Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup

The Week That Was: 2014-01-11 (January 11, 2014) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: • “…we can expect to see [extreme cold] with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” Presidential Science Advisor John Holdren [H/t Howard Hayden]

Number of the Week: $199,100


THIS WEEK: By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

The Trap: On her web site Judith Curry has a re-posting of an essay by Garth Paltridge that originally appeared in The Quadrant on the Fundamental Uncertainties of Climate Change. Paltridge discusses the major forecasting uncertainties of clouds and oceans, which have been known since the 1970s and have not been much improved upon. Herein lies the trap that the climate alarmists and science bureaucrats of the UN-IPCC has set for themselves. With each new Assessment Report (every six years or so) the Summary for Policymakers is asserting greater certainty in the work, even though the greater certainty is not appearing in the actual science. Many once distinguished national academies of science dutifully followed along. Now, there is no way these bureaucratic scientists can conveniently extract themselves from the trap and discuss the great uncertainty in climate science. 

In a different post, Curry points out that in the scientific report (WG1) the scientific support for human emissions of CO2 dominating global warming/climate change has weakened from the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4-2007) to the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5-2013). Curry states that the major issues are: 1) lack of warming since 1998 and growing discrepancy with climate model projections [as compared with observations]; 2) evidence of a decreased climate sensitivity to increases in CO2; 3) evidence that sea level rise in 1920-1950 is of the same magnitude as in 1993-2012; 4) increasing Antarctic sea ice extent; and 5) low confidence in attributing extreme weather events to anthropogenic global warming.

Now doubt the climate establishment will ignore the uncertainties and continue to publicly attack those who assert the significant shortcomings. But, the real issue is how much longer will taxpayers tolerate politicians funding this scientific charade? See links under Problems in the Orthodoxy and Seeking a Common Ground.


Climate Vortex: Dictionary examples of a vortex include a whirlpool, a cyclone, and a quagmire. In a slick promotional video, the President’s Chief Science Advisor, John Holdren, jumps into a quagmire. As illustrated in the Quote of the Week, Holdren blames the severe recent cold weather in the US on global warming. The claim is counterintuitive. One would think that in making such a video for the public, a presidential Science Advisor would carefully lay out the scientific arguments for making such an assertion. Holdren does not even try.

The scientific argument is very weak. A lessening of the temperature differences between the Arctic and the Mid-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere results in a weakening of the circumpolar vortex. As explained by Tim Ball, and others, linked in prior TWTWs, the circumpolar vortex is generally east to west, but may meander to a more north south pattern. These are called Rossby Waves, with the former called Zonal Waves and the latter called Meridional Waves (more closely following meridional lines of longitude). In his blog Resilient Earth, Doug Hoffman demolishes Holdren’s argument and appropriately suggests that the entire effort is similar to a beer commercial.

The credibility of science is at issue. Statements such as Holdren’s highlights reasons for public skepticism, and why government agencies and others promoting global warming find it necessary to hire communications experts and psychological experts to come up with explanations (excuses), why the public is becoming increasingly skeptical about their pronouncements. Do these people believe the public is endlessly gullible, or do they believe their own propaganda?

January 1977 was so cold in Washington that the Potomac River froze at the city. Some who attended the inauguration of President Carter walked across the Potomac to and from the ceremonies. What political speculation can be made from that event?

See links under Changing Weather, Climate Vortex – Whirlpool, Cyclone, or Quagmire?

http://drtimball.com/2012/current-global-weather-patterns-normal-despite-government-and-media-distortions/ and



Send Money! British Prime Minister David Cameron claimed that the mild wet winter in England was being caused by global warming changing the circumpolar vortex. Initially, the Met Office, which failed to predict the wet weather, disavowed the assertion. Then some officials in the Met and other climate alarmist supported the claim. Myles Allen, head of the climate dynamics group at Oxford University, supported the claim and asserted that providing the Met Office or European Centre for Medium Range Forecasts with around £10 million a year would allow experts to model the weather against conditions that would have occurred if humans had not interfered with the climate.

According to a letter from the US House Committee on Energy and Commerce, 40 federal agencies or sub-agencies participating in climate change activities spent over $22 billion in 2013. SEPP does not know the extent of British expenditures, but has calculated that the US effort has cost over $185 Billion since 1993.

Now some recipients of lavish government spending are admitting that their models cannot separate the natural influences on climate from the human influences on climate – something that skeptics have been pointing out for years. See links under Changing Weather and Funding Issues.


Turbine Life: As TWTW readers realize, SEPP does not think highly of wind power being an alternative to reliable fossil fuels for the generation of electricity. Among other issues, wind power is unreliable and needs expensive back-up, the costs of which usually falls on others. Turbine life, specifically gearbox life, remains an issue which is not publically addressed. Estimates are as low as 5 to 8 years. In 2007, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), under the Department of Energy, formed the Gearbox Reliability Collaborative.

