Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #166

The Week That Was: 2015-01-31 (January 31, 2015) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

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

KEYSTONE XL: As promised by the Republican leadership, the Senate passed S.1 the bill authorizing the TransCanada Corp. to proceed in planning and building the Keystone Pipeline to transport up to 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day from the oil sands in Alberta, Canada and shale oil from the Bakken formation in North Dakota to Steele City Nebraska. From there it will be transported by existing pipelines to Gulf Coast refineries. Once completed, the pipeline system would span 1,700 miles and cross six U.S. states. Nine Democrats voted with all Senate Republicans in approving the bill.

Once the details are reconciled with a similar House bill, it will go to President Obama who has promised to veto it. The Administration has had six years to study the pipeline, so arguments of time to study the issue are frivolous. So are claims that the pipeline is no longer economic because oil prices have dropped. As TransCanada Chief Executive wrote in a statement: “Keystone XL is a project that was needed when the price of a barrel of oil was less than $40 in 2008, when we first made our application, at more than $100 last year, and around $45 today.”

The legislation was messy, with multiple amendments considered including two promoting energy efficiency and one declaring a sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax that passed. The press had a field day, making much of these amendments, but the legislation passed. Now the President has a choice. Does he anger the anti-fossil-fuel green groups whom he promised he would veto the measure, or does he anger labor unions and others who supported the bill and who traditionally support the Democratic Party?

As questionable polls are showing, the public is becoming increasingly aware that the science of global warming/climate change, as proclaimed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its followers, is overblown with a multitude of experts who cannot justify their earlier statements and the predictions/projections from their models that greatly overestimated 21st century warming. The pollsters term the products of models that have not been validated as science, which it is not. See Article # 3 and links under Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll? and Washington’s Control of Energy.


Quote of the Week: You ask me where the extra trapped heat has gone, but I do not agree with the models that say the extra trapped heat exists. I cannot answer your question because I disagree with your assumptions. Freeman Dyson [H/t Steven Hayward “Power Line”


Number of the Week: Probability of 38%, or 48%, or ???


Cherry-Picking Temperatures: The January 24 TWTW used a quote from Richard Somerville, a climate scientist and professor emeritus at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. According to his web site, Somerville was a Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group I, Physical Science, for the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR-4) of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), report that expressed great certainty in global warming science and the models used. TWTW used the quote to assert that by ignoring superior atmospheric temperature data, both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) are engaged of cherry-picking data. Further, TWTW stated that as criticism of the press release by NOAA and NASA intensified, Gavin Schmidt of NASA-GISS (Goddard Institute of Space Studies) presented a table by NASA stating there was a 38% probability that 2014 was the warmest year recorded. Apparently, both NOAA and NASA calculated such low probabilities prior to the press release but did not disclose them.

A reader, who will remain nameless, wrote: “You are quite wrong that the 38 percent figure was not disclosed at the time of the first announcements. And you clearly don’t understand how to interpret the number. Every other year in the record had a much lower probability of being the warmest. Since one of them had to be the warmest, it makes good sense to pick the one with the highest probability. The next most probable year was only half as likely to top the others.”

Quite to the contrary, the NASA press release dated Jan 16, contained no probability statements. Probability values were added later, particularly to the NOAA statement. Further, the probabilities used are not based on a frequency distribution. The paper used to justify NOAA’s probability calculations is: “Uncertainty in annual rankings from NOAA’s global temperature time seriesBy Arguez, Karl, Squires and Vose, Geophysical Research Letters, Nov 27, 2013.

“Annual rankings of global temperature are an important component of climate monitoring. However, there is some degree of uncertainty for every yearly value in the global temperature time series, which leads to uncertainty in annual rankings as well. This study applies a Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center’s global land-ocean surface temperature (NOAATMP) time series. Accounting for persistence between years does not materially affect the results versus presuming statistical independence. The highest probabilities for the warmest year analysis (1880–2012) are associated with the years 2010 (~36%), 2005 (~28%), and 1998 (~11%). The current separation among the warmest observed years is relatively small compared to the standard errors of the NOAATMP time series. However, each year between 1997 and 2012 was warmer than the vast majority of all other years since 1880 at the 95% confidence level.”

There are several major issues with this paper. One, the paper was not published in a major statistical journal, therefore one cannot assume that it underwent expert analysis for its statistical rigor. As seen in the Michael Mann “hockey-stick” debacle, a small group of like-minded researchers can agree on a statistical procedure – even if the procedure leads to a bias. Outside statistical expertise is needed.

A second problem is the time-frame. Prior warm periods are ignored. One cannot establish probabilities of temperatures by ignoring massive amounts of historical data. As Timothy Ball noted, amusingly, if the data record is the GRIP 2 ice core from Greenland, then 2014 would rank in the 3% of the coldest years in the record. Climate science has reached its current state of being ignored by the public (and its impending implosion) by ignoring climate history and the natural causes of climate change.

These issues are separate from the manipulation of the historic instrument record by making earlier 20th century measurements appear cooler than they were. This manipulation is a long simmering problem. These issues also illustrate why TWTW prefers using the satellite temperature record, independently supported by the records from weather balloons. The justification of NOAA and NASA of using surface temperatures in the space age is often stated as “That’s where people live.” The claim is weak. Surface temperatures are influenced by other human activities including urbanization, irrigation, agriculture, vegetation, etc. The surface instruments may be measuring these human activities, not emissions of carbon dioxide, which is the central issue in the study of global warming/climate change. If increased greenhouse gases are the cause of global warming, it should be measured where it occurs, in the atmosphere – with space-age satellites.

See links under Measurement Issues, http://drtimball.com/2015/2014-among-the-3-percent-coldest-years-in-10000-years/, and http://www.nasa.gov/press/2015/january/nasa-determines-2014-warmest-year-in-modern-record/#.VLlARCvF98H,


Expanding the Orthodoxy: Numerous news reports have promoted the idea that the Pope will endorse the claim that human emissions of carbon dioxide endanger humanity. On his web site, Pierre Gosselin performs a valuable service by giving regular and very reliable translations of German news. TWTW links to some of these in virtually every issue. However, it appears one has to be careful about jumping to conclusions over a recent article in Der Spiegel. Tom Sheahen, Vice President of SEPP, who follows religious affairs closely, made the following remarks on a recent posting by Gosselin.

“In the present case, it is obvious that Der Spiegel really dislikes the Catholic Church and enjoys bashing it. The giveaway is the reference to Giordano Bruno, a certified heretic on religious-doctrine grounds, who dabbled in astronomy; Bruno’s astronomy had absolutely nothing to do with his condemnation — but it’s a mighty convenient club to wield by those who want to make the Catholic Church look bad.

