Month: May 2017

“Scientists Say”

“Scientists Say”

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

We are Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

The fake news Washington Post reports that “scientists” did an “entire study” proving that satellites show no leveling off of warming. The implication being that all scientists speak in one voice and share the same opinion.

Instead of doing “an entire study” how about we just look at the data? Over the last 20 years satellites show no warming.

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Science is not a Borg of idiots who can’t understand simple data, as the Washington Post imagines.  Science is a process. The stupidity and dishonesty level of the Washington Post is off scale. They don’t understand the first thing about science.

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

May 24, 2017 at 10:31PM

Climate Scientist Michael Mann Borrows the Words of a Holocaust Survivor to Express His Personal Angst

Climate Scientist Michael Mann Borrows the Words of a Holocaust Survivor to Express His Personal Angst

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

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Judith Curry – Climate scientist Michael Mann seems to think his personal distress at having his theories and scientific conduct criticised is comparable to the suffering of holocaust survivor Martin Niemöller, who endured eight years of internment in NAZI concentration camps because of his outspoken opposition to Adolf Hitler.

Michael Mann: If You Believe in Science You Must Now Make Your Voice Heard

That evidence now shows us that we face a stark choice, between a future with a little more climate change that we will still have to adapt to and cope with, and one with catastrophic climate change that will threaten the future of life as we know it.

And so here we are, at a crossroads.

Let me be blunt.

Never before have we witnessed science under the kind of assault it is being subject to right now in this country.

Nor have we witnessed an assault on the environment like the one we are witnessing in the current political atmosphere.

I will borrow and adapt—for our current time and place—the words of Martin Niemöller, a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps:

First they came for the immigrants and I did not speak out—

Because I was not an immigrant.

Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a scientist.

Then they came for the environmentalists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not an environmentalist.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Friends, let this not be our legacy.

Read more (transcript of a speech to students and parents at Green Mountain College): http://ift.tt/2qS5TUE

Why do people still listen to this clown?

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

May 24, 2017 at 10:30PM

No one’s noticed, but the Tories are quietly killing off the smart meter revolution

No one’s noticed, but the Tories are quietly killing off the smart meter revolution

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

By Paul Homewood

h/t Philip Bratby

An interesting piece in the Telegraph this week:

image

Normally politicians promise much and deliver little.

Last week brought a rare example of the converse: a manifesto burying a huge policy change that will save every household in Britain fifty pounds a year.

It’s lurking on page 60 of the Conservative offering: “everyone will be offered a smart meter by 2020”.

If you blinked, you missed it. A national programme committed to install meters in 80pc of homes by 2020 has just become voluntary.

Twenty years ago, the electricity meter industry thought up a wizard wheeze.

For a prime minister who wants to drive energy bills as low as possible, the sacred cow has to go

Why not replace old meters that cost £15 and lasted 50 years with new meters that cost £50 and lasted only 15? The story was that if you could see how much electricity you were using you’d use less of it, and we could recoup the cost by building fewer power stations.

When Ed Miliband become climate change secretary, he seized on this chance to save the planet.

Three successive impact assessments had shown that smart meters would not be viable in Britain, but no matter: a new one was ordered which argued that smart meters could save enough energy to pay for themselves.

Britain pressed the commit button, and promised Brussels to put smart meters in 80pc of homes by 2020.

There was just one small problem. British electricity meters belong to the retailer, which has no incentive to help you use less of its product.

Ontario and Germany are the same. In the former, a $2bn smart meter programme failed to save any energy, while Angela Merkel ordered an honest impact assessment and decided to leave well alone. The Miliband project quickly got into trouble.

It’s not tax money being wasted, as the power companies can just add their costs to your bil

The power industry couldn’t agree a common specification, so the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) decided to build a central computer system to collect your meter data and reroute it to whichever retailer you buy energy from.

One commitment led to another, with the design becoming more Heath Robinson at every step, and nobody at DECC having the engineering know-how or political confidence to take the hard decisions.

So while Spaniards have a standard smart meter costing 40 euros, we’ll get three or four devices in each house, at a cost in the high hundreds. But why should the Treasury care?

It’s not tax money being wasted, as the power companies can just add their costs to your bill.

Criticism from despairing engineers and energy economists fell on deaf ears. As a Labour leader’s policy triumph had become a Coalition commitment, no MP or civil servant dared question it.

Contractors licked their lips. But while Centrica and Ovo already sell proprietary smart meters, the integrated national system Miliband dreamed of is still far away. The radio network won’t reach enough homes. The meters won’t communicate with appliances.

The ever-changing standards for a British national meter have become too complicated.

Oh, and people who fit smart meters and then change supplier discover a whole new world of pain.

So for a prime minister who wants to drive energy bills as low as possible, the sacred cow has to go.

Otherwise every household in Britain will end up paying about fifty pounds a year more on their fuel bill, a regressive tax that would hit the elderly poor the worst.

But how can a government kill a £20bn programme without getting roasted alive by the lobbyists? Easy: split the industry. Let companies who don’t install smart meters charge their customers less.

And do it quietly in the middle of an election – when the lobbyists have no access to anyone. On June 9th it will be a done deal. 

Ross Anderson is  professor of security engineering at the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory

http://ift.tt/2rOXUFk

 

It makes a change to read an article written by somebody who knows what he is talking about, rather then a cut’n’paste job from the likes of Jillian Ambrose.

