From MasterResource

By Allen Brooks — May 23, 2024

“The hypocrisy of the Biden administration taking credit for lower gasoline prices as the summer driving season begins by fulfilling a Congressional mandate is unsurprising.”

“We now have the amazing scenario where days before the start of the hurricane season, Democrats in Congress and Biden are willing to empty the gasoline reserve.”

The Department of Energy announced Tuesday that it would begin selling the one million barrels of gasoline in the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve.  Bids for the supply are due May 28th with delivery expected by June 30th.  Bids will be accepted for lots of 100,000 barrels.  The supply represents 42 million gallons of gasoline and is held in commercial storage tanks in Maine and New Jersey. 

The sale was mandated by the omnibus Congressional spending bill (HR 2882) approved in late March with procedural hijinks by Senate Leader Chuck Schumer.  If you remember, it was during the final hours of the Friday before the week-long Congress’ Easter Recess that the House passed the legislation 286-134 providing funding to keep the government operating through its September 30 fiscal year-end.  The bill was passed over to the Senate which passed it in the early morning hours of Saturday and forwarded it to the White House for President Joe Biden’s signature that evening.  Importantly, more Democrats than Republicans in the House voted for the bill as more than 100 Republicans voted against it. 

We now have the amazing scenario where days before the start of the hurricane season, Democrats in Congress and Biden are willing to empty the gasoline reserve.  Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a statement, “By strategically releasing this reserve in between Memorial Day and July 4th, we are ensuring sufficient supply flows to the tri-state and northeast at a time hardworking Americans need it the most.”  How funny that the Biden administration is taking credit for helping consumers by following through on a Congressionally mandated action. 

I recently wrote about our drive from Houston to Rhode Island. My article discussed gasoline prices and how they became more expensive as we headed north, primarily due to higher state taxes in the Northeast states.  I commented on Biden’s election problem with high gasoline prices and our expectation that he would repeat his 2022 move to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower pump prices in the run-up to the November election.  He was successful, but as shown in a chart, gasoline pump prices have increased 53% since Biden entered office.

Biden successfully pushed down gasoline prices by tapping the SPR in 2022.

The gasoline reserve was established in 2014, two years after Super Storm Sandy slammed the Northeast region and disrupted fuel supply availability sending gasoline prices soaring.  Some gasoline stations were without fuel for 30 days.  Having gasoline supplies pre-positioned in the region reduces the risk for consumers from future storm disruptions. 

East Coast states depend on Colonial Pipeline for 55% of their gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel supply.

The vulnerability of the Northeast and Middle Atlantic states to fuel supply disruptions emerged on May 7, 2021, when the Colonial Pipeline was hit in a ransomware attack.  The pipeline, which originates in Houston and runs to New York, supplies the East Coast states with 55% of its petroleum fuels – gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.  The pipeline was shut down to protect its operations and billing system.  Operations were slowly restarted after the ransom was paid. 

Fuel shortages occurred at gasoline stations amid panic buying as the pipeline shutdown extended for days.  By the fourth day, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina reported shortages.  Areas from northern South Carolina to southern Virginia were hardest hit, with 71% of gasoline stations running out of fuel in Charlotte on May 11th and 87% of stations out in Washington, D.C., on May 14th.  Average fuel prices rose to their highest point since 2014, reaching more than $3 a gallon.  Jet fuel availability caused several airlines operating from Charlotte to alter refueling arrangements including forced refueling stops for long-haul flights. 

Estimates are that the gasoline reserve sale will raise $125 million but, importantly, cut storage costs.  The Energy Department’s 2022 report on the SPR said it costs about $13 per barrel annually for operations and maintenance of the gasoline reserve compared with about 30 cents per barrel for crude oil in the SPR. 

The hypocrisy of the Biden administration taking credit for lower gasoline prices as the summer driving season begins by fulfilling a Congressional mandate is unsurprising.  We are also struck by how shortsighted Democrats are, especially those in the Northeast states who voted for the spending bill.  Their shortsightedness is laughable given the region’s energy risk from supply disruptions on the eve of the start of the hurricane season, which is predicted to be extremely active. 

