Sunday Open Thread

I’m caught up in Mothers day duties as well as reviewing data for a new paper, so please talk quietly amongst yourselves and don’t make me come back here.

For those going to the Heartland ICCC7 in Chicago, I’ll be there and I propose a Tuesday evening informal meetup. Leave a comment if you are interested. – Anthony

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

81 Responses to Sunday Open Thread

  1. pwl says:

    At least one has the gumption to call Hansen on his crazy.

    “U.S. Govt Scientist vs. U.S. Govt Scientist: NOAA’s Hoerling turns on NASA’s Hansen: ‘Facts should, and do, matter’ — Hansen is ‘intent to instill fear rather than reason’ – Claims ‘patently false’”

    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/hoerling-to-hansen-facts-do-matter-to-some-people/

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    Happy Mother’s Day, Y’all!

  3. John from CA says:

    “and don’t make me come back here” <– Anthony is channeling the Kids Table at family gatherings?

    This caught my eye and deserves a read:

    Environmental Extremism:
    backgrounding:
    California’s ‘Fishy’ Water Problem
    http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000080107&play=1

    An area the size of the State of Rhode Island will not be planted this year in just one region of California due to the lack of water. Part of the issue relates to fresh water that’s being diverted by Court order to protect the Delta Smelt. The bigger issue relates to the lack of desalination plants.

    The Zetas And The Surfriders
    Extremism In Defense Of Environmentalism Can Be A Catastrophic Vice.

    http://hbfreshwater.com/uncategorized/the-zetas-and-the-surfriders

    excerpt:
    If the country has so hamstrung itself with regulatory process and tolerance for greens gaming the system that public agencies responsible for the water supply think that contending with the Zetas in Mexico is a more attractive option than contending with the Surfrider Foundation in California, are we facing an environmental crisis of existential proportions — or a governance crisis of existential proportions?

  4. Laurie says:

    http://www.justice.gov/usao/pam/news/2012/Grimes_01_31_2012.htm
    Thought this was interesting. Got to both NIH and NSF but looks like he’s going to pay for it.

    Thanks, E.M.Smith :) My daughters were the biggest challenge in my life and the greatest satisfaction. They grew up to be women I’m proud to call my friends.

  5. DirkH says:

    Kirk Sorensen 2 h Molten Salt Reactor, Thorium, reposting this here because it’s the best video about it I’ve seen so far. Near the end, the ongoing attempts of the Chinese to build a LFTR are mentioned.

  6. michaeljmcfadden says:

    Anthony wrote, ” please talk quietly amongst yourselves and don’t make me come back here.”

    ::taking frog out of pocket and letting it hop down the aisle…::

    ;>
    MJM

  7. tallbloke says:

    Solar variation has a much stronger effect on climate than prominent warmists and prominent commenters on prominent climate sites would have you believe.

  8. Ally E. says:

    Thanks, pwl.

    “Those who continue to talk in certain terms of how local weather extremes are the result of human climate change are failing to heed all the available evidence.”

    So true.

    I’m surprised that anyone listens to the alarmists at all any more. I’m beginning to wonder if it’s only the media that believes in CAGW (we know the politicians don’t, they’re just using that to control the people).

    I tell you, the people are ready the world over for the media to start investigating the con and the fraud behind the scaremongering. You’d think they’d notice sales of newspapers dropping off. You’d think they’d want to deliver the sort of news people will get excited about.

    We’ve had the excitement of “scare”, it doesn’t excite anymore, in fact it’s getting downright boring. Can we now please have the excitement of “exposure”, discovery of all the facts, and a good sprinkling of court cases to juice up the “Now we’ve got to put things right!” message.

  9. mfo says:

    From Christopher Booker’s column:-

    “Someone whom I was delighted to meet again in Australia was Professor Ian Plimer, a prominent “climate sceptic”, who is one of Abbott’s advisers (Australian opposition leader). In his latest entertaining book, How To Get Expelled From School (by asking the teachers 101 awkward scientific questions about their belief in global warming), Plimer cites a vivid illustration of how great is the threat posed to the planet by man-made CO2.

    “If one imagines a length of the Earth’s atmosphere one kilometre long, 780 metres of this are made up of nitrogen, 210 are oxygen and 10 metres are water vapour (the largest greenhouse gas). Just 0.38 of a metre is carbon dioxide, to which human emissions contribute one millimetre. Australia’s share of this is 0.015 of a millimetre, the breadth of a human hair………”

  10. gerrydorrian66 says:

    Agree with everything Christopher Booker says, he’s a one-man Campaign for Real Science.

    Something though that people in the UK don’t say about the drought. Over and above all the leakage in the water systems, our immigration controls here are so lax that we don’t know what the population of our own country is because we don’t know the true number of illegal immigrants. No wonder the water’s running out!

