Category: Uncategorized

Grid-Level Electricity Storage – NOAA’s Critique of the WWS Vision

Grid-Level Electricity Storage – NOAA’s Critique of the WWS Vision

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

.
.
There’s the wind, water, and solar (WWS) vision promoted by a few academics, and then there’s economic and technical reality – with a seriously large chasm in between.

Friends of Science Calgary

Contributed by Robert Lyman © 2017

A new paper prepared by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Earth System Laboratory and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) is drawing attention in policy circles in the U.S. The paper critiques the claims of a study by Mark Jacobson et. al. that it is feasible, at low cost, to achieve 100% conversion of the U.S. electricity generation system to wind, hydroelectricity and solar energy by 2050 (the “WWS Vision”).

The authors of the critique include experts in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, who could not be accused of being “climate sceptics”. Indeed, they have previously authored reports in which they concluded that an 80% decarbonisation of the U.S. electrical grid eventually could be achieved at “reasonable” cost, assuming that a broad suite of generation options and other technologies are employed. Their critique of the Jacobson…

View original post 775 more words

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

June 25, 2017 at 05:15AM

Nice heatwave, but June 1878 was hotter

Nice heatwave, but June 1878 was hotter

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

By Paul Homewood

 

 

Booker on last week’s heatwave:

 

image

Headline writers were itching during last week’s heatwave to proclaim that it was a “record breaking” June, particularly on June 21, when the BBC flashed up that the temperature had hit “35 degrees” (in fact it had only been 34.5).

The problem, as all had to admit, was that this was only the hottest June spell since the drought year of 1976, when June temperatures on seven days exceeded 34.5, followed by months more of exceptional heat before the drought broke in September.

But the suspicions of that expert analyst Paul Homewood were aroused when he noticed that the 34.5 degrees had only been recorded in one place, Heathrow airport: just as happened two years ago when the Met Office splashed across the media that July 1 2015 had been “the hottest July day ever”, with a temperature of 36.7 degrees, again recorded only at Heathrow airport.

 

The hottest temperature this week was recorded in Heathrow airport

The hottest temperature this week was recorded in Heathrow airport Credit: DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AFP/Getty Images

 

Homewood’s detective work on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog suggested that the 36.7 figure had nowhere near been matched by the official weather stations nearest to Heathrow.

Even there it had only been recorded in a fleeting spike at 2.15 in the afternoon, by a thermometer sited on heat-radiating tarmac, near a main runway where it could have been affected by a blast from a passing airliner.

The Met Office confirms that last week was similar, where weather stations nearby recorded temperatures no higher than 33.8 degrees, equal to one recorded in 1995.

For a better perspective on last week’s heatwave, Homewood looked at the Central England Temperature record, based on centuries-old recordings at three weather stations across the country.

He found that there were hotter spells and June days recorded in more than a dozen previous years going back to 1878, showing that there was nothing exceptional about last week.

For years the greatest problem for the warmists was the failure after 1998 of global temperatures to continue rising

But the real reason why the global warming-obsessed Met Office and BBC are so desperate to convince us that the world is getting hotter than ever must itself be seen as only part of a much wider story, which I have lately been analysing in a paper for the Global Warming Policy Foundation, to show how the belief in man-made climate change has in every respect been a perfect case study in the rules of groupthink first identified 45 years ago by Irving Janis, a professor of psychology at Yale.

For years the greatest problem for the warmists was the failure after 1998 of global temperatures to continue rising as all their computer models had predicted.

Programmed to assume that as CO2 levels continued to rise, so global temperatures would follow, they had all agreed that in the 21st century the world would continue to get hotter by at least 0.3 degrees every decade.

But after the unusually strong El Niño year of 1998, this simply hadn’t happened. 1998 still stubbornly remained the hottest year in the modern record, and the trend failed to rise at all, in what became recognised, even by warmists, as the “Pause”.

So how could this be explained away? Around 2012, they thought they had the answer. The world was indeed continuing to warm according to the theory. But the reason why this was not reflected in the global temperature record was that all that extra heat was hiding away in the deep oceans.

 

INDIAN OCEAN

Scientists claim that extra heat has been absorbed by the ocean Credit: Andrey Nekrasov / Barcroft Media

 

Then, between 2014 and 2016, they thought they had been saved: by another El Niño, even stronger than that in 1998, which made 2016 the new “hottest year ever”.

All this was gleefully put together in a recent article in The Spectator by Philip Williamson, a scientist at the University of East Anglia who used it to show how the “denialists” had got it all totally wrong.

The Pause after 1998 had indeed been an illusion, Williamson claimed, because, during that time, an astonishing “93 per cent” of the extra heat created by human activity had simply been absorbed by the oceans, with only a mere 1 per cent reflected in surface temperatures.

