The Week That Was: 2021-10-09 (October 9, 2021)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “Nullius in verba” – The Royal Society [UK]
Number of the Week: 0.12 °C per Decade over oceans
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Science Societies: The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge was founded in 1660 following a lecture by Christopher Wren. In 1663, the group received approval by King Charles II resulting in its name. It focused on natural philosophy, or the systematic study of nature, which subsequently became called “science.” This differed from German natural philosophy which tried to achieve a unity of nature and spirit. The motto of The Royal Society has served it well:
“The Royal Society’s motto ‘Nullius in verba’ is taken to mean ‘take nobody’s word for it’. It is an expression of the determination of Fellows to withstand the domination of authority and to verify all statements by an appeal to facts determined by experiment.”
Global climate modelers have rejected experiments in spectroscopy, the study of the interaction between matter (atoms and molecules) and electromagnetic radiation which started with John Tyndall in 1859, who named the greenhouse effect (or they do not understand infrared absorption at all pressures and temperatures). Even though spectroscopic analysis has been crucial in the development fundamental theories such as special and general theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum electrodynamics, global climate modelers consider the controlled experiments too confining, too limited.
The awarding of a Nobel in physics to climate modelers provides an excellent opportunity to review what systematic physical evidence climate modelers offer to support their bold claims that human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming. These claims are giving politicians an excuse for declaring a climate crisis and seizing emergency, dictatorial powers. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy and https://royalsociety.org/about-us/history/.
Climate Models Themselves: The Nobel was divided into two halves. One half went to Syukuro Manabe and Klaus Hasselmann “for the physical modelling of Earth’s climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming.” (Note that reliably predicting global warming is results-driven unlike reliably predicting the climate.) The second half went to Giorgio Parisi “for the discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems from atomic to planetary scales.” Manabe did his work at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton, which is financed by NOAA. Hasselmann is Professor Emeritus at the University of Hamburg and former Director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. Manabe’s work will be the focus of this section of TWTW.
The other half of the Prize went to theoretical physicist Giorgio Parisi at the Sapienza Università di Roma. His work will be discussed in the section below.
Piers Forster, a Professor of Physical Climate Change and Director of the Priestley International Centre for Climate at the University of Leeds, provides a valuable guide for addressing the work of Manabe and climate modelers in general. After recognizing the limits of computer power in 1967, when Manabe’s major paper was published, Forster writes:
In trying to simplify the code, Manabe and his colleague Richard Wetherald [Wetherald died in 2011, thus is ineligible for the award] wanted to know the minimum number of discrete levels to use in his model atmosphere. They also wanted to know which greenhouse gasses it was necessary to include in the model to adequately represent the way temperatures vary with altitude, as these gasses absorb heat emitted from the Earth’s surface, but at different levels. Their three-dimensional climate model was too computer-intensive to run these model tests, so they had to build a simpler one-dimensional model. They wanted to simulate how radiation and clouds interact to redistribute heat and water vapor through the atmosphere.
The bulk of the paper concerns itself with building the simple model and doing these tests. But they also do two other experiments in the paper to quantify how greenhouse gas might alter climate. And this is where the breakthrough occurred: they found they had built the perfect model to accurately estimate how human activities could alter the Earth’s surface temperature.
Their first such climate-change experiment wasn’t to look at the role of carbon dioxide but was to look at the effects of water vapor injected high into the stratosphere from a potential fleet of supersonic jets, as this and a possible nuclear winter were the immediate concerns of the time. However, their Table 5 goes down in history as the first robust estimate of how much the world would warm if carbon dioxide concentrations doubled. Manabe and Wetherald estimated 2.36℃ of warming, not far off today’s best estimate of 3℃.
Earlier attempts to estimate the warming from carbon dioxide increases had floundered, as scientists struggled to work out how water vapor, the most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, would respond as the Earth warmed. Manabe and Wetherald’s simple model could accurately redistribute water vapor in a way that real deep clouds do, with water vapor broadly increasing in concentration up to a certain level of humidity. This increase was found to amplify the warming from carbon dioxide by around 75%. This water vapor feedback estimate has also stood the test of time.
Manabe, working with various colleagues, went on to write many more seminal climate modeling papers. He set the foundation for today’s global climate modeling efforts. The physics was beguilingly simple so his models could run on these early computers. Yet, by being simple, the results could be understood and tested. His application of these simple models to the pressing problems of today was insightful.
After graduating with a degree in physics over 30 years ago, I chose a career in atmospheric science over particle physics. I always worried about how my applied physics was viewed by mainstream physics colleagues. With a Nobel prize in physics under our discipline’s belt, it gives me and climate modeling colleagues the credibility and recognition we have yearned for: climate science is real science. [Boldface added]
Contrary to what Forester asserts, the positive water vapor feedback amplifying the modest warming from carbon dioxide (CO2) has not withstood the test of time. With data going back to December 1978, we now have comprehensive measurements of temperature trends in the atmosphere. The amplification of atmospheric temperature trends over the tropics from an increase in water vapor as predicted in the climate models is not occurring. If the atmosphere is not warming significantly, greenhouse gases cannot cause significant surface warming.