—————–

For more of G. Allen Brooks, see Energy Musings: Insights into the Energy Industry, where this post first appeared. It has been slightly revised for publication here. Mr. Brooks is a long-time participant in, observer of, and commentator on the energy industry. He has been a Wall Street securities analyst, an oil service company manager, a consultant to energy company executives, a member of the boards of directors of numerous energy companies, and a writer and commentator on energy markets and trends.

From the DAILY CALLER

NICK POPE
CONTRIBUTOR

Nineteen Republican state attorneys general hit five Democrat-controlled states with a legal challenge alleging that the blue states are illegally attempting to impose aggressive climate policies on the rest of the country.

The coalition of red states filed the challenge with the Supreme Court on Wednesday, alleging that the five blue states — California, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Minnesota — are trying to advance an anti-fossil fuel agenda for the entire country via tools like climate nuisance lawsuits against oil companies. The coalition of red states requested that the Supreme Court step in to determine whether these Democrat-controlled states can effectively interfere in other states’ energy policy.

“Plaintiff States and their citizens rely on traditional energy products every day,” the complaint says. “The assertion that Defendant States can regulate, tax, and enjoin the promotion, production, and use of such products beyond their borders—but outside the purview of federal law—threatens profound injury.” (RELATED: ‘Grave Threat’: Calls Mount For SCOTUS To Intervene In Key Climate Lawsuit Against Major Energy Companies)

The coalition of plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to examine the complaint in the context of the Commerce Clause, which gives the federal government the ability to address matters of interstate commerce that are beyond the jurisdiction of one state or another. The states that filed the complaint include Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

“In essence, Defendant States want a global carbon tax on the traditional energy industry,” the complaint states. “Citing fears of a climate catastrophe, they seek massive penalties, disgorgement, and injunctive relief against energy producers based on out-of-state conduct with out-of-state effects.”

The complaint references climate nuisance lawsuits that have been pursued by Minnesota and the other defendant states as evidence that the five blue states are trying to alter the national energy landscape by seeking to extract large settlements from traditional energy companies. In many instances, the third-party law firms that are helping prosecutors bring these tort cases stand to reap large paydays if the energy companies being sued decide to settle.

“Defendant States assert the power to dictate the future of the American energy industry,” states the complaint. “They hope to do so not by influencing federal legislation or by petitioning federal agencies, but by imposing ruinous liability and coercive remedies on energy companies through state tort actions governed by state law in state court.”

Democratic New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin expressed confidence that the Supreme Court will not side against him and described the red states’ complaint as politically-motivated.

“We are proud to stand up for New Jersey residents and consumers in combating the deception the largest oil and gas companies engaged in for decades. It’s a shame that other states are trying to hamstring our efforts to protect New Jerseyans under New Jersey law,” Platkin said in a statement shared with the Daily Caller News Foundation. “But we are confident the Supreme Court will see this for the desperate stunt that it is, and deny their motion. In any event, our important work continues.”

Democratic Connecticut Attorney General Chris Tong issued a statement on Wednesday deriding the complaint filed against his state.

“This must be a fake lawsuit filed in the Land of Make Believe. I live and work in the real world, where I am focused on actual threats — like the climate crisis — to the health and safety of the people of Connecticut,” Tong said. “This is pure partisan political theater, and it will not distract or deter us from fighting for Connecticut consumers, families and our environment.”

The offices of Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Democratic Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Democratic California Attorney General Rob Bonta did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

by anonymous contributor

Global Circulation Models (GCMs) have long been the primary tools for climate prediction, driving political and policy decisions. However, GCMs have consistently run hot, predicting more warming than has been observed. A recent paper titled “The Overlooked Sub-Grid Air-Sea Flux in Climate Models” by Julius J.M. Busecke et al. exposes a significant deficiency in these models: their handling of small-scale air-sea interactions. Let’s explore the findings and implications of this study, highlighting the potential for improved modeling techniques to enhance climate predictions, though without guaranteed results.