A review of the documents online found discussion of engineering issues that influence gearbox life, but little on the expected life of the turbines. For some years, the Federal government has been paying wind farm developers cash money on the expected production of wind farms in lieu of the production tax credit that expired at the end of December. If the turbine life is shorter than the expected 20 years, then government has been overpaying wind farm developers. See links under Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind.


Department of Energy: The US Department of Energy (DOE) has produced a publication entitled “The Clean Energy Economy in Three Charts.” This is no more than a pure marketing piece for wind and solar power. Amid flashy graphs that show booming increases in installation of wind and solar capacity, the report states: “And according to the American Wind Energy Association, by 2012 there were well over 80,000 workers employed in wind-related jobs in the U.S.” This employment is insignificant when compared with the estimated employment increase of 2 million from increases in oil and gas production from smart drilling – which is not supported by taxpayers or Washington. The DOE report does not give the massive government expenditures – but mentions government “investments.” What is the rate of return on these “investment?”

Interestingly, the link to the DOE report did not work on Sunday, when this was being written. See links under Energy Issues – US.


Additions and Corrections: Reader Clyde Spencer corrected a sentence in TWTW on oil from the Bakken formation. The oil contains such a high proportion of the more volatile components, which ignite at temperatures lower than regular crude.


Number of the Week: $199,100. Last week the American Petroleum Institute (API) gave a briefing on the oil and gas industries emphasizing oil and gas shale revolution in the US. The API failed to mention that the revolution was brought about by independent producers, not the major integrated companies.

API President Jack Gerard emphasized that API will support those political candidates that support oil and natural gas. The politically influential newspaper, The Hill, made much of this and calculated that over 75% of the political action committee contributions to national candidates in 2012 went to Republicans. According to the article, 2012 political contributions totaled to $199,100 – an amount that is not enough to pay the salary of a senior executive in many green organizations. See link under Washington’s Control of Energy.



For the numbered articles below please see this week’s TWTW at: www.sepp.org. The articles are at the end of the pdf.

1. How the Great Rare-Earth Metals Crisis Vanished

China’s attempt to control the market for materials essential to the tech industry is turning to dust.

By Joseph Sternberg, WSJ, Jan 8, 2014


2. How the EPA Sticks Miners With a Motherlode of Regulation

The years-long wait for mining permits in the U.S. is the worst in the world.

By Daniel McGorarty, WSJ, Jan 3, 2014


3. The Future of Coal: New Pollution Rules Choke Old Power Plants

Southern Co. Builds New Plant That Captures CO2. The Price: $5.24 Billion

By Rebecca Smith and John Miller, WSJ, Jan 7, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The articles fails to distinguish between traditional pollutants and life giving CO2.]

4. The Future of Coal: Gulf Coast Hums as Exports Rise

Louisiana Terminals Expand to Move Mississippi River Cargo to Overseas Power Plants

By Alison Sider, WSJ, Jan 8, 2014




Suppressing Scientific Inquiry

Should Australian newspapers publish climate change denialist opinion pieces?

Should Australian newspapers, like Fairfax, publish opinion pieces that deny or seek to cast doubt on man-made global warming?

By Alex White, Guardian, UK, Jan 3, 2014 [H/t Bishop Hill]


Challenging the Orthodoxy

10 Facts and 10 Myths about Climate Change: Prof Bob Carter

By Bob Carter, NCTCSP, Jan 1, 2014


Al Gore’s 10-year warning – only 2 years left, still no warming

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 10, 2014


Comments on the recent “warming is worse than we thought” Nature paper

This is the first paper in a long time that made my brain hurt to read.

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 6, 2014


Scientists Predict Colder Winters

By Larry Bell, New Max, Dec 30, 2013


Overpopulation: The Fallacy Behind The Fallacy Of Global Warming

By Tim Ball, WUWT, Jan 5, 2014


Defending the Orthodoxy

Can global warming be real if it’s cold in the U.S.? Um… yes!

By Brad Plumer, Washington Post, Jan 6, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Contrary to the assertion, the planet is no longer warming.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

The Scientist As Rebel: A Tribute To Freeman Dyson On His 90th Birthday

Interview by Penny Peiser, Mar 2007, GWPF, Jan 4, 2014


The Corruption of ‘Climate Literacy’

By Peter Wilson, American Thinker, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t Tomas Hayward]


2013 Was Not A Good Year For Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change Disruption Weirding, Ocean Acidification, Extreme Weather, etc.

By Just the Facts, WUWT, Jan 4, 2014


German Global Analysis: 2013 Was A Debacle For The Promoters Of Anthropogenic Global Warming

By P. Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 9, 2014


Michael Asten’s novel idea – think first, spend later?