In Table 5, cited above, Manabe and Wetherald estimated that with a change in CO2 from 300 parts per million volume (ppm) to 600 ppm, with fixed absolute humidity temperatures would increase 1.33 °C with average cloudiness and 1.36 °C with clear skies. With fixed relative humidity the increase in temperatures from an increase in CO2 from 300 to 600 ppm is 2.36 °C with average cloudiness and 2.92 °C with clear skies.
Since its inception, the UN International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) has used 3 °C plus or minus 1.5 °C for its six assessment reports, though sometimes raising the lower bound. Table 5 illustrates that the UN IPCC chooses the most extreme estimates and cannot be depended upon to accurately report all the science involved.
[The annual carbon dioxide data reported by NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (with data from March 1958 through April 1974 obtained by C. David Keeling of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography) start in 1959 with a mean of 316 ppm, the 2020 mean was 414.]
See links under Defending the Orthodoxy, Measurement Issues – Atmosphere, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/summary/ and https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt
Separating Increasing CO2 From Other Variation: Statistician Ross McKitrick has shown that a popular statistical technique used in climate studies has no basis in theoretical statistics. The technique, called Optimal Fingerprinting or Fractional Attribution of Risk (FAR) does not meet the conditions of the Gauss-Markov Theorem of Generalized Least Squares, thus the probabilities assigned to various extreme events are statistically meaningless. This was discussed in the August, 28 TWTW. Thus, one must be very leery of popular techniques used in climate studies.
The “discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems from atomic to planetary scales” appears to be a similar technique. However, the concept is so vague that unless one can present concrete physical evidence, it is not at the level generally considered for a Nobel Prize in physics. Perhaps String Theorist Lubos Motl expresses the issue best. He writes:
“Giorgio Parisi has been a top-notch particle physicist who has worked on QCD, partons, asymptotic freedom, Monte Carlo simulations, and even SUSY, and co-authored with men like Virasoro, to show that he has really been close to ‘my field’ (his collaboration distance from me is 3, through Ferrara and Freedman). He increasingly focused on things like spin glasses, complexity, behavior of flocks of birds and planetary systems, and similar things.
“Complexity-related ideas may be interesting but none of them is true Nobel Prize-level material – well, with this drop of the Nobel Prize, my assertion just became tautologically false.
“The explanation of the award involving the ‘interplay’ is incredibly vague. What is the precise discovery or the paper that is being appreciated here? After some minutes, it seems to me that it is specifically his paper(s) about the flocks of birds. He has written many of those, too. And papers about planets. Where is the beef? What is the finding or law or idea that has earned the medal? Does it matter any longer? Is there anyone else who cares and asks my question? Can someone help me? The ‘interplay mixing birds and planets’ is exactly the kind of New Age unfocused gibberish that the anti-science people love. Parisi isn’t an anti-science guy but this way of justifying an award is a New Age BS.”
The central issue remains: can order come from chaos? Can one determine a central thread of the influence of carbon dioxide on climate by using complex weather models that become chaotic within two weeks? TWTW has not found physical evidence that we can. Thus, it considers global climate models highly speculative.
A better approach may be recognizing the uncertainty inherent in the physics, and continuously monitoring the atmosphere to see whether dangerous greenhouse gas warming is occurring rather than speculate about what may or may not be. However, TWTW has found no significant, comprehensive physical evidence that the world is warming dangerously from increasing greenhouse gases. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
From Bias to Balance? Writing for the Global Warming Policy Forum, Engineering Professor emeritus Michael Kelly has a lengthy review of a new book by Professor Jason Scott Johnson of the University of Virginia Law School. The review of Climate Rationality: From Bias to Balance begins:
“Of all the dozens of books I have read about climate change, this book is the most forensic in its analysis of the public debate, the policy formation processes and indeed the scientific process itself. The author is a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia Law School. In places, the book is a deep dive, which repays the effort needed to confirm the conclusions reached. In other places it is an easier read. It retreads much of the territory covered by Steven E. Koonin in his book ‘Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Does not, and Why It Matters,’ but with different emphases – for example, a much more detailed look at the legislative processes in the USA on environmental matters.
“There are two long sections: (i) The costs of precautionary policy and (ii) The other side of the story: the structure, process and output of the climate science assessment institutions and the science they neglect, and a short third section (iii) Towards rational climate policy.
“I found the conclusions of each section quite compelling. This review consists of the last paragraph of most of the chapters, from which the reader can form a direct opinion.”
See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
IPCC-AR6 Main Report: Judith Curry provides a review of the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the IPCC Working Group I: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Except for raising the lower bound of the estimated climate response from a doubling of CO2, she ispleased with the changes from the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5, 2013). She concludes:
“In the AR5, the emphasis was on the Earth Systems Models [ESMs], and their ever-growing complexity in terms of adding more chemistry and some ice sheet dynamics.
