First day post Hazelwood – Tassie Hydro props up Eastern electricity grid

via Errors in IPCC climate science
http://ift.tt/1F9oSq3

Comments from the north and during an eastern wind drought. Generation by Nemwatch – Price and Demand from AEMO. For bigger Nemwatch chart

QLD demand 6,042MW with generation 6,959MW running a modest surplus in view all grids need some spinning reserve.
NSW demand 8,306MW with generation 7,686MW running a surprising deficit. Must be maxing imports from Qld.
Vic demand 5,373MW with generation 5,328MW small deficit should have spinning reserve. I have never seen Vic in deficit in a year or more watching.
SA demand 1,525MW with generation 1,323MW running a deficit – must be importing from Vic.
Tas demand 1,277MW with generation 1,902MW running a big surplus – Basslink must be humming at near max 600MW.
Verily our politicians have wrought harm to our electricity system.

via Errors in IPCC climate science http://ift.tt/1F9oSq3

March 30, 2017 at 10:18AM

Brexit leak: Britain must uphold climate standards to secure EU trade deal

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

Misfits

No doubt both sides in the UK-EU negotiations will have their ‘wish lists’ but can the EU dictate British policies?

The UK will have to abide by EU environmental and climate change standards in order to conclude a future trading agreement with the rest of the trading bloc, according to a leaked European Parliament paper seen by Utility Week.

A draft resolution, setting out the parliament’s parameters for EU-UK negotiations on the latter’s withdrawal from the union, identifies the environment and climate change as two areas where common benchmarks must continue to apply.

Regarding future EU-UK relationships, the document stresses that “any future agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom is conditional on the United Kingdom’s continued adherence to the standards provided by the Union’s legislation and polices, in among others the fields of environment, climate change, the fight against tax evasion and avoidance, fair competition, trade and social policy”.

In her letter delivered at midday yesterday to European Council president Donald Tusk, which formally triggered the beginning of Brexit, Prime Minister Theresa May identified network industries as one of the areas that should be covered by a new free trade agreement between the EU and the UK. She said the “bold and ambitious” agreement should cover “sectors crucial to our linked economies such as financial services and network industries”.

The letter also confirmed that the government will publish a white paper today (Thursday), which will incorporate the vast bulk of EU legislation into UK law in order to minimise disruption and provide business with as “much certainty as possible”.

Responding to the triggering of the Article 50 process, Stuart Cook, PwC’s head of utility strategy and regulation, warned that energy bills could rise if Brexit had an impact on the operation of the gas and electricity interconnectors that link the UK’s energy networks with those of its European neighbours.

He said: “The UK energy market is supported by physical connections with continental Europe through the gas and electricity interconnectors. The status of these interconnectors will be an important feature of the arrangements established with the 27 remaining EU nations. Security of supply and the affordability of energy could be put at risk if Brexit has an adverse impact on the operation of the interconnectors.

“Wherever possible, securing early commitments on the status of key energy sector policies and regulation, post-Brexit, should be a priority.

“The UK energy and utilities sector, like many others across the economy, is hoping that Article 50 negotiations will result in as much access to European markets as possible. This includes Europe’s energy trading markets, sources of investment funding and the European markets for goods and labour.”

Continued here.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

March 30, 2017 at 10:15AM

Trump’s Energy Executive Order: A Good Beginning but Much More Is Needed

via Carlin Economics and Science
http://ift.tt/1gVT2t3

This week has been an important one in the battle over climate change. On March 28 Trump signed and released a new Executive Order (EO) on “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth.” On March 29 the House Science Committee held a hearing on “Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method.”

Trump’s Executive Order

The March 28 EO was notable for its breadth and its likely result of substantially changing the direction of Obama’s climate policy. It avoided, however, two issues of great importance for the Trump Administration’s climate policy. The first is whether the US will continue to sort of be a party under the so-called Paris Treaty. The second is whether EPA will reconsider its 2009 Endangerment Finding (EF), which claims that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Given the reluctance of Trump and EPA Administrator Pruitt to clearly state their views on the scientific aspects of climate change since assuming office, which would be necessary if EPA is to reconsider the EF, I wonder whether they may be trying to avoid doing so and instead trying to dodge an issue of great public controversy. Delingpole, however, blames Pruitt rather than Trump.

The March 29 Hearing

The March 29 hearing was of particular interest because of the testimony by Dr. John Christy. In previous testimony he showed in easily understood graphical form that the IPCC model projections are significantly different from actual observed global temperatures. This time he added to that by showing that if CO₂, the IPCC’s favorite cause for increased global temperatures are left out of their climate models, the models do far better at explaining temperatures. In other words, it is the IPCC’s unjustified insistence on blaming CO₂ for global warming that explains why their temperature forecasts have been much too high.

Christy further cited the same study I have been discussing in recent months, which shows that changes in atmospheric CO₂ levels have no significant effect on temperatures. I find Christy’s arguments persuasive and readily understandable. The effect is to present a powerful argument against further use of the IPCC’s models by EPA or anyone else, and in favor of using the econometric approach proposed by Wallace, Christy, and D’Aleo (2016) as the basis for understanding the role of CO₂ (or the lack thereof) in global warming/climate change.

At the March 29 hearing, the only testimony by a climate alarmist, Michael Mann, gave all the usual “consensus” arguments for the IPCC case but did not effectively challenge Christy’s testimony or any of the other skeptic presenters.

The Mismatch between the Administration’s Actions and the Situation

So the Trump Administration appears to be softening its stand on climate while the scientific evidence against climate alarmism has become even stronger and easier to understand. I would argue that a stronger case should result in a harder stand against alarmism rather than a softer stand. A much stronger stand (by ending US involvement with the so-called Paris Treaty and reconsideration of the EPA Endangerment Finding) is more than justified on the basis of the arguments made in the latest Christy testimony. There is simply no basis for further serious policy consideration of the UN IPCC’s and EPA’s bad “science.”

Not to reconsider the EF will put the EPA in legal jeopardy from suits by climate alarmist groups seeking to force EPA to implement its current Endangerment Finding and force EPA to pursue a far harder approach by having to wipe each of Obama’s climate regulations by revocation or revision compared to adopting the much simpler approach of wiping out the underlying EF and thus all of the regulations based on it. Leaving the EF in place would also make it much simpler for a future alarmist-inclined Administration to reinstitute the baseless Obama climate regulations. There is even a rumor that the Trump campaign promised EF reconsideration prior to the election; I hope that Trump will honor both this rumored promise as well as all of his other promises concerning climate policy, particularly the exit from the Paris “treaty” perhaps by exiting the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

via Carlin Economics and Science http://ift.tt/1gVT2t3

March 30, 2017 at 09:18AM

Inconvenient finding: Melting sea ice may lead to more life in the sea

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

From the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK and the “I can hear sea ice fanatic heads exploding already” department comes this bit of good news.

Melting sea ice may lead to more life in the sea

When spring arrives in the Arctic, both snow and sea ice melt, forming melt ponds on the surface of the sea ice. Every year, as global warming increases, there are more and larger melt ponds.

Melt ponds cover vast areas in the Arctic. CREDIT Heidi Louise Sørensen/SDU

Melt ponds provide more light and heat for the ice and the underlying water, but now it turns out that they may also have a more direct and potentially important influence on life in the Arctic waters.

Mats of algae and bacteria can evolve in the melt ponds, which can provide food for marine creatures. This is the conclusion of researchers in the periodical, Polar Biology.

Own little ecosystems

• The melt ponds can form their own little ecosystem. When all the sea ice melts during the summer, algae and other organisms from melt ponds are released into the surrounding seawater. Some of this food is immediately ingested by creatures living high up in the water column. Other food sinks to the bottom and gets eaten by seabed dwellers, explains Heidi Louise Sørensen, who is the principal author of the scientific article, continuing:
• Given that larger and larger areas of melt ponds are being formed in the Arctic, we can expect the release of more and more food for creatures in the polar sea.

Heidi Louise Sørensen studied the phenomenon in a number of melt ponds in North-Eastern Greenland as part of her PhD thesis at University of Southern Denmark (SDU).

Bo Thamdrup and Ronnie Glud of SDU, and Erik Jeppesen and Søren Rysgaard of Aarhus University also contributed to the work.

Food for seals and sea cucumbers

In the upper part of the water column it is mainly krill and copepods that benefit from the nutrient-rich algae and bacteria from melt ponds. These creatures are eaten by various larger animals, ranging from amphipods to fish, seals and whales. Deeper down, it is seabed dwellers such as sea cucumbers and brittle stars that benefit from the algae that sink down.

For some time now, researchers have been aware that simple biological organisms can evolve in melt ponds – they may even support very diverse communities. But so far it has been unclear why sometimes there are many organisms in the ponds, and on other occasions virtually none.

According to the new study, ‘nutrients’ is the keyword. When nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen find their way into a melt pond, entire communities of algae and micro-organisms can flourish.

From the Siberian tundra

Nutrients can find their way into a melt pond in a variety of ways, For example, they can be washed in with waves of sea water; they can be transported by dust storms from the mainland (for example, from the Siberian tundra); or they can be washed with earth from the coast out on the ice, when it rains.

Finally, migratory birds or other larger animals resting on the ice can leave behind sources of nutrient.

• Climate change is accompanies by more storms and more precipitation, and we must expect that more nutrients will be released from the surroundings into the melt ponds. These conditions, plus the fact that the distribution of areas of melt ponds is increasing, can contribute to increased productivity in plant and animal life in the Arctic seas, says Professor Ronnie Glud of the Department of Biology at SDU.

Warmer and more windy

There are further factors that may potentially contribute to increased productivity in the Arctic seas:

• When the sea ice disappears, light can penetrate down into the water.
• water. When it gets warmer on the mainland, this creates more melt water, which can flow out into the sea, carrying nutrients in its wake.

BOX What the researchers did

Six melt ponds in Young Sound in North-Eastern Greenland were selected: two natural and four artificial basins. Phosphorous and nitrogen (nutrients, which are also known from common garden fertilizer) were added in various combinations to four ponds, while two served as control ponds. For a period of up to 13 days Heidi Louise Sørensen measured many different parameters in the melt water, including the content of Chlorophyll a: a pigment that enables algae to absorb energy from light. The chlorophyll content of the phosphorus- and nitrogen-enriched ponds was 2 to 10 times higher than in the control ponds and testifies to an increased content of algae.

BOX This is why the number of melt ponds is on the rise

Global warming is melting more and more sea ice, potentially forming an increasing number of melt ponds. NASA satellites have just measured the smallest ever distribution of sea ice in the Arctic. The melt ponds make the ice darker, so it absorbs, rather than reflects light and thereby it heats. This accelerates the melting process. Satellite photos show that areas with melt ponds are getting bigger each year.

###

The paper: http://ift.tt/2omnMYB

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

March 30, 2017 at 08:00AM