Understanding Air-Sea Interactions

Air-sea interactions are critical for regulating the Earth’s climate. These processes involve the exchange of heat, momentum, and gases between the ocean and the atmosphere, affecting weather patterns, ocean circulation, and climate variability. The ocean absorbs about 90% of the excess heat due to human activities, playing a central role in global climate dynamics.

Complexities in Modeling Air-Sea Interactions

Accurately representing air-sea interactions in climate models is challenging due to their complex and variable nature. These interactions occur across a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, from short-term processes like boundary layer turbulence and hurricane formation to long-term phenomena such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation. The representation of these processes is hampered by the resolution of the models and the inherent nonlinearity of the coupling formulae used to simulate them.

Limitations of Coarse-Resolution Models

The primary issue highlighted by Busecke et al. is the coarse resolution of most current GCMs, typically around 1° or larger. These models fail to capture small-scale structures and processes at the air-sea interface, leading to significant biases in the simulation of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and air-sea heat fluxes. The study states:

“Coarse-resolution climate models do not resolve small-scale structures in the air-sea state, which, due to strong nonlinearities in the coupling formulae, can impact the large-scale air-sea exchange—a mechanism that has received little attention.”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380723812_The_Overlooked_Sub-Grid_Air-Sea_Flux_in_Climate_Models

This oversight results in a systematic cooling of the ocean by about 4 W/m² globally, with significant regional variations. These biases contribute to the tendency of GCMs to overestimate future warming, casting doubt on their reliability.

The Role of High-Resolution Simulations

To address this deficiency, the researchers employed high-resolution coupled climate simulations with a resolution of 1/10°. These simulations allowed them to analyze the effects of small-scale heterogeneity on air-sea heat fluxes, revealing that such heterogeneity can significantly alter large-scale fluxes.

Methodology

The researchers used a method involving spatial filtering and offline computation of heat fluxes to quantify the impact of small-scale processes. They defined the small-scale turbulent heat flux (Q*) as:

“Q* = Q – Qc, where Q is the flux computed using the high-resolution fields, and Qc is the flux computed using the low-resolution surrogate fields.”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380723812_The_Overlooked_Sub-Grid_Air-Sea_Flux_in_Climate_Models

This approach isolates the net impact of small-scale variability on large-scale fluxes, which is often missing in coarse-resolution models.

Key Findings

The study found that small-scale air-sea fluxes show strong spatial and temporal variability, locally reaching values up to 100 W/m². On average, these fluxes result in a global cooling effect of approximately 4 W/m², with some regions experiencing even higher values.

Atmospheric vs. Oceanic Contributions

One striking finding is the differentiation between atmospheric and oceanic contributions to these small-scale fluxes. The atmospheric component predominantly leads to cooling, while the oceanic component is more variable, causing both warming and cooling depending on the region. This variability is especially pronounced in dynamically active areas such as western boundary currents and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.

The study explains:

“The contribution to the sub-grid flux (Q*) due to small-scale atmospheric features (Q*,A) produces a spatially smooth cooling effect over much of the ocean… In contrast, the contribution from small-scale oceanic features (Q*,O) is highly spatially variable and results in both warming and cooling of the ocean.”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380723812_The_Overlooked_Sub-Grid_Air-Sea_Flux_in_Climate_Models

Regional Impacts

The impact of small-scale heterogeneity is not uniform across the globe. Regions with high dynamic activity, such as the western boundary currents (e.g., the Gulf Stream and the Kuroshio Current) and the Agulhas retroflection, exhibit the strongest cooling effects, with long-term averages exceeding 20 W/m². In contrast, areas near the equator and the more energetic parts of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current sometimes show warming effects due to small-scale oceanic features.

The researchers found that around 70% of daily average values for the small-scale flux enhance the large-scale flux, with over 20% of these values showing an enhancement exceeding 10% of the magnitude of the large-scale flux. In dynamically active regions, this enhancement is even more pronounced, highlighting the critical role of small-scale processes in shaping large-scale climatic patterns.

Implications for Climate Modeling

The implications of these findings are significant. The study underscores the need for GCMs to incorporate parameterizations that account for small-scale heterogeneity. The current generation of models, as used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), exhibits substantial biases that have led to inaccurate predictions and, consequently, questionable policy decisions based on these models.

Moving Towards Improved Models

Future climate models need to integrate high-resolution data and develop robust parameterizations for small-scale processes. As the paper suggests:

“By identifying an overlooked contribution to air-sea heat flux in climate models, we open a promising new direction for addressing biases in climate simulations and thus improving future climate predictions.”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380723812_The_Overlooked_Sub-Grid_Air-Sea_Flux_in_Climate_Models

However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that these improvements are not guaranteed to resolve all the inaccuracies in current climate models. While the study highlights a significant oversight, the path to fully accurate climate predictions remains uncertain.

The Need for Comprehensive Parameterizations

Developing comprehensive parameterizations that accurately represent the impact of small-scale heterogeneity in coarse-resolution models is a complex but essential task. This involves not only heat fluxes but also momentum and gas exchanges, which play critical roles in the climate system.

The study emphasizes the importance of accounting for the variability due to sub-grid flows using stochastic approaches, as well as the need for parameterizations that address the impacts of spatial heterogeneity at the air-sea interface. While some parameterizations exist for temporal variability (e.g., gustiness), no comprehensive parameterization currently accounts for all components of spatial heterogeneity.

Challenges and Future Directions

While the study provides a crucial step forward, it also acknowledges several limitations. The reliance on high-resolution simulations means that results are sensitive to the resolution and scale of filtering used. Additionally, more work is needed to understand how these small-scale fluxes interact with other processes and influence large-scale circulation and energetics.

Addressing Scale-Dependence

One major challenge is the scale-dependence of the estimated fluxes. The researchers note that while they do not believe the qualitative results of their study would change with different resolutions, building quantitative confidence will require higher-resolution coupled simulations and a thorough investigation of scale-dependence.

Integrating Observations and Models

A promising direction for future research is the integration of high-resolution observational data with model simulations. Upcoming satellite missions, like ODYSEA, and field campaigns conducting high-resolution surveys of the air-sea transition zone could provide valuable data to validate and refine model parameterizations. These efforts could help bridge the gap between high-resolution simulations and coarse-resolution climate models.

Extending the Study to Other Fluxes

While this study focuses on turbulent heat fluxes, the researchers suggest that future work should also consider the effects on momentum and gas fluxes. These fluxes are equally important for understanding the dynamics of the climate system and could reveal additional biases and deficiencies in current models.

Conclusion

The paper by Busecke et al. highlights a significant shortcoming in current climate models, emphasizing the need for greater attention to small-scale air-sea interactions. Addressing this gap is crucial for improving the accuracy of climate predictions and informing more reliable policy decisions. Integrating high-resolution data and refining model parameterizations will be essential steps toward a more accurate and reliable understanding of our changing climate.

In summary, while GCMs have provided a basic framework for understanding climate dynamics, it is imperative to recognize and address their limitations. By incorporating insights from studies like this one, we can develop more robust models that better capture the complexities of the Earth system, leading to more informed and effective climate policies.

The journey towards more accurate climate models is ongoing, and acknowledging the deficiencies in current approaches is a critical step. As we enhance our understanding of small-scale processes and their impacts, we might move closer to developing climate models that can truly reflect the intricacies of the Earth’s climate system. However, it’s essential to remain cautious and critical, as the path to reliable climate predictions is fraught with challenges and uncertainties.

The full pre-print can be accessed here.

H/T Judith Curry and  Friends of Science Society, Ken Gregory Director