“In AR6, these complex climate models are revealed for what they are: very complicated and computationally intensive toys, whose main results are dependent on fast thermodynamic feedback processes (water vapor, lapse rate, clouds) that are determined by subgrid-scale parameterizations and the inevitable model tuning.
With the very large range of climate sensitivity values provided by the CMIP6 models, we are arguably in a period of negative learning. And this is in spite of the IPCC AR6 substantially reducing the range of ECS [Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity] from the long-standing 1.5-4.5C to 2.5 to 4C (reminder: I am not buying this reduction on the low end, more on this soon). [Boldface added]
“So, what are we left with?
- Global climate models (ESMs) remain an important tool for understanding how the climate system works. However, we have reached the point of diminishing returns on this unless there is more emphasis on improving the simulation of modes of internal climate variability and advancing the treatment of solar indirect effects.
- We should abandon ECS as a policy-relevant metric and work on better understanding and evaluation of TCR and TCRE from historical data.
- In context of #1, I question whether the CMIP6 ESMs have much use in attribution studies.
- ESMs have lost their utility for policy applications. Policy applications are far more usefully achieved with climate emulator models. However, the use of climate emulators distances policy making from a basis in physics. This is particularly relevant for the legal status in various climate lawsuits of 21st century climate projections and the ESMs in various climate lawsuits.
“While this is hidden in the Summary for Policy Makers, it is pretty significant:
“‘A.1.3 The likely range of total human-caused global surface temperature increase from 1850–1900 to 2010–2019 is 0.8°C to 1.3°C, with a best estimate of 1.07°C. It is likely that well-mixed GHGs contributed a warming of 1.0°C to 2.0°C, other human drivers (principally aerosols) contributed a cooling of 0.0°C to 0.8°C, natural drivers changed global surface temperature by [minus] 0.1°C to [plus] 0.1°C, and internal variability changed it by –0.2°C to 0.2°C. It is very likely that well-mixed GHGs were the main driver of tropospheric warming since 1979, and extremely likely that human-caused stratospheric ozone depletion was the main driver of cooling of the lower stratosphere between 1979 and the mid-1990s.’
“Compare this to the statements in the AR5 SPM:
“‘It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.’
“Overall, the AR6 WG1 report is much better than the AR5, although I remain unimpressed by their increased confidence in a narrower range of ECS.
“The bottom line is that the AR6 has broken the hegemony of the global climate models. The large amount of funding supporting these models towards policy objectives just became more difficult to justify.”
Nevertheless, the use a of a 2000-year hockey-stick at the beginning of the Summary for Policymakers, which is not supported by concrete physical evidence, misleads the public which will not read the full report. Further, as twenty-three solar scientists have shown, there is strong disagreement as to the influence of the sun over the past few decades, with the IPCC choosing only a minor influence. And as expressed above, the IPCC chooses the greatest values for the influence of increasing CO2 on temperatures. See links under Seeking a Common Ground.
Coral Reports: The Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN), funded by UN Environment, issued its sixth report on the status of corals as a part of the International Coral
Reef Initiative (ICRI). The ICRI is “an informal partnership between Nations and organizations which strives to preserve coral reefs and related ecosystems around the world.”
“The work of ICRI is regularly acknowledged in United Nations documents, highlighting the Initiative’s important cooperation, collaboration and advocacy role within the international arena.”
“ICRI Members include a mix of governments, non-governmental organisations and international organisations. Founding Members include Australia, France, Japan, Jamaica, the Philippines, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. Today, ICRI counts 93 members, including 44 countries custodians of 75% of the worlds coral reefs.”
The ICRI also includes environmental groups such as the WWF noted for claiming polar bears are endangered.
The headlines of the report claimed that 14 percent of the world’s coral reefs were destroyed in a decade. There are trillions of corals that have survived times far warmer than today. Given that the Great Barrier Reef is rebounding after it was pronounced dead, the question is what percentage of the “destroyed” 14 percent will survive? For links regarding the Great Barrier Reef, please see the previous two TWTWs and for links on the report see Changing Seas, https://gcrmn.net/#, and https://www.icriforum.org/
A Chill in the Air? According to the “Washington Post”:
“The average temperature at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station between April and September, a frigid minus-78 degrees (minus-61 Celsius), was the coldest on record, dating back to 1957. This was 4.5 degrees lower than the most recent 30-year average at this remote station, which is operated by United States Antarctic Program and administered by the National Science Foundation.”
“The current temperatures are still some distance from the coldest ever observed on the continent. In July 1983, Vostok plummeted to minus-129 degrees (minus-89.6 Celsius). Satellites have detected temperatures as low as minus-144 degrees (minus-98 Celsius).”
This may be a blip, but the bulk of Antarctica is in cooling trend. See links under Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
Additions and Corrections: Last week’s TWTW went out with editing errors. Ken Haapala sent it while traveling and having trouble with his laptop and cell phone mobile hotspot. We will try to avoid such errors in the future.