“Reading the interview carefully, the president of the Pontifical Academy didn’t really disclose anything, and it was the reporter from Der Spiegel who made up the rest of the speculations. Separately, his speculations might very well be correct, in that there is increasing evidence that the Pope is definitely on the political left, and likely sides with the greens.”


See links under Expanding the Orthodoxy.


Executive Orders: The January 17 TWTW discussed suggestions for legislative correction under the new Congress. One area of concern is the “tailoring of global models for regional analysis, without independent validation. Further, when models are inconsistent with data, data should take preference. For example, the budget of the US Global Change Research program is about $2.5 billion and has remained at that level since 2010 (adjusted for inflation). The USGCRA states its mission as: “Thirteen Agencies, One Vision: Empower the Nation with Global Change Science.”


On May 6, 2014 USGCRP released its National Climate Assessment. The report contains 8 regional reports and one for the 48 states contiguous US. The regional report for the Southeast U.S. projects a major general warming of about 10 F for the region even though The report states:“The lack of mid-20th century warming in the Southeast is not simulated by the models. However, 21st century simulations of temperature indicate that future warming will be much larger than the observed values for the 20th century.” There is no logical reason for this assertion and the inconsistency between data and models.

According to reports, on Friday January 30, a slow news day, President Obama took the initiative to direct all federal agencies to factor-in rising sea levels when building infrastructure projects. TWTW has not yet obtained the Corps of Engineers (COE) report which 31,200 miles of north Atlantic coast have a flood risk caused by rising sea levels and climate change.. If it is of the same quality as the 2014 National Climate Assessment it is closer to speculation than any meaningful science.

“Losses caused by flooding affect the environment, our economic prosperity, and public health and safety, each of which affects our national security,” the White House order states.


The new standards give agencies three options on how to prepare for floods and use them in the siting, design and construction of federally funded buildings, roads and infrastructure.


The three choices: Use data and methods provided by the “best-available, actionable climate science,” build 2 feet above the 100-year flood elevation mark for standard projects and 3 feet for “critical” buildings like hospitals and evacuation centers, or build to the 500-year flood elevation. [Boldface added]/


“By requiring that Federally funded buildings, roads and other infrastructure are constructed to better withstand the impacts of flooding, the President’s action will support the thousands of communities that have strengthened their local floodplain management codes and standards, and will help ensure Federal projects last as long as intended,” the White House Council on Environmental Quality said in a fact sheet.


According to the National Climate Assessment issued by the White House last year, over $1 trillion of property and structures in the U.S. are at risk of sea level rise.


Over 50 percent of Americans live in coastal counties susceptible to storm surges, rising sea levels and flooding, the White House said.”

The order comes days after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a post-Hurricane Sandy report on the flood risk posed to 31,200 miles of the north Atlantic coast.


In the report, the Army Corps specifically cited sea level rise cause[d] by climate change as a factor that “flood risk is increasing for coastal populations and supporting infrastructure.”


In its fact sheet, the Council on Environmental Quality also noted data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that put 2014 as the hottest year on record.

If the reports are correct, the coastal plains of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts will be most affected. Florida, Louisiana, and the Carolinas are especially vulnerable. And officials might as well forget any improvements in the Norfolk-Newport News naval complex in Virginia.

Clearly, local officials must prepare for an array of outrageous demands from the 13 Federal agencies that make up the US Global Change Research Program. Local officials must be willing to vigorously challenge the Washington experts to provide the physical validation of the models on which they rely, and explain inconsistencies in studies. This Executive Order makes Washington climate establishment, and its culture focused on climate models, hostile to the prosperity of regions in the country where, according to the above quote, “Over 50 percent of Americans live in coastal counties susceptible to storm surges, rising sea levels and flooding, the White House said.”

The exaggerations present in the IPCC and the US Global Change Research Programs, and the excessive confidence in the science, are about to have a significant impact on the personal lives of many in the nation. The program will be discussed more fully as facts develop. See links under Changing Seas.


The NYC Blizzard That Wasn’t: The forecasts that New York City would be hit by double-digit inches of snow and high winds was a dud. The City received about 3 to 6 inches. The failure of National Weather Service, an agency of NOAA, to accurately predict the storm resulted in unnecessary disruption tp many people who expected the forecast to be accurate.

Some meteorologists apologized for their failure to correctly predict the track of the storm. It went 50 to 100 miles east of the city. But, it would be proper to recognize that their equipment needs improvement and that uncertainty of such forecasts needs to be emphasized.

Although few mentioned it, if Sandy had taken a similar track as this storm, it would have received little publicity. This affair illustrates the need to prepare accurate predictions of weather events, and the need to convey the uncertainty involved.

There is a major lesson in this event, which is that you CANNOT take computer results as “absolute truth.” The best models in the world are not perfect, because nature doesn’t always do what nature normally does. The task is not simply to “prepare accurate predictions” but to “convey the uncertainty involved.” People need to realize that no weather prediction is ever perfect. People need to be taught that both measurements and predictions come with error brackets.

A note about politics: IF this storm had struck where it was predicted to, both Cuomo and Christie would have looked downright Presidential for their foresight. The same could be said for climate predictions. See links under Changing Weather.


On the Attack: The January 17 TWTW briefly discussed a simplified climate model presented by Christopher Monckton, Willie Soon, David Legates and William Briggs, which, according to the authors out-performs the general climate models used by the IPCC in forecasting 21st century temperatures. Monckton states: “Our irreducibly simple climate model does not replace more complex models, but it does expose major errors and exaggerations in those models, such as the over-emphasis on positive or amplifying temperature feedbacks. ..”

Already the Climate Establishment is on the attack, not in providing critical analysis of the model but by demanding one of its authors, Astrophysicist Willie Soon, be fired from his position at the Smithsonian. Following the well-trod path established by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, Soon is accused of receiving research money from the fossil fuel industry. No evidence is presented. An assertion by DeSmogBlog is “proof of guilt.” See links under Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.


Number of the Week: In an amusing post, Charles Battig, of the Virginia Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment (VA-SEEE), discusses the estimate by NASA that it is 38% likely that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880. [As discussed above, NOAA has a 48% likelihood and both cannot be right, but both can be wrong.] Battig suggests that the 38% may become a benchmark for government work. See link under Article # 3.



Please note that articles that are not linked or summarized here are reproduced in the Articles Section of the full TWTW that can be found on the web site under the date of the TWTW.

1. Just Say No To A Carbon Tax, MAYBE To An Energy Tax

By S. Fred Singer, IBD, Jan 23, 2015


[SUMMARY: Compared to a carbon tax, a tax on all forms of energy represents a lesser evil; neither tax will “save the climate.” Excessive regulations and the quest for non-CO2-emitting energy have already added many extra costs — mimicking an energy tax, but without adding revenues to the US Treasury.]