Whether the Tory Manifesto really means what he says remains to be seen. The real problem is that, currently, energy companies can be fined if they don’t roll out smart meters.

It is not clear whether this threat will be dropped.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

May 24, 2017 at 09:27PM

Robust Natural Variability Affirmed In Global Sea Level Rise Rates – No Correlation With CO2 Forcing

Robust Natural Variability Affirmed In Global Sea Level Rise Rates – No Correlation With CO2 Forcing

via NoTricksZone
http://notrickszone.com

 Tide Gauge Evidence: Sea Levels 

Rose Faster Before 1950 Than Since


In recent years it has become increasingly apparent that tide gauge measurements of sea level rise often do not align with climate model expectations.

The models are predicated on the assumption that anthropogenic CO2 emissions, which have risen explosively since about 1950are the drivers of modern sea level rise.

Evidence from observed sea level trends have not been cooperating with this narrative, however.

Tide gauges indicate there has been a substantial overall reduction in the rate of sea level rise since about 1950 rather than the expected substantial acceleration.

For example, UK oceanographer Simon Holgate reported a 29% deceleration in global sea level rise rates from the first half of the 20th century (1904-1953) to the second half (1954-2003)

Holgate, 2007    “The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904–1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954–2003).”

A small sampling of regional tide gauge results (SW Pacific, Japan) affirm the deceleration of sea level rise since the mid-20th century, and indicate the highest rates of sea level rise occurred before human CO2 emissions began accelerating rapidly.

Gehrels et al., 2012    “Between 1900 and 1950 relative sea level rose at an average rate of 4.2±0.1 mm/yr. During the latter half of the 20th century the reconstructed rate of relative sea-level rise was 0.7±0.6 mm/yr. Our study is consistent with a similar pattern of relative sea-level change recently reconstructed for southern New Zealand.”

Sasaki et al., 2017    “Sea level variability around Japan from 1906 to 2010 is examined using a regional ocean model, along with observational data and the CMIP5 historical simulations. The regional model reproduces observed interdecadal sea level variability, e.g., high sea level around 1950, low sea level in the 1970s, and sea level rise during the most recent three decades, along the Japanese coast. … That the wind-induced sea level rise along the Japanese coast around 1950 is as large as the recent sea level rise highlights the importance of natural variability in understanding regional sea level change on interdecadal timescales.”

A reconstruction of global-scale rates from tide gauges (Jevrejeva et al., 2008) dating back to 1700 also reveals a deceleration in the rate of sea level increase since 1950.

Jevrejeva et al., 2008


Rates Of Recent Rise For 2,133 Global-Scale Tide Gauges: 1.04 mm/year 


According to a comprehensive analysis (2,133 tide gauges) of Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) data, the current (2014) global mean sea level rise rate is a little more than 1 mm/year.

Parker and Ollier, 2015    “The nominal satellite altimeter-based determination of the absolute global mean sea level is actually a computational result rather than a direct observation. It is obtained by correcting the satellite altimeter raw signal with algorithms having many features in common with the climate models. Regardless of any modeling problems, Carter et al. (2014) pointed out that estimates of sea-level change from satellite-collected data remain problematic, because of the many uncertainties in data collection and processing. In particular, there is inconsistency between the results derived by different research groups, with all results depending upon the accuracy of complex adjustments, some of which lack in- dependent verification, plus the severe problem that the signal being sought may be less than the noise level of the data being used. Many corrections applied to all satellite altimeter measurements of sea-level since 2003 had the effect of changing a sea-level record that showed no trend or a gentle rise into one that projects high rates of rise.”
“The latest PSMSL Table of Relative Mean Sea Level Secular Trends update 14-Feb-2014 (www.psmsl.org) proposes the relative rates of rise computed for 2133 tide gauges of variable record length (maximum 183 [years], minimum 21 [years], average 56.5 years) with the more recent, shortest readings collected mostly in areas of subsidence and a strongly non uniform geographical coverage. The average relative rate of rise of the 2133 tide gauges is 1.04±0.45 mm/year

NOAA’s ‘Believed’ Rates Of Recent Rise From Tide Gauges: 1.7-1.8 mm/year 


NOAA.gov


Adding NOAA’s ‘Believed’ Modern Rate To The Long-Term Rate Trend



Trends In Human CO2 Emissions Rates (GtC/year)



Non-Correlation: Sea Level Rise Rates & CO2 Emissions Rates



Reconstructed Trends In Total Solar Irradiance 1700-2013


Yndestad and Solheim, 2017

“Deterministic models based on the stationary periods confirm the results through a close relation to known long solar minima since 1000 A.D. and suggest a modern maximum period from 1940 to 2015. The model computes a new Dalton-type sunspot minimum from approximately 2025 to 2050 and a new Dalton-type period TSI minimum from approximately 2040 to 2065. … Periods with few sunspots are associated with low solar activity and cold climate periods. Periods with many sunspots are associated with high solar activity and warm climate periods.”


Apparent Correlation: TSI And (Lagged) Sea Level Rise Rate Changes



Apparent Correlation: TSI And Northern Hemisphere Temperatures


Stoffel et al., 2015

via NoTricksZone http://notrickszone.com

May 24, 2017 at 08:44PM