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 5, 2014


Climate Alarmists Trash IPCC Cold Spell Predictions

By James Taylor, Heartland, Jan 7, 2014


Global Cooling: Is an Ice Age Coming?

By Dale Hurd, CBN News, Jan 8, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


How Leftists (Badly) Explain Climate Stability

By Chet Richards, American Thinker, Jan 7, 2014


It’s Colder? Hotter? Blame Climate Change

By Robert Babcock, American Thinker, Jan 9, 2014


Obama’s “Climate Change” Lies

By Alan Caruba, Warning Signs, Jan 6, 2014


Problems in the Orthodoxy

IPCC AR5 weakens the case for AGW

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Jan 6, 2014


The IPCC discards its models

By Barry Brill, WUWT, Jan 9, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Similar to link immediately above.]

Oops…Trenberth Concedes Natural Ocean Cycles Contributed To 1976 – 1998 Warming … CO2 Diminishes As A Factor

Former IPCC Author Kevin Trenberth admits in a new paper: PDO ocean oscillation contributed to the 1976-1998 warming phase

By Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt, Translation by P. Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 10, 2014


Seeking a Common Ground

The Fundamental Uncertainties of Climate Change

By Garth Paltridge, Climate Etc. Jan 8, 2014


Science and religion: Do your own damn Google search

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 7, 2014


The real risks of cherry picking scientific data

The sin of omission of inconvenient results

By Matt Ridley, Rational Optimist, Jan 7, 2014


[SEPP Comment: In its reports, is the climate establishment to be more trusted than the pharmaceutical industry?]

Review of Recent Scientific Articles by NIPCC

For a full list of articles see www.NIPCCreport.org

Predicting Precipitation Extremes via CMIP5 Climate Models

Reference: Toreti, A., Naveau, P., Zampieri, M., Schindler, A., Scoccimarro, E., Xoplaki, E., Dijkstra, H.A., Gualdi, S. and Luterbacher, J. 2013. Projections of global changes in precipitation extremes from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 Models. Geophysical Research Letters 40: 4887-4892.


Corals Forced to Live in a CO2-Enriched and Warmer Environment

Reference: Schoepf, V., Grottoli, A.G., Warner, M.E., Cai, W-J., Melman, T.F., Hoadley, K.D., Pettay, D.T., Hu, X., Li, Q., Xu, H., Wang, Y., Matsui, Y. and Baumann, J.H. 2013. Coral energy reserves and calcification in a high-CO2 world at two temperatures. PLOS ONE 8: e75049.


Near-Death Experiences of Brazilian Corals

Reference: Miranda, R.J., Cruz, I.C.S. and Leao, Z.M.A.N. 2013. Coral bleaching in the Caramuanas reef (Todos os Santos Bay, Brazil) during the 2010 El Niño event. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 41: 351-360.


The Flip Side of Coral Bleaching

Reference: Mondal, T., Raghunathan, C. and Venkataraman, K. 2013. Bleaching: The driving force of scleractinian new recruitment at Little Andaman Island, Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India, Section B Biological Sciences 83: 585-592.


Models v. Observations

Antarctic Sea Ice Trends: Modelled vs. Measured

Reference: Mahlstein, I., Gent, P.R. and Solomon, S. 2013. Historical Antarctic mean sea ice area, sea ice trends, and winds in CMIP5 simulations. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 118: 5105-5110. [H/t GWPF]


It is difficult for a climate model to be more wrong than when it hind-casts just the opposite of what has been observed to be happening over the past three and a half decades in the real world, which is what most of the CMIP5 models apparently do.

Measurement Issues

RSS AMSU 2013: 10th warmest year on record

By Luboš Motl, The Reference Frame, Jan 5, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The UAH analysis puts 2013 as the fourth warmest.]

UAH v5.6 Global Temperature Update for Dec. 2013: +0.27 Deg. C

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 3, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The anomaly map for 2013 shows no pronounced warming over the Arctic, which is unlike the 30 plus year trend. The trend map for the entire satellite record is not yet available.]

The Original Temperatures Project

By Frank Lansner, WUWT, Jan 6, 2014


[SEPP Comment: A long post on the effort to obtain original temperature data and compare it with adjusted data. The ocean-air shelter regions may explain why certain areas are warmer today than in the 1930s.]

Australia endures hottest year on record

By Staff Writers, Sydney (AFP), Jan 03, 2014


Global warming update: hot with a lot of ice

By Anthony Cox, No Carbon Tax Climate Sceptics, Jan 10, 2014


[SEPP Comment: See link immediately above.]

Changing Weather

Does the Cold Wave Imply Anything About Global Warming? The Answer is Clearly No.