  11. vukcevic says:

    There was a ‘certain workshop’ held this week in Bern, Switzerland. I have no idea what went on there, but do sincerely hope that the participants were kinder to each other than those on a display in the Bern cathedral.
    http://www.sacred-destinations.com/switzerland/images/bern/munster/resized/d80_a_174.jpg

  12. Eric Simpson says:

    Quotes, A War Against Humanity:
    “The planet is about to break out with fever, indeed it may already have, and we [humans] are the disease. We should be at war with ourselves and our lifestyles.” –Thomas Lovejoy, Smithsonian Institution
    “The only real good technology is no technology at all. ” -John Shuttleworth, Mother Earth News
    “An ecocatastrophe is taking place on earth…..discipline, prohibition, enforcement and oppression are the only solution. [And those most responsible should] be sent to the mountains for re-education in eco-gulags… The sole glimmer of hope lies in a centralised government and the tireless control of citizens.” — Pentti Linkila, Finnish Ecologist
    “It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves.” — George Monbiot, British Ecojournalist

    “Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” – Neol Brown (1989), ex UN Environment Program Director

  13. Bruce Findlay says:

    The comments of James Hansen directed to President Obama were the subject of several comments in Slashdot.org, which is a blog for people interested in computing. Slashdot is usually quite skeptical, but I don’t think they have benefited from the work on this website. I was especially chagrined to read the comments, which assume that the propositiion that AGW is causing climate dislocations has been established. Here are the materials to which I refer.

    http://politics.slashdot.org/story/12/05/12/0451228/nasas-hansen-calls-out-obama-on-climate-change

    I would be interested in any suggestions as to how to respond to this.

  14. stan stendera says:

    Us skeptics are frequently accused of not caring about Nature. A false accusation of course. I recommend that all WUWT readers go to the Decorah Eagle bird cam and watch our National Bird raise their family of three eaglets. You will not be sorry.

  15. Otter says:

    tallbloke says:
    May 13, 2012 at 2:11 pm
    Solar variation has a much stronger effect on climate than prominent warmists and prominent commenters on prominent climate sites would have you believe.

    I’ll grant you the prominent warmists, but outside of skeptical sites, I am not really aware of any Other ‘prominent’ climate sites, although I have heard faints cries of anguish from such places as ‘real’climate…

  16. Bob Diaz says:

    I’m excited about the upcoming solar eclipse on Sunday, May 20.

    http://www.nature.nps.gov/features/eclipse/wheretoview.cfm

    I just wonder is anyone will blame the solar eclipse on increasing CO2 levels. :-))

  17. Myrrh says:

    I really would like an answer to this question: Why isn’t the heat direct from the Sun included in the AGW energy budget?

    Why is it missing, why has no one noticed it is missing?

    Water, is a transparent medium for visible light. Transparent means that visible light is not absorbed. It is not absorbed but transmitted through. Transmitted through because it is not absorbed.

    Transmitted through – which is what AGW energy budget cartoon says visible light is in the atmosphere – but – the atmosphere is not transparent to visible light in the real world, the electrons of the molecules of oxygen and nitrogen absorb visible light, and bounce it back out – blue being more energetic gets bounced around more, hence our blue sky.

    Visible light works on the electronic transition scale, not molecular vibrational.

    Visible light is tiny. The electrons of the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen bounce it around and so it isn’t powerful enough to bounce around the molecules., and it’s pretty much useless even when captured in photovoltaic cells to make electricity…

    But, water is really transparent to visible light, the electrons of the molecules of water do not absorb visible light, but transmit it through without being absorbed. Transmitted is a technical term in optics. And, visible light does not have the power – as from the Sun – don’t confuse yourself with lasers here, the Sun isn’t a laser, visible light does not have the power to move the whole molecule of water into vibration which is what it takes to heat it up. So, it doesn’t heat the oceans.

    But – where is the missing heat in the energy budget? Why have you taken out the real heat direct from the Sun?

    Thermal infrared does have the power to heat water, it moves the molecules into vibrational states. Just as when you rub your hands together the mechanical energy you are using moves the molecules in your skin into vibrational states, and heats the skin up. visible light from the Sun can’t do this – it doesn’t heat matter, heat direct from the Sun can and does.

    The pavement gets hot because the invisible heat, thermal infrared, direct from the Sun heats it up. Why isn’t it in your energy budget? Because you’ve called it ‘backradiation’?

    The heat we feel direct from the Sun is the actual Sun’s heat that is radiating out to us, the invisible thermal infrared. Just as the heat you feel from a fire or from a hot pavement is actual heat radiating out to us.

    That’s not visible light or uv or near infrared radiating out from a hot pavement, but thermal infrared, longwave. Why isn’t this direct heat from the Sun in the energy budget?

    I find it astonishing that you don’t use this in your arguments with Hansen and Mann and Trenberth…

  18. Craig Moore says:

    michaeljmcfadden, I don’t think Mae West would confuse having a jumpy frog in your pocket in lieu of a banana.

    Now if Anthony will just turn out the lights, close the door, and walk away the party can begin!

  19. DirkH says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    May 13, 2012 at 3:27 pm
    “Water has memory?”

    Nice pictures; the guy talks pretty esoteric BS though. He should have repeated the experiments in the dark.

    Dr Gerald Pollack. 2008
    Photonic energy induces charge separation in water; leading to layer formation near surfaces. This is a much more prominent effect than heating the water by photons.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo

  20. u.k.(us) says:

    The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper (circulation of 422,335), deposited its daily dose of bad news upon my driveway apron again this morning (Sunday).
    The fact it was Mother’s Day didn’t rate a mention till page 24a (titled “commentary” with two articles under the heading “other views”).
    The first article was headlined “Let moms just enjoy their special day”, the second was “Today’s GOP: You can’t reason with crazy”.