NO TWTW NEXT WEEK: Attending the 14th International Conference on Climate Change presented by The Heartland Institute on October 15 to 17, 2021, at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas to present the 2021 Fredrick Seitz Memorial Award and to learn from an array of distinguished scientists including members of SEPP. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and https://climateconference.heartland.org/
Number of the Week: 0.12 °C per Decade over oceans. According to data collected by the Earth System Science Center, UAH, the linear warming trend since January 1979 is +0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans. This may be a better, but not perfect, measure of the influence of greenhouse gases than global data which includes data over land masses that may be influenced by other human activity. See links under Measurement Issues – Atmosphere.
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
FOI comes back black: The experts say “Trust us with your lives” but act utterly untrustworthy [in UK]
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 4, 2021
“And they wonder why people don’t believe them?”
Google Demonetizes Websites Which Contradict Their Climate Narrative
By Erick Worrall, WUWT, Oct 8, 2021
Questioning Consensus Banned
By Tony Heller, Real Climate Science, Oct 7, 2021
Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science
Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013
Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019
Download with no charge:
Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming
The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus
By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015
Download with no charge:
S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008
Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data
By Craig D. Idso, David Legates, and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Policy Brief, May 20, 2019
Challenging the Orthodoxy
Book review: ‘Climate Rationality: From Bias to Balance’
By Michael Kelly, GWPF, Oct 10, 2021
Climate Science: Let the Data Speak
Video, Guus Berkout, President of CLINTEL, Via Friends of Science, Oct 2, 2021
Speakers, Schedule Set for ‘Climate Realism’ Conference Oct 15-17, 2021 in Las Vegas
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Oct 9, 2021
Global warming: Nobel Prize in Physics has become a joke, too
By Lubos Motl, The Reference Frame, Oct 5, 2021
Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 With Their Doomsday Predictions…*UPDATE 0-53*
By John Nolte, Breitbart, Sep 20, 2021
Lies, Damned Lies And Government Graphs
Video by Tony Heller, His Blog, Oct 7, 2021
Video showing hiding of sea ice extent prior to 1979 and many of false predictions.
On the Inability of Wind and Solar Electric Generation to Power Modern Civilization
By Wallace Manheimer, Journal of Energy Research and Reviews, Oct 7, 2021
Nobel Prize in Physics awarded for making ‘guess’ about climate
By Anthony Watts, American Thinker, Oct 8, 2021
[SEPP Comment: See links immediately below.]
Defending the Orthodoxy
The most influential climate science paper of all time
By Piers Forster, The Conversation, Via Phys.org, Oct 7, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Link to paper: Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution
of Relative Humidity
By Manabe and Wetherald, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, ESSA, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, May 1967
Nobel prize: Why climate modelers deserved the physics award – they’ve been proved right again and again
By Pushp Raj Tiwari, The Conversation, Via Phys.org, Oct 6, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Nobel Prize winner says governments must take ‘urgent’ action on climate
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Oct 5, 2021
Claim: Government Policy Must Curb the Climate Excesses of the Rich
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 7, 2021
Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science
Energy price crunch risks derailing UN climate talks, Iberdrola warns
By Kira Taylor, EURACTIV.com, OCT 4, 2021
[SEPP Comment: The world’s second largest wind industry manufacturer has spoken!]
Questioning the Orthodoxy
The Will of the Swiss People Be Done! What Will? Which People?
Farewell to climate policy illusions after the successful referendum against the revised CO2 law.
By Hans Rentsch, Real Clear Energy, Oct 7, 2021
Announcing: The First WUWT Climate Change Essay Contest
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Oct 8, 2021
“Climate Emergency” – Nothing But Politics And Propaganda Unsupported By Scientific Data
By Larry Hamlin, WUWT, Oct 5, 2021
Rising Temperatures, Sunshine Hours & The Clean Air Acts
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 7, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Cleaning the air leads to climate pollution?]
The left’s climate path to remaking our society into a communist utopia
By Steve Malloy, The Washington Times, Sep 29, 2021
UK Energy Secretary Appeals for Faith Leaders to Save COP26
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 5, 2021
Can the Plastics Crisis Save the COP26 Climate Conference?
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 3, 2021
Change in US Administrations
Which Climate Threats Are Most Worrisome? U.S. Agencies Made a List.
By Christopher Flavelle, New York Times, Via Yahoo, Oct 7, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Sen. James Inhofe: Biden’s climate fiats aren’t about climate—they’re about control
Green policies will hamstring the American economy
By Eric Shawn, Fox News, Oct 1, 2021
Biden EPA sued for illegally stacking science advisory panels
By Steve Milloy, Junk Science, Oct 7, 2021
Treasury Secretary on European Wind Drought: “Energy Storage … Can Be Deployed”
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 4, 2021
“‘I don’t believe that the president’s program is going to lead to increases in the cost of energy,’ Yellen said, referring to the fuel shortage and high gas prices in the UK and Europe more broadly.”