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Jan 6, 2014


Meteorologist Tells Hannity Global Warmists ‘Are Meteorological Know-Nothings’

By James Beattie, CNS News, Jan 8, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Bitter cold blasts Chicago, a city fighting climate change

By Steve Goreham, Washington Times, Jan 7, 2014


Met Office Did Not See Floods Coming

By Paul Homewood, No a Lot of People Know That, Jan 7, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


The storms are no different – but we are

It’s not the weather that has got worse, it’s our ability to cope without the creature comforts

By Christopher Howse, Telegraph, UK, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Is England’s Bad Weather A Sign Of Climate Change?

By Paul Homewood, WUWT, Jan 7, 2014


Weather Is Not Climate

Antarctic ice doesn’t discredit the warmists, but they should dial down the death-cult drama.

By Charles C. W. Cooke, National Review Online, Jan 6, 2014


UK weather: it’s just a storm, not global warming

By Tom Chivers, The Telegraph, UK, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


UK Weather: How stormy has it been and why?

By Staff Writers, Press Release, Met Office, Jan 3, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


‘Hot air’ over climate change

By Bill Carmichael, Yorkshire Post, Jan 10, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Has the media stopped linking floods to climate change?

By Leo Barasi, Noise of the Crowd, Jan 5, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Veteran German Meteorologist Affirms Winter Cold And Mild Extremes Are Natural. And: Winter Returning To Europe

By P. Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 8, 2014


Study: What is driving the rising cost of natural disasters?

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 5, 2014


Link to paper: What is driving the rising cost of natural disasters?

By John McAneny and Ryan Crompton, Macquarie University, 2013


[SEPP Comment: Applies to Australia – building in high risk areas.]

The Great Storm

By Richard Cavendish, History Today, Nov, 2003 [H/t Bishop Hill]


[SEPP Comment: Even before there was global warming!]

Changing Climate

Recent testimony a reminder that climate change skepticism is healthy

Editorial, Oklahoman, Jan 3, 2014


Changing Seas

Alarmists Feverish Over Sea Levels

By Larry Bell, News Max, Dec 23, 2013


Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice

Review Of 2013 – Global Sea Ice Area

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 3, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: Greatest extend since the satellite measurements began in 1979.]

Antarctic ice shelf melt ‘lowest EVER recorded, global warming is NOT eroding it’

Human CO2 just not a big deal at Pine Island Glacier

By Lewis Page, The Register, Jan 3, 2014 [H/t Reed Gibby]


Link to paper: Strong Sensitivity of Pine Island Ice-Shelf Melting to Climatic Variability

By Dutrieux, et al, Science, Jan 2, 2014


Domino effect of chain reaction drainage of surface lakes led to the breakup of Larsen B Ice Shelf in 2002

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 8, 2014


Polar Ice Is Growing Again, Upsetting Climatologists: But Others Are Happy

By Eugen Sorg, Basler Zeitung, Translation by Philipp Mueller, GWPF


[SEPP Comment: Antarctic sea ice again interfering with the plans of deluded eco-warriors.]

Acidic Waters

Can Squid Abide Ocean’s Lower pH?

Experiments hint at harm to critical balance organs

By Kate Madin, Oceanus, Jan 29, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Two problems with this research: 1) petition principii, assuming that increased atmospheric CO2 will decrease the alkalinity of the ocean and 2) transferring egg masses from one environment to one with a lower pH.]

Claim: Local factors cause dramatic spikes in coastal ocean acidity

By Anthon Watts, WUWT, Jan 3, 2014


Link to paper: Dramatic variability of the carbonate system at a temperate coastal ocean site (beaufort, north Carolina, USA) is regulated by physical and biogeochemical processes on multiple timescales.

By Johnson, et al, Plos One Dec 17, 2013


[SEPP Comment: Species that adapt to rapid local changes in pH would likely adapt to slow changes that in increase in atmospheric CO2 may bring about.]

Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine

Chinese scientists create high-yield, salt-resistant rice variety

By Staff Writers, Yangcheng, China (UPI), Jan 2, 2013


Lowering Standards

John Holdren, Pseudoscience Czar, predicted waste heat would doom humanity

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 10, 2014


Climate Comedy?

Global warming’s glorious ship of fools

Has there ever been a better story? It’s like a version of Titanic where first class cheers for the iceberg

By Mark Steyn, Spectator, Jan 11, 2014


Who is behind the ship of fools?

By Ross Clark, Spectator, Jan 4, 2014


Akademik Shokalskiy and the Xue Long have broken free from the ice in Antarctica and are no longer in need of assistance

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 7, 2014


Polar Chief Slams Antarctic ‘Pseudo-Scientific Expedition’

By Staff Writers, Sky News, AU, Jan 4, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


2014: Let’s Change the Climate

By Clarice Feldman, American Thinker, Jan 5, 2014


Climate Vortex – Whirlpool, Cyclone, or Quagmire?