But, once again, Homewood looked at the evidence for this. It was all based on data provided since 2004 by the US Argo buoy system. But he found that this only measures temperatures in the upper 2,000 metres of the oceans, and even this had only recorded a minuscule rise of 0.02 degrees.

However, when oceans warm, they expand, causing sea levels to rise. And measurements from tide gauges across the world show that there has been no increase in the rate of sea-level rise since the start of the Modern Warming 200 years ago.

When Williamson triumphantly referred to 2014, 2015 and 2016 as the “hottest years ever”, showing that the heat was once again emerging, he tellingly relied only on the two main surface temperature records, one kept by his colleagues at the UEA’s Climatic Research Unit and the UK Met Office.

But these have in recent years been controversially “adjusted” to show a temperature rise much larger than that actually recorded.

Significantly, Williamson made no mention of the much more comprehensive satellite temperature records, which have long been giving a very different picture.

Our June weather last week was not even as hot as it was in 1878, a century before the great global warming scare was invented

They indeed agreed that 2016 was tied for heat with 1998. But they have since shown a drop of more than 0.6 degrees, putting recent months way below their 2016, 2010 and 1998 El Niño peaks.

All we can safely say, therefore, is that those official computer models didn’t predict anything of what has been actually happening.

Natural factors such as the El Niños have clearly had much more influence on temperatures than the rise in CO2. And, far from breaking any records, our June weather last week was not even as hot as it was in 1878, a century before the great global warming scare was invented.

http://ift.tt/2sEtNUn

The full CET analysis is here.

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

June 25, 2017 at 05:03AM

Dale Vince Increases His Prices

Dale Vince Increases His Prices

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

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Bloke down the Pub

Not content with receiving huge subsidies from the taxpayer, electric car drivers are now moaning about paying a proper cost for their electricity:

 

image

Reckoned to be Britain’s wealthiest hippy, Dale Vince can be pretty pleased with his £100m fortune.

Some of his customers appear less happy. For Mr Vince’s company is accused of hiking up prices at electric car charging points while at the same time ploughing millions of pounds into his football club.

On Monday, Ecotricity, which has the monopoly on motorway service station electric charging points, will introduce a new pricing scheme for electric vehicles.

Critics claim the new charges will make it as expensive to charge up an electric car as put petrol in a conventional, fuel-efficient vehicle.

They even complain that Mr Vince would be better advised diverting the money spent by Ecotricity on his football club to reduce the cost of his rapid charging points.

The company, which sells green electricity to tens of thousands of households, has the near monopoly on rapid car-charging points at motorway service stations through another subsidiary company Electric Highway, which also made a near £1m loss, according to its 2016 accounts.

Ecotricity’s pricing change also exposes the bewildering array of different costs for charging up an electric car.

While petrol or diesel is charged by the litre, a variety of companies running electric charging points deploy myriad pricing structures. Dozens of different tariffs exist, prompting the Department for Transport to launch a review in an attempt to simplify the system for consumers.

Ecotricity, which used to offer free charging to encourage the take up of electric cars, will change to its new tariff from tomorrow. Motorists will have to pay £3 connection fee and then a further 17 pence for every unit of electricity used (kWh). Previously the company charged a flat fee of £6 for 30 minutes of charge.

Ecotricity insists the price change will benefit customers but Zap-Map, a website which offers a consumer guide to charging points, has estimated that for a Nissan Leaf, the cost of charging it for 30 minutes will rise from £6 to £7.08.

Motorists have complained at the pricing change. One posted on the Zap-Map website: “He [Dale Vince] has now kicked his loyal customers in the teeth with a ridiculous price rise to £7.25 for the same amount of energy.

“He obviously wants to put all his limited resources into Green Gas and his football team.”

The RAC Foundation, the motoring think tank, estimates it will cost about 9p a mile to run a Nissan Leaf, about the same as the cost of an efficient petrol driven car. Zap-Map’s own analysis suggests it will still be cheaper to run an electric vehicle than an equivalent petrol or diesel driven car.

http://ift.tt/2sD9MgZ

According to the report:

FairFuelUK, a group that rails against the “fleecing of drivers at the pumps and sockets”, said: “The already murky world of pump pricing is not helped by opportunistic and confusing charging prices for electric cars.

The new, humble, consensus-driven Government needs to recognise that cleaner emissions should be linked with lower vehicle running costs, and definitely not Ecotricity’s aspirations to reach the Premier League.”

Why?

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

June 25, 2017 at 05:03AM

UK to leave EU with no deal

UK to leave EU with no deal

via Scottish Sceptic
http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

For a while I’ve been saying to anyone that would listen that the UK was extremely unlikely to come to a deal with the dysfunctional EU in a mere 2 years. This was obvious from the way it took the … Continue reading

via Scottish Sceptic http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

June 25, 2017 at 04:26AM