0 out of 10 based on 0 rating
via JoNova
March 31, 2025 at 09:47AM
Reversing this faulty EPA finding will curtail climate alarmism and green energy grifting.
via CFACT
March 31, 2025 at 08:22AM
From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
Now the Net Zero lunatics are coming for your boats!
The Telegraph report:
Labour is implementing stricter net zero measures on fishing boats, canal barges and pleasure craft, The Telegraph can reveal.
Under the maritime decarbonisation strategy, boat owners will be forced to swap out diesel engines, petrol generators and wood-fired stoves for electric motors, batteries and extra shore power hookups.
There will also be tax rises on marine fuel, with new boats required to be entirely electric.
Maritime bosses branded the Government’s plans “completely and utterly impractical”.
Richard Gregson, the owner of Worcester-based Classic Yacht Brokerage, said: “It’s complete nonsense to have net zero on yachts.
“The technology for electric engines on small boats isn’t really there. The amount of diesel a yacht burns in a year is negligible, and even if the diesel engines were replaced it would be offset by the making of electric batteries.”
Read the full story here.
For most, barges, yachts and pleasure boats are hobbies. Where on earth does the Government think ordinary people, who have skimped and scraped to renovate and maintain them, will get the money from to replace engines, batteries and the rest of the nonsense?
As for fisherman, this mad crusade will end up destroying their livelihoods.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
via Watts Up With That?
March 31, 2025 at 08:07AM
53.06194 -3.55383 Met Office CIMO Assessed Class 5 Archived Temperatures records from 1/1/1959
Llyn Alwen Reservoir is certainly anthropogenic being constructed between 1911 and 1920. The CIMO regulations specifically state that weather stations should avoid large bodies of water unless typical of the region – being an artificial modification will mark down this site. The Met Office already rates the site as the lowest possible and effectively unregulated Class 5 but I doubt the reservoir was even considered. This site had a rain gauge fitted shortly after the dam and reservoir construction in 1928 but archived temperature records only run from 1/1/1959. The story with Alwen is one of significant change over time effectively rendering historic comparisons from this manaul “Climate Reporting” station effectively impossible.
The CEDA records for this site head up its current location and in the absence of any site renaming and/or renumbering it would be reasonable to assume it had always been at that location. However at the foot of the “Remarks” section there is a notification of a relocation in 1994. MET Office procedures indicate the following:
“Over time certain instruments, or the whole enclosure, may be relocated some distance away from the original site. Where the distance moved is small, the observations obtained from the new site may have exactly the same climatological characteristics as previously and it makes sense to regard them as coming from the same source or station distinguished by certain identifiers. Where the distance moved is large, or, where the exposure at the new site is sufficiently different that a detectable impact on the measured climatology is judged likely, it is appropriate that observations from the new site are labelled by a different set of identifiers.”
The lack of any change of “identifiers” suggests the relocation effects were minimal so firstly how far was this relocation and was it really so insignificant?
The old site was both 302 metres/ 990 feet away but also at a 10 metre/33 feet elevation difference. An indication of whether such a distance could make any substantial difference is given by the 58 metre differential between two separate official Met Office stations at Manston showing marked discrepancies so clearly, yes such a move definitely could. Below is an image of the original site from the given coordinates with a 100 metre radius circle
Whether or not the Met Office would consider the reservoir an issue is probably unlikely – they certainly are not concerned about proximity to Loch Shin at Cassley which they claim achieves Class 1 despite the majority of a Hydro Electricity generating plant within the 100 metre radius and a significant slope. In the case of the original Alwen reservoir site, I would not be surprised if the Met Office classed it similarly as Class 1 and class 2 would not seem unreasonable.
Both the original and current site are manual reporting units so it would not have been necessary for electricity or communication supplies for automation to have enforced relocation. Whatever the reason to move the site it certainly did not improve it though initially it was not as bad as the modern day site. Below is a close up of the site shortly after the move.
This new position is not as good as its original with buildings, hard-standing, roadways and parking encroaching, however, this only got much worse over further time as this water works site developed.
The 10 metre zone is now largely covered by new buildings rendering the weather station’s reading to junk status for the purposes of representing any area other than its own footprint. It will, however, no doubt read elevated temperatures from its enclosed “courtyard” location which raises the obvious question of why does the Met Office not now relocate it again to a much more representative open site? Or is the more likely case (in my personal opinion) that such inevitably elevated readings are a modern design feature that the Met Office finds necessary.
But then to add more poor management of this site we must add in the modern day inevitability of lack of readings being taken. In the last archived year (2023) the 365 daily requirements dropped to just 205 times the effort was actually made. On top of that, on no fewer than 28 occasions either the maximum or minimum daily reading was omitted making a daily mean figure an impossibility to derive. Under half the annual days averages could have been arrived at rendering any annual figure frankly an absurdity.
Overall these are an unacceptable standard from a taxpayer funded organisation.In any serious independent temperature reconstruction of the UK national historic record there is no possible justification for including any of the many sites, like Alwen, that the Met Office currently finds acceptable.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
March 31, 2025 at 08:04AM