Biden Declares War on Showerheads
By Ben Lieberman, Washington Examiner, Via CEI, Oct 3, 2021
Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide
Have Scientists Ignored 11.7 TRILLION Tons Of Sequestered Carbon? (45 Times Man’s Addition)
CO2 and climate change – some fundamental contradictions
By Fred F. Mueller, Via No Tricks Zone, Oct 6, 2021
“What explanation is put forward by “climate science” with respect to the source of the whopping 11,700 GtC that have been dealt with by simple shell-clad detritus-gobblers building up their reefs during the last 12,000 years? We are constantly called on to “follow the science” of climate change. But how well does this science match with the realities we find in nature?”
Problems in the Orthodoxy
Chinese and Indian Climate Policy Power Crisis Worsens
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 6, 2021
Seeking a Common Ground
IPCC AR6: Breaking the hegemony of global climate models
By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Oct 6, 2021
TGIF: Why “Science Denial”?
By Sheldon Richman, The Libertarian Institute, Oct 1, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Science, Policy, and Evidence
Government refusal of North Sea natural gas field is irrational [UK]
Press Release, GWPF, Oct 8, 2021
Boris should kick-start a shale revolution to avoid an energy cost disaster
By Staff, GWPF & Gaia Fawkes, Oct 7, 2021
How Deep is that Swamp? Science papers silenced. Even the former head of MI-6 was pressured to stay silent [on Covid]
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 3, 2021
Measurement Issues — Surface
Risk of deadly heat surges for city dwellers, new study shows
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Oct 4, 2021
Link to paper: Global urban population exposure to extreme heat
By Cascade Tuholske, et al. PNAS, Oct 12, 2021
By Staff, Earth System Science Center, UAH, September 2021
Earth Seems to Be Losing Its Shine Due to Warming Oceans
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Oct 4, 2021
Link to paper: Earth’s Albedo 1998–2017 as Measured From Earthshine
P.R. Goode, et al, Geophysical Research Letters, Aug 29, 2021
An Unmanned Saildrone Takes Weather Observations in the Center of a Hurricane
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Oct 3, 2021
In 2019 Global Deaths Attributable To Cold Weather Were 24% Above 1990 Levels
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Oct 4, 2021
Try To Remember ….
Record Hot October 1963
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Oct 7, 1963
Tokyo’s Coolest September In Over 30 Years…Hachijojima No Warming In 107 Years…Latest Forecast: Sharp La Niña!
By Kirye and Pierre, No Tricks Zone, Oct 1, 2021
14 percent of world’s coral reefs destroyed in a decade: research
By Joseph Choi, The Hill, Oct 5, 2021
Link to report: Launch of the Sixth GCRMN Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2020 Report
By Staff, Organized Under The Monaco, Australia and Indonesia Secretariat, Plus NOAA, Oct 5, 2021
Mainstream Media Hypes False Claims Climate Change is Killing Coral
By H. Sterling Burnett, Climate Realism, Oct 8, 2021
Global Warming Of Past 40 Years An Artefact Of Pacific Ocean Cycle… Now Comes The Cooling
The One Oscillation That Rules Them All
By David Archibald, No Tricks Zone, Oct 5, 2021
[SEPP Comment: NOAA trivializes the PDO by showing multiple brief shifts rather than emphasizing major shifts.]
South Pole posts most severe cold season on record, a surprise in a warming world
While the rest of the world sizzled, the South Pole shivered with an average temperature of minus-78 degrees over the past six months.
By Jason Samenow and Kasha Patel, Washington Post, Oct 2, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
South Pole has coldest winter ever, but it’s just “a blip”
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 5, 2021
A Robust Balance
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Oct 3, 2021
Alaska polar bear researchers claim poor sea ice limited spring field work in 2021 more than 2019
By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Oct 7, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Being unable to safely land a 4000-pound helicopter has nothing to do ability of bears to survive. Bears can swim.]
Antarctic Temperatures Were ‘Up To 5°C Above Modern’ From 12,000–2,000 Years BP
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Oct 7, 2021
Link to paper on decline in temperatures contrary to PAGES2k: The Dependence of Internal Multidecadal Variability in the Southern Ocean on the Ocean Background Mean State
By Liping Zhang, et al. Journal of Climate, Jan 7, 2021
From abstract: In this work, we use sensitivity studies based on Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) models to investigate the linkage of this internal variability with the background ocean mean state. We find that mean ocean stratification in the subpolar region that is dominated by mean salinity influences whether this variability occurs, as well as its time scale.”
Link to study of McMurdo Dry Valleys: Thermal legacy of a large paleolake in Taylor Valley, East Antarctica, as evidenced by an airborne electromagnetic survey
By Krista F. Myers, et al. The Cryosphere, Aug 3, 2021
Antarctic Ice Mass — Alternate Sources
By Kip Hansen, WUWT, Oct 6, 2021
Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine
Aussie Treasurer: Climate Change is Not Just an Issue for Affluent Liberals
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 1, 2021
“Inner city based Aussie treasurer Josh Frydenberg telling rural district representatives like Senator Bridget McKenzie, that they don’t understand farming, mining and climate change.”
Are the Aussie Nationals Close to Caving on Net Zero?