2. World price of oil — where is OPEC now?

By S. Fred Singer, American Thinker, Jan 27, 2015


[SUMMARY: The collapse in the world price of oil was quite predictable, but not its timing – once US technology reduced natural-gas prices drastically in 2010. Saudi unwillingness to stem the collapse can be traced to security concerns that trump simple economics.]

3. Global Warming and Government Work

By Charles Battig, American Thinker, Jan 24, 2015


NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Global Analysis – Annual 2014


4. Obama’s Trans-Alaska Oil Assault

He’s slowly starving the current pipeline so it will have to shut down.

Editorial, WSJ, Jan 26, 2015


[SUMMARY: President Obama announced on January 26 that he will use his executive authority to designate 12 million acres in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) as wilderness. This effectively destroys any resource development in the region and “abrogates a 1980 deal in which Congress specifically set aside some of this acreage for future oil and gas exploration. It’s also a slap at the new Republican Congress, where Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has been corralling bipartisan support for more Arctic drilling.” “The Interior Department this week will release a five-year offshore drilling plan that puts vast parts of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas—the area to the north of the pipeline—out of bounds for drilling. This follows an Administration move in 2010 to close down nearly half of the 23.5 million acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA)—the area west of the pipeline.” “The Arctic Outer Continental Shelf is estimated to hold at least 27 billion barrels of oil.” ‘Yet not one drop of oil is flowing from these areas, and Mr. Obama seems intent on ensuring that none does.” The political prize is the destruction of the pipeline which must be dismantled if the pipeline shuts down. “The pity is that in his ANWR announcement Mr. Obama didn’t express as much concern for Alaskans as he did caribou. An estimated one-third of Alaskan jobs are oil-related, and the oil industry accounts for some 85% of state revenue. Shutting the pipeline would be a terrible blow to the state.”]



Climategate Continued

Climategate, the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming

Something very odd has been going on with the temperature data relied on by the world’s scientists, writes Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker, Telegraph, UK, Jan 24, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Forget Climategate: This “Global Warming” Scandal Is Much Bigger

By James Delingpole, Brietbart, Jan 30, 2015


Challenging the Orthodoxy

Northeast Snowstorms & Atlantic Water Vapor: No Connection in Last 37 Years

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 30, 2015


A Sin Of Commission

By David Archibald, WUWT, Jan 29, 2015


IPCC Climate Science As A Gestalt Theory Problem

By Tim Ball, WUWT, Jan 26, 2015


New Paper Claims Extreme La Niñas to Become More Frequent under Global Warming

By Bob Tisdale, WUWT, Jan 28, 2015


Part 2 Of Documentary Totally Dismisses/Contradicts Michael Mann’s Claim Of A Steady Climate Since 1000 A.D.

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 25, 2015


When Climate Heretics Speak

By Steven Hayward, Power Line, Jan 25, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Defending the Orthodoxy

Does global warming mean more or less snow?

By Kevin Trenberth, NCAR, The Conversation, Jan 30, 2015 [Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: Note reference to the US National Climate Assessment, an effort to create regional forecasts from global models that have not been validated.]

We Must Act Now to Protect Our Winters

By Gina McCarthy, White House Blog, Jan 28, 2015


Questioning the Orthodoxy

Climate change will hit “Everywhere” harder than “rest of world”

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 27, 2015


Get NASA Out of Climate Alarm Business

By Larry Bell, Newsmax, Jan 26, 2015


New York City Gets a Taste of the Precautionary Principle

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 28, 2015


Global warming is still on the ‘Great Shelf’

By Christopher Monckton, WUWT, Jan 28, 2015


Marotzke’s mischief

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 29, 2015


Climate Grief — Believers mourning — It’s denial and anger (but it sure isn’t science)

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 29m, 2015 [H/t Climate Depot]


Another alarmist temperature lie

By Viv Forbes, American Thinker, Jan 27, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


What are Your Fears about Global Warming and Climate Change

By Bob Tisdale, WUWT, Jan 30, 2015


Problems in the Orthodoxy

German Television Shocks…Outstanding Documentary On Historical Sudden Climate Changes Driven By Natural Factors

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 24, 2015


Last Ditch Clinging Effort…Scientists Plainly Have Struck Out On Short and Mid-Term Climate Model Reliability

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Modelers blame “spontaneous climate variability”????]

India unwilling to be treated at par with China on CO2 emissions

By Chetan Chauhan, Hindustan Times, New Delhi, Jan 27, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Why India Didn’t Follow China’s “Green” Lead

By Walter Russell Mead and Staff, The American Interest, Jan 28, 2015


Global Warming Won’t Mean More Stormy Weather

Atmosphere will adapt to hotter, wetter climate

By Sean Bettam, Press Release, Univ of Toronto, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Link to Paper: Constrained work output of the moist atmospheric heat engine in a warming climate

By Laliberté et al, Science, Jan 30, 2015


Davos — Another Gathering of the Wealthy to Speculate About World Issues

At Davos, Hypocrites Tell Rest Of Us To Lower Expectations

Editorial, IBD, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Davos 2015: World Bank chief makes climate action plea

By Staff Writers, SPPI Blog, Jan 23, 2015



Seeking a Common Ground

Climate change as a political process

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Jan 26, 2015


Radical greens

By Richard Tol, His Blog, Jan 28, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Review of Recent Scientific Articles by CO2 Science

The Past and Future of Tornado Occurrences in the United States

Brooks, H.E., Carbin, G.W. and Marsh, P.T. 2014. Increased variability of tornado occurrence in the United States.Science 346: 349-352. Jan 28, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Changes in the way tornados are reported makes it difficult to establish if there is any trend.]

Helping Feed the Future World: Earthworms in CO2-Enriched Air

van Groenigen, J.W., Lubbers, I.M., Vos, H.M.J., Brown, G.G., De Deyn, G.B. and van Groenigen, K.J. 2014. Earthworms increase plant production: a meta-analysis. Scientific Reports 4: 10.1038/srep06365. Jan 28, 2015


The World’s Longest Ecosystem CO2 Enrichment Study

Drake, B.G. 2014. Rising sea level, temperature, and precipitation impact plant and ecosystem responses to elevated CO2 on a Chesapeake Bay wetland: review of a 28-year study. Global Change Biology 20: 3329-3343. Jan 27, 2015


“Thus we find clear evidence from data obtained in the real world of important benefits conferred by rising atmospheric CO2 upon nature, evidence that many unfortunately continue to deny.”

The Evolution of Human Health Responses to Extreme Heat Events

Coates, L., Haynes, K., O’Brien, J., McAneney, J. and Dimer de Oliveira, F. 2014. Exploring 167 years of vulnerability: An examination of extreme heat events in Australia 1844-2010. Environmental Science & Policy 42: 33-4., Jan 26, 2015


“the elderly are significantly more vulnerable to the risk of heat-associated death than the general population, and this vulnerability increases with age.” Nevertheless, they clearly state that “death rates amongst seniors also show a decrease with time,” which finding is in harmony with that of Bobb et al. (2014), who found much the same thing for the elderly in the United States, where between 1987 and 2005, the decline in death rate due to heat “was largest among those ≥ 75 years of age.”

Model Issues

Climate Models Disagree On Why Temperature “Wiggles” Occur

Press Release, Duke University, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Link to paper: Regions of significant influence on unforced global mean surface air temperature variability in climate models

By Patrick T. Brown1,*, Wenhong Li1 andShang-Ping Xie2, Journal of Geophysical Research, Jan 22, 2015


On tuning climate models

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 30, 2015


Measurement Issues

What Does Gavin Schmidt’s ‘Warmest’ Year Tell Us About Climate Sensitivity to CO2?

By Jim Steele, WUWT, Jan 25, 2015


Last year tied with 2010 as warmest on record: British data

By Alister, Doyle, Reuters, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Thomas Stocker, a professor at the University of Bern who co-chaired a 2013 U.N. report about climate change, said the recent run of warm years meant “the possibility is quite there that this hiatus is over”.

“On Jan. 16, the U.S. space agency NASA and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration said last year was the warmest on record, just ahead of 2010.”

[SEPP Comment: The U.S. space agency ignores space-age data.]

BEST practices step uncertainty levels in their climate data

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 29, 2015


Temperature Adjustments Around The World

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 29, 2015


NCDC’s Retrograde Step

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 24, 2015


The EPA & Heatwaves

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: The EPA starts with 1950, but historic data, without modern adjustments, show the 1930s was the hottest decade for the US. Avoiding data that is inconsistent with the assertion is cherry-picking.]

Cooling The Past In Bolivia

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 30, 2015


Man-made adjustments transform cooling to warming in Paraguay, South America

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 25, 2015


Global Analysis – Annual 2014

Calculating the Probability of Rankings for 2014


Link to paper: Uncertainty in annual rankings from NOAA’s global temperature time series

By Arguez, Karl, Squires and Vose, Geophysical Research Letters, Nov 27, 2013



Higher Snowfalls Due to Change In Measurement, Not Global Warming.

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 30, 2015



Changing Weather

What Does the Peer-Reviewed Literature Say About Trends in East Coast Winter Storms?

By Roger Pielke, Jr, The Climate Fix, Jan 27, 2015


Blizzard 2015: What Went Wrong With the Forecasting?

By Robert Lee Hotz, Wall Street Journal, Via ICECAP, Jan 28, 2015


Snowpocalypse – not

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Jan 27, 2015


The Blizzard That Wasn’t

By Alan Caruba, Warning Signs, Jan 27, 2015


The Little Blizzard that Couldn’t

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 27, 2015


Did Global Warming Juice Winter Storm Juno?

By Patrick Michaels, CATO, Jan 30, 2015


Repeating News Story: Global Warming To Make Blizzards Worse

By Chip Knappenberger and Patrick Michaels, CATO, Jan 26, 2015


Another snow job

By Cal Thomas, Washington Times, Jan 28, 2015


Forecast Lessons from the Northeast Snowstorm

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Jan 27, 2015


Global Warming Is Snowed Out

By Daniel Greenfield, Frontpage, Jan 29, 2015


Here’s What the Blizzard Is Shutting Down

By Josh Petri and Kelly Gilblom, Bloomberg Business Week, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t William Readdy]


Changing Climate

Study: Siberian permafrost has been warming for 7000 years

Winters in Siberian permafrost regions have warmed since millennia

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 27, 2015


Link to paper: Long-term winter warming trend in the Siberian Arctic during the mid- to late Holocene

By Meyer et al. Nature Geoscience, Jan 26, 2015


Long series of droughts doomed Mexican city 1,000 years ago

By Staff Writers, Berkeley CA (SPX), Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Does the IPCC know this?]

Claim: ‘global warming has been amplified in cities’, ignores infrastructure increase

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 29, 2015


“The fact that the trend was so much stronger at night underscores the role of the heat island effect in urban areas,” said Lattenmaier, one of the authors of the study.

Glacial Advance During The Little Ice Age

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 25, 2015


Changing Seas

Obama directs agencies to prepare federal projects for rising sea levels

By Laura Barron-Lopez, The Hill, Jan 30, 2015



Climate change could cost U.S. coasts $1 trillion by 2100

By Puneet Kollipara, Science Mag, Dec 22, 2014


Link to paper: Joint effects of storm surge and sea-level rise on US Coasts: new economic estimates of impacts, adaptation, and benefits of mitigation policy

By James E. Neumann, Kerry Emanuel, Sai Ravela, Lindsay Ludwig, Paul Kirshen, Kirk Bosma, Jeremy Martinich, Climatic Change, Dec 14, 2014


[SEPP Comment: An exercise to frighten the public by using in models the researchers did not bother to validate.]


Most of Hawaii’s coral recover from mass bleaching

By Audrey McAvoy, AP, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: As they have for eons.]

Ocean Catastrophe Narratives: Something Fishy Going On

By Greg Rehmke, Master Resource, Jan 30, 2015


Link to paper: Reconsidering Ocean Calamities

By Duarte, et al, Bioscience (Oxford Journals) Jan 28, 2015


Ocean could hold key to predicting recurring extreme winters

By Staff Writers, Science Daily, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Link to paper: Historical analogues of the recent extreme minima observed in the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 26°N

By Blaker, et al. Climate Dynamics, January 2015


Small drop in sea level had big impact on southern Great Barrier Reef

By Staff Writers, Sydney, Australia (SPX) Jan 26, 2015


[SEPP Comment: What caused the fall? How is a fall in sea levels an example of the future where sea levels are projected to rise?]

Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice

NSIDC Mark Serreze’s sea ice ‘death spiral’ no longer ‘screaming’ on the way down, now termed to be ‘erratic & bumpy’

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 29, 2015


Link to paper: Influence of internal variability on Arctic sea-ice trends

By Swart, Fyfe, Hawkins, Kay and Jahn, Nature Climate Change, Jan 28, 2015


An Arctic ice cap’s shockingly rapid slide into the sea

By Joby Warrick, Washington Post, Jan 23, 2015


[SEPP Comment: All the adjectives are here, but Arctic ice is expanding.]

Arctic sea ice loss expected to be bumpy in the short term

By Staff Writers, Boulder CO (SPX), Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Ignoring earlier declines in Arctic sea ice.]

Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine

“Peak Food”? No, the Average Person Has More Food to Eat

By Roy Spencer, Global Warming, Jan 29, 2015


“But, without the threat of climate change and reduced food supply, universities and environmental institutes wouldn’t be able to get the money they need to survive, would they?”

Capitalism Defused the Population Bomb

By Chelsea German, CATO, Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: It is human innovation that created the increase in agricultural production.]

Un-Science or Non-Science?

Climate change could mean massive ocean dead zones

Record of past climate change indicates abrupt loss of oxygen

By Josh Dzieza, The Verge, Jan 28, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


“It’s not just about temperature,” says Moffitt. “It’s about disrupting fundamental earth processes that we as humans have understood to be very stable.

[SEPP Comment: According to those who have studied geology, the earth’s systems are not stable. The use of modesl, which have not been validated, makes such studies pure speculation and should be so identified.]

Why Salmon Might Disappear From the Menu

By Emily Gertz, Takeaprt.com, Jan 28, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Link to paper: Adaptive potential of a Pacific salmon challenged by climate change

By Muñoz, Farrell, Heath, & Neff, Nature Climate Change, Dec 22, 2014


[SEPP Comment: The authors may care about the future of salmon, but they do not care about integrity in science. Not only did they fail to validate the models, they also failed to clearly state that their study is speculation.]

Lowering Standards

Another Even Handed Piece From The BBC!

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 28, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Hardly even-handed. Do the proclaimed sensitive areas include the most promising locations for successful extraction of natural gas?]

Fracking ‘could harm wildlife’

By Clair Marshall, BBC, Mar 12, 2015


[SEPP Comment: See link immediately above.]

MPs: Ban fracking to meet carbon targets

By Helen Griggs, BBC, Jan 26, 2015


Boston belching gigantic gobs of greenhouse gas

By Eli Kintisch, Science Mag, Jan 22, 2015 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


[SEPP Comment: The flagship publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science which bills itself as the “World’s Largest General Scientific Society” resorts to a typical propaganda photo of smoke stacks belching steam.]

The money chase, 2016: New head of key House science spending panel likes limited government, unlimited exploration

By Jeffrey Mervis, Science Mag, Jan 28, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Given the bias Science Mag has exhibited against those who question human CO2 emissions are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming, and against those who show dramatic climate change by natural occurrences, is there any doubt how Science Mag will report the money chase?]

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

Climate psychology’s consensus bias

By Andy West, Climate Etc. Jan 30, 2015


Scientists move Doomsday Clock: Global warming apparently an imminent threat

By Rick Moran, American Thinker, Jan 24, 2015


The Responsible Investor’s Guide to Climate Change

By Jeffrey Sachs and Lisa Sachs, Earth Institute at Columbia University, Project Syndicates, Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Do not take investment advice from those who fail to support their central premise with evidence.]

The Prediction Racket

By Steven Hayward, Power Line, Jan 28, 2015


“One of John Kenneth Galbraith’s better and more-sound witticisms was that economic forecasting was invented to make astrology look good. He should have lived long enough to take in climate change predictions.”

Warmists Take the Hardest Hits

By Tony Thomas, Quadrant, Jan 30, 2015


Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?

Public’s and scientists’ views diverge widely on important Issues

By Staff Writer, ACSH, Jan 30, 2015


You Ought to Have a Look: Polls, Polls and More Poles

By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger, CATO, Jan 30, 2015


Public are not buying science “experts” opinions: AAAS survey shows 30-50% gap

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Jan 31, 2015


AAAS Scientists: Consensus on GMO Safety Firmer Than For Human-Induced Climate Change

By Jon Entine, Huff Post, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Most Americans Support Government Action on Climate Change, Poll Finds

By Coral Davenport and Marjorie Connelly, NYT, Jan 30, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Trite poll particularly after decades of government propaganda on the dangers of global warming/climate change. How about starting with the following question, the UN and US government agencies greatly overestimated the amount of global warming during the 21st century, do you think global warming is a serious problem?]

Climate Poll Con Job: ‘When you don’t like the poll numbers, make up your own poll’ – Media Duped Again By Stanford U. Pollster Jon Krosnick’s Shoddy Agenda Driven Climate Polling

By Marc Morano, Climate Depot, No date


From GMOs to Climate, Public Disagrees with Scientists

By Tia Ghose, Live Science, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


Britons believe in climate change… but do they care?

Survey shows 88 per cent of public believe climate is changing yet a record low of just 18 per cent are “very concerned” about it

By Emily Gosden, Telegraph, UK, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

Australia temperatures rising faster than rest of the world: official report

By Jan Wardell, Reuters, jan 26, 2015


“Australia faced a rise in temperature of potentially more than 5 degrees celsius (41 degrees fahrenheit) …”

[SEPP Comment: The new math from Reuters reflects the quality of the article. By most standards 5 degrees C works out to be about 9 degrees F. CSIRO is as poor as NASA-GISS.]

Claim of range-contraction of polar bears due to declines in summer sea ice doesn’t hold up

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Jan 28, 2015


How GHCN Keep Rewriting Reykjavik History

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 30, 2015


Shock News – We’ve Only Got Five Years Left

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 30, 2015


Severe La Nina weather events in Pacific may double due to warming

By Alister Doyle, Reuters, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: The AU CSIRO is getting desperate. The Climate Establishment earlier rejected the idea that frequency of El Ninos increased in warming periods. Now they are saying warming will increase La Ninas? Will frequent El Ninos cause frequent La Ninas? No one has established they can predict either El Ninos or La Ninas ]

The old fabulist of Fleet Street

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 27, 2015


Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.

Willie Soon, will he soon be fired?

By Greg Laden, The X Blog, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t Climate Etc.]


[SEPP Comment: Petition by Forecast the Facts: Where is the substantiation that Soon receives funding from the fossil fuel industry?]

Government Funding Is A Conflict Of Interest: Cowardly Calls For Climate Scientist’s Firing

By William Briggs, His Blog, Jan 31, 2015 [H/t Climate Etc.]


[SEPP Comment: Briggs is a co-author (with Willie Soon] on the paper that presented a simplified model that, according to the researchers, out-performs general climate models since 1979.]

Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda on Children

Outed by FOIA – EPA strategy memo reveals deep flaws in the integrity of the agency, and lack of integrity of the press

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 26, 2015


Link to memo to “Richard Windsor” better known as EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, at the time of the memo.


“Possibly most refreshing is the acknowledgement of EPA’s symbiotic relationship with a “cadre of reporters” who EPA expects to demand an agenda — according to EPA, just like pressure groups — to which demands EPA will respond.”

[SEPP Comment: Using the EPA Children’s Health Office for the “mission” of indoctrination about ice caps, polar bears, and individual respiratory illnesses – all threatened by CO2 emissions?]

