Years of alarmist claims of the imminent end of Arctic summer sea ice have blown up big-time, so excuses have to be found. They claimed CO2 from human causes was the dominant driver of modern warming, while any other CO2 source was natural and OK. Their models predicted a relentless rise in temperatures, with Arctic sea ice the obvious evidence of the supposed climate problem. They still claim the Arctic is warming 4 times (or some other multiple) faster than the rest of the planet. Now they say: Natural climate variation is the most likely reason for the ‘slowdown’ as CO2 hasn’t declined, but it’s only a ‘temporary reprieve’. Twenty years and counting is a lot of ‘temporary’ non-effectiveness of their greenhouse gas ideas. Cognitive dissonance springs to mind.
– – –
The melting of sea ice in the Arctic has slowed dramatically in the past 20 years, scientists have reported, with no statistically significant decline in its extent since 2005, says The Guardian.

The finding is surprising, the researchers say, given that carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning have continued to rise and trap ever more heat over that time. [Talkshop comment – only surprising to those who thought CO2 was a dominant factor in climate].

They said natural variations in ocean currents that limit ice melting had probably balanced out the continuing rise in global temperatures.

However, they said this was only a temporary reprieve and melting was highly likely to start again at about double the long-term rate at some point in the next five to 10 years.

The findings do not mean Arctic sea ice is rebounding. Sea ice area in September, when it reaches its annual minimum, has halved since 1979, when satellite measurements began. [Talkshop comment – but it was rising for years before 1979, at the same time that CO2 was rising].

The climate crisis remains “unequivocally real”, the scientists said, and the need for urgent action to avoid the worst impacts remains unchanged.

The natural variation causing the slowdown is probably the multi-decadal fluctuations in currents in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, which change the amount of warmed water flowing into the Arctic.

The Arctic is still expected to see ice-free conditions later in the century, harming people and wildlife in the region and boosting global heating by exposing the dark, heat-absorbing ocean. [Talkshop comment – why would people in the Arctic not want a bit more warmth?]

Full article here.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/fxKodHJ

August 21, 2025 at 01:43PM

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/7o3U4d5

August 21, 2025 at 12:07PM

CO2 Coalition analyzed the data and concluded that Texas has no climate crisis to fear.  The report is Texas and Climate Change: No Climate Crisis in the Lone Star State.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report will examine the scientific basis for claims of harmful effects from climate change in Texas. Assertions have been made that many areas around the world are experiencing negative impacts from unusual and unprecedented warming driven by increasing human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂). Texas is no different. Promotion of the need to achieve “net zero” emissions is predicated on fear of existing and future devastating calamities resulting from CO₂-enhanced warming.

The Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5) report (USGCRP, 2023) says that climate change is “putting us at risk from climate hazards that degrade our lands and waters, quality of life, health and well-being, and cultural interconnectedness.” The NCA5 report lists “warmer temperatures, more erratic precipitation, and sea level rise,” as well as “drier conditions” and “extreme heat and high humidity,” as the “climate hazards” affecting the Southern Great Plains, which encompasses the State of Texas (Figure 1).

via Science Matters

https://ift.tt/b08h4Pn

August 21, 2025 at 11:18AM

By Paul Homewood

Dr Lars Schernikau exposes the harsh reality about grid-scale batteries:

My first moped when I was fourteen, back in East Berlin, had no starter battery. The only way to get it running was to kickstart it which, back then, seemed perfectly normal. Batteries were expensive and heavy.

My current modern motorcycle (apologies to the Harley owners, because as a German I ride a BMW ) has a battery powerful enough to drive it in reverse and operate a complex control and entertainment system.

Batteries have evolved, they have become better, more efficient, safer, and lasting longer, and today entire cars run on batteries for hundreds of kilometers. But it doesn’t stop there.

The expansion of grid-scale (or utility-scale) batteries for providing grid storage especially for solar is one of the “hottest” topics of the “energy transition” these days. For instance, many provinces in China still have the mandatory requirement that solar projects are to include battery storage. There is no doubt that utility-scale batteries have many benefits, but let’s honestly consider what batteries do to our environment and to the net energy efficiency.

It is therefore high time that we explore the capabilities and short-comings of grid-scale batteries, the production thereof and the impact they have on our energy systems.

Read the full post here.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/qwCEMAL

August 21, 2025 at 11:01AM