Newsbytes: Climate Hysteria Threatens Global Carbon War

By Dr. Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation

Global Warming Policy Foundation

Image via Wikipedia

Russia is considering limits on European flights over Siberia as countries approve possible retaliatory measures against the European Union’s move to force airlines to pay for carbon emissions. “We intend to get the EU’s carbon trading measures either canceled or postponed,” said Okulov, who was previously chief executive officer of OAO Aeroflot, Russia’s biggest airline. Russia reserves the right to reject requests from EU carriers that seek to increase flights through Siberian airspace, giving preference to Asian airlines, Okulov said.  –Bloomberg, 22 February 2012

During the past decade, the European Union blazed a green trail with a series of laws mandating a low-carbon economy and promises to set an example for other parts of the world. That now seems like another era. The E.U. Emissions Trading System — the Union’s flagship climate policy, which requires industries to acquire emissions permits — has been battered by extreme volatility, tax fraud, recycling of used credits, suspicions of profiteering and online attacks. The latest complication for Europe’s green agenda is the prospect of trade wars with important partners like the United States and China at a time when the Union can least afford threats to jobs and growth. –James Kanter, The New York Times, 22 February 2012

Many households in Germany are no longer able to pay their electricity bills. As a result, around half a million households are sitting in the dark. Die Welt, 21 February 2012

At a public meeting in the House of Commons, the climate scientist Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT made a number of declarations that unsettle the claim that global warming is backed by “settled science”. They’re not new, but some of them were new to me… If Lindzen is right, we will never be able to calculate the trillions that have been spent on the advice of “scientists in the service of politics”. –Simon Carr, The Independent, 22 February 2012

Science progresses by testing predictions against real world data obtained from direct observations and rigorous experiments. The stakes in the global-warming debate are much too high to ignore this observational evidence and declare the science settled. The computer-model predictions of alarming global warming have seriously exaggerated the warming by CO2 and have underestimated other causes. Since CO2 is not a pollutant but a substantial benefit to agriculture, and since its warming potential has been greatly exaggerated, it is time for the world to rethink its frenzied pursuit of decarbonization at any cost. — Claude Allegre + 15 co-authors, The Wall Street Journal, 21 February 2012

About these ads

20 thoughts on “Newsbytes: Climate Hysteria Threatens Global Carbon War

  1. This madness is: 1) out of control; 2) very depressing and 3) leaving my children with a ruined world. Wars will likely be fought. I’m glad I’m getting old! But, I’m also p*ssed off enough to keep fighting. The people are being hoodwinked at every turn, and thanks, Anthony, for turning on the lights.

  2. RE: Many households in Germany are no longer able to pay their electricity bills. As a result, around half a million households are sitting in the dark.

    I want to zero in on this one item; however the other items seem to fit too. It seems that the radical environmental groups are pushing like crazy to move us to the stone age. The fact that 500,000 homes in Germany sit in the dark is proof of how crazy it has become.

    What next, tell us that there’s a “computer bit shortage”? Save the Bits recycle your bits now!!!

  3. Bob Diaz says:
    February 23, 2012 at 8:21 am

    RE: Many households in Germany are no longer able to pay their electricity bills. As a result, around half a million households are sitting in the dark.
    ….
    What next, tell us that there’s a “computer bit shortage”? Save the Bits recycle your bits now!!!

    Probably a good idea in keeping with the Green Philosophy… When I started in the industry they only gave us Zeros as they require less energy to store… Conservation is best you know…

    We don’t need no steenking windwills…!!!

  4. During the past decade, the European Union blazed a green trail with a series of laws mandating a low-carbon economy and promises to set an example for other parts of the world.
    It is a wonderful example. The prompt actions of The People’s Directorate in Brussels, coupled with the actions of the individual countries, has allowed the US and other countries to see the follies of pursuing Green Energy and Green Jobs, and the failure and graft with “carbon” trading, in time to stop before going too far. When those at the head of the line disappear over the edge of a cliff, sane people realize it’s not necessary to follow them down to see for themselves if the landing would be all that bad.

    Many households in Germany are no longer able to pay their electricity bills. As a result, around half a million households are sitting in the dark.
    The European Union is now down to Germany, and those indebted to Germany for keeping them from financial collapse, and the UK which hasn’t given up their currency thus is not completely melded into the EU and also isn’t indebted to Germany.

    And Germany now has many people who feel impoverished, feel that other countries have taken advantage of their Homeland and are stealing their wealth, can look back at their greatness from just a few decades ago and be angered as to how that legacy was taken from them… And there’s also those minority immigrants of a certain religion who many believe are wrecking their country and are there for nefarious purposes and a takeover from within (Muslims generally)…

    We all know such a situation has yet to end well.

  5. Re: the EU’s carbon tax on flights.
    The UK already has a huge tax imposed on airline passengers, the so-called Air Passenger Duty

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15769179

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/air-passenger-duty/8923504/Autumn-Statement-2011-Air-Passenger-Duty-rise-confirmed.html

    From the BBC link….“Air Passenger Duty plays an important part in tackling aviation’s significant impact on climate change,” said Richard Dyer of Friends of the Earth.

    We’re all going to have neighbours called Barney Rubble before long.

  6. Baa Humbug says:
    February 23, 2012 at 8:18 am
    “The EU has no chance against the likes of Russia China and the US”

    Are you sure?
    Who do you think develops your weapons?
    Greetings from Germany.

  7. “…in Germany … around half a million households are sitting in the dark”
    Incredible!!
    “Welcome to the 21st century. It’s gonna look a lot like the 19th.” (if the Green religionists have their way).

  8. I read the WSJ article and the graph jumped out at me. 3 of the last 4 IPCC reports resulted in an immediate drop in temperature : )

    Looks like AR5 will make it 4 out of 5.

  9. The EU is a disgrace. We fought two world wars to keep Europe free yet they insist on destroying their way-of-life and democracy all for a hoax called global warming/climate change.

    Don’t expect us to free you from the ecofascists Europe. We wasted good American and Canadian lives twice; there won’t be a third time. Rot in the green hell you’re concocting for yourselves.

  10. Green religion:

    “characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for, or violation of, the rights of others. It is defined in different ways, but can involve a lack of empathy or remorse, false emotions, selfishness, grandiosity or deceptiveness; it can also involve impulsiveness, irritability, aggression, or inability to perceive danger and protect one’s self.”

    Its parallels are remarkable with: Psychopathy.

  11. Gee… Russia covers about 12 time zones. And Canada has recently shown signs of impending sanity… Now if Canada, too, bans ‘overflight’… That means folks from Europe could fly to ALASKA and AFRICA… (and the Middle East / South Asia, honorary mention to South America with very long haul aircraft or refueling stops)

    Seems somehow appropriate to have the EU and Africa working more closely together, since soon the EU will be at the same level of wealth as Africa…

    Perhaps Russia and Canada can just put an “Air Pollution Tax” on any EU flights that are polluting their airspace… One that just happens to be set to the same value as the EU CO2 Tax Haul… After all, it is THEIR airspace that’s being “polluted”…

  12. The EU will defend its legislation through the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization and is “completely sure” its rules are in line with international law, including the ICAO’s principles, Valero-Ladron said. (CO2 flight tax)

    The UN wants this type of tax as well as a tax on financial transaction which, in the end, the UN will control. The UN must be stopped.

  13. All this nonsense so European royalty and The City of London can afford to keep all their bling and stolen land. Tsk. Tsk.

  14. What does it take to convince these morons that CO2 is good and climate is natural? They remind me of leeches; while they are still sucking they will never let go. It takes a pinch of salt or a dose of Dettol both of which kills the leech. Is deadly force the only thing that will stop them? Logic doesn’t do it.

  15. Where is the science in this report. What was the evidence presented by Richard Lindzen ?
    Where is the transcript of his public lecture ?

  16. The unintended consequences of political correctness. The EU again shooting itself in the foot. As if it didn’t have more serious problems–Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Hungary——-

  17. Once the bully is successfully challenged by one, all the others hanging on the outside find the mettle to say “NO” also. I hope Russia holds firm. And the Australians kick out Gillard. All it takes is one to start (okay, maybe two or three).

    Crowd logic. Wonderful, in this case.

  18. I am not a scientist, but I do like to look at the evidence from a wide range of sources.
    With due respect to Professor Lindzen, “if he is right” is the most important phrase in the text above. His key argument as presented in the talk is that comparing Earth’s radiation to space, as measured by ERBE and CERES satellites, with changes to Tropical Sea Surface Temperatures, shows that that there is a quick response to restore equilibrium as a result of negative feedback from water vapour driven by the ocean temperatures.

    This is related to his 2009 paper with Yong-Sang Choi. (LC09) This paper also compares this ‘observed’ result with a selection of climate models that all show the water vapour response to a warming atmosphere provides positive feedback, and so he claims the models exaggerate the warming effect on the Earth system resulting from CO2. The paper also deduces the Climate Sensitivity for a doubling of CO2 is about 0.5 of the ‘no feedback value’, or 0.7 after making allowances for a more global perspective of SST. The conclusion drawn by Richard Lindzen is that “unprecedented climate catastrophes are not on the horizon.”

    Given that this talk was given in February 2012, one might have expected that he would take the opportunity to counter the heavy criticism of his paper by Trenberth et al 2010 outlined at http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/01/lindzen-and-choi-unraveled/ 8.Jan 2010. The main points of which are if I have understood them correctly:

    1) The time intervals of SST warming and cooling selected in LC09 have endpoints that if they were more objectively chosen, the relationship claimed with the Top of Atmosphere radiation is not convincing.

    2) LC09 treats the Tropics as a closed system, whereas El Nino/Southern Oscillation cause major flows of energy between the Ocean and Atmosphere across the Tropics and Sub Tropics, with the complex interaction of evaporation, latent heat release, precipitation and heat redistribution by changing wind patterns, dwarfing the variability in the Top of Atmosphere fluxes.

    3) The models chosen for comparison with the ERBE TOA derived data do not show any model bias, and the models compute the relationship between TOA and SST using a variety of methods all of which show a positive feedback that is not derived from assumed sensitivity.

    4) The models considered are not complete Earth systems as they developed from more simple models for examining how the atmosphere responds to SST and each has its own range of included forcings whilst omitting others. Thus greenhouse gasses, aerosols, solar variation and volcano emissions are not fully represented in all the models. Therefore the models cannot be used as a fair point of comparison with real world TOA observation.

    It is precisely because getting models to replicate the entire Earth System is still incomplete, with various key areas not completely understood; ocean heat distribution, particularly at depth; aerosols reflection/absorption; cloud formation and their heat response according to altitude and type; that James Hansen used the warming of the Earth since the last glaciation to derive a climate sensitivity that should effectively include all these processes with the correct feedbacks whatever they turned out to be. His result yielded a positive feedback with a rise of 0.75C for each Watt of net forcing giving +3C rise for a doubling of CO2.

    A 2011 paper by Hansen & Sato published in Atmos. Chem. Phys. examines in detail the subject of planetary radiation balance, the forcings both negative and positive, including stratospheric aerosol cooling, solar variability, and ocean heat content. For the period from 2005 to 2010, a deep solar minimum, they conclude the Earth maintained a strong positive radiation balance of +0.5 W/Sq m, and that averaged over a full solar cycle it is 0.75W They also pointout that CO2 is the dominant forcing causing the planetary imbalance, and a target of CO2 ppm between 345 and 360 ppm is required to shed this excess heat. Today we are at 393 ppm and rising about 3ppm a year.

    It seems to me, that with 7 billion human beings to feed it is extremely foolish to continue on the current CO2 emission course, with a high risk of the global climate, this century, turning hostile beyond the ability of agriculture, ecosystems and ultimately modern civilisation to cope.

    If the wrong carbon fuel energy decisions are made by today’s political leaders, it is not carbon regulation wars that we should fear, but the regional, and possibly global “hot” warfare that will break out over food, water and habitable zones. Children born today may inherit a nightmare collapsing humanity. This is the event horizon we must try to avoid crossing.

Comments are closed.