in 2012. China is not subject to the accord’s binding emissions targets, but its commitment to talk raises real hope that it may be open to the idea.

Icecap

2007-04-16T21:42:00.000-07:00

A new resource for those seeking the truth about global warming: Icecap.

Top hurricane forecaster blasts Gore

2007-04-16T21:38:00.000-07:00

SF Chron:

A top hurricane forecaster called Al Gore "a gross alarmist" Friday for making an Oscar-winning documentary about global warming.

"He's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things. I think he's doing a great disservice and he doesn't know what he's talking about," Dr. William Gray said in an interview with The Associated Press at the National Hurricane Conference in New Orleans, where he delivered the closing speech.

What does this guy know that Al Gore doesn't?

Overselling of climate models

2007-04-14T22:34:00.000-07:00

Others are noticing that climate models are oversold, hopefully more wake up before we end up taking a path that will take years for our economy to recover from. Truth or Truthiness?:

I disagree. I think the transparent overselling of models is likely to be noticed and will lead members of the public to lose confidence in both in models and in those who are funded to develop and run models. The consequence could well be a decision to continue business as usual.

Town runs up against solar realities

2007-04-14T22:28:00.000-07:00

Ecotality:

What appears to have been a rush to savings with the installation of the solar lights in 2003 has now backfired and cast a shadow on a greener future.
Apparently, the solar panels installed above the lights were faulty and ineffective. Residents complained that they were unsightly and not very bright. Kind of reminds me of those solar garden lights you see everyone using these days. Another issue: the lights stopped working during a strech of sunless days in December 2005 and January 2006.

At least its not *my* money being wasted.

China moving forward on its own...

2007-04-14T22:26:00.000-07:00

Planet Gore:

OK, so the greens already trumpeted China's recent assertion that it would undertake greenhouse emission reduction efforts...on its own, thank you very much...

This is typical and funny (although no details are given), apparently China is allowed to move on its own, but the US isn't?

Put your money where your mouth is

2007-04-14T22:06:00.000-07:00

LiveScience reports:

Now, an online gambling service is giving the public a chance to do what scientists have been doing among themselves for years. The service, BetUS.com, announced it will give members a chance to wager on various global warming-related issues.

One bet gives members 1-to-5 odds that scientists will prove global warming exists beyond any scientific doubt by the end of this year. Another gives 100-to-1 odds that polar bears will be extinct by 2010. (A complete list of all the global-warming related bets is listed at the end of this article.)

This could be interesting, the polar bear one is a safe bet, I think we will manage to keep some alive in zoos until 2010 no matter what the temperature. Some people might find this impossible, but places like LA and Dallas generally have polar bears living outdoors at their zoos and they do just fine. Lately they've been more concerned about keeping the right temperature for the bears, but they've been there for years already. More here.

Reviving the Aral Sea

2007-04-09T21:30:00.000-07:00

The Reference Frame's Reviving Aral Sea is an in progress success story of fixing and environmental disaster.

California Urban heat island

2007-04-08T17:12:00.000-07:00

This flies in the face of IPCC assumptions (which found no indication of significant urban influence on the temperature signal), expect it to be ignored: Study: California being warmed by urbanization

Average temperatures across California rose slightly from 1950 to 2000, with the greatest warming coming in the state's big cities and mostly caused by urbanization -- not greenhouse gases -- authors of a study released on Wednesday said.

The study found that average temperatures in California rose nearly 2 degrees Fahrenheit (nearly one degree Celsius) in the second half of the 20th century, led by large urban centers such as San Francisco and Southern California.

Climate Audit has a fairly good summary of the IPCC position, start here and explore other links, there is lots of information.

Temperature reconstructions

2007-04-07T09:13:00.000-07:00

The Reference Frame: Borehole climate reconstructions & hockey stick revolution in 1998 looks at the independent temperature reconstructions:

It also argued that the authors had found an "independent confirmation of the unusual character of 20th century climate that has emerged from recent multiproxy studies [MBH98]" (see the abstract). The new paper was using temperatures and 358 sites only instead of the 6000 sites used in 1997 (94 percent of sites eliminated) and it has erased 19,500 years out of 20,000 years (97.5 percent of the time interval eliminated) from the paper written in 1997 in order not to contradict Mann et al.

These reconstructions are often used to support each other (ie the hockey stick is true because it has been independently verified by so and so (who used much of the same data)). This is little different than my definition of independently.

The locals aren't so good at that

2007-04-07T08:53:00.000-07:00

The buying local trend is a fairly recent development, buy only what is produced within 100 miles of you, its usually limited to food, but Cafe Hayek looks at making a suit:

It's the story of a class project to produce a man's suit using pieces produced within a 100-mile radius of home. Not quite local, but local enough. Wired reports on the result:
The suit took a team of 20 artisans several months to produce -- 500 man-hours of work in total -- and the finished product wears its rustic origins on its sleeve.
Self-sufficiency is the road to poverty.

There are links to pictures also, which are hilarious.

Gore quote

2007-04-07T08:27:00.000-07:00

Next time you think you should take anything from him seriously (from Grist- who doesn't call him on it):

(Al Gore) I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

He's advocating lying to get what he wants, the amazing thing is that as a believer you can say this crap and get away with it, people still worship him.

IPCC group 2 SPM report

2007-04-07T08:15:00.000-07:00

Seven more reports to go and we'll see some science... Stolen moments summarizes. I am having a problem with this:

At one point, Chinese and Saudi Arabian delegates tried to reduce the scientific confidence level about already noticeable effects of global warming. They lowered the confidence level from 90 percent to 80 percent. Scientists objected, and one lead author from the United States, NASA’s Cynthia Rosenzweig, left the building after filing an official protest.
Under a U.S.-proposed compromise, the final report deleted any mention of the level of confidence about global warming’s current effects. And that may have saved the day, according to some scientists who said the report had appeared doomed over that issue.

So if we are 90% (disregarding the Saudi objections) or so sure that we already have noticeable effects, why don't we just have one climate model? It seems to me that we could weed out the incorrect ones really easily if this is the case. It said something like 18 of 19 climate models report a dryer Southwest. Well, if we already have observable changes, find the climate models that predicted those changes and throw out the rest. Keep moving until you have one left and stick with that one. They obviously all can't be right, why keep the rest around?

More commentary from Ken Maize's Power Blog.

Global warming as a moral issue

2007-03-28T21:24:00.000-07:00

American Thinker has an excellent essay on global warming as a moral issue:

I am referring to the fact that the global warming issue is now regarded as a "moral" matter by its advocates. None other than The High Priest of Global Warming (Al Gore) has decreed it as such. Of course, there is some obvious humor in this because the liberals will also tell you that you "cannot legislate morality". Well, it does not take complicated logic to conclude that if global warming is indeed a moral matter and if it is true that you cannot legislate morality, then it should hold that you cannot legislate global warming.

...

The message of these pseudo-moralists is that "good" people must start by accepting the pre-ordained orthodox conclusion and then work backwards through the claimed facts, making not an intellectual assessment of whether they are indeed true, but rather a "moral" assessment of whether or not they agree with the conclusion. Things claimed as facts which are "good" (in this moral sense) should be embraced and those which are "bad" (in this same moral sense) should be discarded, not because they are factually false, but because they are "immoral".

Fred Thompson's Environmental Record

2007-03-27T19:49:00.000-07:00

Ecotality examines Grist's piece on Fred Thompson and comes up with this conclusion:

Is Thompson a “green” voters’ dream candidate? Of course not. But at least some of his votes are defensible, as long as you’re willing to consider something other than the environmental activists’ standard and misguided mantra on ANWR, and the silly insistence that only government funding will bring the research success we need.

Its nice to see someone get it right once in a while. Its knee jerk to blame Bush or Republicans for perceived failures to act on the environment, but its not as if the Democrats are busting their humps to get things done now, or in the past.