    The second article showed the Heartland billboard, and ended with this:
    “Crazy can’t be reasoned with. Only defeated”.

    Here’s the link:
    http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/12471883-452/todays-gop-you-cant-reason-with-crazy.html

  21. F. Ross says:

    The new Calvinists:
    It seems to me that, even if one could build a completely carbon neutral perpetual motion machine from, say, the energy of “empty” space, there would be a greenie wienie filing a lawsuit to halt the deployemnt and utilization of it.

  22. Verity Jones says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    May 13, 2012 at 3:27 pm
    Water has memory?
    That’s quite amazing. None of this homeopathy ‘memory’ which is what I confess I was expecting. There seems to be quire a lot about water that has been overlooked. After coming across the video posted here: http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/shedding-new-light-on-clouds/ I woud even venture we have fundamentally overlooked properties that have real, practical importance.

  23. nutso fasst says:

    The New Yorker has a scary ‘Annals of Science’ article about geoengineering titled ‘The Climate Fixers’ by Michael Specter. It reads almost like a reincarnation of Al Gore’s old tipping-point hyperbole. Read it at http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/05/14/120514fa_fact_specter.

    I’m hoping someone scientifically better-credentialed than I am will send a response. They do print good criticisms. Send to themail@newyorker.com and include name, address, and daytime phone.

  24. Richdo says:

    @stan stendera
    Thanks for the tip Stan. The Eaglets are awsome!
    Rich

  25. Jim Petrie says:

    To Dirk H
    A great video on thorium reactors. I would like to forward it to several of my friends. Could you
    send me a link by email? Or could one of the WUWT team do this?
    All the best.
    Jim Petrie
    (If I can get the link there is no need to post the comment!)

  26. ghl says:

    re:Booker quoting Plimer
    “Just 0.38 of a metre is carbon dioxide, to which human emissions contribute one millimetre. Australia’s share of this is 0.015 of a millimetre, the breadth of a human hair………”
    In 1 km, 1mm is 1 ppm, so 380 ppm is 380mm.
    However, human emissions (according to IPCC) are 3% of all emissions, if this is reflected in atmospheric composition, then human emissions contribute eleven millimetre. Australia’s share of this is 0.17 of a millimetre
    The whole world is innumerate.

  27. Myrrh says:

    And they’ve missed out the whole of the Water Cycle..

    The “plus 33°C greenhouse gas warming from minus 18°C to 15°C” is a sleight of hand. It doesn’t exist. And that’s why no explanation is ever given of how these greenhouse gases raise the Earth’s temperature from minus 18 to plus 15…

    The -18°C comes from earth without any atmosphere at all, but, the 15°C comes from the Water Cycle cooling the earth with atmosphere of mainly nitrogen and oxygen down 52°C from the 67%deg;C it would be without the greenhouse cooling effect of water vapour.

    Water cools the Earth by evaporation, water vapour lighter than air rises and, with its high heat capacity and its physical nature which readily absorbs heat takes this heat up into the colder heights where it releases it as it condenses back into water, coming down as rain. Carbon dioxide is fully part of this cooling cycle, all rain is carbonic acid (and fog etc.).

    There is no Greenhouse Effect.

    It’s an illusion created by taking the Water Cycle out of the process.

  28. DirkH says:

    Gerald Pollock continues to research the properties of water and its structure. Here is an interview from 2010 where he talks in length about structured water in the human body and whether or not the structure of water that one ingests might be preserved, and how to structure the water in your body (3 micron IR works best he says). He started researching these properties of water because he was interested in finding out how muscles work.

  29. Timothy Can says:

    Something from Australia and perhaps relevant to the current forum is today’s “impact statement” from the climate commission. Media reactions have been predictable
    Heatwaves, bushfires predicted to hammer NSW -ABC
    Climate Change to Bring Heat, Bushfires to NSW -BRW
    NSW is getting hotter: climate report -SBS
    None of the guardians of the public record has made the slightest effort to look into the data that allegedly supports the report. I spent maybe 30 minutes looking at the source of the data for one particularly scary graphic, Fig.3. This purports to show the trend rainfall over NSW.
    What it actually shows is the difference between rainfall in two years, 1970 and 2010. Why pick those years? The source is the BoM. Try changing the period selector. See which map has the least green on it. The one from 1970 to present.
    Attempting to judge a trend from two points is hazardous (especially when the points are chosen by someone else). If forced to do so, you maximize the chance of picking up the trend by choosing the points maximally far apart. Doesn’t look so scary, does it?
    A better way is to look at the whole time series. Here are the NSW rainfall anomalies with a 5 year smoothing line. This is just my qualitative take on the data, but it is my impression as a statistician that there is no significant downward trend in NSW annual rainfall over that period.
    I don’t believe that the presentation of data in that impact statement meets basic levels of scientific integrity.

  30. DirkH says:

    Jim Petrie says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm
    “To Dirk H
    A great video on thorium reactors. I would like to forward it to several of my friends. Could you
    send me a link by email? Or could one of the WUWT team do this?”