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 8, 2021
Analysis: The lack of diversity in climate-science research
By Aysha Tandon, Carbon Brief, Oct 6, 2021
[SEPP Comment: For decades Nature and Science have censored papers presenting evidence questioning the IPCC reports. Now, “Carbon Brief’s Ayesha Tandon uncovered systemic gender and geographic biases within the most-cited climate science papers published over the past five years?”]
Climate change: Voices from global south muted by climate science
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 7, 2021
“Does it not occur to the clueless McGrath [and BBC] that third world countries have got better things to do with their money than waste billions on junk climate research?”
[SEPP Comment: See link immediately above.]
Spot The Decline
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 2, 2021
[SEPP Comment: The MET office does not meet the accounting standards required for public companies.]
Met Office Forecast Wetter/Drier & Colder/Warmer Winters
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 8, 2021
“Has anybody at the Met Office got a clue what they are doing?”
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
What if the media was just the lobbying agency for bigger profit making ventures?
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 2, 2021
Analysis: Which countries are historically responsible for climate change?
By Simon Evans, Carbon Brief, Oct 5, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Can we return to the Little Ice Age?]
Guardian: Frost Damaged Brazilian Coffee is Evidence of Climate Chaos
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Sep 30, 2021
Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?
NBC Sounds Sea Level Alarm at Navy Base – With No Sea Level Acceleration
By James Taylor, Climate Realism, Oct 6, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Land subsidence from pumping ground water is a real problem in the area. False claims of sea level rise provide no solution to the problem which can be addressed with modern de-salination.]
The crafty language of climate alarmism
By David Wojick, CFACT, Oct 4, 2021
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
Advocacy disguised as ‘science’: ‘Intergenerational inequities in climate extremes’
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Oct 1, 2021
Bogus Talk about Climate Tipping Points
By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Oct 9, 2021
Dramatic Climate Change During The 1990s
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Oct 8, 2021
Text: Another Smoking Gun Of IPCC Fraud
[SEPP Comment: Heller shows how the IPCC and its followers have changed graphs in temperatures the subsequent censorship of noted authorities who refused to do so.]
Claim: Green Loans and Solar Panels Could Save Households Money
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 7, 2021
Prolonged exposure to air and noise pollution may increase heart failure risk in women: study
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Oct 7, 2021
Link to paper: Long‐Term Exposure to Air Pollution, Road Traffic Noise, and Heart Failure Incidence: The Danish Nurse Cohort
By Youn‐Hee Lim, et al. JAHA, Oct 6, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Does the noise apply to wind turbines? The weak statistical association may be meaningless.]
Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.
Paul Bryan on Steven Koonin: Cancel Culture at Work
By Robert Bradley Jr, Master Resource, Oct 6, 2021
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda
Aussie Mining Billionaire Gina Rinehart Warns Students About Climate Propaganda
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 6, 2021
Expanding the Orthodoxy
NASA, FEMA to Host Alliance for Climate Action Series in October
Press Release, NASA, Oct 5, 2021 [H/t William Readdy]
Why natural climate solutions are about much more than carbon
By David Brand, Chief Executive Officer, New Forests, World Economic Forum, Oct 5, 2021
Questioning European Green
Energy Experts Warn Of “A Catastrophic Energy Emergency” If German Leaders Don’t Wake Up To Reality
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Oct 2, 2021
Europe Seeing Renaissance in Coal Power Generation, but There Is Limited Room for Switch From Gas
A steep rise in gas prices during the third quarter significantly improved the profitability of coal-fired power generation in Europe.
By Yakov Grabar, FX Empire, Oct 4, 2021
Questioning Green Elsewhere
Japan Stocking Fossil Fuels for Winter (part of global pattern)
By Vijay Jayara, Master Resource, Oct 5, 2021
Harm from war on hydrocarbons exceeds harm from climate change
By Ronald Stein, CFACT, Oct 7, 2021
Attempt to change world’s weather puts 650,000 Australian jobs at risk from “Net Zero” fantasy
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 7, 2021
Dems’ Budget Reconciliation Bill Bursts with Tainted Green Pork
By H. Sterling Burnett, The Heartland Institute, Oct 7, 2021
Lawsuit claims Biden EPA chief’s purge violated federal law
By Samuel Chamberlain, New York Post, Oct 7, 2021
Scottish High Court Dismisses Greenpeace “End-Use Emissions” Argument
By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Oct 7, 2021
Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Taxes
‘Please put a price on carbon’, says Europe’s biggest utility
By Jon Harman and Stephen Jewkes, Reuters, Oct 5, 2021
Subsidies and Mandates Forever
Australia’s Obscene Green Subsidy Machine
By Alan Moran, Quadrant, Oct 6, 2021
GWPF urges government to cancel green levies to help struggling customers
Press Release, GWPF, Oct 4, 2021
Energy Issues – Non-US
Winter Fuel Short Due to CO2 Hysteria
By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Oct 5, 2021
Britain faces bleak winter of soaring energy costs: Gas prices rise by 37% TODAY pushing more firms to brink of collapse, National Grid boss warns of electricity shortages and experts predict bills will soar to £1,700 a year
By Martin Robinson, James Tapsfield, and Jack Wright, Daily Mail, Oct 6, 2021
[SEPP Comment: A real hockey-stick graph, UK natural gas price from 50p per therm in January 2021 to 400p per therm in October!]
Gore Effect goes global: Gas, electricity price shocks mean industry threatened, and may switch to coal in time for COP 26
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 8, 2021
Guardian: UK Industry Facing Climate Policy Winter Shutdown
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 7, 2021
Boris Johnson’s renewables fantasies are a national security problem
By John Constable, GWPF Energy Editor, Oct 6, 2021
Energy Issues — US
By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Oct 5, 2021
“It’s not always easy to illustrate the effect of energy independence, but this chart from the EIA helps to do so.”
Heating Costs Likely to Soar This Winter, US Foreign Energy Dependence to Increase
By Larry Bell, Newsmax, Oct 8, 2021
The Future Of Power Generation
By Peter Kauffner, American Thinker, Oct 6, 2021
NOLAN: Don’t Sabotage Energy Reliability and Affordability
By Rich Noland, NH Journal, Oct 3, 2021 [New Hampshire]
By Staff, BPA.Gov/transmission
BPA Balancing Authority Total Wind Generation, Near-Real-Time
BPA Balancing Authority Load and Total Wind, Hydro, Fossil/Biomass, and Nuclear Generation, Near-Real-Time
By Staff, Current Supply, Sep 21, 2021
Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?
More News On The Progress Toward Eliminating Fossil Fuels
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Oct 3, 2021
“Do the people at OPEC know what they are talking about with these projections? I think that these figures are far more likely to be close to the mark than the fantasies coming out of the UN, where the talk is that the entire world economy will reach “net zero” carbon emissions by 2050.”
U.S. Shale Giant Says OPEC Controls Oil Prices
By Tsvetana Paraskova, Oil Price.com, Oct 5, 2021
“’The U.S. shale industry is showing very strong discipline. Oil prices are roughly double what they were a year ago and despite that we’re not seeing a huge increase in drilling,’ Ben Luckock, Co-Head of Oil Trading at commodity trading giant Trafigura, told Bloomberg in an interview last week.”
[SEPP Comment: Economic discipline or economic pessimism?]
With Oil Prices Rising, Why Isn’t U.S. Shale Production Surging?
By Ellen R. Wald, Investing.com, Sep 30, 2021
Column: European cargo cults? Standing on the shore, waiting for ‘energy cargo’…a full circle of colonial irony
By Terry Etam, BOE Report, Oct 5, 2021 [Canada, H/t WUWT]
Texas LNG to Save the Day as Europe Struggles With Its Gas Supply
By Ed Longanecker, Real Clear Energy, Oct 6, 2021
Return of King Coal?
Now India has a Coal Crisis too: half the plants only have three days supply left
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Oct 5, 2021
Nuclear Energy and Fears
Why California is shutting down its last nuclear plant
By Catherine Clifford, CNBC, Oct 4, 2021
“Underlying the puzzling decision is a complicated morass of local politics, utility economics, and fear.”
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
Having Fun Watching Wind And Solar Failing To Step Up To Power The World Economy
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Oct 8, 2021
“Anyway, we’re little by little seeing the inevitable consequences of trying to replace real energy that works (fossil fuels) with fairy dust. This will continue until the low and middle income people of the world figure this out and throw the climate cultists out of power. Meanwhile, those of us who pay attention can have some fun watching the inevitable crash of the wind and solar fantasy.”
EIA: Renewables no longer expected to be #1 by 2050
By David Middleton, WUWT, Oct 6, 2021
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other
Drax’s renewable energy plant is UK’s biggest CO2 emitter, analysis claims
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 8, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Doesn’t burning trees from North America reduces CO2 there?]
Homes may have gas cut off if they refuse to take part in hydrogen trial
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 3, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Will the opponents adopt the arguments of the anti-nuclear crowd: No hydrogen bombs in my neighborhood?]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
EV buyer’s beware – fires, scarce charging times, and parking restrictions
By Ronald Stein, WUWT, Oct 2, 2021
Newsom signs laws banning ‘forever chemicals’ in children’s products, food packaging
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Oct 5, 2021
“These so-called forever chemicals are most known for contaminating waterways via firefighting foam, but they are also key ingredients in an array of household products like nonstick pans, toys, makeup, fast-food containers and waterproof apparel.”
Health, Energy, and Climate
Doctors Told To Cut Treatment To Tackle Climate Change
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 7, 2021
[SEPP Comment: Article in The Telegraph on an article in British Medical Journal.]
Here’s The List Of 317 Wind Energy Rejections The Sierra Club Doesn’t Want You To See
By Robert Bryce, Forbes Sep 2, 2021
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
China Invents Carbon-Neutral Oil!
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Oct 6, 2021
“Now we know that it will all be smoke and mirrors, with real world emissions being masked by dodgy accounting practices.”
“Insulate Britain” Compares Climate Protest Deaths to WW2 Collateral Damage
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Oct 6, 2021
University Pays Anti-GMO Activist Vandana Shiva To Promote ‘Earth Democracy’
By Cameron English, ACSH, Oct 4, 2021
1. California Oil Spill ‘Worst Case Discharge’ Is 131,000 Gallons, U.S. Coast Guard Estimates
Minimum estimate is 24,696 gallons [or 588 barrels]; German shipping company says investigation of its container ship has concluded
By Talal Ansari, WSJ, Oct. 8, 2021
TWTW Summary: With the flow at the pipeline rupture stopped, and clean up underway, more precise estimates of the extent of discharge will be made.
2. Deregulation and U.S. Energy Independence
Fracking and an end to the oil-export ban turned America into a global powerhouse.
By Paul M. Dabbar, WSJ, Oct. 5, 2021
TWTW Summary: The former undersecretary of energy for science (2017–21) writes:
“The U.S. in 2019 became a net exporter of energy and achieved energy independence. Once at the mercy of hostile foreign governments that used energy supply as a cudgel, the U.S. is now the third-largest energy exporter in the world—a stunning reversal that has driven down prices for American consumers and created more than 10 million jobs in domestic energy.
“Technological innovation and broad deregulation are responsible for transforming the U.S. into a global energy powerhouse. The development by American oil and gas companies of new horizontal drilling techniques and the perfection of the process of hydraulic fracturing were key elements in this turnaround. Inventing and adding additional energy supply options reduced the need for oil and gas supply to provide for domestic energy uses, freeing more up for exports.
“Almost all these advances were made possible by collaboration among the Energy Department’s national laboratories, colleges and the private sector. The U.S. leads investment in basic discovery of new energy technologies such as hydraulic fracturing, photovoltaic solar, and the lithium-ion battery chemistry…”
Here TWTW disagrees. The success of hydraulic fracturing was through trial and error by Mitchell Energy. The Energy Department participated in the development of directional drilling. After discussing other advancements, the author continues:
“As a result of the energy turnaround, Presidents Trump and Biden have had national-security options that didn’t exist before, such as the ability to impose oil embargoes on Iran and Venezuela without disrupting global oil markets, and the recent actions reducing U.S. missile-defense batteries in Saudi Arabia.
“In Europe, regulation and reduction in supply options are leading to both higher prices and higher emissions. With new technologies like advanced nuclear and fusion production and new lithium battery chemistry on the horizon, a return to onerous regulation is likely to raise costs on U.S. consumers, increase emissions and make America less safe. Only innovation will help the U.S. solve its energy and environmental challenges.”
3. The Woke Left’s Primitive Economics
Zero-sum thinking was adaptive in a world of tribal conflict, but isn’t in a modern society.
By Paul H. Rubin, WSJ, Oct. 5, 2021
TWTW Summary: The emeritus professor of economics at Emory University writes:
“Karl Marx called his system ‘scientific socialism.’ Modern leftists advocate a similar ideology and call themselves ‘woke’ to indicate that they understand the world better than the rest of us. Yet the worldview of Marxists and woke leftists alike is fundamentally primitive.
“Folk economics is the economics of people untrained in economics. It is the economic view of the world that evolved in our brains before the development of the modern economy. During this period of evolution the economy was simple, with little specialization except by age and sex, no economic growth, no technological change, limited trade, little capital, and warfare between neighboring tribes.
“Zero-sum thinking was well-adapted to this world. Since there was no economic growth, incomes and wealth didn’t grow. If one person had access to more food or other goods, or greater access to females, it was likely because of expropriation from others. Since there was little capital, a ‘labor theory of value’—the idea that all value is created by labor alone—would have been appropriate, and there was little need to protect capital through property rights. Frequent warfare encouraged xenophobia.
“Adam Smith and other economists challenged this worldview in the 18th century. They taught that specialization of labor was valuable, that capital was productive, and that labor and capital could work together to increase income. They also showed that property rights needed protection, that members of other tribes or groups could cooperate through trade, that wealth could be created with the proper incentives, and that the creation of wealth would benefit everyone in a society, not only the wealthy. Most important, they showed that a complex economy could work with little or no central direction.
“Marx’s economic system was based on the primitive worldview of our ancestors. For him, conflict rather than cooperation between labor and capital defined the economy. He thought that the wealthy became rich only by exploiting the poor, that all income came from labor, and that the economy needed central direction because he didn’t believe markets were good at self-correction. The collapse of the Soviet Union, the largest and most expensive social-science experiment ever conducted, proved Smith right and Marx wrong.
“Members of the woke left want to return to policies based on this primitive economic thinking. One of their major errors is thinking that the world is zero-sum.”
The author gives several examples of “woke” based on the claim the rich only can become so by exploiting others, which leads to counterproductive polices. He concludes:
“…But if policies that penalize saving and investing and that involve excessive government control are adopted, social capital, wealth, and real income will decline. If we bow to this primitive ideology, there will be increased racial animosity and conflict, slow economic growth, and fewer inventions.
“What is particularly sad is that young people, the main advocates of woke ideology, would suffer the ill effects of these policies for the rest of their lives.”
via Watts Up With That?
October 11, 2021 at 04:36AM