Month: August 2017

Warming Hiatus & Cooling Persist In Eastern China To This Day

“There is no evidence indicating a termination of the recent warming hiatus in eastern China. The question of when the accelerated warming trend will resume needs to be answered by climate model prediction.”

Persisting and strong warming hiatus over eastern China during the past two decades

Yang Chen and Panmao Zhai, State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather, Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing, China.

Abstract: During the past two decades since 1997, eastern China has experienced a warming hiatus punctuated by significant cooling in minimum temperature (Tmin), particularly during early-mid winter. By arbitrarily configuring start and end years, a “vantage hiatus period” in eastern China is detected over 1998-2013, during when the domain-averaged Tmin exhibited the strongest cooling trend and the number of significant cooling stations peaked. Regions most susceptible to the warming hiatus are located in North China, the Yangtze-Huai River Valley and South China, where significant cooling in Tmin persisted through 2016. This sustained hiatus gave rise to increasingly frequent and severe cold extremes there.Concerning its prolonged persistency and great cooling rate, the recent warming hiatus over eastern China deviates much from most historical short-term trends during the past five decades, and  thus could be viewed as an outlier against the prevalent warming context. […]

Full paper

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

August 1, 2017 at 07:29AM

Warm is stable – Cold is change

Guest Post by Wim Röst Introduction Today ‘warm’ is strongly connected with ‘climate change’, if not with ‘dangerous climate change’. In the minds of people ‘cold’ should be more stable. But, paleo data show that it is ‘cold’ that is unstable. While ‘warm’ always shows a high stability in climatic conditions. Warm is stable, Cold…

via Watts Up With That?

August 1, 2017 at 07:26AM

Anti-Fracking Activists Face Prison Threat Over Obstruction

Anti-fracking protesters face the threat of prison if they obstruct Ineos’s efforts to explore for shale gas after it secured wide-ranging injunctions to protect its operations.

The petrochemicals group, which is preparing to drill for shale at several sites in the UK, said that it had decided to seek legal protection after an escalation of attempts to frustrate its work. The move also follows months of disruptive protests against Cuadrilla’s efforts to drill in Lancashire.

Ineos’s High Court injunctions, covering trespass, harassment and any obstruction of its business, staff or suppliers, mean that protesters face much tougher penalties than they would under criminal law. Obstructing the highway would normally carry a penalty of up to £1,000 whereas breaching an injunction would constitute contempt of court and could result in a two-year jail term.

Ineos said the injunctions, granted on an interim basis pending a return hearing in September, did not interfere with “the right to lawful, peaceful protest”.

Full story

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

August 1, 2017 at 06:59AM

EV Power Scenarios

By Paul Homewood






There has been a lot of debate about the additional electricity demands which electric cars will impose on the grid.

A figure of an extra 30GW has been widely reported, but this is reckoned to be the maximum likely. The Telegraph printed this letter on Sunday from Richard Black’s global warming propaganda unit, the ECIU:



SIR – Gordon Rayner and Steven Swinford are prudent to outline some of the challenges facing all nations as the electric vehicle revolution takes hold, but claims that peak electricity demand will jump by 50 per cent and that we will need to build 10,000 new wind turbines are  wide of the mark. These figures represent National Grid scenarios which are exceedingly unlikely to come to fruition, and should not be used to discourage change that will be driven by the market as much as by government policy.

Other forecasts show that the increase in peak demand could be less than 10 per cent – a figure that is more than capable of being managed by a burgeoning British technology sector. The benefits that 26 million electric vehicle batteries could offer the UK grid are also startling, increasing the democratisation of energy supply and allowing homes up and down the country to take back control of their energy bills.

Dr Jonathan Marshall
Energy Analyst, Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit
London SE1



This letter is even more misleading than the claims of 30GW.

So let’s start from scratch. The chart at the top, from the National Grid’s latest Future Energy Scenarios (FES), shows that the “10%” figure claimed by Marshall is based around the highly optimistic “Two Degrees” scenario.

In particular, it assumes that drivers will only charge cars at off peak.

Yet as another recent National Grid study found, this is not a realistic option. Millions of cars have no access to off road parking, and many that do have no garage access. For these owners, overnight charging is not practical.

For these, the only logical option is to use public charging stations. This will inevitably put huge extra demand onto periods, such as early evening, when demand already peaks.

Readers may recall that the FES contained four scenarios, and it is the “Consumer Power” one which best fits this behaviour:






Under this scenario, peak demand increases by 17.7GW in 2050, an increase of about 28% on current demand, and a lot more than the ECIU’s claim.

But there is another scenario that is hidden away, called “High Electric Vehicles”







This, rather presciently, is pretty much what the government is now proposing.

But to backtrack, this is what the FES says about the number of cars on the road for the first four scenarios:




Note that under the Two Degree scenario, the number of cars drops sharply from current levels.

Also under the Consumer Power option, there are still nearly 10 million non EVs on the road in 2050. The government has already stated its intention that all cars must be zero emission by then.

Now we can add in the High EV scenario:




Assuming that car ownership stays constant as a percentage of population, there will be 9 million more EVs by 2050 than the Two Degree scenario suggests, and 12 million more then the Consumer Power option.

And this is what the High EV outlook does for peak demand.




Demand will rise by 30.6GW from current levels.

The FES also notes that only 20% of cars will be charged at peak time. This sounds extremely optimistic, given that 43% of households have no access to off street parking.



Nobody can forecast the future, but it seems to me that the High EV figures are likely to be much nearer the truth than the rest.




Last week I made a very simplistic, back of the fag packet guess on the extra electricity needed, if all cars were EV. I came to an annual figure of 112 TWh.

The FES concludes it will be 90 TWH, so I was not far out!


August 1, 2017 at 06:54AM