    Right-click on the video and use the “Copy URL” menu item; or “watch on youtube” which should open up a new browser window with the URL. Or replace the spaces in the following with dots:
    www youtube com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=P9M__yYbsZ4

  31. scott says:

    Stan Stendara says

    “Us skeptics are frequently accused of not caring about Nature. A false accusation of course. I recommend that all WUWT readers go to the Decorah Eagle bird cam and watch our National Bird raise their family of three eaglets. You will not be sorry.”

    We’ve had bald eagles at our cabin for years and it’s always joy to see them. Its not unusual to see them within 50 feet and they won’t move. I’m a skeptic and when I look back at what I’ve done for nature with my own money I wonder if the warmists can say the same. I spent a weekend rebuilding a washed out beaver dam to restore wetland habitat, have they done that? I’ve planted countless oak trees and dozens of apple trees, have they done that? I’ve spend tens of thousands of $$$s on fishing/hunting licenses and fishing/hunting taxes, have they done that? I’ve cleared out paths of overgrown tag alders by hand that can be seen by satellite and are now wildlife hotspots, have they done that? I brought tons of food to the woods (apples, acrorns corn) each fall for animals to eat … without hunting over it .. have they done that? I’ve educated cub scouts for a decade to respect nature, have they done that? I’ve gotten zero accolades for all I’ve done for nature, all on my own dime, and will not stop, if the warmists got zero accolades for their so-called government paid “work” how long could they go? Not very long imo.

  32. DirkH says:

    Jim Petrie says:
    “To Dirk H
    A great video on thorium reactors. I would like to forward it to several of my friends. Could you
    send me a link by email? Or could one of the WUWT team do this?”

    Right-click on the video, use “Copy URL to clipboard”.

  33. Dr. Dave says:

    The link below is to a PDF file of a very good primer on energy production and use in the US. It’s a very enlightening read and I strongly recommend it. In this political season it would be wise for the electorate to ignore the distractions (e.g. gay marriage, a fabricated “war on women”) and educate themselves about energy in this country. The future of our energy shall define the future of our country.

    http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/Hard-Facts-Final.pdf

  34. Myrrh says:

    http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/18828-Havel-Quote-It-pretends-to-pretend-nothing..html

    Havel Quote: “It pretends to pretend nothing.”

    “The post-totalitarian system touches people at every step, but it does so with its ideological gloves on. This is why life in the system is so thoroughly permeated with hypocrisy and lies: government by bureaucracy is called popular government; the working class is enslaved in the name of the working class; the complete degradation of the individual is presented as his ultimate liberation; depriving people of information is called making it available; the use of power to manipulate is called the public control of power, and the arbitrary abuse of power is called observing the legal code; the repression of culture is called its development; the expansion of imperial influence is presented as support for the oppressed; the lack of free expression becomes the highest form of freedom; farcical elections become the highest form of democracy; banning independent thought becomes the most scientific of world views; military occupation becomes fraternal assistance. Because the regime is captive to its own lies, it must falsify everything. It falsifies the past. It falsifies the present, and it falsifies the future. It falsifies statistics. It pretends not to possess an omnipotent and unprincipled police apparatus. It pretends to respect human rights. It pretends to persecute no one. It pretends to fear nothing. It pretends to pretend nothing.”

  35. timetochooseagain says:

    Maybe you guys can help me figure something out. I identified twenty examples of positive and negative ENSO events that qualified as “exceptional” over the period 1895-2010 (I recently tried updated this with 2011 data, it didn’t change the basic probably I encountered, but the El Nino temperature chart was a little different) defined based on their magnitude relative to ENSO conditions in their roughly contemporary time period. I did this to create composite maps of weather conditions in the US associated with ENSO events. The results for temperatures:

    El Nino:
    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEIElNinoTemp.png

    La Nina:
    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEILaNinaTemp.png

    So you might notice that there is considerably amount of the US (especially the North-Central US) that is above average in temperature during either kind of ENSO event. In fact, I tried the “most neutral” years recently, since I had assumed that those were cool in those places. Nope, that was just generally above average, but especially in the Northeast, but also including much of the same areas. So my question is: What exactly is it that is associated with below average weather in those locations and why does ENSO seem to have so little influence?

  36. pat says:

    Timothy Can -
    don’t know if your report is the same one referenced here:

    14 May: Australian Daily Telegraph: Gemma Jones: Climate commissioner Professor Tim Flannery said temperatures on rise in Sydney’s west
    The commission said western suburbs were suffering from “an urban island heat effect” with concrete, buildings and asphalt raising temperatures by 1C to 2C…
    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/climate-commissioner-professor-tim-flannery-said-temperatures-on-rise-in-sydneys-west/story-e6freuy9-1226354331959

  37. pat says:

    Anthony,

    Is there any way a sceptic/sceptics could challenge the use of “climate change” which is being substituted for Anthropogenic Global Warming?

    Perhaps a guest contributor could do a thread on WUWT called “Climate Change is NOT AGW” or similar. it is becoming more and more frustrating that students, including young children, are being taught that “climate change” is something catastrophic. it is soooo wrong and it needs to be stopped.

    Rarely turn on Discovery Channel but went there last nite to see a program on the Koala Hospital in New South Wales, but had to turn it off after 20 minutes when it stated “climate change” was the biggest threat to the koala’s future.

  38. jorgekafkazar says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites says: “Water has memory?”

    New Age pseudoscientific drivel.

  39. philincalifornia says:

    stan stendera says:
    May 13, 2012 at 3:01 pm
    Us skeptics are frequently accused of not caring about Nature. A false accusation of course.
    =============================

    ….. when in actual fact we most probably care way more about nature, which is why we speak up against fake-environmentalism – (nature not capitalized because these days, although I’ve published several papers there, I do NOT care about, or even read the former journal, now rag, Nature).

    Thanks for the link.

  40. pat says:

    oops, should have said the Koala program was on NatGeo, not Discovery, which i also rarely watch these days.

  41. Otter

    but outside of skeptical sites, I am not really aware of any Other ‘prominent’ climate sites,

    I think you’d be surprised then at how many are thus—including one who I admire very, very much.

  42. pat says:

    unintended or intended?

    13 May: Financial Times: Joshua Chaffin: Carbon trading: Emissions law bears down on small operators
    United Airlines, Luft­hansa, and Qatar Airways, among others, have complained that this law – which forces them to pay for their carbon emissions on all flights that take off or land in Europe – will push up costs, saddle them with regulation and possibly ignite a trade war.
    Yet the majors can count themselves lucky. Private aircraft owners and small operators are set to bear a much heavier burden under the law.
    “For companies in the business aviation industry, this is going to make things much more expensive,” says Sue Barham, a partner specialising in aviation at Holman Fenwick Willan, the law firm…
    In an effort to soften the blow for large carriers, the commission has said that it will supply about 85 per cent of their necessary permits free next year…
    But private operators will receive only 4 per cent of their permits free, forcing them to buy the remainder through auctions or on the open market – a staggering proportion by comparison…
    Mr Gamba estimates that 15-20 of his group’s members would be forced to pay about €4m between them next April, when the first bill for emissions is due.
    The reason for the difference is the formula the commission uses to award permits. It measures an aircraft’s passenger or cargo weight against miles flown. On that basis, a small aeroplane with three passengers ranks far worse than a big one with hundreds…
    Private operators also face a disproportionate blow when it comes to the administrative work necessary to comply with the law. They are subjected to many of the same reporting requirements as large carriers, yet they may have a fraction of the staff.
    “It’s a nightmare,” says Martina Becher of TAG Aviation, a Swiss private jet company that operates 120 aircraft.
    The EU’s bureaucracy does not make it any easier. Ms Becher must submit flight data to authorities in the UK, France and Germany – each of which demands the data in a different format…
    On the bright side, carbon permits are trading at near record lows, which should ease compliance costs for all carriers. Private carriers can also pass on costs to deep-pocketed customers…
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/52ded076-92d5-11e1-b6e2-00144feab49a.html#axzz1unpgK8Pr

    ——————————————————————————–

  43. Smokey says:

    Amino,

    Otter wrote, “…outside of skeptical sites…”. The way I read it, alarmist blogs are not nearly as prominent. Agree with you otherwise.☺

  44. The Keystone Garter says:

    Made progress in using peat moss to sequester wood. An idea would be to cut down trees or tree farms or GMO (fast growing) tree farms, near a peat bog. Find a nearby ground depression, ideally a deep aspect ratio. Wait for lots of rain, pump, I’ve seen a $1.25M farm pump on the Prairie Farm Report used to drain bogs, some excess water, onto the trees. Hopefully is phenolic rich water. Phenolics being molecular strings of the peat bog that prevent decomposition when wet by stymying the phenol oxidase enzyme. In addition, strips of the top layer of peat bogs, the acrotelm, can be sustainably harvested. Pile enough acrotelm on until you have a peat bog. If it works, a median rough calculation is 250GT of carbon sequestered as wood, or about 25 yrs of emissions, 40% of existing carbon in fuscum peat bogs.
    It might not work because:
    1) Acrotelm is aereated. If it doesn’t compress fast or if there are air-pockets in the mix, the wood will decay.
    2) Wood might float.
    3) Wood might emit too much methane. Some of the wood will decay, but maybe less than 20%.
    4) Wood might not soak up the phenol-rich water.

    A water-well experiment might suffice. Most peat bogs flow downhill into ocean, so hard to find deep terrain upstream (presumably) nearby. I can start the experiments but can’t make measurements by myself. Could use peat itself, but only renews at 1mm/yr as opposed to 1cm/yr acrotelm. And the harvested peat (catotelm), with acrotelm replaced, will transfer water less efficiently; L.Rochefort thinks this is because of hysteresis (shape of remaining peat surface doesn’t match acrotelm after a middle chunk of peat is removed). Oil sands fund Price’s fen restoration research, they could fund peat afforestation. Russia and Canada, and Scandinavia, and Alaska need a carbon tax/cap. Finland needs to stop burning peat.

  45. pat says:

    14 May: UK Independent: Steve Connor: Drink your milk: waste is equal to gas emissions from 20,000 cars
    Scientists have calculated that the 360,000 tonnes of waste milk that is poured down British drains each year creates greenhouse gases equivalent to 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide, which is about the same as that emitted in a year by 20,000 cars…
    Dr David Reay at Edinburgh University, who led the study on nitrous oxide published in the journal Nature Climate Change, said: “Nitrous oxide is the major greenhouse gas from agriculture. It stands out as the gas you can really reduce in terms of emissions if you can cut down on agricultural waste and increase agricultural efficiency. Eating less meat and wasting less food can play a big part in helping to keep a lid on greenhouse gas emissions as the world’s population increases.”…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/drink-your-milk-waste-is-equal-to-gas-emissions-from-20000-cars-7743521.html

  46. Ric Werme says:

    Myrrh says:
    May 13, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    But, water is really transparent to visible light, the electrons of the molecules of water do not absorb visible light, but transmit it through without being absorbed. Transmitted is a technical term in optics. And, visible light does not have the power – as from the Sun – don’t confuse yourself with lasers here, the Sun isn’t a laser, visible light does not have the power to move the whole molecule of water into vibration which is what it takes to heat it up. So, it doesn’t heat the oceans.

    Of course it does. One weather-related example that comes to mind is the effect of Saharan dust on Cape Verde hurricanes – the dust absorbs sunlight and heats the middle atomosphere. The reduced sunlight at the surface doesn’t heat the sea surface as much, so the surface temperature is depressed. Together – less hurricane activity.

    Water is not completely transparent. If it were, the seafloor would be as bright as day. What happens when photons are absorbed? Their energy is converted to heat. (Or if it’s absorbed by photosynthetic algae, it may be converted to chemical energy.) Ultimately, energy usually gets turned into heat.

    I find it astonishing that you don’t use this in your arguments with Hansen and Mann and Trenberth…

    I find it astonishing this claim that visible light doesn’t have energy still gets posted here. Excuse while I go into a soundproof room and scream. Which will most serve to heat up the soundproofing.

    If you do try using this in a Q & A with Mann someday (I don’t think Trenberth is on the tour schedule), please don’t say you got this idea from WUWT.

  47. Eric Webb says:

    I’m watching the AAO, and noticed that it had some correlation with our AO oscillation the following winter. Right now, it’s about to negative, and the JAMSTEC and CFS both predict it to stay negative through the remainder of their winter. In cold PDO’s with an el nino there seems to be some kind of connection between the two. Both models currently show higher pressures developing over the northern latitudes this winter, which would indicate,a negative AO and NAO, which may help to explain the cold predictions these models are making this winter.

  48. stan stendera says:

    @Scott

    You put me and my poor little birdfeeders to shame. Thank you for your service!!! A pharse I usually on;y use for serving or retired Military.

  49. Gail Combs says:

    DirkH says:
    May 13, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    Kirk Sorensen 2 h Molten Salt Reactor, Thorium,….
    __________________________
    Thank you Dirk, I just finished watching it and it was great. It answered a lot of my questions.

  50. ferd berple says:

    Verity Jones says:
    May 13, 2012 at 4:46 pm
    There seems to be quire a lot about water that has been overlooked.
    =======
    Great video. Why does water vapor clump up into clouds, with very high humidity, while right next to the cloud is an area of low humidity? Why does climate science and the IPCC say that clouds are not well understood, but we are confident they play only a small role in climate? How can you be sure something you don’t understand is not important? Could it be that climate science simply assumes that only things that are well understood are important?

    Doesn’t the IPCC also say the reason that we know CO2 is driving the climate is that science has not found any other cause to explain the warming 1980-2000. Could it be that we have fundamentally misunderstood the nature of water? It appears we have. Simple water is not so simple.

  51. jorgekafkazar

    The pictures are drivel? Or the man’s hypothesis at the end of the video?

  52. old44 says:

    In this Tim Flannery article it is claimed the UHI effect on Western Sydney is 1C-2C, I thought the IPCC only allowed 0.6C a discrepancy of 0.4C-1.4C wiping out a centuries worth of global temperature increase. Would someone like to check this out.

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/climate-commissioner-professor-tim-flannery-said-temperatures-on-rise-in-sydneys-west/story-e6freuy9-1226354331959

  53. Did you know a voice produces these kinds of patterns?

  54. Manfred says:

    Anybody heard anything from the Monckton inquiry ?

  55. Smokey

    You know, I wasn’t clear on exactly what he meant. But I think I caught part of what he was saying, that well known global warming ‘skeptics’ don’t question the sun’s influence on earth’s climate, or at least they don’t think it has a significant effect. But there is a very well known skeptic who says the sun doesn’t have a great effect on earth’s climate. If I was to mention his name everyone would recognize it. And he is someone I admire very much.

  56. Gail Combs says:

    Jim Petrie says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm
    I was going to post the link I tracked down with my last comment. I guess I should have.
    LFTR in 5 Minutes – THORIUM REMIX 2011 | torij torija torio トリウム

    It really was a good video wasn’t it. I read a few comments and none that I read seemed to “get it” Even though Kirk explained the difference between the two Plutonium isotopes and there uses in some detail, some…. person was whinging about producing weapons grade plutonium. (Insert roll of eyes)

  57. Kevin Kilty says:

    timetochooseagain says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:51 pm
    … I did this to create composite maps of weather conditions in the US associated with ENSO events. The results for temperatures:

    El Nino:
    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEIElNinoTemp.png

    La Nina:
    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEILaNinaTemp.png

    So you might notice that there is considerably amount of the US (especially the North-Central US) that is above average in temperature during either kind of ENSO event. In fact, I tried the “most neutral” years recently, since I had assumed that those were cool in those places. Nope, that was just generally above average, but especially in the Northeast, but also including much of the same areas. So my question is: What exactly is it that is associated with below average weather in those locations and why does ENSO seem to have so little influence?

    These are interesting plots. Your explanation is not entirely clear to me, though. These are temperature anomalies relative to what? And, you seem to say that in the north-central U.S. the temperature is always above normal, which suggests that the comparisons are not made against the normal per locality. The maps show anomalies relative to a U.S. average or something?

    The temperature record since 1890s is, overall, a positive trend, so you could be mapping the trend here and the impact of El Nino/ La Nina is overwhelmed by this signal. Detrend the data first; did you do that? What about other parameters, like precipitation?

  58. gregole says:

    http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/power-hour-with-alex-epstein/id465769847

    There’s a new book out by Robert Zubrin; “Merchants of Despair“.

    The link is to an interview with the author. I think a lot of the readers of this blog might be interested in this book.

    * * * * * * * * * * *
    Dr. Dave says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:34 pm

    “The link below is to a PDF file of a very good primer on energy production and use in the US. It’s a very enlightening read and I strongly recommend it.”

    Excellent educational report.

  59. Gail Combs says:

    F. Ross says:
    May 13, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    The new Calvinists:…
    ________________________
    The New Calvinism: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1884779_1884782_1884760,00.html

    I consider them modern day Luddites intent on smashing machinery and technology so that we may return to the deep-eco dream of a Stone Age agrarian socialist culture. Never mind that it means a return to slavery (or death) for most of the human population.

  60. Gail Combs says:

    stan stendera says:
    May 13, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    @Scott

    You put me and my poor little birdfeeders to shame. Thank you for your service!!!
    ____________________________
    I will second that.

    As a caver/climber/horseman I hate to think of the tons of trash I have hauled out of the woods over the years. My husband and I are still picking up and disposing of other peoples trash. Collected another garbage bag full this weekend.

    I think most here on WUWT are real environmentalists in some fashion or other.

  61. Gail Combs says:

    Gail Combs says:
    May 13, 2012 at 7:43 pm

    Jim Petrie says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm
    I was going to post the link I tracked down with my last comment…..
    _______
    Darn it! When I try to embed a video link it does not work and this time when I wanted the URL it does. Gremlins, there are gremlins in this here maachine, I say.

    add http:// to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo

  62. ferd berple says:

    DirkH says:
    May 13, 2012 at 4:24 pm
    Dr Gerald Pollack. 2008
    Photonic energy induces charge separation in water; leading to layer formation near surfaces. This is a much more prominent effect than heating the water by photons.
    ==============
    This is a fascinating re-discovery of science lost for the past 50 years. The conversion of normal water into ordered/structured water at surface boundaries due to light energy. If you every wondered how like charged particles can attract to assemble macroscopic objects, this provides the explanation.

  63. Khwarizmi says:

    Re: -LOD
    Is it possible/plausible that wind-driven changes to the rate at which the ocean gyres spin could be responsible for slight variations in the Length of Day?

  64. timetochooseagain says:

    Kevin Kilty-
    “These are temperature anomalies relative to what?”

    These plots were constructed here:

    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/usclimdivs/

    I selected to have the anomalies be relative to the 1895-2000 mean. Ideally, I would have liked to set them to the 1895-2010 mean but there was no option for using the mean of the entire period.

    “And, you seem to say that in the north-central U.S. the temperature is always above normal, which suggests that the comparisons are not made against the normal per locality. The maps show anomalies relative to a U.S. average or something?”

    Not always just during the twenty positive ENSO years ranked highest when normalized with respect to changing means and variances and the twenty negative ENSO years rank lowest in the same manner. So during other years, the means are presumably below average.

    “The temperature record since 1890s is, overall, a positive trend, so you could be mapping the trend here and the impact of El Nino/ La Nina is overwhelmed by this signal. Detrend the data first; did you do that?”\

    I don’t think that should be necessary. The years for both positive ENSO events and negative are distributed pretty evenly throughout the time period 1895-2010:

    in chronological order, negative years:

    1898
    1909
    1910
    1916
    1921
    1933
    1938
    1942
    1945
    1950
    1955
    1956
    1964
    1971
    1975
    1984
    1988
    1989
    1999
    2000

    Positive years:

    1896
    1900
    1905
    1914
    1919
    1930
    1940
    1941
    1948
    1953
    1957
    1958
    1965
    1969
    1972
    1977
    1982
    1987
    1997
    2002

    Any long term trend should generally be averaged out.

    “What about other parameters, like precipitation?”

    I did precipitation too, it’s just not nearly as interesting, or confusing, but it did post-dict the Texas Drought:

    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEIElNinoPrecip.png

    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEILaNinaPrecip.png

  65. timetochooseagain says:

    Oh, and I am fairly certain that they are anomalies relative to the local means.

  66. jorgekafkazar says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites asks: The pictures are drivel? Or the man’s hypothesis at the end of the video?

    Water has memory. The video. The pictures. The hypothesis. In toto.

  67. F. Ross says:

    @Gail Combs says:
    May 13, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    Interesting links; and yes your eco/Luddite information probably comes closer to my intent.

    Thanks

  68. tango says:

    The latest on Tim Flannery,s alarmist warnings he has made a statement in sydney harbour today 5/14/2012 that we will all fry next summer, more violence in the streets , higher deaths in sydney we are all doomed

  69. Myrrh says:

    waste-is-equal-to-gas-emissions-from-20000-cars-7743521.html

    Ric Werme says:
    May 13, 2012 at 6:55 pm
    I find it astonishing this claim that visible light doesn’t have energy still gets posted here. Excuse while I go into a soundproof room and scream. Which will most serve to heat up the soundproofing.

    You’re already in a soundproof room, scream as much as you like no one can hear you, your atmosphere is empty space and thus no sound can travel in it..

    Shortwave cannot heat land and oceans. But, the real puzzling thing about the insane fisics created to support AGW of shortwave in longwave out is – why have you excluded the real heat direct from the Sun?

    Are you aliens from an alternative reality pushing your own world’s fisics?

    You take the real heat from the Sun out and then give its properties to shortwave which is light not heat.

    Thermal infrared, heat, the thermal energy of the Sun on the move to direct to the Earth’s surface which we really do feel as heat because we feel it heating us up is missing from your comic cartoon energy budget!

    Hey, wake up or get real or something. What have you done with it? Why don’t you include it? How can you claim this is based on real science when you don’t even realise what ludicrous nonsense you’re spouting?

    I do hope the padding around you is soft..

  70. King of Cool says:

    Timothy Can says:
    May 13, 2012 at 5:30 pm
    Something from Australia and perhaps relevant to the current forum is today’s “impact statement” from the climate commission. Media reactions have been predictable…

    Good one Timothy Can. Even using the 1960-present rainfall trend (which is where they start their temp trend) doesn’t look scary either. I guess 1970 is a better cherry pick for rainfall?

    I note that they say that “most human-caused carbon dioxide emissions have occurred since 1950”. I guess this conveniently explains why there was a pronounced decrease of temperature between 1940 and 1950 during and after WW2. I guess we didn’t measure CO2 emissions then? But I would have thought that CO2 emissions would have been high during this period and suddenly did not increase in 1950. But I suppose there will be an answer – lag or something, they always seems to come up with a reason to explain the anomalies.

  71. Kelvin Vaughan says:

    ghl says:

    May 13, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    The whole world is innumerate.

    That’s a coincidence, so am I!

  72. Jessie says:

    Hi Anthony,
    I am glad you are caught up with Mothers Day duties. No doubt helping the little Watt-lets prepare all sorts of secret early morning culinary extravagances. and packaging of handmade items.
    And well deserved Mrs Watts.
    Hope the day was fantastic.

  73. Ally E. says:

    michaeljmcfadden says:

    May 13, 2012 at 2:11 pm

    Anthony wrote, ” please talk quietly amongst yourselves and don’t make me come back here.”

    ::taking frog out of pocket and letting it hop down the aisle…::

    ;>
    MJM

    *

    Dang! Am I too late to ask if this is a GREEN frog? :)

  74. Gail Combs says:

    Ally E. says:
    May 14, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    michaeljmcfadden says:

    May 13, 2012 at 2:11 pm
    Dang! Am I too late to ask if this is a GREEN frog?
    ____________________________
    OH MY GOSH, he caught Kermit. Michael put him down NOW! There’s a good little boy.

  75. Brian H says:

    “Those who continue to talk in certain terms of how local weather extremes are the result of human climate change are failing to heed all the available evidence.”

    I object to the wishy-washy choice of verb. “Heed” is not accurate; “acknowledge” is much closer. “Disclose and acknowledge” would be even better.

  76. As for the Chicago Sun-Times:

    “In the report from the Audit Bureau of Circulations, the Chicago Sun-Times had a circulation decline of 9 percent for its Monday through Friday editions, to 250,747 copies. The Sunday edition of the Sun-Times lost 5.5 percent of its circulation, to 237,367.”

    Serves them right.

  77. jorgekafkazar

    The pictures too? I don’t think water has memory. That’s why I put a question mark at the end. And I don’t agree with the man’s idea about the Rhine. But the pictures? I can’t see why you think those are new age pseudoscientific drivel. They’re just pictures that were taken. They aren’t retouched. The pictures are interesting. And what they did in taking the pictures is reproducible.

  78. Khwarizmi says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites – the “salt effected by sound” video was interesting, but the description at the source wasn’t helpful.
    It is not the salt, but the plate that is resonating in response to particular lengths of wave, inducing self-reinforcing standing-waves within the boundaries of the plate (that’s what resonance is): the salt is there only to expose the pattern and position of the standing waves that emerge within the plate at resonant wavelengths.
    It was an excellent demonstration of resonance, as a matter of fact, because you can see the waveform “standing.” Thanks for that.

Comments are closed.