The White House gets into the ‘polar vortex’ climate change blame business

John Holdren, Video, WUWT, Jan 8, 2014


Climate Change Might Just Be Driving the Historic Cold Snap

Climate change skeptics are pointing to the record cold weather as evidence that the globe isn’t warming. But it could be that melting Arctic ice is making sudden cold snaps more likely—not less

By Bryan Walsh, Time, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t Climate Depot]


Arctic Vortex Vexation

By Doug Hoffman, Resilient Earth, Jan 10, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Princeton Physicist Dr. Will Happer refutes claims that global warming is causing record cold: ‘Polar vortices have been around forever. They have almost nothing to do with more CO2 in the atmosphere’

By Marc Morano, Climate Depot, Jan 7, 2014


What is a ‘polar vortex’ and why is it so dangerous?

By Matt Pearce, Time Magazine, Via ICECAP, Jan 7, 2014


Climateers Caught in the Vortex

By Steven Hayward, Power Line, Jan 8, 2014


Time Magazine Goes Both Ways On The Polar Vortex

By Steven Goddard, Real Science, Jan 7, 2014


Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?

‘Worse Than We Thought’ Rears Ugly Head Again

By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger, CATO, Jan 6, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Explaining why the term “worse than we thought” may be a dead giveaway for a propaganda piece.]

Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

Are we weather wimps?

By Staff Writers, ICECAP, Jan 9, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Response from ICECAP to an article by Seth Borenstein of AP.]

Link to article: Scientists: Americans Are becoming Weather Wimps

By Seth Borenstein, AP, Jan 9, 2014


Insurance Companies Cash In On Fear – But Spanish Flood Data Over Last 40 Years Show No Increased Risk

Flood Analysis in Spain Shows No Trend In 40 Years

By Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt, Translated by P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 7, 2014


Quote of the week – climate induced ‘extreme weather’ has long been a concern of climate scientists

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 9, 2014


Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.

Being bullish on Robert Brulle’s “Dark Money” Smear of Skeptics

By Brandon Schollenberger, WUWT, Jan 6, 2014


Readfearn and The Guardian: Science is one big long ad-hom

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 10, 2014


Questioning European Green

Big industry will quit Germany if green energy costs rise –minister

By Tom Körkemeier, Reuters, Jan 7, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Pros and cons of fracking

By Martin Livermore, Scientific Alliance, Jan 10, 2014


Questioning Green Elsewhere

The Clean Tech Crash

Despite billions invested by the U.S. government in so-called “Cleantech” energy, Washington and Silicon Valley have little to show for it

By Lesley Stahl, Transcript and Video, Jan 5, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Testimony Against Industrial Wind Power (Kevon Martis before the Ohio Senate and House Public Utilities Committees)

By Kevon Martis, Master Resource, Jan 8, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Powerful testimony on the manipulation of the public by the wind industry and its political supporters.]

Green Jobs

60 Minutes: ‘The Cleantech Crash’ ($150 billion boondoggle exposed)

By Robert Bradley, Jr. Master Resource, Jan 6, 2014


Funding Issues

House Committee on Energy and Commerce

By Members of Congress to OMB, Oct 24, 2013


Americans Spent $7.45B in 3 Years Helping Other Countries Deal With ‘Climate Change’

By Patrick Goodenough, CNS News, Jan 3, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Link to the report: 2014 U.S. Climate Action Report

By Staff Writers, Department of State, Jan 1, 2014


Climate experts back PM’s comments

By Staff Writers, Belfast Telegraph, Jan 10, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


David Cameron was right to link storms to climate change, say weather experts

David Cameron was recently criticised for linking the increase in storms to climate change, but today weather experts say the prime minister was right.

By Sarah Knapton, Telegraph, UK, Jan 10, 2014 [H/t Bishop Hill]


Subsidies and Mandates Forever

Spain makes abrupt U-turn on solar payments; Retreat on rates leaves thousands of investors fearing they’ll go broke

By Suzanne Daley, Power Engineering, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t Anne Debeil]


EPA and other Regulators on the March

EPA’s formal release of emissions rules for new power plants draws immediate criticism

By Zack Colman, Washington Examiner, Jan 8, 2014


Energy Issues – Non-US

Germany: The Canary for Renewables

By Donn Dears, Power for USA, Jan 7, 2014


The Return of Centralized Energy Planning in Britain

By Staff Writers, NCPA, Dec 30, 2013


Link to paper: “From Nationalisation to State Control: The Return of Centralised Energy Planning,”

By Colin Robinson, Institute of Economic Affairs, UK, Dec 2013


[SEPP Comment: The evils committed in the name of energy security.]

The Global Impact of US Shale

By Daniel Yergin, Project Syndicate, Jan 8, 2014


Lavish energy lifestyles,

By Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post, Jan 9, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: Will northern cities have heated sidewalks?]

Energy Issues — US

Government Acting As a Shill

By Donn Dears, Power for USA, Jan 10, 2014


[SEPP Comment: See link immediately below.]

“Clean Energy Economy in Three Charts” U.S. DOE Misleads Again

By Glenn Schleede, Master Resource, Jan 9, 2014


Link to report: The Clean Energy Economy in Three Charts

By Dan Utech, DOE, Jan 6, 2014


Washington’s Control of Energy

Obama’s ‘Quadrennial Energy Review’: Old Vinegar in New Bottles (remember Jimmy Carter and FDR)

By Robert Bradley, Jr, Master Resource, Jan 10, 2014


Link to press release: New Steps to Strengthen the Nation’s Energy Infrastructure

Signed by John P. Holdren, Cecilia Muñoz, and Ernest Moniz, White House Press Release, Jan 9, 2014


Podesta’s Climate And Environmental Agendas Will Add To Obama’s Executive Disorders

By Larry Bell, Forbes, Jan 5, 2014


American Petroleum Institute to push hard for ‘pro-growth energy policies’ in 2014 elections

By Zack Colman, Washington Examiner, Jan 7, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The claimed $4 billion in tax incentives is contrived.]

Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Vaclav Smil’s graph of the year: The natural-gas boom

By Wonkblog, Washington Post, Dec 29, 2013


[SEPP Comment: The divergence between the price of natural gas in the US since 2009 and the price of oil is quite stunning.]

Some States Confirm Water Pollution from Drilling

By Kevin Begos, AP, Jan 5, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The article lacks specifics, particularly when dealing with contamination from the surface.]

Return of King Coal?

China approves massive new coal capacity despite pollution fears

* Beijing approves 15 new large coal mining projects over year

* Total new capacity, including small mines, likely to be higher

* Capacity to increase by 860 mln T over 2011-2015 period

By David Stanway, Reuters, Jan 7, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: How much will go to new power plants and will any replace imports?]

Dirtiest Coal’s Rebirth in Europe Flattens Medieval Towns

By Stefan Nicola and Ladka Bauerova, Bloomberg, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Germany out in the coal

By Ezra Levant, Toronto Sun, Jan 6, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Green Revolution? Germany’s New Coal Boom Reaches Record Level

Editorial, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Via GWPF, Translation Philipp Mueller, Jan 7, 2014


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind

How to make money doing nothing

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 8, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Big wind makes big money by not generating electricity.]

Wind Farms ‘Will Be Paid Billions To Switch Off’

By Mike Wade, The Times, Via GWPF, Jan 8, 2014


Wind Turbines: The Ghost in the Gearbox

By Billo the Wisp, His Blog, Dec 1, 2013 [H/t Bishop Hill]


Link to the Gearbox Reliability Collaborative, NREL


Researchers Find Ways To Minimize Power Grid Disruptions From Wind Power

By Staff Writers, Raleigh NC (SPX), Jan 03, 2014


Link to paper: Coordinating Wind Farms and Battery Management Systems for Inter-Area Oscillation Damping: A Frequency-Domain Approach

By Chandra, et al. IEEE, Oct 17, 2013


[SEPP Comment: A long way to go.]

California Dreaming

350.org wants AGW health warning on gas pumps

By Luboš Motl, Reference Frame, Jan 10, 2014


California Coastal Commission to solicit input on Global Warming driven sea level policy document

From the “we’ve already made up our minds, these hearings are simply for show” department.

Posted by Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 8, 2014


Health, Energy, and Climate

New compounds discovered that are hundreds of times more mutagenic

By Staff Writers, Corvallis OR (SPX), Jan 07, 2014


Environmental Industry

A Killing Frost for Green Bosses

By Matthew Vadum, Front Page, Jan 8, 2014


Other Scientific News

Top 10 Retractions of 2013

A look at this year’s most memorable retractions

By Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky, The Scientist, Dec 30, 2013 [H/t Catherine French]




Now it’s the fungi carbon footprint that isn’t in climate models

Symbiotic fungi inhabiting plant roots have major impact on atmospheric carbon, scientists say

Posted by Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 9, 2014



0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
M Courtney
January 13, 2014 1:23 am

How Leftists (Badly) Explain Climate Stability doesn’t explain how Leftists explain anything.
Instead it is about the case for a negative feedback dominating the temperature of the planet (else we would have runaway global warming).
I happen to agree but also note that the article would have been better if it confronted the actual case that is put: Industrial scale release of CO2 is so rapid that the feedback mechanisms are being swamped and (after a lag) the planet will switch to a warmer state.
Sloppy thought and partisan bias may rally the troops but does nothing for the debate.

January 13, 2014 1:40 am

M Courtney says:
“Industrial scale release of CO2 is so rapid that the feedback mechanisms are being swamped and (after a lag) the planet will switch to a warmer state.”
Are you saying that CO2 causes measurable global warming?
If it did, then recent warming would be more pronounced due to the rise in CO2. But the recent rise in T is no different from past rises, when CO2 was much lower…

January 13, 2014 1:51 am

“Now doubt the climate establishment will ignore the uncertainties and continue to publicly attack those who assert the significant shortcomings. But, the real issue is how much longer will taxpayers tolerate politicians funding this scientific charade? See links under Problems in the Orthodoxy and Seeking a Common Ground.”
yes, indeed…and at an ever more frenzied pace. The latest, from SciAmerican? That pesky 97 percent agreement
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/2014/01/10/about-that-consensus-on-global-warming-9136-agree-one-disagrees/as expanded to….99.99 percent
so, natch…”This chart should tell us why we need to move the debate beyond the fundamental fact of global warming, from disputing the basic science and effects of the process to disputing the details of consequences and the proposed solutions.”
will someone call me when these bozos start talking about an advanced nuclear Renaissance?

M Courtney
January 13, 2014 2:44 am

dbstealey, no I am not saying that.
I am saying that that is the claim that is made and the article I referred to studiously avoids confronting that claim. You, yourself, have just made more of an argument against it than the article “How Leftists (Badly) Explain Climate Stability” does.
My complaint was with the article because it doesn’t confront he real claims. Instead itjust applies circular rasonng to say that it ewon’t happen. I agree it probably won’t happen and certainly not fast enough to cause a problem – I am a sceptic.
But, as sceptics, I think we should consider the opposing views instead of close-mindedly turning away from them. And you cant consider alternatove views if you call those who hold such views, silly names.

January 13, 2014 3:02 am

Um, why is this bog called TWTW now?

Alan Robertson
January 13, 2014 3:10 am

klem says:
January 13, 2014 at 3:02 am
Um, why is this bog called TWTW now?
THIS blog is still WUWT, which has a weekly feature: The Week That Was: 2014-01-11 (January 11, 2014) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project
(copied/pasted from top of thread)

January 13, 2014 3:32 am

M Courtney,
Thanks, I didn’t think you were really saying that. BTW, what “silly names”? Far be it from moi to call the alarmist contingent silly names. T’would be unprofessional! Not to mention naughty. ☺

M Courtney
January 13, 2014 3:36 am

dbstealey, twas not you but the article that called believers in catastrophic clmate change silly names. The article calls them “Lefties”.
I am a bit of a “lefty” but find the term disparaging and simplistic so prefer a more helpful tone.
Also, David Cameron (Conservative) has said he suspects that the recent floods in the UK are due to Climate Change – with no evidence. He is not on the Left. So I don’t think that labelling the alarmist contingent with an economic-political flag is in anyway conducive to a constructive debate.

Mike McMillan
January 13, 2014 4:51 am

Quote of the Week: • “…we can expect to see [extreme cold] with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” Presidential Science Advisor John Holdren
It is unfortunate that the highest I.Q. in the President’s Cabinet belongs to the Housing Secretary.

January 13, 2014 5:22 am

One of the best current videos really gets the message appears to be mainstream media

Pooh, Dixie
January 13, 2014 5:42 am

Perhaps I can respond later once I get my parka, mukluks and arctic mittens off.

It doesn't add up...
January 13, 2014 6:07 am

The Akademik Shokalskiy has made it back to Invercargill
Anyone interviewing the captain and crew?

It doesn't add up...
January 13, 2014 6:12 am

More on that review of 2,258 peer-reviewed scientific articles about climate change.
Some of the papers include:
“X-ray emission from high-redshift miniquasars: self-regulating the population of massive black holes through global warming”
Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition
Whole-genome sequencing of giant pandas provides insights into demographic history and local adaptation
Who is moving where? Molecular evidence reveals patterns of range shift in the acorn barnacle Hexechamaesipho pilsbryi in Asia
Warming up a stream reach: design of a hydraulic and heating system
Utilization and performance evaluation of a surplus air heat pump system for greenhouse cooling and heating
Transport Pathways for Light Duty Vehicles: Towards a 2 degrees Scenario
Thermodynamic performance of a hybrid air cycle refrigeration system using a desiccant rotor
More ominously:
What Climate Policy Can a Utilitarian Justify?
I’ll leave others to find their favourites with zero climate relevance.

January 13, 2014 6:53 am

The following two statements could stand as the most ridiculous comments of 2014 – and it’s only January!
Quote of the Week: “…we can expect to see [extreme cold] with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” – Presidential Science Advisor John Holdren.
British Prime Minister David Cameron claimed that the mild wet winter in England was being caused by global warming changing the circumpolar vortex.
OK children, repeat after me: “Cooling is clear evidence of global warming.“

January 13, 2014 6:56 am

How high does Global warming have to get before we all freeze to death.
If there was Global cooling instead of Global warming, would the weather get hotter ?

more soylent green!
January 13, 2014 7:10 am
January 13, 2014 7:43 am

more soylent green! says:
January 13, 2014 at 7:10 am

Does anybody know why the US Coast Guard is spending so much in preparation for a melting Arctic ice cap?

With today’s administration, the services HAVE to scramble for ANY possible funding. Obama’s administration has only a few buttons they want to use for the military in general (USCG has military and technological roots that the average Obama-appointee positively hates and despises) and so, using any and as many CAGW talking points as possible is the only way to get attention in Washington today.
Does the USCG or USN’s discussion or planning for potential melting Arctic sea ice prove anything about global warming, or about CO2’s theoretical role in global warming?
By the way, at the last three years rate of growth in Antarctic sea ice extents, the Strait of Magellan and Cape Horn will be closed to ship traffic within 8-12 years. But THAT potential problem in sea traffic will NEVER be discussed in any Washington bureaucracy ruled by Obama.

Jim G
January 13, 2014 9:01 am

M Courtney says:
January 13, 2014 at 3:36 am
“dbstealey, twas not you but the article that called believers in catastrophic clmate change silly names. The article calls them “Lefties”.
I am a bit of a “lefty” but find the term disparaging and simplistic so prefer a more helpful tone.
Also, David Cameron (Conservative) has said he suspects that the recent floods in the UK are due to Climate Change – with no evidence. He is not on the Left. So I don’t think that labelling the alarmist contingent with an economic-political flag is in anyway conducive to a constructive debate.”
There are many who label themselves “conservative” or “moderate” or, in the US, “republican” that believe in the forced redistribution of wealth, higher taxation and government control. In my lexicon they are “lefties” irrespective of party affiliation or label. Such a label as “lefties” is a clarification of their true stance and not a “silly” name. Judgemental labels like “idiot” are not helpful since we know not if they believe what they preach of have other agendae. Also though it is possible for folks to be lefties on other issues but not so on these AGW related issues, or vice versa, in my experience government control and redistribution usually carry through a person’s political stance and define them quite well from a political point of view.

Alan Robertson
January 13, 2014 9:01 am

RACookPE1978 says:
January 13, 2014 at 7:43 am
By the way, at the last three years rate of growth in Antarctic sea ice extents, the Strait of Magellan and Cape Horn will be closed to ship traffic within 8-12 years. But THAT potential problem in sea traffic will NEVER be discussed in any Washington bureaucracy ruled by Obama.
Panama Canal Expansion underway for a few years, but now in trouble over money:
The project will continue. Are the issues as described in media sources, or have some behind the scenes begun to envision the “ice” issues which you describe and are now “shifting” their involvement? Who will profit? Will the US military be eventually tasked with “protecting” the canal and Panamanian sovereignty, or maybe restoring same? What of the Chinese?
disclaimer: no answers here.

more soylent green!
January 13, 2014 9:29 am

@more soylent green! says: January 13, 2014 at 7:10 am
Reply to self — Of course the Coast Guard isn’t making any independent studies on global warming, but you would think they would know whether the ice sheets are melting or expanding or staying the same (note: they never stay the same, they are always in flux) and the USCG is concerned about keeping its mission relevant and keeping the funding going. Once sure way to help get more funding is to align the USCG’s mission with the administration’s goals.
A related question is why is the Navy spending so much on biofuels, but the answer is entirely different. (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/on-energy/2012/07/19/the-navys-use-of-biofuels-is-inefficient-and-costly) The Navy’s purchase of biofuels at $26 a gallon is primarily to prop-up the administration’s green fuel initiatives and has nothing to do with the Navy’s mission or protecting our national security. Don’t we already spend enough money on our military without paying six times the cost of conventional fuels for purely political purposes?

January 13, 2014 10:16 am

Dr. Holden was a poor instructor when I took a course from him at UC Berkeley in 1976 and he has shown no improvement in job performance over the last 38 years.

Keith Enright
January 13, 2014 11:16 am

Dyson Freeman needs help. He’s away with the fairies.

January 13, 2014 1:26 pm

“Interview by Penny Peiser, Mar 2007, GWPF, Jan 4, 2014″
Uh, no.

January 13, 2014 3:47 pm

“Make Mine Freedom,” a humorous 9:25-long political cartoon from 1948, depicts a snake oil salesman pushing “ISM.” At the 2:50 mark he says, “Why, it will even make the weather perfect every day.” Here’s the link:

January 14, 2014 10:55 am

Quoting Curry on the Fundamental Issues of Climate Change is like quoting Homer Simpson on the nutritional benefits of donuts. Specifically, Curry is a politician wearing the clothes of a scientists. Her only goal is to obfuscate the fact that the only “Fundamental” issue that matters is whether or not and to what degree CO2 Forcing is definable, measurable, and testable. The undeniable fact is that CO2 Forcing is not definable, measurable, and testable. Conclusion: AGW isn’t about science. It’s just a way for politician, Like Curry, to secure the paychecks and pensions of herself and her constituents.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights