Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #369

The Week That Was: 2019-07-27 (July 27, 2019)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.” Richard P. Feynman, final sentence in his report on the Challenger disaster.

Number of the Week: 1934


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

The Scientific Method – SEPP: For some, the term “science” is a political slogan. Such as, “science supports my program.” Further, government entities entrusted to produce scientific reports are frequently drifting away from rigorous science and more towards research using unvalidated models. The US Fourth National Climate Assessment produced by the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and its 13 government entities is an excellent example. The Summaries for Policymakers of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have become largely political. So are its special reports such as “Global Warming of 1.5 ºC” in October 2018. Such reports are harming the public. As discussed in last week’s TWTW, the psychiatric and psychological communities are identifying patients as suffering from “climate distress,” “climate grief,” “climate anxiety” or “eco-anxiety.”

Unfortunately, these government funded groups appear to be so driven by the use of unvalidated models, that they do not care about the harm they cause or the scientific integrity of their reports. TWTW and SEPP have been searching for an accurate way to identify properly conducted research as compared with research using unvalidated models also called science. At one point, TWTW used the term “empirical science.” But Professor Christopher Essex of the Department of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario demonstrated the terms “empiricism” and “empirical science” have become murky as well.

Following the guidelines of The Right Climate Stuff team, rigorous adherence to the scientific method may be the appropriate guide for evaluating reports. The scientific method has been developed since the 17th century and is an important contribution from Western Civilization to humanity. It is a procedure that involves systematic observation, careful measurement, experimentation, and the creation, rigorous testing, and modifications of hypotheses. Skepticism is a critical part of the scientific method.

On its website, SEPP has posted a mission statement that includes:

“SEPP questions the use of models for public policy unless the models have been appropriately verified and validated. No matter how elaborate, results from numerical models that are not thoroughly tested against hard evidence are speculative and cannot be relied upon. Testing the results of a model by using parts of the model against the results from the entire model is a ruse, used all too frequently. Comparing a model with similar models is not model validation. They may have similar errors.

“Logic can carry models only so far. If they fail any tests against relevant data, the models must be changed or discarded. Omitting critical data violates the scientific method.”

The above quote from Richard Feynman came from his investigation of the Challenger disaster. Critical data had been ignored by NASA’s management. The first two paragraphs of Feynman’s report bear repeating:

“It appears that there are enormous differences of opinion as to the probability of a failure with loss of vehicle and of human life. The estimates range from roughly 1 in 100 to 1 in 100,000. The higher figures come from the working engineers, and the very low figures from management. What are the causes and consequences of this lack of agreement? Since 1 part in 100,000 would imply that one could put a Shuttle up each day for 300 years expecting to lose only one, we could properly ask “What is the cause of management’s fantastic faith in the machinery?”

The NASA culture of the scientists and engineers was risk adverse. They sent management information describing that the O-Rings were being bypassed with launches at temperatures around freezing. Management ignored these warmings. Feynman goes on to write:

“We have also found that certification criteria used in Flight Readiness Reviews often develop a gradually decreasing strictness. The argument that the same risk was flown before without failure is often accepted as an argument for the safety of accepting it again. Because of this, obvious weaknesses are accepted again and again, sometimes without a sufficiently serious attempt to remedy them, or to delay a flight because of their continued presence.”

One can ask NASA, NOAA and NCAR/UCAR: “What is the cause of management’s fantastic faith in the models?” It has been clearly demonstrated that the climate models used by NASA, NOAA, and NCAR/UCAR fail to describe current temperature trends in the atmosphere, the troposphere, where the greenhouse effect occurs. The results of these unvalidated models, contradicted by evidence, are projected 100 years hence, depicting significant warming. Consequently, these organizations and their unvalidated models are encouraging government policies that will be economically destructive and harmful to Americans. See links under Seeking a Common Ground and www.sepp.org.


A Different Perspective: Douglas Carson of Louisiana Geological Survey gave an interesting talk at the Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Convention, which included presentations by members of The Right Climate Stuff team. The subject was: “Which will dominate future global temperature changes in next 200 years: solar irradiance or greenhouse gases?”

He asserts that the proxy data shows that a decrease in sunspot activity leads to increased cloudiness, supporting the Svensmark hypothesis. A big problem with drawing any firm conclusions is that all the major decreases in sunspots occurred before 1850, before the beginnings of any systematic temperature record (though isolated instrument records exist, such as for middle England). Thus, the datasets are very thin and do not show a great deal of cooling during the Little Ice Age. (However, there are increasing proxy data that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age occurred on all continents and was not restricted to Europe as many alarmists claim.)

Carson shows a graph giving estimates of how much sunlight is reflected by different clouds, earth surfaces, vegetation, and water bodies. For example, thick clouds reflect 70 to 80% of sunlight, thin clouds from 25 to 30%. See links under Commentary: Is the Sun Rising? and Changing Climate.


ICCC-13: After several years of emphasizing energy, The Heartland Institute organized a conference on climate change in Washington, which was sold out. Unfortunately, it occurred on July 25, the day before the House of Representatives went on August recess. Usually, there is a flurry of activity immediately before a recess. Yet, two members found time to address those attending. Both Representative Jeff Duncan of South Carolina and Tom McClintock of California seemed to be attuned to the improper use of climate models, that have not been validated, to make predictions.

As an article describing his talk stated, McClintock noted claims by Prince Charles, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others that we have 18 months to 35 years until catastrophic events occur:

“’I suppose I have as much authority as either of them to make predictions so I’ll give us another four and a half billion years, which is the amount of time the climate’s already been changing on the planet,’ McClintock said to an appreciative crowd at the Heartland Institute’s convention featuring climate scientists and other experts who spent the day making the case against a manmade climate crisis.”

The Global Warming Policy Forum has posted the slides its president, Benny Peiser, presented at the convention. His view of the economic prospects of the EU are grim. The EU is a leader in the “keep it in the ground” and anti-fossil fuels movements. But it now has the highest energy prices among G20 nations [19 countries plus the EU accounting for about 90% of the world’s gross product and 80% of the world’s trade], its share of the global economy is falling rapidly, and its household electricity prices are double those in the G20, while industrial electricity prices are nearly 50% higher. Yet, CO2 emissions are increasing. Put simply, the promise of green jobs depended on continued subsidies on solar and wind or breakthroughs in technology that are not materializing. Taxpayers are revolting as growing unrest demonstrates.

Upcoming TWTWs will discuss other presentations made at the conference. A general observation may be that the scientists making presentations agree that carbon dioxide has a small greenhouse effect and the warming effect of a doubling of CO2 is in the range of 1 to 1.5ºC. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy – Conference.


Seeing the Invisible: With a blog titled “Seeing the Invisible” The Times of India carried an editorial by Indian economist Sanjeev Sabhlok. It is a good take on Adam Smith’s invisible hand discussed in his 1776 book “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” where individuals pursuing their own private interests benefit the society as a whole. The blog states:

“The blog is named after Seeing the Invisible, the title of the book on economics that Sanjeev has written. Economics involves the study of invisible incentives and motivations. Self-seeking ministers and bureaucrats often work invisibly and insidiously against the public interest. This is more so in socialist countries where governments undertake a number of unnecessary functions.”

Among other comments, the blog post asserts:

“We know how hard it is to stop governments from interfering in our lives. The cost-benefit test was devised specifically to stop bureaucracies from running amuck [sic] at the slightest scare by forcing them to confess all costs and all benefits.”

“The cost-benefit test can often be tortuous and is hated by all bureaucrats and ministers, but it is invaluable in imposing a crucial discipline on them.”

Unfortunately, by using statistical manipulation, economist Nicholas Stern influenced the UK Parliament to pass the Climate Change Act 2008. Stern declared global warming / climate change was a market failure requiring government interference. As the UK public is discovering, Stern greatly underestimated the current costs of the UK reducing CO2 emissions and overestimated the benefits. The value of cost benefit analysis depends on the integrity of those preforming the analysis. The actions of US government entities in greatly overestimating the current warming of the atmosphere are no better than the actions of Mr. Stern. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Benefits of CO2: Craig Idso, with his father Sherman Idso, was a major editor and contributor to the NIPCC book, “Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts.” This book references several thousand studies showing increasing carbon dioxide benefits humanity and the environment. Virtually all types of plants benefit. Green plants produce oxygen and food, carbohydrates. Thus, animals which use both, directly and indirectly, benefit as well. Recently, Craig discussed research using micro-instruments measuring corals manipulating the pH of the water in the area in which they grow shells, bringing into question that increasing CO2 will cause harmful changes in pH of the water – so called ocean acidification.

Craig announced the Institute for the Human Environment, “…a non-profit educational organization advocating for the continued development and improvement of society and the natural environment. Its mission is to support the unfettered use of fossil fuels so that the industrial evolution of the human community can continue…” We wish him success in this notable endeavor. See link under Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide




The voting is closed and the winner who most closely meets the qualification is being selected. No missing shards here, one hopes.


Number of the Week: 1934: Tony Heller has a post showing two sides of 1934. In the northeast US, the winter was extremely cold. On February 9, 1934, the coldest location was -52ºF at Stillwater Reservoir, NY. In the central US, the summer was extremely hot and dry. On July 23, 1934, the Chicago Airport hit 109ºF – “the highest ever reached on a government thermometer here since the establishment of the weather bureau in 1871.” According to the July 1934 Palmer Modified Drought Index, about half the country, most of the Midwest was in extreme drought.

Yet the media and many weather stations continue to exclaim that extreme weather today is unprecedented. Is this the type of stable weather that alarmists consider stable? See link under Changing Weather.


Commentary: Is the Sun Rising?

Which will dominate future global temperature changes in next 200 years: solar irradiance or greenhouse gases?

By Douglas Carson, Louisiana Geological Survey, Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Convention, October 1, 2018


Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 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, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014


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

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019


Download with no charge:


Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015


Download with no charge:


Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008


Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data

By Craig D. Idso, David Legates, and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Policy Brief, May 20, 2019


My new video – Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, July 14, 2019


Challenging the Orthodoxy

Why the precautionary principle is bad policy

By Sanjeev Sabhlok, Seeing the Invisible, Via The Times of India, July 23, 2019 [H/t GWPF]


Surface Temperature Data of Limited Scientific Value Even before Being Manipulated by Alarmists

By Alan Carlin, Carlin Economics and Science, July 22, 2019


Climate Models: Forecasts of the Future?

By David R. Legates, TRCS team video, Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Convention, October 1, 2018


Climate Change Democracy Deniers Strike Again, [With Comments by John]

By Steven Hayward, Power Line, July 22, 2019


“As I’ve been pointing out for more than a decade, the most ominous contradiction of the environmental left these days is the way in which they champion the rights of nature while going along with the rest of the left in denying human nature, let alone the natural rights of humans—which is the central premise of democratic self-government.”

Challenging the Orthodoxy – Conference

13th International Conference on Climate Change

Various speakers, The Heartland Institute, July 25, 2019


Incredible Shrinking Europe–Between Climate Utopia & Green Energy Crisis

By Benny Peiser, Global Warming Policy Forum, Presented at ICCC-13, July 25, 2019


Tom McClintock [Rep. R-CA] on AOC’s Doomsday Climate Change Scenario: 4.5 Billion Years to Go

By Penny Starr, Breitbart, July 25, 2019 [H/t Cooler Heads]


Defending the Orthodoxy

Implementing The One Viable Solution To Climate Change

By Steve Denning, Forbes, July 21, 2019


“The Only Viable Solution: A New Moon Shot”

[SEPP Comment: The success of the moon shot required rigorous testing of many hypotheses, a process that this author apparently does not understand.]

Military starts task force after spreading toxic “forever chemicals”

By Rebecca Beitsch, The Hill, July 24, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Making fire-fighting more dangerous.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

1980s Science: Ice Cores Show CO2 Naturally Rose 200 ppm (65 ppm/100 Years) During The Early Holocene

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, July 22, 2019


1970s: Earth Warmed 0.6°C From 1880-1940 And Cooled -0.3°C From 1940-1970. Now It’s 0.1°C And -0.05°C.

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, July 25, 2019


After Paris!

China Still Expanding Coal Power Capacity

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, July 23, 2019


Change in US Administrations

Trump’s plans for development at Bears Ears monument sparks condemnation

By Rebecca Beitsch, The Hill, July 26, 2019


[SEPP Comment: The previous administration’s making a great deal of barren waste into a monument sparked local condemnation, which was ignored by the national press.]

Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide

Institute for the Human Environment

By Craig Idso, July 27, 2019


Problems in the Orthodoxy

Collapse of Wind Power Threatens Germany’s Green Energy Transition

By Staff, Die Welt, Trans. Via GWPF, July 26, 2019


China Energy to expand ultra-low emission coal-fired power: executive

By Muyu Xu and David Stanway, Reuters, July 18, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Under Mr Obama’s energy plan, such technology was forbidden in the US.]

Seeking a Common Ground

“Personal observations on the reliability of the Shuttle”

By Richard Feynman, Rogers Commission, Appendix F, June 9, 1986


Some climate alarmists embrace chemtrails

By Lubos Molt, The Reference Frame, July 23, 2019


Review of Recent Scientific Articles by CO2 Science

Elevated CO2 Helps Mitigate Growth Reductions in Pigeonpea Induced by Drought Stress

Sreeharsha, R.V., Mudalkar, S., Sengupta, D., Unnikrishnan, D.K. and Reddy, A.R. 2019. Mitigation of drought-induced oxidative damage by enhanced carbon assimilation and an efficient antioxidative metabolism under high CO2 environment in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L.). Photosynthesis Research 139: 425-439. July 25, 2019


The Impact of CO2 and Nitrogen Supply on Rice Yields

Raj, A., Chakrabarti, B., Pathak, H., Singh, S.D., Mina, U. and Purakayastha, T.J. 2019. Growth, yield and nitrogen uptake in rice crop grown under elevated carbon dioxide and different doses of nitrogen fertilizer. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 57: 181-187. July 24, 2019


The Increasing Land Sink of the Northern Hemisphere

Ciais, P., Tan, J., Wang, X., Roedenbeck, C., Chevallier, F., Piao, S.-L., Moriarty, R., Broquet, G., Le Quéré, C., Canadell, J.G., Peng, S., Poulter, B., Liu, Z. and Tans, P. 2019. Five decades of northern land carbon uptake revealed by the interhemispheric CO2 gradient. Nature 568: 221-225.


Models v. Observations

China is warming fastest where the cities are, not where the models predicted – classic UHI

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, July 23, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Nova notes: Beijing increased from 1.7 million in 1950 to 18.4 million in 2015. Its population grew by about 11 times in 65 years.]

Measurement Issues — Surface

More Data Shenanigans At NASA. “Unadjusted” Data Get Whole New Definition: No Longer “Raw”, But Now “Quality Controlled”

By Kirye and P. Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, July 23, 2019


Urban Heat Island Effect Caused 50% of Warming in China, New Study Finds

By Nicola Scafetta and Shenghui Ouyang, GWPF, July 22, 2019


Link to paper: Detection of UHI bias in China climate network using Tmin and Tmax surface temperature divergence

By Nicola Scafetta and Shenghui Ouyang, Global and Planetary Change, October 2019


Cambridge Botanical “Too Compromised” For Climatological Purposes

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, July 27, 2019


Changing Weather

The Other Side of 1934

By Tony Heller, the Deplorable Climate Science Blog, July 27, 2019


[SEPP Comment: In the northeast US, the winter was extremely cold; in the central US, the summer was extremely hot and dry. Yet the media and many weather stations continue to exclaim that extreme weather is unprecedented.]

Joe Oliver: We should prepare for extreme weather, but tying it to climate change is a mistake

Even if climate change were the source of extreme weather, Trudeau’s signature carbon solution would be certain to fail

By Joe Oliver, Financial Post, Can, July 23, 2019 [H/t GWPF]


Changing Climate

Climate change could revive medieval megadroughts in US Southwest

By Charles the Moderator, WUWT, July 26, 2019


“By reconstructing aquatic climate data and sea-surface temperatures from the last 2,000 years, the team found three key factors that led to megadroughts in the American Southwest: radiative forcing, severe and frequent La Niña events — cool tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures that cause changes to global weather events — and warm conditions in the Atlantic. High radiative forcing appears to have dried out the American Southwest, likely due to an increase in solar activity (which would send more radiation toward us) and a decrease in volcanic activity (which would admit more of it) at the time. The resulting increase in heat would lead to greater evaporation. At the same time, warmer than usual Atlantic sea-surface temperatures combined with very strong and frequent La Niñas decreased precipitation in the already dried-out area. Of these three factors, La Niña conditions were estimated to be more than twice as important in causing the megadroughts.”

[SEPP Comment: “During the time of the medieval megadroughts, increased radiative forcing was caused by natural climate variability.” Does one assume reduction in cloudiness?]

Denying 2000 years of the Medieval Warm Period, Little Ice Age on every continent

Jo Nova, Her Blog, July 26, 2019


Changing Seas

Apocalyptic Sea-Level Rise—Just a Thing of the Past?

By Gregory Rummo, Townhall, July 23, 2019


Geothermal ocean warming discussion thread

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. July 21, 2019


Link to post by Ron Clutz: Overview: Seafloor Eruptions and Ocean Warming

By Ron Clutz, Energy Matters, October 5, 2016


“1. Is geothermal energy powerful enough to make a difference upon the vast ocean heat capacity?

“2. If so, is geothermal energy variable enough to create temperature differentials?

“3. Most of the ocean floor is unexplored, so how much can we generalize from the few places we have studied?”

Thirty years of unique data reveal what’s really killing coral reefs

By Staff Writers, Boca Raton FL (SPX) Jul 22, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Not CO2-caused climate change, but other human influences such as wastewater and fertilizer runoff. Comments about climate change are obligatory nonsense.]

Acidic Waters

The Total Myth of Ocean Acidification: Science! Edition

By David Middleton, WUWT, July 25, 2019


Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine

Climate crisis needs radical food changes

By Tim Radford, Climate News Network, Via Physics World, July 19, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Oblivious to food production in tropical Brazil, and the benefits of CO2.]

Un-Science or Non-Science?

Joshua trees facing extinction

By Staff Writers, Riverside CA (SPX), Jul 22, 2019


Link to paper: Congruence between future distribution models and empirical data for an iconic species at Joshua Tree National Park

By Lynn C. Sweet, et al., Ecosphere, June 3, 2019


Lowering Standards

CNN: Wind Tops Coal in Texas in 3 out of 6 Months in 2019

Guest News analysis by David Middleton, WUWT, July 26, 2019


Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

The pause in global warming shows CO2 may be *more* powerful! Say hello to Hyperwarming Weirdness.

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, July 25, 2019


Link to paper: Decadal global temperature variability increases strongly with climate sensitivity

By Femke J. M. M. Nijsse, Peter M. Cox, Chris Huntingford & Mark S. Williamson, Nature Climate Change, July 22, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Steady increasing CO2 results in increasing and decreasing greenhouse effect?]

While Global Temps Soared, Study Shows US Media Coverage of Right-Wing Think Tanks’ Climate Lies Actually Rose Over Past 5 Years

“The media should not give these organizations a platform, and if they must cover them, do a better job of alerting readers and viewers who is funding them.”

By Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams, July 25, 2019 [[H/t Cooler Heads]


“The mounds of scientific evidence that the burning of fossil fuels is overheating our planet, coupled with the knowledge that the fossil fuel industry has funneled money to think tanks to manufacture doubt about the crisis should lead to a radical decline in the influence of climate deniers in the media.”—Allison Fisher, Public Citizen

[SEPP Comment: Global Temps Soared? Reports are not scientific evidence.]

Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda

More than 60 media outlets commit to week of focused climate coverage

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, July 26, 2019


“The Guardian earlier this year also changed its style guidelines to no longer refer to ‘climate change’ but to instead use ‘climate emergency, crisis or breakdown.’”

[SEPP Comment: Complete with unidentified photo of stuff, probably steam, coming out of chimneys.]

Questioning European Green

While Boasting About Cutting CO2, Europe In Fact Driving Up Carbon Dioxide Emissions …Through TROPICAL DEFORESTATION!

By Staff, Die Kalte Sonne,, Via No Tricks Zone, July 26, 2019


Dominic Lawson: We Don’t Need an Ecological Pol Pot

By Dominic Lawson, The Sunday Times, Via GWPF.July 21, 2019


Germans choose fuel-guzzling cars, pushing up CO2 emissions

By Benjamin Wehrmann, Clean Energy Wire. July 26, 2019


Questioning Green Elsewhere

Before Saving the Planet, Could We Please Get the Bill?

By W. David Montgomery & Henry Sokolski, Real Clear Energy, July 24, 2019


Keep It in the Ground Policies ‘Not a Good Way to Go’

By Nicole Jacobs, Energy In Depth, July 19, 2019 [H/t GWPF]


The Political Games Continue

Steyer vows to declare climate change a national emergency as part of sweeping environmental plan

By Tal Axelrod, The Hill, July 25, 2019


[SEPP Comment: What would this major financer of fear of CO2 say about the 1934? See link above under Changing Weather.]

Gillibrand releases $10 trillion climate change plan

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, July 25, 2019


“The wide-ranging ‘Climate Change Moonshot Plan’ plan aims to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, ‘hold polluters accountable’ and phase out fossil fuels, among other goals.

“‘Climate change is the most serious threat to humanity today, and we need immediate and bold action to address it before it’s too late,’ she said in the post.”

[SEPP Comment; Greater serious threats to humanity are poor-thinking politicians and their pseudo-science experts.]

Litigation Issues

Activist Group Suing Energy Companies Completely Alters Its Complaint

By Spencer Walrath, Energy In Depth, July 25, 2019


Judge cuts Roundup cancer case payout from $2 billion to $86 million

By John Bowden, The Hill, July 26, 2019


[SEPP Comment: But the advertising by the lawyers hasn’t stopped.]

Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Taxes

Carbon tax shows new signs of life in Congress

By Miranda Green, The Hill, July 26, 2019


Subsidies and Mandates Forever

Onshore wind critic Leadsom is new UK energy secretary

Former energy minister who said benefits of onshore turbines ‘hugely exaggerated’ to lead policy-making

By Andrew Lee, Recharge Wind, July 25, 2019


EPA and other Regulators on the March

Green groups sue EPA over ‘sweeping overhaul’ of public records policy

By Miranda Green, The Hill, July 24, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Article fails to discuss how many FOIA requests were treated during the prior administration.]

EXCLUSIVE: Media Requests for EPA Records Soar Under Trump

By Kevin Mooney, Daily Signal, July 22, 2019


[SEPP Comment: No media questions before?]

Energy Issues – Non-US

The Real Data On Energy Usage

By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, July 24, 2019


Venezuela’s Oil Production Could Soon Fall Below 500,000 Bpd

By Tsvetana Paraskova, Oil Price.com, July 23, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Venezuela’s annual crude oil production has been falling since 1997.] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35312

Energy Issues — US

The Jones Act is a lose-lose for Puerto Rico and US LNG

By Philip G. Hoxie, Vincent H. Smith, AEI, July 22, 2019


[SEPP Comment: The 1920s law is damaging LNG trade between US states and territories.]

Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Fracking Company Hopes for Seismic Change

By Emily Gosden, The Times, Via GWPF, July 22, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Shows the exponential relationship between the intensity of an earthquake and the values used in the Richter Scale, often called a logarithmic scale leading to a misunderstanding.]

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind

Robbins Island Mega wind farm: killing birds and baseload power at 300 kilometers per hour

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, July 27, 2019


“Look how erratic that wind is — 90% one day, zero the next”

“Tom Quirk looked at the nearest wind farm to Robbins Island, and it’s a fitful machine (see that graph below). Worse, it fails in synchrony with most wind farms in Australia. Thus exacerbating the unstable, fickle supply of wind energy.”

Comment from a reader: “The whole wind energy production problem is easily solved by using nuclear powered fans [with huge government subsidies] to blow air at the windmills when Mother Nature is not doing her job.”

New York City’s Rikers Solar Plan Makes No Sense

By Daniel turner, Real Clear Energy, July 11, 2019


[SEPP Comment: It appears that New York City has become a new dreaming center, competing with California.]

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles

Major Automakers Cave to California on Trump Auto Rule

By Marlo Lewis, CEI, July 26, 2019


“The federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act prohibits states from adopting or enforcing laws or regulations “related to” fuel economy standards. If the automakers truly want regulatory certainty and an end to the patchwork threat, they should embrace the SAFE rule, which proposes to rescind California’s unlawful power to regulate fuel economy.”

Economics of Battery-Powered Vehicles

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, July 23, 2019


California Dreaming

Daniel Turner: California’s latest descent into liberal madness – Berkeley bans natural gas

By Daniel Turner, Fox News, July 20, 2019


Health, Energy, and Climate

Never Have US Health Professionals Been So Foolish

By Steve Goreham, News Blaze, July 23, 2019


Can India kick its coal addiction?

By Nell Lewis and John Defterios, CNN, July 11, 2019


Link to questionable report: State of Global Air, 2019

By Staff, 2019 Health Effects Institute, Boston, Mass. 2019


Environmental Industry

Green Activists With Ties to China Advised Obama State Department

NRDC’s role in Paris Agreement revealed by FOIA emails

By Kevin Mooney, Washington Free Beacon, July 23, 2019


Link to database of Foundation Support of Green Organizations: $Big Green, Inc.

By Staff, Institute for Energy Research, Accessed July 23, 2019



Scientists honor Iceland’s first glacier lost to climate change with plaque, eulogy

By Rebecca Klar, The Hill, July 21, 2019


“Rice University recently announced researchers will join the Icelandic Hiking Society to reveal the plaque Aug. 18, honoring the melted Okjökull, ‘Ok,’ glacier.]

[SEPP Comment: Did anyone say a eulogy when Manhattan lost its first glacier, or its last one?]

Prominent German Economist Calls For 20-Hour Work Week, Less Housing, Real Role Models To Rescue Climate!

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, July 24, 2019


[SEPP Comment: And who provides the food and comforts, the natives of Tahiti?]


1. A Reality Check for Solar and Wind

All told, renewables produce a small fraction of recent years’ increased production of oil and gas.

By Robert Bryce, WSJ, July 21, 2019


SUMMARY: The senior fellow of the Manhattan Institute asserts that nearly all the candidates to replace Trump have two common talking points: loathe hydrocarbons and love renewables. He continues:

“Democratic contenders need a reality check. Despite years of federal subsidies, wind and solar are being trounced by the staggering surge in domestic oil and natural-gas production.

“Occidental Petroleum recently agreed to buy Anadarko Petroleum for $38 billion largely because it coveted Anadarko’s acreage in the Permian Basin, which covers about 75,000 square miles of West Texas and eastern New Mexico. The first commercial well in the Permian, the Santa Rita No. 1, blew in near Big Lake, Texas, in 1923. Despite its long history, the Permian is now the world’s hottest energy play.

“The latest Energy Information Administration data show that since early 2014 oil production in the Permian has grown to more than four million barrels a day from about 1.5 million. Gas production in the Permian has nearly tripled in the same period to about 14 billion cubic feet a day from about five billion. In terms of energy, nine billion cubic feet of gas is equivalent to 1.5 million barrels of oil. Add the oil and gas increases and since 2014 the Permian’s output has jumped by roughly four million barrels of oil equivalent a day.

“Now look at solar and wind. In 2018, according to BP, all U.S. solar projects produced about 441,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day. The increase in oil and gas production from 2014 to today in the Permian alone is equal to about nine times the output of every solar project in the U.S. In 2018 domestic wind production totaled about 1.3 million barrels of oil equivalent a day. The increase in Permian oil and gas production since 2014 is equal to three times the annual output of every wind turbine in the country.

“Those numbers are instructive, but that’s only the Permian. Add production from all the other shale plays—including the Haynesville, Utica and Marcellus—and total U.S. oil and gas production since 2014 has jumped by about 5.7 million barrels of oil equivalent a day. That means that over the past half-decade alone U.S. oil and gas production has increased by roughly 13 times the total output of all domestic solar projects and more than four times the total output of every wind turbine in the country.

“Renewable-energy promoters never tire of touting the growing output and declining cost of solar and wind. Those claims may be true. But simple math shows that oil and gas are leaving solar and wind in the shade.”


2. ‘The Weather Machine’ Review: The Future of the Forecast

Weather prognostications represent 150 years of open international cooperation. But with the privatization of data, there are dark skies ahead.

By Howard Schneider, WSJ, July 21, 2019


SUMMARY: The book reviewer writes:

“The future is often portrayed, in books and in articles, as being overrun by the sinister consequences of robotics and artificial intelligence. In ‘The Weather Machine: A Journey Inside the Forecast,’ Andrew Blum offers a reassuring counterpoint to such technodystopias. Weather forecasting ‘is a wonder we treat as a banality,’ Mr. Blum tells us. ‘It marks a high point of science and technology’s aspirations for society, but like a lot of things these days, its complex inner workings are not only mysterious but hidden beneath a veneer of simplicity.’

“The book is a chronicle and celebration of meteorology. The author traces modern weather science back to the first half of the 19th century, when many of the tools and means that would allow scientists to scrutinize the climate and disseminate their findings were being invented, among them synoptic weather charts, improved anemometers to measure wind speed, and professional weather observers—but also Samuel Morse’s telegraph, which brought forecasting to a pioneering new stage. ‘ ‘The weather’ no longer merely described the conditions at a specific place on earth but weather patterns that stretched thousands of miles,’ Mr. Blum writes. The weather became ‘a rationally and imaginatively constructed vision stretching broadly across the land.’ In short, meteorology had entered the industrial era.

“The 19th century not only engendered inventors like Morse and scientists like the Norwegian Vilhelm Bjerknes, whose groundbreaking work applied the principles of physics to an examination of the atmosphere, but also started the bureaucratization of meteorology. ‘Bureaucracy’ usually has ominous connotations, but here it allowed scientists to share information, theories and discoveries much more smoothly than before. Mr. Blum tells us that ‘the first congress of what became the International Meteorological Organization met in Vienna in 1873. Thirty-two representatives of twenty governments attended. They were primarily scientists and directors of weather bureaus. . . . Their fundamental project was to begin the international exchange of weather observations.’

“As technology advanced, weather-research instruments followed apace: increasingly sophisticated buoys, thermometers and barometers, eventually followed by satellites and instrumented balloons. Weather satellites—the U.S. launched the first one in 1960—were truly revolutionary. In particular, the satellites orbiting the poles, projecting ‘10,000 channels of infrared and radar soundings, shot from space through the clouds, [are] the game-changing observatories of today’s forecasts.’ Now we have ‘supercomputers and a purpose-built telecommunications system to tie it all together,’ Mr. Blum writes. He notes that weather satellites were initially and inextricably linked to Cold War realpolitik, where ‘military uses justified the meteorological efforts.’ Indeed, one of the most suggestive conclusions of this book is that weather forecasting is shaped by society’s larger agendas.

“Today the organizational epicenter of state-of-the-art meteorology is the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. Opened for business in 1979, this ‘forecast factory’ is located in Reading, England, and is funded by 22 European member-nations. When it comes to global weather models, the center’s version ‘is king,’ Mr. Blum says, superior to the one produced by the U.S. National Weather Service. One highlight of the book is Mr. Blum’s visit to the center’s headquarters. The data-crunching prowess of its two Cray supercomputers is impressive to the point of being intimidating. ‘At the time I visited,’ Mr. Blum writes, the computers ‘had 260,000 processor cores, capable of conducting 90 trillion calculations per second,’ and they ‘ingested 40 million weather observations a day.’

“The European Center is a splendid example of how technology can unite us. Nevertheless, Mr. Blum has forebodings of potential problems on the horizon. ‘There is the possibility,’ he tells us, ‘that billions of tiny temperature and barometric sensors—in smartphones, home devices, attached to buildings, buses or airliners—could meaningfully compete with the [current] relatively few and carefully constructed weather stations.’ In that event, he asks, ‘Who would own the data? Government weather services have a hundred-and-fifty-year history of sharing their data and giving their services away for free. But if observations are being made by private networks and aggregated by the Googles, IBMs or Amazons of the world, that openness can no longer be assumed.’ [SEPP Comment: This is a concern, but so the deliberate manipulation of historical data by government entities entrusted with the data.]

“In his overview of 19th-century weather scientists, Mr. Blum surprisingly omits the distinguished British meteorologist James Glaisher, who risked his life to obtain data by soaring aloft in a balloon. Mr. Blum also mistakenly states that Nazi Germany’s attempt to install ‘a clandestine intercontinental automatic weather station’ in Canada was ‘the only known Nazi incursion on North American soil.’ In truth, Nazi saboteurs also landed in New York and Florida. Finally, the book gives a rather perfunctory account of climate change—which is startling, since climate change could, conceivably, profoundly alter our culture, our lives, our planet’s very geography.

“I end with a caveat: Weather prognostication continues to improve, but isn’t perfect and, if I understand Mr. Blum correctly, it probably never will be. Better to keep a sense of humor—and those umbrellas—handy forever.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Matthew K
July 29, 2019 4:26 am

Wow, looking at those articles, it looks like the whole climate change shtick might slowly be falling apart!

And yet there are still people who believe in it! I digress though, let the devil have its dues.

Keep up with the excellent work! The climate change hoax is being exposed one step at a time!

Reply to  Matthew K
July 29, 2019 6:37 am

That “the whole climate change shtick” may be shown to be a fraud, is no grounds for supposing it might fall apart! Men are predisposed to believe lies it it supports their interests. ‘Science’ is the more likely to fail if belief becomes the standard. We would be headed for a new dark age of superstition and tyranny.

Reply to  Ge0ld0re
July 29, 2019 4:05 pm

Not necessarily. I suspect that Climate Science will be looked upon more like Astrology. Both have certified colleges, and both rely on unverified and unvalidated models. Neither uses the scientific method (null hypothesis, etc.). Even as Astrology is looked at as more of a superstition/religion, so is Climate Science, as one has to “believe” before any conversation can ensue. Science is often considered antithetical to religion, and Climate Science is more often than not at odds with meteorology, physics, geology, biology, and chemistry.

July 29, 2019 10:41 am

‘The cost-benefit test’ presupposes government authority.

If government determines that banning 100 watt light bulbs would save consumers money, the government would still have no business messing with what kind of light bulbs the citizens use. It is tyranny, regardless of the cost-benefit test.

Government doesn’t exist to perfect our lives. We should be free to have imperfect lives.

Kevin kilty
July 29, 2019 12:12 pm

It is very difficult to formulate a hypothesis test with results so clear that it can invalidate a theory. Many tests and theories depend on auxiliary hypotheses, and it may be an auxiliary condition that causes the failure of a test; or at least partisans will begin their defense on such. Usually it takes a sequence of failures to get partisans to finally surrender.

July 30, 2019 1:23 am

Regarding the EU and the “”Keep it in the ground”” thinking. I do not
agree, Germany is a manufacturing country as is Britain. In both countries politics are moving to the right.

Boris Johnson will be a critical factor, the UK even with some sort of
acceptable deal, unlikely, they will probably go into a recession. I have always believed that only rich countries can afford to put up with Greenies.

He Boris has already had a “”Spring Clean”” of all the pro EU M.P.’s
so expect some strong measures to take place.

We do indeed live in very interesting times.


Verified by MonsterInsights