Expanding the Orthodoxy

Spiegel: Pontifical Academy Of Sciences Pushing For Climate Treaty…Finds Fossil Fuels Akin To “Modern Slavery”!

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 31, 2015


U.S. EPA chief hopes Pope will spur concern on climate change

By Philip Pullela, Reuters, Jan 30, 2015


Celebrities, the UN & Ad Agencies

By Donna Laframboise, NFC, Jan 26, 2015


UN members agree on major policy for ocean and marine life protection

States took a major step toward urgently needed ocean protection at the United Nations over the weekend agreeing to develop a legally binding agreement to conserve marine life in the high seas. After four days of deliberations States reached consensus to begin negotiating the first UN treaty that specifically addresses the protection of marine life in an area covering half the planet – those ocean areas beyond national jurisdiction.

By Staff Writers, Merco Press, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t Dennis Amberler]


Questioning European Green

EU Carbon Plummets as Panel Rejects Market Fix Recommendation

By Ewa Krukowska and Ian Wishart, Bloomberg, Jan 22, 2015


Europe Burns $140 Billion On A Big Green Mistake

By Kerry Jackson, IBD, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Funding Issues

ARPA-E Announces $60 M in Funding Opportunities for Disruptive [?] Energy Technologies

Two New Programs Aim to Improve the Energy Efficiency of Thermoelectric Power Plants and to Increase the Yield from Renewable Energy Crops

Press Release, ARPA-E, No date – Accessed Jan 30, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Research for cooling processes that do not use water and increased bio-fuels for a nation that has abundant fossil fuels.]

Ocean science needs more funding: US [National Research Council]

By Staff Writers, AFP, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


The Political Games Continue

Koch-backed network aims to spend nearly $1 billion on 2016 elections

By Matea Gold, Washington Post, Jan 26, 2015


Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Taxes

Just Say No To A Carbon Tax, Maybe To An Energy Tax

By S. Fred Singer, IBD, Jan 23, 2015


Gas-Price Demagogues Feed Off Economic Ignorance

By Walter Williams, IBD, Jan 27, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


The climate debate is brutal and dysfunctional, but there’s still a way out

By Chris Mooney, Washington Post, Jan 29, 2015


Editorial: Record temps + cheap gas = Time for carbon tax

Editorial, Tampa Bay Times, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


[SEPP Comment: How falsely claimed temperature records justify taxing consumers from the benefits of reduced fuel prices.]

Industry committee ‘silenced’ itself on EU carbon rules

By Peter Teffer, EUObserver, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Subsidies and Mandates Forever

The Big Untruth

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Jan 30, 2015


Link to Testimony: Federal Financial Support for Fuels and Energy Technologies

By Terry Dian, Senior Advisor, CBO, Mar 13, 2013


[SEPP Comment: According to the Congressional Budget Office testimony subsidies to fossil fuels are about 20% of total US government financial support and subsidies to renewable energy are 45%.]

West Virginia Moves to Repeal Alternative Energy Mandate [Corrected]

By Thomas Overton, Power Mag, Jan 23, 2015


EPA and other Regulators on the March

Update on Textgate, EPA’s Burgeoning Transparency Scandal

By Chris Horner, Global Warming.org, Jan 30, 2015



EPA Chief: ‘Aspen’s Climate Could Be a Lot Like That of Amarillo, TX’ in 2100

By Jeryl Bier, The Weekly Standard, Jan 29, 2015


[SEPP Comment: EPA Administrator is trying to get the politics out of the issue!]


The EPA’s Newest Strategy to Sneakily Restrict Fracking, Drilling

By Stephen Moore, The Daily Signal, Jan 25, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]



The EPA Uses Children (and Adults) as Guinea Pigs

By John Dale Dunn MD JD, American Thinker, Jan 26, 2015



EPA Exploits Americans’ Worries To Promote Its Agenda

By Kerry Jackson, IBD, Jan 28, 2015


The Clean Power Plan’s Dirty Secret

Obama plans to put the bungling EPA in charge of the nation’s electricity.

Could be very, very Costly

By William Yeatman, U.S. News, Jan 26, 2015


Energy Issues – Non-US

A big day for shale gas

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 26, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Anti-fossil fuel groups are busy in the UK]

Britain’s Guardian: Shale gas ‘questionable’

By Daniel J. Graeber, London (UPI), Jan 27, 2015


[SEPP Comment: The Guardian newspaper is among the anti-shale gas groups.]

Times Leader: Shale Of The Century

Editorial, The Times, Via GWPF, Jan 25, 2015


Diluting the truth

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 29, 2015


On choosing experts

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 30, 2015


Link to article: Headline numbers: Is fracking viable at current prices?

By Anthony Reuben, BBC, Jan 28, 2015


Fracking divides UK media as Lancashire Council defers Cuadrilla decision

By Mat Hope, The Carbon Brief, Jan 28, 2015


Fracking: MPs demanding ban ‘listened to ill-informed green groups not science’

Environmental Audit Committee issues report calling for a moratorium on shale gas exploration, citing fears over the health and environmental impacts of fracking

By Emily Gosden, Telegraph, UK, Jan 26, 2015


Trouble in Eden

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 28, 2015


Former German Minister Of Economics Calls Energiewende “A Disaster”…”Careened Completely Out Of Control”

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 27, 2015


Leaders: Fracking moratorium

MOD [Ministry of Defence] Incompetence

Editorial The Scotsman, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Russia needs oil at $78 to break even

By Daniel J. Graeber, Moscow (UPI,) Jan 27, 2015


Energy Issues — US

Antifracking: the Russian connection

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jan 28, 2015


Colorado liberals make peace with fracking, reject emergency moratorium

By Valerie Richardson, Washington Times, Jan 28, 2015


Oil Price Collapse Hurting Some More Than Others

By Nick Cunningham of Oilprice.com

Washington DC (SPX) Jan 26, 2015


Washington’s Control of Energy

Senate votes to build Keystone, defying veto threat from Obama

By Laura Barron-Lopez, The Hill, Jan 29, 2015


Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska won’t protect polar bears from thick spring ice

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Jan 25, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Stop drilling in the Arctic by whatever means possible.]

Obama’s Alaska plans spark Republican ire

By Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, Jan 26, 2015


Obama seeks bigger wilderness designation in Alaska refuge

By Becky Bohrer and Jim Kuhhenn, AP, AP, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Obama’s Allowing More Drilling, But It’s Not All It’s Cracked Up to Be

By Katie Tubb, Daily Signal, Jan 28, 2015


Energy boom muddles Obama’s climate agenda

By Zack Colman, Washington Examiner, Jan 28, 2015


Keystone filibuster fails, pipeline poised for approval

By Stephen Dinan, Washington Times, Jan 29, 2015


Obama: We’re No. 1 in Wind Power

By Terence Jeffrey, CNS News, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Low prices to delay ‘peak oil demand’ past 2030, says BofA

By Arpan Varghese and Ratul, Reuters, Jan 26, 2015 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: WHAT?]

Conoco, Occidental and Shell cut 2015 budgets on crude slide

By Anna Driver and Ernest Scheyder, Reuters, Jan 29, 2015


Return of King Coal?

India’s climate change pledge won’t hinder its coal output plan

By Urmi Goswami, Times of India, Jan 29, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


Nuclear Energy and Fears

Blizzard Takes Down Pilgrim Nuclear Plant [Updated]

By Thomas Overton, Power Mag, Jan 27, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Loss of the GRID did not cause a problem.]

The EPA’s “Carbon Rule” Ignores Nuclear Power

By William F. Shughart II, The Independent Institute, Jan 19, 2015


Nuclear regulators say Yucca disposal site would be safe

By Timothy Cama, The Hill, Jan 29, 2015


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other

Drought sees Rio’s main hydro plant turned off

By Staff Writers, Rio De Janeiro (AFP), Jan 22, 2015


New Report Urges Western Governments to Reconsider Reliance on Biofuels

By Justin Gillis, NYT, Jan 28, 2015 [H/t Anne Debeil]


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles

Disappointing Year for EVs and PHEVs

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Jan 27, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Given the heavy federal subsidies plus state subsidies, perhaps the public has been fortunate the sales have been poor.]

Tesla Model S Aluminum Body: Why Repair Costs Are Higher

By David Noland, Green Car Reports, Jan 15, 2015 [H/t Bishop Hill]


[SEPP Comment: What about the possible repair costs of the aluminum F-150 Ford pick-up truck?]

Towards mass marketed electric vehicles

By Robert Ellison, Climate Etc. Jan 29, 2015


Carbon Schemes

MIT Study: Carbon Sequestration May Not Work as Advertised

By Aaron Larson, Power Mag, Jan 28, 2015


Link to paper: Mechanisms for mechanical trapping of geologically sequestered carbon dioxide

By Yossi Cohen, Daniel H. Rothman, The Royal Society, Proceedings A, Jan 21, 2015


[SEPP Comment: But that is not what the DOE and the EPA claimed!]

California Dreaming

California aims to slash greenhouse gas emissions through 2030

By Staff Writers, Berkeley CA (SPX), Jan 26, 2015


Claim: California’s policies can significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions through 2030

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 26, 2015


New Berkeley Lab model finds state will meet 2020 reduction goals

Health, Energy, and Climate

Mortuaries overflowing as freezing weather causes rise in deaths

Earlier this month Age UK warned one older person could die every seven minutes from the cold this winter

By Bill Gardner, Telegraph, UK, Jan 19, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


A Profile in Cowardice: Cuomo’s Fracking Ban (Commentary)

By Gilbert Ross, Syracuse.com, Jan 26, 2015


Environmental Industry

Paris mayor wants to ban polluting trucks, buses

By Staff Writers, Paris (AFP), Jan 28, 2015


[SEPP Comment: Shall we see a return of non-polluting horses?]

Deepak Lal: The eco-fundamentalists

The Modi government is right to crack down on foreign financing of environmental NGOs

By Deepak Lal, Business Standard, India, Jan 23, 2015 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: Classifying extreme greens as religious fundamentalists.]

Foreign Firm Funding U.S. Green Groups Tied to State-Owned Russian Oil Company

Executives at a Bermudan firm funneling money to U.S. environmentalists run investment funds with Russian tycoons

By Lachlan Markay, Washington Free Beacon, Jan 27, 2015


Green Groups Go Red, Team With Putin To Fight Fracking

Editorial, IBD, Jan 27, 2015 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Is Russia Financing the Anti-Fracking Campaign?

By John Hinderaker, Power Line, Jan 27, 2015


Other Scientific News

A sad footnote to Explorer Day

By Paul Shlichta, American Thinker, Jan 31, 2015


Other News that May Be of Interest

Boeing will be first to carry US astronauts to space

By Kerry Sheridan , Miami (AFP), Jan 26, 2015


US Emergency Services to Depend On Russian Satellites?

By Staff Writers, Moscow, Russia (Sputnik), Jan 23, 2015




University College London Professor Of Climatology Mark Maslin Claims Mankind Now Able To Control Climate!

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jan 26, 2015


Monday Mirthiness – polar melting test

By Warren Smith, WUWT, Jan 26, 2015


Polar bear penises not breaking due to PCBs – new paper full of “coulds” and “maybes”

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Jan 28, 2015


Time Magazine’s Jeffrey Kluger writes what might possibly be the stupidest article about climate ever – climate change causes volcanoes

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jan 30, 2015



0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 1, 2015 11:16 pm

Speaking of energy, I just found out that China cut its deadline from 25 years to 10 years for a working Thorium reactor design:
Part of truncated deadline is due to the terrible smog problem China is facing, and I’m sure the instability of the Middle East and Russia were also contributing factors. I think the long initial 25-yr deadline was announced in effort to create a competitive advantage.
If China does start a large-scale LFTR rollout in 10 years, a second HUGE wave of production will roll into China to take advantage of cheap, clean, safe and inexhaustible LFTR power…. The Chinese are experts at deception…
It’s completely INSANE the US isn’t pushing through legislation to allow immediate LFTR development in the US, especially since we developed LFTR technology in the 60’s…
I’ve contacted all major US Senators/Congressmen on this issue and only Senator Rand Paul promised me he’d have his staff draft legislation to make it happen (the other legislators just sent me auto-replies of thanks and later sent me e-mails asking for political donations…), although I haven’t seen Senator Paul make ANY progress on this, yet…
I hope Senator Paul makes LFTRs part of his political platform during his upcoming presidential bid.

Reply to  SAMURAI
February 2, 2015 4:48 am

“especially since we developed LFTR technology in the 60’s…”
Where did you get such nonsense?
You really “contacted all major US Senators/Congressmen on this issue?” You’ll never get that mess cleared up.

Reply to  Gamecock
February 2, 2015 6:05 am

Gamecock– Dr. Alvin Weinberg developed the LFTR in the late 50’s. Oak Ridge National Labs actually built and ran a Molten Salt Reactor from 1964~69 and it worked perfectly.
Yes, I did actually contact all the major Senate/Congressional power brokers… I’m a light-a-candle kind of guy. Yeah, perhaps sending all those e-mails took some time, but if Senator Rand Paul actually becomes President, and implements a LFTR program, I could have played a role in changing US history.
Kind of cool if you think about it…

Reply to  Gamecock
February 2, 2015 6:42 am

Dr. Alvin Weinberg developed the LFTR concept in the 1950’s. Based on Weinberg’s LFTR concept, a Molten Salt Reactor was built and run at Oak Rodge National Labs from 1965~69 and it ran flawlessly.
Yes, I did contact 100’s of Senators and Congressman about the urgent need for LFTR legislation.
Only Senator Paul expressed interest in doing so. If Rand Paul does become President and does implement a LFTR program as promised, it’s kind of cool to realize I may have played a small role in changing US history.
Other than being cynical, what have you done?

Reply to  Gamecock
February 2, 2015 7:18 am

There was no thorium in the Oak Ridge reactor. Double-ought zero.
All major US Senators and Congressmen will know that, or their staff will, or they will find out when they research it, if they do. You have succeeded in making their kooks list.

Reply to  Gamecock
February 3, 2015 6:15 pm

Gamecock- The first Oak Ridge Lab (ORNL) experiment was simply a proof of concept test of Molten Salt Reactors, and it worked flawlessly.
The next stage was for a LFTR reactor, but the powers that be, killed it; not because the MSR test failed, but because it was a resounding success…
By the time ORNL was ready to move to the LFTR stage, the bureaucracy and crony contracts for Light Water Reactors (LWR) were already firmly in place. The Defense Dept was also pushing for LWRs/Fast Breeder reactors as they produced the right type of isotopes required to process weapons-grade fissile material, which they needed for their nuclear arsenal in the Cold War. LFTRs produce U233, which is a real pain to process to weapons-grade fissile material.
Anyway, China’s first MSR starts this year, their first LFTR starts in 2017 and they now have until 2024 to develop a commercial LFTR for large-scale rollout.
China is going to eat our lunch again.

Lance Wallace
February 1, 2015 11:51 pm

“Giordano Bruno, a certified heretic on religious-doctrine grounds, who dabbled in astronomy…”
Bruno was no mere dabbler. In multiple publications, he considered that we can see many stars, guessed that there might therefore be many planets, and extended that to consider that their number might be infinite. This is not far from present-day cosmology; for a man of his time, it is a wonderful extrapolation of the Copernican picture. True, he also had some problems with Catholic dogma such as the virgin birth, but in that he is not now alone.

Reply to  Lance Wallace
February 2, 2015 9:44 am

Bruno Giordano? Is that where we are now in the “climate disruption” debate? Jeez…
Let’s get back to reality. Gina McCarthy, the head of the EPA –for cryin’ out loud– tracks up Gaia’s carpet with her brazen-hypocrite, size “12” Xtra-wide carbon foot-prints just to get some face-time and schmooze with the Pope–for St. Pete’s sake! I mean, like, she could have conducted her little, CO2-spew trip as a “pollution”-free video-conference, and saved tons and tons of hot-house gas emissions. But no, not our Gina! And does anybody know?–did the Pope reprimand her for not being a good steward of the environment? He must have, right?
But it gets worse! You see, it’s been reliably reported (Google: “Washington TImes Charles Hurt $75K a day over a pond) that Gina, all under-the-radar and everything (ever wonder why the EPA has “lost” some of Gina’s text-messages?), has engineered her EPA headquarters-building so that it now functions as a big, fat, giant, merde-express injection-device that shoots the vegan creep-out stool-extrusions of Gina and that whole, brown-nose Dookie-mafia, she has surrounded herself with at her EPA headquarters, FROM THE AGENCY-CRAPPERS, RAW AND WITHOUT TREATMENT, INTO THE POTOMAC RIVER!!! I’M NOT KIDDING!!!
I mean, like, it’s gotten so bad that several highly-competitive NGO’s have already formed around the Beltway’s latest thrill-seeking, high-risk fad–eco-turd spotting (some big, big money to be had, I hear, in validated pictures of Gina’s Potomac-borne “floaters”, and even bigger money in video footage of her “sinkers” bumpin’ along the river’s bottom (and don’t even get me started on that little, tourist-trap “museum” our “copro-observant” betters are planning with YOUR TAX MONEY!!!)).
So go ahead, hive-bozos, just try and dismiss this whole, EPA, “Caca-Boudin”-Gate outrage as the conspiracy-theory “ideation” of raving, right-wing nutters. Just try! And, I mean, like, can’t the Pope put a fatwa, or something like that, on Gina’s butt and make her clean up her act?

February 2, 2015 1:05 am

“Pope,” like other titles, such as “king,” should not be capitalized unless it precedes the name of a holder of that title. The Chicago Manual of Style states:

Pope John Paul II; the pope; papacy

February 2, 2015 4:16 am

“But, it would be proper to recognize that their equipment needs improvement and that uncertainty of such forecasts needs to be emphasized.”
We were wrong, so give us more money.

February 2, 2015 7:29 am

Please check the number of miles of US North Atlantic coast line 31,200 miles seems to be a bit large. 3,120 miles is probably more like it. Thanks.

February 2, 2015 7:34 am

“Now the President has a choice. Does he anger the anti-fossil-fuel green groups whom he promised he would veto the measure, or does he anger labor unions and others who supported the bill and who traditionally support the Democratic Party?”
That’s easy. When the conflict is between working class white males, and trustafarians, go with the trustifaruans. This isn’t even close.

February 2, 2015 7:37 am

The legislation was messy, with multiple amendments considered including two promoting energy efficiency and one declaring a sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax that passed.

If you ever want to see how not to make a bill watch Congress debating a bill on CSPAN. Each bill becomes a bucket for congressman to get a “little something” for their special interest groups and then subsequent bragging rights to those special interests during elections. It’s horse trading all right, but unfortunately trading in items irrelevant to the bill being “debated”.
The keystone pipeline bill amendment “climate change is not a hoax” is meaningless language to add to the bill except for election season voting. Once it is understood that writing critical federal laws is a by-product of political advertising, it is easier to see why Congress is such a mess.
The ironic consequence is that when/if Obama vetoes the bill, Republicans can charge Obama with disagreeing with Climate change not being a hoax. And the nonsense just keeps on rolling on.

February 2, 2015 8:58 am

Did the Senate bill address the issue of immoral coercion – expropriating land?
I’d vote against Keystone until the pipeline company shows it is moral.
The work of http://www.ij.org is related.

February 3, 2015 8:07 am

Oh, tearing up peoples land and risking environmental disaster for oil that will mostly just end up overseas is the GOP’$ idea of Patriotism! They always resort to eminent domain, but people try to push back. They’ll absolutely find a way to do whatever their billionaire masters instruct them to do so as the masters can progress ever closer to being the first trillionaire.
Even if it poisons their grandma.http://www.publicintegrity.org/
Then the cowards will just run away from the big messes they’ve made.
The One Percent’s Great Escape

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights