Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #248

The Week That Was: 2016-11-12 (November 12, 2016) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

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

When Does A Scientific Assumption Become a Myth? As discussed in the October 22 TWTW, the influential 1979 Charney Report asserted that laboratory results showed that any increase in surface temperatures from a doubling of atmosphere carbon dioxide (CO2) would be very modest. Further, the influence of CO2 on temperatures is logarithmic. As the concentration increases, the total influence increases, but the influence of each additional amount declines. For practical purposes, this warming would be insignificant and cannot be differentiated from natural variation.

As the Report stated: “The primary effect of an increase of CO2 is to cause more absorption of thermal radiation from the earth’s surface and thus to increase the air temperature in the troposphere.”

The Report further stated: “A strong positive feedback mechanism is the accompanying increase of moisture, which is an even more powerful absorber of terrestrial radiation.”

“We estimate the most probable global warming for a doubling of CO2 to be near 3ºC with a probable error of ±1.5ºC. Our estimate is based primarily on a review of a series of calculations with three-dimensional models of the global atmospheric circulation, which is summarized in Chapter 4.”

The existence of this strong positive feedback, the so-called hotspot in the atmosphere, that amplifies, by several times, the direct warming from CO2 is the major contention between the global warming advocates and many global warming skeptics, the so-called deniers.

Without the hotspot, any warming produced by an increase in atmospheric CO2 will likely be beneficial. We have satellite photos showing an increase in greening from the increase of CO2, which is beneficial to green plants and to the environment and humanity.

At the time of the Charney Report, there were no comprehensive global temperature data to confirm or deny the existence of the hotspot. The surface data were sparse, and concentrated in densely populated, industrialized areas. The atmospheric data were from weather balloons, which were a tiny sliver of the atmosphere.

We now have over 35 years of comprehensive atmospheric data from satellites, independently confirmed by weather balloons. They show no strong positive feedback mechanism. Of course, heat is absorbed in phase change from liquid water to water vapor, then given off by the phase change in the atmosphere when condensing from water vapor to water droplets. Why this does not occurring is not clear. But if it did, the earth probably would have experienced more wild fluctuations in temperatures from natural variation. Even more so than with Ice Ages.

Without the hotspot, all the claims based on global climate models of drastic consequences from global warming/climate change are pure speculation, unsupported by evidence. It is past time to assert that dire conclusions in the Charney Report, the Assessment Reports of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), are dubious. One can learn that even the best scientific minds can be misled by plausible ideas, concepts, and that one must consistently reference the best available physical evidence and data. See Article # 1 and links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and Defending the Orthodoxy.


Quote of the Week. “We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.” – George Orwell [H/t Samuel Simon]


Number of the Week: 55% up 22% by 2020!


Dansgaard-Oeschger Events: Writing in No Tricks Zone, Kenneth Richard discusses papers on Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, or D-O cycles, which indicate that: “Unlike the relatively stable climate Earth has experienced over the last 10,000 years, Earth’s climate system underwent a series of abrupt oscillations and reorganizations during the last ice age between 18,000 and 80,000 years ago (Dansgaard 1984, Bond et al. 1997, 1999). …There are twenty-five of these distinct warming-cooling oscillations. These include up to 10°C (in the Greenland region) were reached within as little as 50 years or about 2°C per decade.”

One can assert that D-O events apply only to the Arctic, or to Greenland, specifically. However, alarmists claim that a warming of the Arctic and of Greenland are the result of CO2 caused warming. The alarmists have generally failed to discuss D-O Events and to separate this natural variability from the influence of CO2. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


West Antarctic Fault / Rift System: The November 5 TWTW discussed the West Antarctic Fault / Rift System which is causing melting of ice in some parts the west Antarctic from geothermal heat. With Secretary of State John Kerry going to Antarctica, we can expect to see more reports on ice melt in the west Antarctic claiming it is a result of CO2-caused global warming. It is likely the reports will ignore the fault / rift system and geothermal heat flow. There is nothing new about the system, with papers appearing as early as 1982, which are available on the web. See links under Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice.


US Election: Paraphrasing Shakespeare in Macbeth, the hurly-burly’s done and the battle’s lost and won. It is too early to make predictions about what a Trump administration will do, or how the Obama administration will react to the possible end of his legacy in trying to control carbon dioxide emissions. In 2009, cap-and-trade, called the Waxman-Markey Bill, died in Congress. The Bill was passed by the House was but not brought to the floor of the Senate for discussion or vote, because it would have been defeated. Afterwards, President Obama famously said he has a pen and a phone, and struck out without Congress.

By evading the responsibilities of seeking advice and consent of Congress, and legislative approval on many actions, Mr. Obama may have made his actions temporary. Executive actions as well as executive agreements can be changed with a change in the executive office.

For example, in 2009 the EPA famously declared that greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide emissions, endanger public health and welfare – the Endangerment Finding. The evidence is extremely thin, relying on the speculated hotspot, discussed above, and highly suspect global climate models, which have not been validated.

As a career professional in EPA at the time (from 1971-2010), Alan Carlin wrote against the endangerment finding and was told not to write about climate issues while he was employed there. Immediately prior to the election he co-wrote a letter to the Inspector General of EPA requesting “that EPA forthwith reconsider – or, more accurately, that it properly consider for the first time – its so-called ‘Endangerment Finding’ (EF) of December 2009 with respect to atmospheric greenhouse gases. As you know, in the EF EPA concluded that certain atmospheric greenhouse gases ‘endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.’”

Others, such as E&E Legal, have obtain significant evidence of a questionable close working relationship between green organizations and the EPA in developing the endangerment finding and the anti-coal programs of the EPA and, subsequently, the administration’s power plan. How this plays out remains to be seen. Certainly, the failure of the climate establishment to demonstrate the existence of the so-called hotspot draws into question the global climate models and the endangerment finding.

Without the endangerment finding the entire EPA regulatory edifice constructed on it will collapse.

As a side note, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is heading the Trump transition team for EPA, a temporary position. SEPP Chairman Fred Singer and Ken Haapala have known Ebell for several years and usually Haapala attends monthly meetings headed by Ebell discussing environmental issues. SEPP joined CEI in litigation against the endangerment finding. Ebell is competent, cool headed, and low key – a good fit for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the agency. See links under After The US Election!


COP-22: The 22nd Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has begun in Marrakech, Morocco (COP-22). No doubt, the festivities are subdued given the results of the US election. President-elect Trump is not a fan of carbon dioxide-caused global warming.

There will be a significant effort to try to claim that the US is compelled to meet the Paris Agreement, which President Obama signed but did not submit to Congress or to the Senate for approval as a treaty. Some may claim that the UNFCCC is a treaty and the US is obligated to the Paris Agreement under UNFCCC action. However, the Senate approval of the UNFCCC contained caveats which have not been met, opening significant legal dispute. Further, the UNFCCC accepted Palestine as a member, which is contrary to US law. The fireworks will not be a celebratory display. See links under After Paris! and After The US Election!


Additions and Corrections: Last week, TWTW brought up the term Schneeflaute and referenced a photo of snow covered solar panels. The photo was not posted. The TWTW incorrectly stated that the photo was taken at an IPCC conference. The photo was taken at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Eastern Switzerland. At an elevation of 1,560 m (5,120 ft.), Davos is the highest “town” in Europe with a population of 11,000. TWTW apologizes for the error and appreciates the correction.


Number of the Week: 55% up 22% by 2020! Prior to the election China announced that its 5-year plan called for a major expansion of coal-fired power generation. Even though the percentage of coal-generation to total generation will drop, the increase in coal-fired generation will be up about 22%.

According to reports: “the National Energy Administration said it would raise coal-fired power capacity from around 900 gigawatts last year to as high as 1,100 gigawatts by 2020. The roughly 200-gigawatt increase alone is more than the total power capacity of Canada.”




Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008


Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, NIPCC, Nov 23, 2015


Download with no charge


Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2013


Summary: http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/ccr2a/pdf/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2014


Summary: https://www.heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Challenging the Orthodoxy

On the Existence of a ‘Tropical Hot Spot’ and the Validity of EPA’s CO2 Endangerment Finding

By James Wallace, John Christy, and Joseph D’Aleo Aug 2016 [Shortened version]


Prepared Testimony to House Committee on Science, Space & Technology

By John Christy, UAH, Feb 2, 2016



8 New Papers Reveal ‘Natural’ Global Warming Reaches Amplitudes Of 10°C In Just 50 Years With No CO2 Influence

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Nov 11, 2016


Tossing another climate scare talking point into the circular file

By Anthony J. Sadar, American Thinker, Nov 10, 2016


“My letter noted the teaser on the back cover of the [1977] book that claimed: ‘Northern hemisphere temperatures have been falling steadily since the 1940s. Glaciers are advancing once again. Scientists no longer debate the coming of a new ice age: the question now is when?’”

Defending the Orthodoxy

Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment

Ad Hoc Study Group on Carbon Dioxide and Climate

By Jule G. Charney, et al, Climate Research Board, July 23-27, 1979



Radical Realism About Climate Change

By Lili Fuhr, Project Syndicate, Nov 2, 2016


Question Authority, But Trust Science

By Faye Flam, Bloomberg, Nov 6, 2016 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


“According to the last report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate models are converging on a temperature rise of 1.5 to 4.5 degrees Celsius, or even higher, by the end of the century if emissions continue unabated. That’s become more than just an opinion. But in the WSJ editorial, the authors say carbon emissions will warm the planet by only 1 degree Celsius. “When a claim falls that far from established science, even heroes owe us an explanation.””

“I would say that when the models fall so far from reality, the modelers owe us an explanation! – Clyde Spencer”

Climate change: Low-hanging fruit ripe for the picking

By Marlowe Hood, AFP, Nov 3, 2016 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: Curbing methane leaks will do little or nothing. The absorption bands are saturated by water vapor.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Trumping the elites

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Nov 9, 2016


“The elites can only run things with the American people’s permission. Trump is the people’s way of withdrawing their permission. Wolfe’s novel was titled ‘the Bonfire of the Vanities.’ The Vanities or sins of the elite in the early 21st Century is to think that they are ultimately in control.”

Audit CSIRO: they lack evidence says Senator Malcolm Roberts

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Nov 7, 2016


After Paris!

10,000 Fly In For Doomed UN Climate Talks

By Ben Webster, The Times, Via GWPF, Nov 5, 2016


India’s Signature to Climate Change Treaty Fraught With Peril

By Megan Ingram, Real Clear Energy, Nov 9, 2016


New Paper Asks ‘What Does The Paris Agreement Actually Do?’ Answer: Nothing. CO2 Emissions Continue Rising Unabated.

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Nov 7, 2016


After The US Election!

A Proposed Early Priority for the Trump Administration: A Letter to USEPA to Reconsider and Withdraw Its GHG Endangerment Finding

By Alan Carlin, Carlin Economics and Science, Nov 9, 2016


You Ought to Have a Look: Advice for Trump’s Transition Team

By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger, CATO, Nov 11, 2016


Oil, Coal Seen As Winners With Donald Trump Victory

Editorial, WSJ, Via GWPF, Nov 10, 2016


“The Paris Agreement from a U.S. perspective is a dead agreement walking.”

Trump can kill UN climate deal, warns EU carbon market chief – the end is nigh

By Staff Writers, ICECAP, Nov 9, 2016


Chart of the Day

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Nov 9, 2016


“Looks like the election models and forecasts are about as bad as those we’ve seen in climate ‘science’”.

Myron Ebell is a hope for the return of sanity to the climate policymaking

By Luboš Motl, The Reference Frame, Nov 10, 2016


Some Climate Realities for the Incoming Administration to Consider

By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger, CATO, Nov 11, 2016


Marrakech versus Washington

By Martin Livermore, The Scientific Alliance, Nov 11, 2016


Energy Independence

Trump Transition Team web site


Finally, Warmists Find a Real Threat

By Tony Thomas, Quadrant, Nov 12, 2016


Four Obama climate-change efforts that probably will get scrapped now

By Tom DiChristopher, CNBC, Nov 9, 2016


‘Just scrap’ Obama energy rules, Trump adviser says

By Bill Loveless, USA Today, Nov 9, 2016


Obama’s Environmental Legacy Just Went Up in Smoke

“You can pretty much burn the Paris agreement.”

By Matthew Philips, Bloomberg, Nov 10, 2016


Trump Has A Chance To Pull U.S. Out Of Climate Accord

By Christopher Joyce, NPR, Nov 10, 2016


“Another potential threat to the accord is a $100 billion-a-year fund promised to developing countries if they joined the Paris deal. If the U.S. backs out of that, it might look to developing countries like a bait and switch.”

What Will President Trump Do About Energy?

By Michael Lynch, Forbes, Nov 9, 2016


Todd Stern warns killing accord would be ‘hugely damaging’

By Jean Chemnick, E&E, Nov 10, 2016


“EPA transition team head, Myron Ebell, said must happen anyway under domestic law because of the status the body has granted to Palestine (ClimateWire, March 23).”

The Administration’s Plan – Push-Back

Senators Slam Obama for Misleading Other Countries to Pass UN Climate Treaty

By Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, Nov 4, 2016


Link to letter from 14 leading Republican Senators to John Kerry: http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/244c9583-e2ec-47cf-a329-28c7c9f64fe3/letter-to-unfccc-re-paris-agreement-final.pdf

By Senators Inhofe, et al. Nov 3, 2016


Social Benefits of Carbon

Carbon-hungry plants impede growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide

By Staff Writers, Science Daily, Nov 8, 2016 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


Link to paper: Recent pause in the growth rate of atmospheric CO2 due to enhanced terrestrial carbon uptake

By Trevor F. Keenan, Nature Communications, Nov 8, 2016


From the abstract: The pause in the atmospheric CO2 growth rate provides further evidence of the roles of CO2 fertilization and warming-induced respiration, and highlights the need to protect both existing carbon stocks and regions, where the sink is growing rapidly. [Boldface added]

[SEPP Comment: The mystery of the missing heat exposed! Another crisis revealed!]

Problems in the Orthodoxy

Europe at Risk of Missing 2030 Climate Goal, Researchers Say

By Ewa Krukowska, Bloomberg, Nov 8, 2016


Germany Fails To Approve National Climate Plan

By Staff Writers, Deutsche Welle, Via GWPF, Nov 5, 2016


Some of China’s green projects are “cleaner than others”, says former UN climate change chief

The rapid growth of China’s green bonds market suggests it could one day be a global leader in sustainable investment, but hurdles remain

By Eric Ng, South China Morning Post, Nov 4, 2016 [H/t Dennis Ambler]


Seeking a Common Ground

They may not like it, but scientists must work with President Trump

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Nov 11, 2016


Review of Recent Scientific Articles by CO2 Science

Two Thousand Years of Chinese Climate History: What It Tells Us

Ge, Quansheng, Zheng, Jingyun, Hao, Zhixin, H., Liu, Yang and Li, Mingqi. 2016. Recent advances on reconstruction of climate and extreme events in China for the past 2000 years. Journal of Geographic Sciences 26: 827-854. Nov 8, 2016


“And so it is that we find today’s climate alarmists erroneously expressing great concern about what would appear to be nothing unusual or unprecedented about the degree of warming and the frequency and severity of droughts that have been experienced in China — and likely much of the rest of the world as well — over the course of the industrial era.”

CO2 Enrichment of Air Boosts African Trees Water Use Efficiencies

Wils, T.H.G., Robertson, I., Woodborne, S., Hall, G., Koprowski, M. and Eshetu, Z. 2016. Anthropogenic forcing increases the water-use efficiency of African trees. Journal of Quaternary Science 31: 386-390. Nov 9, 2016


Modelling Precipitation Cycles Over Major Asian River Basins

Hasson, S., Pascale, S., Lucarini, V. and Bohner, J. 2016. Seasonal cycle of precipitation over major river basins in South and Southeast Asia: A review of the CMIP5 climate models data for present climate and future climate projections. Atmospheric Research 180: 42-63. Nov 10, 2016


“Hasson et al. conclude that (7) ‘state-of-the-art coupled models need to be improved [i] enormously and [ii] meaningfully, particularly for the representation of region-specific geophysical characteristics and their interaction with the physical processes that are presently [i] absent completely or [ii] represented inadequately.’ And so the quest continues.”

Models v. Observations

NOAA Forced To Totally Overhaul Winter Forecast For Northern Europe, Russia, As Cold Spreads

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Nov 10, 2016


Model Issues

Climate modelers open up their black boxes to scrutiny

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Nov 5, 2016


Link to paper: Climate scientists open up their black boxes to scrutiny

By Paul Voosen, Science Oct 28, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Access to the article is restricted!]

Changing Weather

Watch Global CO2 jump with El Niño over time – then look at the whys

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Oct 31, 2016


Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice

Evidence of rapid Cenozoic uplift of the shoulder escarpment of the Cenozoic West Antarctic rift system and a speculation on possible climate forcing

By John C. Behrendt and Alan Cooper, Geology 1982


Patterns of late Cenozoic volcanic and tectonic activity in the West Antarctic rift system revealed by aeromagnetic surveys

By John Behrendt et al, Tectonics, AGU, June 1996


John Kerry Heads To Antarctica And To A New Travel Record

By Michele Kelemen, NPR, Nov 8, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Will he be briefed on the West Antarctic Fault / Rift System? See links immediately above.]

Lowering Standards

Sea Levels Will Rise Faster Than Ever

The Atlantic coast will be one of the hardest hit regions

By Scott Waldman, Scientific American, Nov 8, 2016


No link to the paper

[SEPP Comment: The article repeats ClimateWire; indicating that thinking at Scientific American is vacuous.]

Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

‘Last Chance’ to Limit Global Warming to Safe Levels, UN Scientists Warn

New study says that unless nations ramp up their carbon-reduction pledges before 2020, it will be nearly impossible to keep warming to 2 degrees.

By John Cushman, Inside Climate News, Nov 3, 2016 [H/t GWPF]


Nicholas Stern: cost of global warming ‘is worse than I feared’

Ten years ago the leading economist warned about climate change in a landmark report – he says while there is cause for optimism, the picture is still grim

By Robin McKie, The Guardian, Nov 5, 2016


Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?

Why the Polls Stunk Up the Place

By William Briggs, The Stream, Nov 9, 2016


Questioning European Green

Blowout Week 149

By Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, Nov 6, 2016


“The big news this week comes from Europe, where the European Commission is seriously considering canceling after 2020 the grid dispatch priority that renewable energy has up to now enjoyed. If implemented, as it seems it will be, this change could have a major impact on future renewables growth in Europe and on the EU’s ability to meet its emissions targets:”

Litigation Issues

UK Court Rules Unwinding Of Renewable Energy Subsidies

By John Constable, GWPF, Nov 6, 2016


EPA and other Regulators on the March

EPA rushing through regulations after Trump election

By John Siciliano, Washington Examiner, Nov 10, 2016


EPA Chief Urges Staff To Finish Obama’s Agenda Before Trump Takes Over

By Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, Nov 10, 2016 [H/t Cooler Heads]


“The Obama administration has already added 78,020 pages of new regulations to the Federal Register this year, according to the right-leaning American Action Forum (AAF), and more pages are likely on the way.”

Energy Issues – Non-US


By Euan Mearns, Energy Matters, Nov 11, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Explaining why the idea that renewable energy can power the UK is an “appalling delusion.”]

Energy Issues — US

Is replacing coal with natural gas actually good for the climate?

By Adam Dove, Phys.org, Nov 7, 2016


Link to paper: Beyond Global Warming Potential: A Comparative Application of Climate Impact Metrics for the Life Cycle Assessment of Coal and Natural Gas Based Electricity

By DeVynne Farquharson, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Aug 24, 2016


“These results are consistent across climate metrics and the MAGICC model over a 100-year time frame. Although it is not clear whether any of these metrics are better than the others, the choice of metric can inform decisions based on different societal values.”

[SEPP Comment: No discussion that the methane absorption bands are virtually saturated by water vapor.]

New England’s Drive to Boost Gas Supplies Hits Roadblock

By Thomas Overton, Power Mag. Nov 2, 2016


Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Russia keeps expanding oil production despite low oil prices

By Staff Writers, Energy Post, Nov 2, 2016


[SEPP Comment: The government highly depends on export revenues.]

OPEC Report: Global Oil And Gas Demand Will Rise For Decades To Come

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Telegraph, UK, Via GWPF, Nov 8, 2016


Fracking ‘could generate £3.9 billion for the Scottish economy’

By Simon Johnson, Telegraph, UK, Nov 8, 2016


“A moratorium was imposed in January last year, with SNP members hostile and Nicola Sturgeon sceptical about the practice. However, her government has come under pressure to make a final decision after the Grangemouth refinery started importing US shale gas in September.”

Return of King Coal?

China Announces Massive Rise In Coal Capacity By 2020

By Brian Spegele, WSJ, Via GWPF Nov 7, 2016



China 5-Year Plan Confirms Massive Expansion Of Coal Fired Capacity

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Nov 8, 2016


India Becomes Coal Superpower, Overtakes USA

By Staff Writers, Press Trust of India, Via GWPF, Nov 5, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Second only to China! GWPF adds a clear graphic to the glowing report on the future of coal in India.]

Oil Spills, Gas Leaks, Excess Water Injection & Consequences

Earthquake Shakes Oklahoma Oil Storage Hub

By Rebecca Hersher, NPR, Nov 7, 2016


Oklahoma’s Aftershocks

By Editors, Real Clear Energy, Nov 8, 2016


Link to: Magnitude / Intensity Comparison

By Staff Writers, USGS, No Date


Nuclear Energy and Fears

France’s Nuclear Storm: Many Power Plants Down Due to Quality Concerns

By Lee Buchsbaum, Power Mag, Nov 1, 2016


For China 2016 has not been the Year of Nuclear Power

By Steve Thomas, Energy Post, EU, Nov 7, 2016


Molten Salt Reactors: IAEA to Establish New Platform for Collaboration

By Yundi Luo and Miklos Gaspar, IAEA, Nov 9, 2016


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind

American Bird Conservancy: Wind Power, Solar Farms Must Play by Federal Rules, too

By Robert Bradley Jr. Master Resource, Nov 10, 2016


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles

Automakers ask Trump to roll back fuel efficiency rules

By Devin Henry, The Hill, Nov 10, 2016


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Storage

Using Trains to Send Power to the Grid

By John Kosowatz, ASME, Nov 2016 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


“While the Tehachapi tests showed the system operates best on grades of six percent to eight percent, ARES is already developing plans to adapt the system to steeper grades. [operations VP] Cava says the next demonstration could use a cog railroad.”

Carbon Schemes

UAE to Host Region’s First Carbon Capture Plant – Naharnet

By Editor, Environment and Climate in the Middle East, Nov 9, 2016 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


CO2 Wizardry or Hype?

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Nov 11, 2016


[SEPP Comment: There is no perpetual motion energy machine? Breaking stable chemical bonds does not create energy?]

Environmental Industry

Friday Funny: Liberals are in such disbelief/shock on Myron Ebell appointment for EPA transition, he has a Snopes page

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Nov 11, 2016


Washington’s Green Civil War

By Staff Writers, The American Interest, Nov 10, 2016


Poverty, not wealth, is the greater threat to wildlife

By Matt Ridley, The Rational Optimist, Nov 7, 2016


Blocking pipelines is the new anti-fracking ploy

By Robert Bryce, New York Post, Nov 8, 2016 [H/t Cooler Heads]


Roundup the Corrupt Fear Mongers

By Paul Driessen, Townhall, Nov 5, 2016


Other Scientific News

Ralph Cicerone: 1943-2016 [RIP]

By Luboš Motl, The Reference Frame, Nov 6, 2016


Other News that May Be of Interest

Political Economy 101: Wisdom for Election Week [Quotes]

By Robert Bradley Jr. Master Resource, Nov 7, 2016


“The influence of special interests is now at an extremely unhealthy level. And it’s to the point where it’s virtually impossible for participants in the current political system to enact any significant change without first seeking and gaining permission from the largest commercial interests who are most affected by the proposed change.” (Al Gore) [No date given.]



Balanced, carefully considered scientific opinion

By Staff Writers, Climate Change Predictions.org, Nov 10, 2016


My frustration with these greedy, lying bastards is personal. Human-caused climate disruption is not a belief – it is one of the best-studied phenomena on Earth. Even a half-wit can understand this.

As any father, would, anyone threatening my family will be on the receiving end of my ire and vengeance. This anger is the manifestation of my deep love for my daughter, and the sadness I feel in my core about how others are treating her future.

Mark my words, you plutocrats, denialists, fossil-fuel hacks and science charlatans – your time will come when you will be backed against the wall by the full wrath of billions who have suffered from your greed and stupidity, and I’ll be first in line to put you there.”

– Professor Corey Bradshaw, Director of Ecological Modelling, The University of Adelaide –

Is This How You Feel? Website – This is how scientists feel




(an upper-troposphere temperature trend in the tropics)

By S Fred Singer, Oct 1,2016


To my knowledge, the existence of the HOTSPOT [HS] was ‘invented’ by BD Santer, lead author of chapter 8 of IPCC-AR2 [1996], based on his own, thenunpublished research paper [which is contrary to IPCC rules].

Santer also claimed, in IPCC-AR2 and since, that his ‘observed’ HS agreed with GH models and thus provided a long- sought ‘fingerprint’ for anthropogenic global warming [AGW]. Neither claim is true, however. [see fig 1, from CCSP-SAP1.1 2006]

But along with making [and never denied] crucial text changes in Chap 8 [after the final draft had been approved in Dec1995], Santer thus provided vital scientific support [it seemed] for the disastrously wasteful and ineffective 1997 Kyoto Protocol.

Even earlier, Michaels & Knappenberger had demonstrated [Nature 1996] that Santer’s claimed agreement of observations and models was based on ‘cherry-picking’ of radiosonde temp data. Unfortunately, the Michaels & Knappenberger paper made little impact on scientists anxious to believe in AGW. Instead, much of the relevant scientific community [in AMS and UCAR] rose to Santer’s defense [BAMS 1998] – after he himself admitted to having made the crucial text changes in chap 8 [and in the IPCCs SPM], after the approval of the final draft in Dec 1995 and just before printing, in 1996.

I had a similar experience some years later [E&E 2011 &2013] when I argued that the HS was not a fingerprint of AGW but a consequence of any kind of surface warming, coupled with the physics of a tropical moist adiabatic lapse rate that amplified the surface warming; absence of a HS therefore signaled absence of any significant surface warming. Ironically, Santer himself had demonstrated existence of such an amplification [Science 2005] but treated the result as a ‘puzzle;’ for an explanation, see Singer in EIKE 2011 report — fig 2.

Meanwhile, several publications had established the absence of an observed HS [GRL, 2004; CCSP-SAP-1.1, 2006; IJC 2007]. Santer, as lead author of chap 5 of the 2006 CCSP report [see fig1] was forced to show the absence of an observed HS – although its exec summary tried to hide that result. But the AGW team was really upset about the IJC paper and bullied a compliant editor to delay its printing for a full year, until 2008 [see essay by Douglass & Christy 2009, based on evidence from Climategate e-mails].

Santer then replied in a long-winded paper [IJC 2008], full of spurious claims, which I vainly tried to correct in IJC and finally managed to publish [in Energy & Environment 2011, 2013]. For example, Santer showed seven (!) vastly different temp vs altitude curves [there can only be a single one in reality and then claimed, erroneously, that all seven were compatible with satellite data; he also managed to expand the uncertainty interval of the model results until they overlapped some of his 7 ‘empirical’ temp curves; see fig 3.

The crux of the HS problem, in my opinion, was the prevalent disregard of the satellite data that showed little or no warming (1978-1997) – a finding totally unacceptable [even until today] to AGW alarmists. [A similar situation exists today with respect to evidence that solar activity, via cosmic rays, controls the climate — rather than anthropogenic CO2; cf fig 4.]

[NOTE: The figures can be found in the post on the SEPP web site.]


2. Green Elites Face Trump Threat

A chance to clean up rampant cronyism in the energy sector won’t soon return.

By Holman Jenkins, WSJ, Nov 8, 2016


Jenkins states:

“Whatever you think of Donald Trump, his candidacy represents an important opportunity. It’s a chance to dismiss a very particular elite about whom it could be said, borrowing from Cromwell, “For any good you have been doing . . . in the name of God, go!”

“We are referring, of course, to America’s green-energy elite.

“With a Hillary Clinton victory on Tuesday, America’s ludicrous Tesla subsidies would be certain to continue—because so many Democratic politicians aligned with the company, especially in California, are themselves too big to fail.

“Washington’s Kafkaesque fuel mileage rules would only become more Kafkaesque. By forcing car makers and their customers to invest in economically unjustified fuel-saving technology, they’ve already perversely contributed to last summer’s breaking of a decade-old record for miles traveled and fuel burned.

“Ethanol’s alleged greenhouse benefits have long since been scientifically debunked. Its putative contribution to America’s “energy security” has been rendered a joke by the fracking revolution. Never mind. Corn farmers like a handout, and corn-state senators like being re-elected. The cost to American motorists: $10 billion a year.

“And making sure it remains so—we hardly needed the latest WikiLeaks dump to tell us—have been a handful of activist hedge-fund billionaires like Tom Steyer and Nat Simons. In the recent dump of emails stolen from Clinton campaign chief John Podesta, we see these men, in return for being willing to write four-figure checks to Democratic candidates, fishing for reassurance that policies that cost the American people billions, with no benefits, will be embraced by the next Democratic administration.

“We see climate saints like Bill McKibben and Joe Romm conspiring at their behest to silence a scientist for saying perfectly accurate things about the lack of evidence for a worsening of extreme weather events. We see Mr. Podesta himself trying to orchestrate a media mugging of liberal Harvard Law Prof. Larry Tribe for representing the coal industry.

“And to what end, exactly?

“Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency, is hardly a green-energy naysayer. Yet last week he estimated that even if electric vehicles accounted for half of global auto sales (currently EVs account for less than 1%), oil consumption would nevertheless continue to rise because the “demand growth is not coming from cars, it’s from trucks, aviation and the petrochemical industry and we don’t have major alternatives to oil products there.”

“Mr. Birol politely failed to mention that the climate effect would also be nil, because these electric cars would be running on coal. China, the world’s biggest consumer of electric vehicles, fires up a new coal plant at the rate of one or two per week and will do so for years to come.

“President Obama’s “clean power plan,” costing upward of $200 billion over the next 15 years, will have no discernible effect on temperatures even a century hence. A catastrophic idiocy has informed Europe’s favoritism toward diesel cars: In return for trivial CO2 gains, it got dirtier air in its cities. The Nature Conservancy, in a 2009 study, finds that even a modest U.S cap-and-trade program of the sort preached by greenies would require “an area larger than the state of Nebraska” for biofuels, wind and solar.

“And still the effect would be meaningless: A 100% cut in U.S. emissions, by the standard climate sensitivity estimate, would influence temperatures by less than 0.2 degrees centigrade a century from now.

“Even a carbon tax—the sensible policy—would offer no help unless the technological possibility already exists of meeting human needs with alternative energy at a price competitive with fossil fuels. In which case such technology will be forthcoming anyway for market reasons.

“All this might be terrifically worrisome if climate change fears were soundly established by science. They aren’t. Al Gore-like forecasts of doom rely on doubtful computer simulations. As the International Panel on Climate Change delicately phrases it, numerous possible paths for future temperature are in rough “agreement with observations.” This is a roundabout way of saying that the observations have been unable to discern the effect, if any, of human-scale emissions on global temperature.

“But then policies in a democracy are not sustained by their rationale. They are sustained by vested interests. Mr. Trump may be rude, crude, and largely visionless to boot. Yet purely by virtue of being out of sympathy with such elites his election would go a long way to de-corrupting America at least as far as energy policy is concerned.”


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 14, 2016 11:28 am

So, the problem is not “global warming”, but rather irregular warming that may be indistinguishable from natural variability. That is weather or, over longer, indefinite periods, climate.

November 14, 2016 12:50 pm

Once again, we have a “weekly roundup” that misses the week’s most important, newsworthy article.
So, like, I was reading an article, that appeared in the Guardian (google: “guardian timothy garton ash populists are out to divide us they must be stopped), this week, in which the author of the article, exhibiting unmistakable, clinical signs of a thought-process that has been tragically impaired by “REH” (Recently Exploded Head) syndrome issues, advises us that the “populists” to which he refers, in the title of his little, wound-up, froth-friendly, fusspot-booger tirade, must be defeated: “It will be a long, hard struggle to defeat them, at home and abroad,….But defeat them we will.”
I mean, like, double WOWEE!!! So just who is it, anyway, who owns the hyper-active, bold pie-hole from which issues the kick-your-butt, “No pasaran!”, hive-hero, banzai-charge war-whoop, above?
-Well, our fearless big-mouth is a graduate of a so-called institution of higher learning (Oxford–he has also, apparently, gone on to become a professor at that same parasite-magnet nerd-pit), which unlike a legitimate school, like Trump University, is so lacking in intellectual rigor, that even indolent, cretinous, in-bred, psychopathic, European Royals can meet its peasant-phobe, diploma-mill standards and obtain a hoity-toity sheep-skin.
-The gent’s wiki entry advises, via a purported quote from Time Magazine, that, “Shelves are where most works of history spend their lives. But the kind of history [this dude] writes is more likely to be found on the desks of the world’s decision makers.” I mean, like, does anyone believe such hype? Anyone? I mean, like, what is it about our hive-licensed thought-leaders that compels them to incessantly make such puffed-up, megalomaniac, complete-ass, public spectacles of themselves, anyway? Maybe it has something to do with the total absence of honest labor in their CVs. But who knows, really?
-Our berserker, signed-up-for-the-duration, ivory-tower ninja, is further of the opinion that when populists, like Trump, present themselves as the “voice of the people”, a more accurate term for the “people” is “Volk”. Now since nobody, except those ensconced in the hives’ inner-sanctum on a daily basis, have any idea of what that whole “Volk” business is all about, please allow me to explain, dear reader, that “Volk” is an archaic (for everyone, not a part of the hive-bubble’s senior cadre, that is), “dog-whistle”, safe-space-normative, scare-mongering, agit-prop, flim-flam term, that is equivalent to the contemporary “La Raza”, but with a “chilling” suggestion of “you know who”, as opposed to a warm, good-comradely evocation of Castro. In other words, the term, “Volk” is most likely employed, in the Guardian article, so that the author can score insider points with his fellow hive-bozos with minimal risk that he’ll be tagged with a Godwin’s Law violation and frog-marched into the court of public-opinion to face the rap.
-And I can even report that our author has been handicapped, since birth, by a privileged-white-dork, total-wanker name–Timothy Garton Ash!. Of course, there’s nothin’ wrong with the guy’s Christian name, but “Garton”? GARTON?!!! You’ve gotta be kiddin’ moi! And only my slavish devotion to “good taste” prevents me from exploring the ribald-humor potential of Timmy-boy’s surname. I mean, like, where does the hive come up with these weirdos, anyway (and yes!–I’m also thinkin’ of Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (a. k. a. Senator “Skin-job”), in this context).
So, anyway, we’ve finally got a fix on the author of the Guardian article, referenced above–he’s nothing more than yet another one of those ubiquitous, cookie-cutter, mouthy, Gruber-clone, cheese-dick geekballs, of the sort that the hive regularly throws up at the cyclic-rate, good for fifteen minutes of fame as the star of a viral video-spoof of “you know whose” bunker-scene, and nothing more.

November 14, 2016 2:22 pm

A whole lot of very good thinking here, as usual, it seems to me. Thank you, Mr. Haapala.

November 14, 2016 7:55 pm

Others, such as E&E Legal, have obtain[sic] significant evidence of a questionable close working relationship between green organizations and the EPA

Calling them “green” organizations is simply wrong. They are not green. By wanting to limit CO2, they are anti-green, plain and simple. They are plant haters.

November 14, 2016 8:12 pm

This graph indicates that CH4 bands are not saturated by water vapor. In the total absorption, peaks exist on the side of H2O absorption due to CH4.comment image

Dr. Strangelove
November 15, 2016 6:42 am

John Christy, et. al.,
I suggest you publish your important paper on the Journal of the American Mathematical Society to show the world this is accepted not just by a bunch of ‘deniers’ but also by reputable mathematicians. Hopefully there won’t be political censorship on this journal

Dr. Strangelove
November 15, 2016 6:44 am

John Christy, et. al.,
I suggest you publish your important paper on the Journal of the American Mathematical Society to show the world this is accepted not just by a bunch of ‘deniers’ but also by reputable mathematicians. Hopefully there won’t be political censorship on this journal

Dr. Strangelove
November 15, 2016 7:00 am

John Christy, et. al.,
I suggest you publish your important paper on the Journal of the American Statistical Association to show the world your work is accepted by the statistical community

%d bloggers like this: