The Week That Was: 2023-04-22 (April 22, 2023)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day. ― Bertrand Russell [H/t Thomas Sowell]
Number of the Week: 30 Seconds
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Scope: TWTW will discuss the following issues. Watts Up With That carried a post by researcher Thomas Shula arguing that there is little or no greenhouse effect and the earth’s surface loses most of its heat by convection alone. [By private communication, he fully understands that the earth as a whole loses energy to space only by infrared (IR) emission.] The post brings out several deficiencies in applying concepts found in the reports by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its followers such as the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). These deficiencies include the depiction of the Earth’s Energy Budget (attributing only a small heat-transfer effect to conduction and convection) and the layering approach used in global climate modeling. It also illustrates the superiority of the simplified modeling used by van Wijngaarden and Happer.
Last week TWTW discussed the highly commendable new research by Cheng-Zhi Zou, et al. Their calculations adjust for orbital discrepancies in NOAA satellite data and confirm the exceptional work of John Christy, Roy Spencer, and the researchers at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). Unfortunately, the work includes a short-term trend indicating that the rate of atmospheric warming may be increasing. From graphs of the data, TWTW considered the trend to be a placating “throw-away.” Econometrician Ross McKitrick used rigorous statistical tests to demonstrate that the “warming trend” is statistically insignificant.
Theoretical physicist Steve Koonin has publicly defended the basic science of the IPCC reports and used them as an instrument to criticize the “bandwagon science” that follows. He has been criticized for his approach, perhaps unjustly.
Jennifer Marohasy continues her relentless pursuit to obtain two sets of data for the same location for the same times in order to see if changing instruments changes readings for the same location. She is demonstrating that statistical averages are meaningless when dealing with extreme temperatures, high or low. In so doing, she is demonstrating the importance of control, or standardization, periods to assure different instruments produce identical results.
Long-term goals of policy are desirable. A current political fad is declaring “visions,” goals. Long-time leader of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting, Lennart Bengtsson, states that it is important to first ensure that the objectives are reasonable and, above all, that they are feasible. “Visions” guiding energy policies in Canada and New York are evaluated.
Falsely claiming a climate “crisis,” the US government is trying to shut down all use of fossil fuels for electrical power and transportation. A few of the latest developments are discussed.
The US EPA has a slogan that “Every day is Earth Day.” Possible meanings of Earth Day are explored.
****************
No Greenhouse Effect? In beginning his essay arguing that there is little or no Greenhouse Effect, Thomas Shula uses the Earth’s Energy Budget diagram by NASA which is similar to the ones by the UN IPCC. These all stem from one developed by members of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Shula argues that conduction and convection carry far more heat away from the surface than IR does, contrary to what the IPCC’s Heat Balance Drawings show. The “sensible heat” flux is calculated by the IPCC as worldwide amounts of heat removed from the surface by conduction and convection averaged with worldwide amounts of heat transferred from the atmosphere to the surface when the atmosphere is warmer than the surface (owing to winds moving warm air around). By contrast, the amounts of IR emitted and absorbed are shown separately.
A big problem was explained by Howard Hayden in his essays on Basic Climate Physics posted on the SEPP website, particularly in Essay # 4. The heat-flow diagrams of the earth really do not display the greenhouse effect. But what will the new temperature be if there is some change in the greenhouse effect due to a change in CO2 concentration. Essay #4 makes no prediction but says that any realistic prediction must conform to the Planetary Heat Balance equation and IPCC’s definition of the greenhouse effect.
Equation # 4 in Hayden’s Essay # 4 describes what happens in all bodies in the solar system (except those heated by tidal forces in proximity to massive planets). In subsequent essays on Basic Climate Physics and his description of UN deficiencies Hayden explains that the UN and its followers make assertions that are inconsistent with Equation # 4 which describes Planetary Heat Balance. Briefly, IPCC’s predicted temperature rises would cause far more IR emission from the surface than the increase in greenhouse effect could accommodate.
The real problem in the Shula essay is thathe denies (A) that the surface emits IR according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law, and (B) that there is such a thing as the greenhouse effect. His discussion of the Pirani vacuum gauge clearly indicates that the hot filament radiates the same amount of heat whether gas is present or not, so his objection to the Stefan-Boltzmann law is hard to understand. The greenhouse effect is the net reduction of surface IR by greenhouse gases to the IR emitted to space. But if you deny that the Stefan-Boltzmann law applies, you can deny that measured reduction.
This issue was brought out in last week’s TWTW addressing the question “why is only 60% of the Infrared Radiation emitted by the surface of the Earth going to space? Is the difference in energy used to do work for all the events in climate? AMO physicist Howard Hayden who wrote the essays on Basic Climate Physics on the SEPP website responded quickly.”
“On average, the surface radiates as a blackbody of ca. 289 K, which means that it radiates ca. 398 W/m2 [watts per square meter]. The radiation to space is ca. 239 W/m2, so the net effect of GHGs [Greenhouse gases] is to absorb 159 W/m2. 159/398 = 40%. (Happer uses numbers that are a bit different — and probably better — but I use IPCC numbers, lest I be accused of using ‘unapproved’ data.)”
“What is the nature of that absorbed energy? Some of it moves the air around. Some of it radiates toward the Earth. Some of it evaporates water. But the long and short of it is that these are internal processes. The only external processes are incoming sunlight and outgoing IR [Infrared radiation], and the two are equal in quantity (though the spectra are entirely different). Consider just one of the balances: Heat leaving the surface (through IR, evaporation, and conduction/convection) equals the heat reaching the surface (sunlight, IR from clouds, IR from GHGs.
“For the time being, ignore the Boltzmann factor which determines the equilibrium fraction of molecules that are in excited states. Think of layers. The 15-micron peak in the CO2 spectrum is so large that at present concentration, the mean free path is only 20 cm. Now imagine a photon of that wavelength leaving the surface — not directly upward, but at some angle, say, 45º. On average it would rise about 14 cm before being absorbed. For a more horizontal angle, it would be even less of a rise. So (without getting our noses out of joint about precision), imagine that there is a layer of (say) 15 cm thickness in which (say) 95% of the IR of that wavelength is absorbed. For that layer, a molecule can emit an IR photon in some random direction, half with some upward inclination, and half with some downward inclination. For the next layer up, the same sort of thing happens, half goes upward, half goes downward. Layer after layer, the same thing happens. Each layer receives IR from the layer below and also from the layer above. Owing to the decreasing pressure with altitude, the layer thickness increases as you go up, but it is clear that there are MANY thousands of such layers between the surface and the ‘top of the atmosphere.’”
“This thinking leads to a false conclusion that the amount of radiation to space (for each given wavelength) is far less than the surface radiation. For example, with a mere 100 layers, about 99% would be radiated back to the surface and a mere 1% would be radiated to space.” [The thinking leads to Shula’s conclusions that IPCC is in error.] Hayden uses the results of the NIMBUS satellite program (1964 to 78) over Guam (April 27, 1970) to show that the thinking is false. Also, it shows that carbon dioxide’s (CO2) infrared emission to space is strongest in wavelengths about 15 micrometers, whereas the simple-minded layer model predicts the weakest radiation for that 15-micrometer peak. [This is similar to Figure 7 in the March van Wijngaarden and Happer paper which shows the theoretical infrared radiation to space (the smooth Planck curve) and the actual, observed infrared radiation to space (the jagged Schwarzschild line), with the wavelengths of the principal greenhouse gases identified.]
As van Wijngaarden and Happer conclude in their March paper: [Boldface added]
“Summary
“Greenhouse gases are responsible for the most striking feature of Earth’s atmosphere, a lower troposphere, and an upper stratosphere. In the troposphere, below the tropopause boundary, a large fraction of the energy flux from the solar heated surface is carried by convection, and not by thermal radiation. Convection maintains average temperature lapse rates in the troposphere that are close to adiabatic [heat does not enter or leave the system]. In the stratosphere, most of the upward heat flux is carried by radiation. Greenhouse gases warm the surface because they increase the “thermal resistance” of the atmosphere to the vertical flow of energy from the solar-heated surface to space. The larger the thermal resistance between the surface and the emission altitude, the larger the temperature difference needed to drive the solar energy absorbed by the surface back to space. Without the thermal resistance induced by greenhouse gases, Earth’s surface would be much colder and life as we know it would not be possible.
“Increasing carbon dioxide will cause a small additional surface warming. It is difficult to calculate exactly how much, but our best estimate is that it is about 1 C for every doubling of CO2 concentration, when all feedbacks are correctly accounted for. Alarming predictions of dangerous warming require large positive feedbacks. The most commonly invoked feedback is an increase in the concentration of water vapor in the upper troposphere. But most climate models have predicted much more warming than has been observed, so there is no observational support for strong positive feedbacks. Indeed, most feedbacks in nature are negative as expressed by Le Chatelier’s Principle: When any system at equilibrium for a long period of time is subjected to a change in concentration, temperature, volume or pressure, the system changes to a new equilibrium, and this change partly counteracts the applied change.
“We have barely touched atmospheric dynamics, perhaps the most interesting part of the grand drama of weather and climate. We are all familiar with manifestations of atmospheric dynamics: warm fronts, cold fronts, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornados etc. Equally fascinating are ocean dynamics, like the El Nino cycles of the tropical Pacific Ocean, also contribute to weather and climate. Earth’s atmosphere works like an extremely complicated engine that transforms heat from the Sun into the work that drives the winds, the weather and ocean dynamics. Greenhouse gases are the heat exchanger which allows the atmospheric heat engine to dump waste heat into cold space.”
Convection is a vital part of cooling the surface of the planet, but greenhouse gases are the vital mechanism for reducing infrared intensity and modifying the IR spectrum to the jagged spectrum that goes into space. Mr. Shula’s confusion is due to the failure of the IPCC and its followers to understand the greenhouse effect and the importance of greenhouse gases for human survival. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy for the van Wijngaarden and Happer paper, Questioning the Orthodoxy for Shula’s essay, http://www.sepp.org/science_papers.cfm?whichyear=2022 for Hayden’s Basic Climate Physics, and http://www.sepp.org/science_papers.cfm?whichyear=2023 for the UN’s self-contradictions.
****************
The Whole Dataset: The outstanding paper by Cheng-Zhi Zou et al. continues to produce responses. In a private communication, John Christy cited the authors for their courage. They work at NOAA Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) and the administration at NOAA has been less than friendly to research questioning the prevailing political view that the planet is in a climate crisis.
Perhaps as a “throw away” gesture to the NOAA administration, Cheng-Zhi Zou et al. asserted that the data since 2001 shows a warming greater than 0.14K per decade shown by the entire dataset. Last week, TWTW dismissed this effort as being a timeframe too short to be meaningful. Econometrician Ross McKitrick was criticized for not mentioning it in his discussion of the importance of the new analysis. To know if the warming rate has changed, proper statistical testing is needed. So, McKitrick applied rigorous statistical testing to the issue.
In a technical post on Judith Curry’s Climate Etc., McKitrick explains where he obtained the data needed, how he tested it, and the results. Interestingly, the dataset for the global mid-troposphere (the atmospheric layer from one kilometer up to about 10 km in altitude) shows a bit more warming than the lower troposphere (surface to about 8 km in altitude).
After performing needed statistical tests, McKitrick concludes:
In sum, based on a preliminary analysis the new NOAA data do not support a claim that warming in the troposphere has undergone a statistically significant change in trend. The Global and Tropical TTT [total troposphere temperature] series show no support for the claim. The Global MT [mid troposphere] series appears to show support but only if the break data is placed in a specific interval in the early part of the last decade, and more recently the tests do not support acceleration. Finally, all of these results are biased towards finding evidence of a trend break due to the treatment of g [comparison point or break data point]. Robust critical values could be generated, which I might get to someday if no one else does it first.
This controversy is an example of why TWTW believes that efforts to establish a linear trend over part of a dataset are generally more political persuasion than rigorous science. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
****************
Defending Science: Steven Koonin has spoken out against climate alarmism. In doing so he has used the main body of IPCC assessment reports, but not the Summary for Policymakers and other follow-up reports that can be called bandwagon science. The blog, No Tricks Zone, posted a criticism of Koonin’s actions as defending the science establishment on climate. To TWTW, understanding the strengths in climate science to show the weaknesses and how others misuse the science is not defending the actions of alarmists or the policies being proposed to address an alarm that is false. For Koonin’s latest presentation and the criticism see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
Yeoman’s Work: Jennifer Marohasy continues to push the Australian Bureau of Meteorology to release data records that were compiled when platinum probes in automatic weather stations (AWS) replaced mercury thermometers in Stevenson screens read by humans in stations across Australia. The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) insists that there are no differences in the readings. But the limited data released thus far indicates that there are. According to Marohasy:
“Measurements from a mercury thermometer are less spikey than measurements from a probe.”
“This is not surprising given the spread of values that are not randomly distributed with the probe recording hotter than the mercury 41% of the time, recording the same 32% of the time and lower 26% of the time.”
Further, the differences do not appear to be randomly distributed. And as Marohasy states:
“Statisticians are notorious for disagreeing about the most appropriate statistical test to apply, but nevertheless should at the very least provide the name of the test undertaken and the level of significance, as a lawyer would detail the case law referenced.”
Her effort is important because extremes in temperature are often flaunted as proof of dangerous global warming, even though they are not. Further, statistical averaging will not eliminate any inconsistency that is not random. Marohasy is publicly stating:
“It is time for another expert assessment, and for all the parallel data held by the Bureau to be made public. There should be 15 years in total of parallel data for Brisbane airport and a similar amount for another 37 of the Bureau’s 700 official weather stations.”
All this illustrates the need for control or standardization periods when one type of instrument is replaced by another type of instrument to verify that they are measuring the same thing the same way. See links under: Measurement Issues – Surface.
****************
Reasonable and Feasible: Lennart Bengtsson long led the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting. Its ten day to two-week forecasts are considered by many metrologists to be the best in the world. He writes:
“There is nothing wrong with setting targets. However, it is important to first ensure that the objectives are reasonable and, above all, that they are feasible. Formulating irrelevant goals – or goals that cannot be achieved for scientific, technical, or economic reasons – does not benefit anyone, especially the citizens of the country or the population of the world.”
John Robson brings attention to Canada’s “First annual report to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change – Compete and succeed in a net-zero future.” In the section, “A vision for net-zero energy systems” the report states:
“What do we mean by a ‘vision’?
“When we talk about a vision for net-zero energy systems, we mean defining an end state. Ideally, we would have a clearer view on what types of energy and energy carriers, in what amounts, and in what parts of the country, would be most likely to deliver a right-sized net-zero energy system by 2050 Only with description of the likely future energy systems will we be able to create credible, capable, and compelling pathways to net-zero energy for Canada.
“The Generation Energy Council released a report in 2018 summarizing findings from a cross-Canada dialogue and engagement process which set out an early vision for a clean energy future. While much has changed since the release of this report, it sets out two detailed scenarios of what life might be like for Canadians a generation from today—with real tangible examples of how lifestyles, work, businesses, and society can change as a result of cleaner and improved energy systems. While a vision this detailed is helpful to inspire people about the ways they can benefit from progress to net-zero, a clear quantitative, technical description of the system itself is still missing.”
“All of the specifics of how to achieve net-zero energy systems are beyond the scope of what can be achieved in our first annual report.”
Setting aside the Orwellian obfuscation, the report states “We have no idea of why we should go to net zero and how much it will cost.” These are not reasonable and feasible goals or mature thinking.
In describing the effort of New York State to achieve similar goals in electricity, Francis Menton writes:
“By our Climate Change and Community Protection Act of 2019 (Climate Act), the legislature has decreed that we are to have a rapid transition to ‘net zero’ carbon emissions, first in the electricity sector, and then for the entire economy. No feasibility study or demonstration project for us! The only option is Full Speed Ahead, without a clue as to whether this will work or not.”
“And it is more or less exactly what you would expect if you think for say, one minute, about what position Con Edison might take. As a deeply regulated entity, they are completely required to affirm the directives and applaud the wisdom of their government overlords. But more than that, they are clearly salivating over the prospect of getting to make billions of dollars of new investments, all of which will earn a guaranteed, regulated rate of return for their investors — and if we are really, really lucky, the end result will be that we get the exact same electricity for much higher cost. If we aren’t so lucky, we will get much less reliable electricity for the much higher cost.”
“But all the verbiage and charts and graphs mainly have the purpose of obscuring the fact that Con Ed does not take responsibility for making sure that there is enough electricity availability to supply customer demand on the grid. That’s somebody else’s job.” [Boldface added]
If they can profit from it, corporations will agree to impossible tasks. It is the policymaker’s job to ensure the tasks are reasonable and feasible. Many Western politicians have lost their way. See links under Science, Policy, and Evidence and Articles # 1 and #2.
****************
What Is Evidence? In supporting the EPA’s efforts to shut down the use of fossil fuels, the American Lung Association (ALA) produced a report claiming “Almost 120M Americans exposed to air pollution that can shorten lives.” The report focuses on PM2.5, tiny particles or droplets in the air that are two- and one-half microns or less in width. The report contains no rigorous health studies showing the toxicity of PM2.5 and no references to such studies.
According to ALA, anything above 250 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) is hazardous. In South Korea, Yellow Dust is considered unhealthy (but not hazardous) above 400 ug/m3. Sometimes it reaches 800 ug/m3. Why has the median age in South Korea more than doubled since 1955? (from 18.9 in 1955 to 43.7 in 2020) See links under Defending the Orthodoxy, https://asiasociety.org/korea/hwang-sa-yellow-dust and https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/south-korea-population/
****************
Sloganeering, Not Research: The US EPA has a new slogan: “Every Day is Earth Day.” The question is what is meant by Earth Day? In an essay titled “Earth Day Has Become Polluted By Ignorance And Political Correctness” Dr. Henry Miller and Jeff Stier of American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) write:
“Once a touchy-feely, consciousness-raising New Age experience, it’s now an occasion for environmental activists to prophesy apocalypse, dish antitechnology dirt, and allow passion and zeal to trump reality.”
They give a brief history of Earth Day, and how it has changed to opposing “environment-friendly advances in science and technology, such as agricultural biotechnology (“GMOs”), fracking, and nuclear power.” All of these benefit humanity. As Robert Bradley Jr. writes:
“That optimistic element has disappeared. The environmental establishment has grown increasingly gloomy, convinced that the Earth is suffering from the ‘Terrible Toos’ — too many people, too much consumption, too great a reliance on technology which is understood too little. Earth Day has become a day of atonement for man’s criminal assault on our planet. That pessimism reflects, in part, their realization that history is no longer on their side; thus, change is no longer in their interest. Stasis must be the order of the day.”
Has the US EPA undertaken a policy of opposing all the modern benefits to humanity? See links under Questioning Green Elsewhere.
****************
SEPP’S APRIL FOOLS AWARD – THE JACKSON
SEPP is conducting its annual vote for the recipient of the coveted trophy, The Jackson, a lump of coal. Readers are asked to nominate and vote for who they think is most deserving. Senators Schumer and Manchin won in 2022.
The voting will close on June 30. Please send your nominee and a brief reason why the person is qualified for the honor to Ken@SEPP.org. The awardee will be announced at the annual meeting of the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness on July 7 to 9.
*******************
Number of the Week – 30 Seconds: The Cheng-Zhi Zou, et al. research showed that for the entire dataset, tropospheric temperature, low and mid, increase 0.14 K per decade or one quarter of a degree F per decade, or one-tenth of one quarter of a degree F per year. On a typical spring morning in Northern Virginia, temperatures will increase by this amount in about 30 seconds. Yet, across the Potomac River, the US EPA has declared a climate crisis for 30 seconds of spring morning warming?
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
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: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/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
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/climate-change-reconsidered-ii-biological-impacts/
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
http://store.heartland.org/shop/ccr-ii-fossil-fuels/
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
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/
Download with no charge:
Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate
S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008
http://www.sepp.org/publications/nipcc_final.pdf
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
Atmosphere and Greenhouse Gas Primer
By W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada & Department of Physics, Princeton University, USA, March 3, 2023
Is warming accelerating in the troposphere?
By Ross McKitrick, Climate Etc. Apr 19, 2023
Link to paper: Mid-Tropospheric Layer Temperature Record Derived From Satellite Microwave Sounder Observations With Backward Merging Approach
By Cheng-Zhi Zou, JGR Atmospheres, Mar 3, 2023
40 years of expert failure: New NOAA STAR satellite temperatures only show half the warming that climate models do
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 21, 2023
NOAA’s STAR has fallen
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Correction, the UAH trend for the entire dataset is 0.13 C increase per decade]
Steven E Koonin’s conference in Paris on March 23
Association des Climato-réalistes [H/t Peter Salonius]
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgyAWIiMYqI&t=280s
Review Of Koonin’s “Unsettled”…Government, Scientific Institutions As “Instruments Of Hostile Forces”
By William Walter Kay, Via No Tricks Zone, Apr 16, 2023
The Broken Science Initiative with guest, William Briggs
By Staff, Academy for Science and Freedom, Via WUWT, Apr 18, 2023
Video
Defending the Orthodoxy
Almost 120M Americans exposed to air pollution that can shorten lives: research
By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 19, 2023
Link to report: State of the Air, 2023
By Staff, American Lung Association, 2023
UN Secretary-General Wrong to Blame Climate Change for Somalian Suffering
By Linnea Lueken, Climate Realism, Apr 13, 2023
Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science
Half of North American bat species are at risk, report warns
By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 17, 2023
Link to: State of The Bats in North America
By Staff, Bat Conservation International, 2023
“Climate change harms bats. In North America, extreme temperatures and drought are the biggest threats to bats from climate change.”
Questioning the Orthodoxy
A Novel Perspective on the Greenhouse Effect
By Thomas Shula, WUWT, Apr 18, 2023
Luxury Beliefs And Energy Policy: The Fatal Conceit
By Tilak Doshi, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023
Renewable Experts: Undeterred and Unmoved by Failed Ideas
By Planning Engineer Russ Schussler, Climate Etc. Apr 17, 2023
Why “Net Zero” Is Not a Rational U.S. Energy Policy
By Jonathan Lesser, Real Clear Energy, April 17, 2023
“It is doubtful the U.S. will adopt this approach in the near future, because political expediency nearly always beats rational economics. But as economist Herb Stein said long ago, something that cannot go on forever, won’t. The unrealistic energy policies in place today eventually will collapse under their own weight. The resulting costs to U.S. consumers and businesses will be staggering.”
Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety
By Hannes Zacher & Cort W. Rudolph, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Particularly true with politicians?]
Change in US Administrations
President Biden may have mandated a death spiral for the auto industry
By Ronald Stein, CFACT, April 20th, 2023
Problems in the Orthodoxy
Pentagon Sounds Alarm Over Biden Plan for Offshore Wind Sites
The Defense Department has raised concerns about East Coast areas earmarked for new wind farms in a setback for the fledgling industry.
By Jennifer A Dlouhy, Bloomberg, Apr 17, 2023
Seeking a Common Ground
What Is A 1000 Year Flood?
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 18, 2023
“In laymen’s terms, Roger [Pielke] is merely pointing out that a 1-in 1000-year event is par for the course somewhere or other when there are thousands of places in the world where such events can occur.”
Lennart Bengtsson: Off target
By Lennart Bengtsson, Net Zero Watch, Apr 21, 2023
None so blind
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
By Staff, Canada’s Climate Plan, 2023
New York Goes Full Central Planning For The Electricity Sector
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Apr 19, 2023
Models v. Observations
Dueling ITCZs
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Apr 18, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Or is it shifting ITCZ that may influence Arctic warming?]
Model Issues
It’s going to have been hot
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
On the use of near-surface air temperature data to assess the magnitude of global warming
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
From the CO2Science archive:
Mercury Thermometers Versus Probes in Automatic Weather Stations
By Jennifer Marohasy, Her Blog, Apr 19, 2023
Includes a link to audio.
Parallel Temperature Data, Except for Cape Otway Lighthouse
By Jennifer Marohasy, Her Blog, Apr 21, 2021
Earth’s Mean Annual Temperature Was Warmer 31,000 Years Ago…The North Pole 22°C Warmer
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Apr 17, 2023
Link to latest paper: Paleotemperatures of the Earth’s Surface 2: Determination of the Midlatitude Near-Surface Heat-Capacity of the Earth
By Joseph Smulsky, Journal of Engineering Physics and Thermophysics, March 2022
Changing Weather
US Drought Monitor
By Staff, National Drought Mitigation Center, Accessed Apr 18, 2023 [H/t WUWT]
[SEPP Comment: Enter a date such as April 12, 2022, in the “Left” slot then move the slider. The “permanent” drought in the West disappears in less than a year.]
Where can you get the most skillful weather forecast? And a cool week ahead. All in my new podcast
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 17, 2023
Link to: ForecastAdvisor
Central Europe April Has Been Cool And Wet, Bringing Relief To Drought Stricken Regions
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 21, 2023
Increased Wildfire Danger over the Western U.S. from Wet and Cold Conditions
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 19, 2023
One of the Coldest Aprils In Northwest History Will Soon Be History
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 21, 2023
Notes on Florida Torrential Rainfall and Ft. Lauderdale
By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Apr 15, 2023
Changing Climate
#CoolClimateData: Climate4You.com
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
“Oh, one more thing. The latest warmish period is rather long as these things have gone during the Pleistocene, which means if we were going to project anything for the centuries ahead, a sudden drop into a new ice age would be the most plausible forecast.”
“The Day After Tomorrow” to Happen in the Next Few Decades?
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 19, 2023
Changing Seas
Ocean Warming Spike March 2023
By Ron Clutz. Science Matters, Apr 21, 2023
“A major El Nino was the dominant climate feature in recent years.”
Are ENSO Regime Changes Connected To Major Climate Shifts? Are We Tipping To Cooling?
By Gabriel Oxenstierna, No Tricks Zone, Apr 19, 20223
Tropical Paradise Islands Are Not Sinking And Shrinking…Most Are In Fact Growing!
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 15, 2023
Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
‘Less ice means more conflicts with polar bears’ narrative not supported by scientific evidence
By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Apr 19, 2023
“Money Quote from the abstract: ‘…ice cover had no significant impact on the odds for a [polar bear] kill.’”
NASA Credibility Melting At 100% Per Decade
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 19, 2023
Russian walrus and polar bears continue to thrive US researchers tell the Washington Post
By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Apr 15, 2023
Acidic Waters
Ocean Acidification
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 20, 2023
Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine
Climatists Against Growing Rice, Because . . .Methane
By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Apr 18, 2023
Lowering Standards
“Degrowth” (Last refuge for climate alarmists?)
By Robert Bradley Jr. Master Resource, April 18, 2023
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
64 million Americans face daily spikes in ‘deadly particle pollution’: report
By Julia Mueller, The Hill, Apr 19, 2023
“Bakersfield, Calif., topped the report’s lists of 25 cities most polluted by daily and annual particulate matter. California cities took up ten of the slots on the daily list, and the top four slots on the annual list.”
[SEPP Comment: The American Lung Association report above.]
Rain, drought, it’s all terrible
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
New York Times: “’Still, even longtime residents have been staggered this year by the brute swiftness with which Tulare Lake has resurfaced: In less than three weeks, a parched expanse of 30 square miles has been transformed by furious storms into a vast and rising sea.’”
BBC Ignore Cold-Related Deaths In India
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 21, 2023
Tornado alley is expanding — and scientists don’t know why
By Saul Elbein, The Hill, Apr 16, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Since the Four-State Tornado Swarm in New England in 1787?]
Tidbits
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
“From the ‘Oh no, not spring’ department, Bloomberg announces that ‘Climate Change Is Making Allergy Season Last Longer’.”
[SEPP Comment: Horrors! Spring is lasting longer?]
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
Droughts developing more rapidly says global study
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 16, 2023
“I am quite sure that Dr Wu and his colleagues are perfectly aware of all of this [including 125 years of records]. That is why they have invented flash droughts, which with some dodgy computer modelling has enabled them to claim something which does not exist.”
Disasters report features ‘crudely manipulated data’
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2023
Link to report: 2022 Disasters in numbers
Sponsored by: UCLouvain (Belgium’s largest French speaking university, Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) and USAID
file:///C:/Users/Owner/Downloads/2022_EMDAT_report.pdf
Thirty Years of Global Warming Prophecies
By Warren Beatty, American Thinker, Apr 15, 2023
“This was echoed by Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council: ‘This is the stone-cold truth laid out in unassailable science by the world’s top climate experts. We’re hurtling down the road to ruin and running out of time to change course.’”
Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?
Democrats, independents and young Americans losing faith that climate change is “man made”
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 19, 2023
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda on Children
How (Not) to talk with children about climate change
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 20, 2023
Mission Australia: Climate Anxiety is Causing Youth Mental Health Problems
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 20, 2023
Scientific American: Social Bullying is the Best Motivator for Green Behavior
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 20, 2023
Communicating Better to the Public – Protest
Julia Hartley Brewer’s Furious CLASH With Extinction Rebellion Activist
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 20, 2023
Expanding the Orthodoxy
We’ll pass… pass… pass…
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
From invitation: “As urgency around the climate change response continues to build, there’s growing recognition of the need for collective action, new approaches and faster progress toward net-zero.”
G7 commits to faster clean energy transition
By Stephen Neukam, The Hill, Apr 16, 2023
Biden to announce executive order to promote environmental justice
By Alex Gangitano, The Hill, Apr 21, 2023
“The order will launch an Office of Environmental Justice, which will work within the White House Council on Environmental Quality and be led by a federal chief environmental justice officer tasked with coordinating implementation of environmental justice policies.”
[SEPP Comment: Another Orwellian office? What is the definition of environmental justice?]
Questioning European Green
The Rising Chorus of Renewable Energy Skeptics
By Andrew Nikiforuk, Resilience, Apr 10, 2023
“For largely ideological reasons many greens and “transitionists” have presented the transition to renewables as a smooth road with no potholes.
“In so doing they have ignored much basic geology, energy physics and even geopolitics. As a consequence, many imagine the construction of millions of batteries, windmills, solar panels, transmission lines and associated technologies, but they downplay the required intensification of mining for copper, nickel, cobalt and rare minerals you’ve probably never heard of such as dysprosium and neodymium.”
Did The Guardian Just Almost Call for a Coal Plant to Stay Open?
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 17, 2023
Low heat pump uptake ‘an embarrassment’
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 18, 2023
Earth Day Has Become Polluted By Ignorance And Political Correctness
By Henry I. Miller, MS, MD and Jeff Stier, ACSH, April 20, 2023
Resourceful Earth Day: Fred Smith on Julian Simon
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, April 21, 2023
Earth Day 2023: Utterly Bereft of Ideas
By Benjamin Zycher, Real Clear Energy, April 20, 2023
A Technocratic Superclass of Earth Saviors seek to manage every aspect of our lives
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 20, 2023
Green Jobs
The Unbearable Lightness of Renewables – In Time
By: Leen Weijers, VP Engineering, Liberty Energy, WUWT, Apr 18, 2023
“The sad truth is that the poorer renewables work the more will have to be built. Could it be that progressive politicians love the fact that wind and solar have such a low-capacity factor? Why? Overbuilding is a green gift that keeps on giving to progressive politicians, utilities and renewable companies. Let’s hope I am wrong.”
Funding Issues
The “Climate Funding Gap” … Gap? More like an “unscalable cliff”!
By David Middleton, WUWT, Apr 20, 2023
Litigation Issues
SCOTUS Should Review Climate Cases to Stop the Gaming of an Outdated Legal Doctrine
By Phil Goldberg, Real Clear Energy, April 20, 2023
“That’s because when a previous climate case went to the Supreme Court in 2011, the Court unanimously held that federal claims over climate change were displaced by the Clean Air Act. It also explained that climate change raises federal policy matters for regulators, not liability issues for courts.”
“Now, the groups are desperately trying to keep their other cases out of federal court.”
Subsidies and Mandates Forever
For some, it’s better not to work
By Andrew Montford, Net Zero Watch, Apr 19, 2923
“For windfarms, being switched off is more profitable than producing power.”
Government Fiat Will Not Make Electric Cars Viable
By Jerome Corsi, American Thinker, Apr 21, 2023
EVs ride shotgun in new climate rule
By Arianna Skibell, Politico, Apr 12, 2023
Energy Department making $3B available for rooftop solar installations
By Julia Mueller, The Hill, Apr 20, 2023
“The administration aims to make the country’s electric grid carbon-free by 2035.”
EPA and other Regulators on the March
Too Clever by Half – EPA’s De-Facto Electric Vehicle Mandate
By Marlo Lewis, Jr., CEI, Apr 12, 2023
“The EPA will likely argue that tax credits and other subsidies in the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provide a clear statement of Congress’s support for vehicle electrification. That won’t wash. Statutory authority is chiefly a matter of means, not ends. The BIL and IRA authorize specific types of subsidies. They are not broad authorizations to pursue electrification by any means necessary.”
Tailpipe Rule Is the ACA’s Individual Mandate Redux
By Robert Henneke, Real Clear Energy, April 18, 2023
“As the Wall Street Journal explained, ‘make no mistake, this isn’t about clean air. This is about forcing auto makers to produce more EVs that consumers will have no choice but to buy since there will be few gas-powered vehicles left.’”
Energy Issues – Non-US
Govt Quietly Drops Promises Of Cheap Renewable Energy
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 18, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Unreliable electricity is no longer cheap?]
German cabinet approves bill to phase out oil and gas heating systems
By Riham Alkousaa and Markus Wacket, Reuters, Apr 19, 2023
The village where net zero won’t work – and why it’s not alone
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 19, 2023
Energy Issues — US
It Took 15 Years for the Feds To Approve a 700-Mile Electric Line
It’ll be another five years before it’s operational.
By Eric Boehm, Reason, Apr 17, 2023 [H/t Bernie Kepshire}
Answering Brad Lander’s Fatal Conceit
By Terrence Keeley, Real Clear Energy, April 18, 2023
“Investing in fossil fuels is irresponsible, even self-immolating.”
“New York Comptroller Brad Lander made this litany of assertions in a letter last week to his colleagues at Ceres, an NGO committed to sustainability challenges on whose board he serves.”
Washington’s Control of Energy
Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety
By Hannes Zacher & Cort W. Rudolph, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Particularly true with politicians?]
10 models qualify for full revamped EV tax credit under Democrats’ climate law
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, April 17, 2023
“According to an administration official, preliminary analysis shows that 65 percent of first quarter electric vehicle sales qualified for the tax credit, and more than 90 percent remain eligible under the updated requirements.”
[SEPP Comment: Bigger bribes to auto manufacturers?]
Biden administration takes first step to protect more than 100 million acres of forest
By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 20, 2023
“The acreage identified includes 80 million acres of mature forest and 32 million acres of old-growth forest, according to the Interior and Agriculture departments.”
[SEPP Comment: By the 1880s, the Eastern US was denuded for fuel and building. Then coal replaced wood as the primary fuel. What will provide a reliable fuel for electricity?]
Biden administration OKs Alaska natural gas exports, drawing progressive ire
By Rachel Fazin, The Hill, Apr 14, 2023
Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?
‘Shark Tank’ investor Kevin O’Leary wants to lower gas prices by building a $14 billion oil refinery
By Jennifer Sor, Market Insider, Apr 12, 2023
[SEPP Comment According to the US EIA, the last refinery with significant downstream capacity came online in 1977.] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=29&t=6#:~:text=However%2C%20the%20newest%20refinery%20with,capacity%20of%20585%2C000%20b%2Fcd.
Oil Spills, Gas Leaks & Consequences
The King’s Gas Leak
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 16, 2023
Nuclear Energy and Fears
Virginia lawmakers kill Youngkin amendment to define nuclear energy as renewable
By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 14, 2023
“Mike Town, executive director of the Virginia League of Conservation Voters, said the organization is ‘grateful’ for the vote.
“Virginians overwhelmingly support affordable clean energy and climate action, yet Governor Youngkin continues going out of his way to keep our state tied to volatile and dirty fossil fuels,’ Town said in a statement.”
[SEPP Comment: Uranium, produced by supernovae, is a fossil fuel?]
Olkiluoto 3 Finally Online in Finland; Germany Closes Last Three Nuclear Plants
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, Apr 17, 2023
“Olkiluoto 3 is the first nuclear power plant built in Finland in more than 40 years. It was originally scheduled to open in 2009, four years after construction began, but a series of technical issues delayed its start-up.”
Will NY rely on nuclear to reach its lofty climate goals?
The controversial energy source is getting renewed attention from climate activists and energy providers alike.
By Kyle Chouinard, City & State, Apr 17, 2023
[SEPP Comment: After closing Indian Point with three reactors?]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
Addressing Wind/Solar Instability: Hardwiring the Grid
By Ed Ireland, Master Resource, Apr 17, 2023
Wind Power Has A Profitability Problem
By Felicity Bradstock, Oil Price.com, Apr 19, 2023 [H/t Bernie Kepshie]
Solar Optimism and Coal Alarmism a Century Ago
By Robert Bradley Jr, Master Resource, Apr 19, 2023
“Hope springs eternal. The notion that the sun’s energy can be converted into electricity because it is just there to be concentrated is naivete. There is such a thing as physics to explain how the sun’s work over the ages has created a dense, reliable stock of potential energy versus a dilute, intermittent flow from the sun.”
Headwinds for Offshore Wind (Rhode Island’s RFP a sign of trouble)
By Allen Brooks, Master Resource, April 20, 2023
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
The End Of Cheap Flights
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 18, 2023
“Would somebody like to tell me when anybody actually voted for any of this?”
Battery Weight: Hidden Costs of EVs versus ICEs
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, April 16, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Ford is manufacturing an electric version of the most popular American vehicle for the past 10 years, the F-150 light truck. The battery weights 1800 lbs. and has an 8 year/100000-mile warranty for 70% of its original capacity. Replacing the battery is estimated to be $32,000 and $36,000 for extended range.]
The hidden costs of electric vehicles
By Robert E. Norton II, Washington Examiner, April 17, 2023
Unfit for use? More EV Woes
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 17, 2023
“‘Brutal:’ EV Road Trip Features Bundling Up in Winter Clothes to Avoid Running Heater”
Ford F-150 Lightning Spectacular EV Fire
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 21, 2023
Health, Energy, and Climate
Sick Or Dying? Don’t Worry, We’re Cutting Carbon Emissions!
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 20, 2023
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
NYC Mayor to Cut Carbon Emissions by Cutting Off Food
“20 percent of New York City’s greenhouse gas emissions come from household food”
By Daniel Greenfield, Front Page, Apr 18, 2023
“’In Fiscal Year 2023, the New York City Department of Aging served nearly 3 million nutritious meals to older New Yorkers, and under Mayor Eric Adams we continue to make changes to these programs to reduce the negative environmental impact they have’ said New York City Department for the Aging Commissioner Lorraine Cortés-Vázquez.”
“The new inventory shows that 20 percent of New York City’s greenhouse gas emissions come from household food consumption — primarily from meats, poultry, fish, eggs, and dairy products.”
[SEPP Comment: Feed the peasants gruel! Return of Depression Era Soup Kitchens?]
Brecon Beacons to be renamed over links to climate change
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2023
“The national park will now be officially referred to as the ‘Bannau Brycheiniog’ National Park, granting the landscape a Welsh name, and steering clear of any associations with historical signal fires.”
Brad Pitt, Mikhail Gorbachev, And the Hurricane Katrina Eco-Homes Disaster
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023
Climate air heads
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023
[SEPP Comment: Five minutes of springtime morning warming per decade is causing increasing air turbulence?]
El Niño is coming, and ocean temps are already at record highs. That can spell disaster for fish and corals
By Dillon Anaya, The Conversation, Via Phs.org, Apr 19, 2023 [H/t Gordon Fulks]
ARTICLES
1. Joe Manchin’s Faux Betrayal and an Endless Green Bill of Goods
The Inflation Reduction Act is welfare for the rich, not investment for places like West Virginia.
By Allysia Finley, WSJ, April 16, 2023
TWTW Summary: The journalist begins:
“Who knows if West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin truly believed the Inflation Reduction Act would reduce the deficit. Either way, he bought a green bill of goods. Several recent independent studies show that the law’s climate spending will cost trillions of dollars—many multiples more than Democrats claimed—and most of it will go to the affluent.
A Goldman Sachs report last month estimated the law’s climate spending would cost $1.2 trillion over the next decade—three times as much as the Congressional Budget Office estimated last summer. One reason is the law’s sundry green-energy tax credits are uncapped, and most are available to businesses that pay little or no tax.
But even that estimate undershoots the true price because it calculates only the costs over a 10-year budget window, and many tax credits won’t expire for decades. Mr. Manchin opposed Build Back Better’s social-entitlement programs because they buried costs in ‘out years.’ This is exactly what the Inflation Reduction Act does for green corporate welfare.
Take the tax credits for renewable-energy production and investment, which don’t lapse until the end of 2032 or until U.S. carbon electricity emissions are 75% lower than in 2022. Even then, they’re allowed a seven-year phaseout and safe-harbor period. The research shop Wood Mackenzie forecasts the U.S. won’t hit the emission threshold until 2044, meaning that renewable projects would qualify for tax credits as long as they begin operating before 2052.
In the event that electricity emissions decline more slowly—say, because natural gas continues to be necessary to keep the lights on—tax credits for building and producing renewable energy could be available for decades longer. The sun may never set on these subsidies. Wood Mackenzie reports that unless the law’s provisions are repealed, ‘instead of several hundred billion dollars in tax credits for new renewables and storage through 2032, the real money on the table is on the order of trillions of dollars over multiple decades.’
Tax credits for carbon capture, unlike for solar, wind and energy storage, technically expire in 2032, but a project only has to begin construction by the end of that year to qualify. Carbon capture is still in its early stages, so many projects probably won’t break ground until next decade. The tax credits are good for 12 years after the facilities start operating. That means companies could pocket the credits well into the 2040s.
A study by the Brookings Institution last month estimates that the carbon-capture tax credits will cost $210 billion by 2040—$176 billion more than CBO estimated over 10 years. Brookings likewise projects that the law’s climate provisions could cost up to $1.2 trillion through 2031.
A Credit Suisse report last year came to a similar conclusion. By its estimates, a special tax credit to boost U.S. solar, wind and battery supply chains would cost $250 billion, about eight times what CBO estimated. Banks are producing these reports because customers want to know where to invest.
Therein lies the problem: CBO underestimated how much the subsidies would drive—or, more accurately, distort—business investment. That’s especially true since the tax credits are exempt from the law’s new alternative corporate minimum tax on book income, which is designed to hit large companies that pay a low effective tax rate. Don’t call it a tax loophole.
The Biden administration is also rewriting provisions in the law that Mr. Manchin carefully negotiated to broaden subsidies. Last month, for example, the Treasury expansively redefined what constitutes a ‘free trade agreement’ and ‘critical minerals’ so more electric vehicles would qualify for the $7,500 consumer tax credits.”
The journalist summarized other political deceits, then concludes:
“No doubt he believed it would help him win re-election and perhaps even mount a presidential bid. Love is blind, and so is political ambition.”
*********************
2. The Carbon Tariff Wars Arrive
Europe imposes the first climate border tax, but more will follow.
By The Editorial Board, WSJ, April 20, 2023
TWTW Summary: The editorial begins:
“The European Union has a penchant for racking up firsts that should have stayed ‘nevers’ and the latest example is the world’s first carbon tariff. The European Parliament this week pulled the trigger on the opening shot in a new climate trade war.
The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, or CBAM, is an outgrowth of the EU’s Emissions Trading System—which lawmakers also tightened this week. As the EU requires manufacturers to buy ever more expensive permits for carbon-dioxide emissions, fears have mounted that manufacturing would shift offshore.
The CBAM is the supposed solution. Foreign companies that haven’t paid for carbon emissions at home will have to pay a tariff when exporting goods to Europe. The aim is to equalize the cost of carbon emissions embedded in all goods prices within the EU, no matter where a product is produced. Starting in October the CBAM will apply to a small number of imported goods such as steel and fertilizer, with the list expanding over time.
Climate coercion advocates say a tariff is needed to avoid ‘carbon leakage,’ which is their term for the flight of manufacturing to countries with less onerous emissions restrictions. This is a tacit admission that Europe’s climate policies are failing. Companies subject to the rules can’t compete without permanent tariff protection, while European consumers won’t pay higher prices for greener goods unless the Brussels tax man forces them to.
The bigger message is that trade is becoming the next battlefield in the climate wars and it will be a bloody one. Foreign companies and governments have raised concerns about the European carbon border tax, which imposes complex and costly compliance burdens and then imposes steep default tariffs on companies that don’t play along.
China and India are in the crosshairs of this border tax, although companies from any country that doesn’t impose emissions taxes will have to pay. That includes U.S. firms.
Europe is also headed toward a related trade war with the U.S. over the Inflation Reduction Act.”
The editorial gives some specifics then concludes:
“Climate evangelists always promise that an efficient, affordable green economy is just around the corner. But it never arrives, the big bills never stop coming, and Europeans this week received their latest one.”
The real headline is China takes the p1ss – again.
“China ramps up coal power despite carbon neutral pledges
Local governments approved more coal power in first three months of 2023 than all of 2021″
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/24/china-ramps-up-coal-power-despite-carbon-neutral-pledges
“Germany plans to ban installation of most oil and gas heating from 2024”
Looking after the poorest…
“additional climate bonus payments, will be available in certain cases, for instance if someone voluntarily switches to a more climate-friendly system, regardless of their income.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/20/germany-plans-to-ban-installation-of-most-oil-and-gas-heating-from-2024
We know that the “volunteers’” income will be fairly high to begin with. Goes with the EV parked outside.
Meanwhile Sadiq Khan goes silent on cuts to public transport – the system we should be using rather than cars as he is wont to tell us.
“Sadiq Khan accused of ‘cultural vandalism’ as he presses ahead with changes to 11 bus route
Tory MPs say the shortening of the 11 route will remove a vital link for Londoners and tourists”
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/changes-11-london-bus-fulham-westminster-sadiq-khan-b1069086.html
And indeed, it will.
“Sadiq Khan to scrap free morning peak travel for pensioners
Freedom Pass restrictions brought in on short-term basis as money-saving step during pandemic to be made permanent”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/01/18/freedom-pass-sadiq-khan-tfl-pensioners-morning-peak-travel/
What many miss is the black hole in Transport for London’s finances won’t just be filled by taxing the poorest – ie those with the oldest cars via ULEZ expansion – cuts to services will also play a key role in keeping TfL afloat. But Khan effectively shut TfL down during the pandemic relying on government handouts and bailouts to keep it going.
2020
“Use of public transport could be discouraged as lockdown ends
…the usual logic of promoting public transport use – to cut congestion and pollution – could be reversed in order to limit the spread of the virus on packed commuter trains and buses, especially in London.”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/04/cost-of-public-transport-should-be-raised-as-lockdown-ends-ifs
And everybody has completely forgotten Hammersmith Bridge. The bridge was closed in 2019 needing repair and it’s still closed and Khan hasn’t said a word. It’s a major road crossing that cannot be used and that creates congestion at other crossings. TfL was given £4 million to stabilise the bridge so you can walk over it.
Hammersmith Bridge updates
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hammersmith-bridge-taskforce
Good News? Robert Rinder is a criminal barrister and sort of UK equivalent of Judge Judy.
TV’s Judge Rinder could be lined up as the Tories candidate for London Mayor in a bid to topple Labour’s Sadiq Khan in next year’s election. Conservatives are hoping the criminal barrister and television personality who shot to fame on ITV’s reality courtroom series Judge Rinder will inject the ‘star power’ needed to topple Mr Khan.
Mr Khan is currently serving his second term as London Mayor, but has caused outrage among Londeners in his latest move to extended the ULEZ zone.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12004003/TVs-Judge-Rinder-tipped-Tory-candidate-London-mayor-bid-topple-Sadiq-Khan-year.html
Anyone but Khan.
On “Bertrand Russell “ I was instantly reminded of Derek & Clive (Peter Cook and Dudley Moore) and The Back of the Cab sketch.
It’s replete with foul language – so, seriously, beware… Christ, even I’m giving trigger warnings…
This is a false perspective because it neglects the role of cloud in reducing surface sunlight. The most important atmospheric process on Earth is convective instability. If the atmosphere did not have the ability to partition above and below the LFC, the atmosphere would become saturated, dense clouds would form and sunlight would never reach the surface. The entire globe would become a snowball.
Convective instability enables period of clear sky over oceans. Without that, Earth would be a snowball.
How can CO2 produce hundreds or watts per square meter when it’s emissivity is almost zero at the temperature and pressure we have on earth?
I don’t get it: Happer often declares a climate sensitivity for CO2 of approximately 1K, but in the end of this study, he writes 2.2K (p.31).That requires much more than 3W/m2 extra (in figure 4).
‘…but in the end of this study, he writes 2.2K (p.31)’
What paper are you looking at? There is no reference to “2.2K” on page 31 or elsewhere in the Wijngaarden and Happer ‘Atmosphere and Greenhouse Gas Primer’ dated March 3, 2003.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.03098
Thanks for the link. Three things stand out: First, In the 2020 paper the 2.2K refers to a doubling from 400 to 800 ppm vs. the 2023 paper where doubling would be measured from the pre-industrial baseline, i.e., from 280 to 560 ppm. Second, the 2020 paper assumes positive water vapor feedback (constant relative humidity) vs. the 2023 paper which backs off the effects of positive feedbacks. And third, the 2.2K 2020 paper result is for clear-sky conditions vs. all-sky conditions in 2023.
As FfNoVA mentioned: “Constant relative humidity”, “clear sky conditions”.
Does those exist in the earth’s atmosphere?
I didn’t think so.
So that paper is just theoretical. Not actually providing a “real” number. BUT that number agrees with the climatariat’s number.
So setting up the climatariat and leading in to the 2023 paper?
Maybe they thought the bicycles would be less triggering for the ER and Stop Oil types-
‘Delusions of grandeur’: UK PM’s police escort something Kim Jong Un ‘would be proud of’ (msn.com)
I recently went through an HVAC system replacement. One of the reasons (a minor reason, but in the equation) is that my very old air conditioner used refrigerant that is no longer available. It was bad for the ozone layer, you see, so it was banned just like original Freon was. It isn’t impossible to get, but it is impossible to get at an affordable price.
In the process of doing my homework on the replacement, I learned that the dominant refrigerant used for household air conditioning in the United States today – R-410A – is also going to be banned in the not too distant future. But why? Its “Ozone Depletion Potential” (ODP) is zero. R-410A doesn’t damage the ozone layer even theoretically, so what gives?
What gives is the preposterous nonsense of “GWP” – that is, “Global Warming Potential.” GWP is calculated by taking the absorption capacity of the gas for infrared, atmospheric life expectancy of the gas, and the time period of interest. It is indexed against the Dread Carbon. CO2 has a GWP of 1. Anything more greenhousey than the Dread Carbon has a GWP of >1 over the standardized 100-year time period. R410-A has a GWP score of around 1,800 (maybe – the number changes by venue, which is a great sign…). One ton of R410-A released into the atmosphere is – according to this scheme – the equivalent to releasing around 1,800 tons of the Dread Carbon.
So R-410A has to go.
https://ace.mu.nu/archives/404142.php
There was a continuous meme that all refrigerants are to be retired once DuPont’s patent on such runs out.
This started when they wanted to replace the CFC with HCFCs. Many said the HCFCs were worse, so what gives ? The only argument that made sense was the patent issue.
“Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day.” Bertrand Russell.
Well, he should know. The comment applied in bucketloads to himself.