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
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
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.
@stan stendera
Thanks for the tip Stan. The Eaglets are awsome!
Rich
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!)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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”.
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
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.”
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?
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
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.
Amino Acids in Meteorites says: “Water has memory?”
New Age pseudoscientific drivel.
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.
oops, should have said the Koala program was on NatGeo, not Discovery, which i also rarely watch these days.
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.
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
——————————————————————————–
Amino,
Otter wrote, “…outside of skeptical sites…”. The way I read it, alarmist blogs are not nearly as prominent. Agree with you otherwise.☺
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.
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
Myrrh says:
May 13, 2012 at 3:30 pm
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 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.
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.