The Week That Was: 2025 04-26 (April 26, 2025)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.” — James Madison (1788)
Number of the Week: Increase of 11ºF by 2100.
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Scope: TWTW begins with a discussion of the National Science Foundation. TWTW continues with a brief discussion of the scientific method and why the US National Climate Assessment does not meet the standards needed for its work to be considered physical science. TWTW considers the high scientific integrity of Roger Pielke, Jr. before criticizing his view that fixing the National Climate Assessment will be easy. TWTW then questions the actual physical science supporting EPA’s Endangerment Finding. It concludes with presenting three interesting articles on diverse subjects.
*********************
NSF: The Nation Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency that supports science and engineering in the US. Its counterpart in the medical fields is the National Institute of Health. The NSF’s enacted budget for fiscal year 2024 is $9.06 Billion. The requested 2025 budget is slightly over $10 billion. According to reports, the current request will be cut, and part of its workforce will be cut. On April 24, NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan announced that he has resigned. News reports claimed this is proof of the anti-science bias of the current administration.
The April 12 TWTW discussed a significant problem in US science funding. The U.S. Global Change Research Program publishes what is considered the nation’s premier report on climate change, the National Climate Assessment (NCA), produced by the consulting firm ICF International. The report is endorsed by 15 government agencies including the National Science Foundation. However, the Fifth National Climate Assessment (2023) is a blatantly political report that omits physical evidence that contradicts its general conclusions that the current warming is unprecedented. Further it contains no physical evidence showing the relationship between increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and increasing temperatures. Yet, it uses the discredited very high emissions scenario to forecast a temperature increase of 11ºF by 2100.
The Fifth National Climate Assessment is not physical science but more a follow-up piece on the highly politicized Sixth Assessment Report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, particularly its Synthesis Report (March 2023). The Synthesis Report contains none of the uncertainty expressed in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (2021).
The US National Climate Assessment should emphasize the uncertainty, not omit it. And the National Science Foundations should not be a party to such a poor report. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy, and Science, Policy, and Evidence.
***************
Zero Omissions: Although its origins are far earlier, the scientific method became established during the controversy on an Earth-centered universe or a planetary system with the visible planets orbiting the sun. The great Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546-1601) insisted that only careful observation over long periods of time can resolve the controversy. In 1572, Brahe observed a new bright star (probably a super nova) that triggered doubt in the old Aristotelian belief that the universe was fixed. Brahe developed a research program with improving the instruments used to observe the planets to determine the paths. After his death his assistant, Johannes Kepler used Brahe’s data to explain that the planetary orbits were not circular but formed an ellipse with the sun as one focus and to develop Kepler’s three laws of planetary motion.
This history establishes an important principle in the scientific method; no observations should be omitted. As discussed above, in the reports of the IPCC, particularly the summaries, and in the National Climate Assessment (NCA), important observations are omitted. For example, for 99.9% of Earth’s history, there was no correlation between CO2 and temperature. For the last few glacial periods, CO2 changes have come after temperature changes. Two decades of data collected for measuring the earth’s energy balance reveal that the increase in absorbed heat is primarily due to changes in the earth’s albedo. Thus, these reports are not physical science. They do not use the scientific method.
Some defenders of this practice in climate “science” avoid the issue by claiming that their work is based on “first principles” or fundamental concepts or assumptions, sometimes considered self-evident. Alas, first principles tell us about the patterns of spectra of molecules such as CO2 but cannot tell us precise energy levels. Nor can first principles tell us about the probability of absorbing IR of a certain wavelength. In Quantum Mechanics, first principles can tell us about the spacings of energy levels, but not their amounts. Precise measurements are required. Such issues are omitted in the NCA.
Those who argue from the standpoint of first principles are in the realm of metaphysics, thinking about physics, not in the realm of physical physics. In his 1912 book Problems of Philosophy, the logician Betrand Russell has several chapters evaluating the work of Immanuel Kant questioning “Is a priori knowledge possible?” Can we know something by pure logic alone, without experience or observations? This is a philosophical question, not one for physical science based on observations.
***************
Misguided Defense of NCA: Roger Pielke, Jr., is a scientist with considerable integrity. He wrote an essay published by the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology titled “Do Not Use the ICAT Hurricane Loss ‘Dataset’: An Opportunity for Course Correction in Climate Science.” Yet Pielke helped develop this dataset. The abstract states:
“A fatally flawed time series of U.S. hurricane losses assembled by an insurance company almost a decade ago has found its way into analyses published in the peer-reviewed literature. The flawed time series is based on undocumented modifications to a research-quality dataset that I and my colleagues [sic.] published almost two decades ago. The uncritical use of the time series has led to erroneous conclusions published in the peer-reviewed literature which then were repeated in important climate science assessments. This paper explains the origin of the flawed dataset and demonstrates its many biases. The errors are so obvious and consequential that papers published in the peer-reviewed literature that rely on the flawed dataset should be retracted. While mistakes happen in science, what matters more is what we in the community do when mistakes are discovered.”
Recognizing his considerable integrity, TWTW takes issue with Pielke’s defense of the National Climate Assessment. In a post “Trump Comes for Climate Research: Making sense of the USGCRP and NCA” Pielke writes:
“To fix the NCA would not be difficult. Three actions are needed.
First, the assessment should be housed within and implemented entirely from a federal agency within the scope of the USGCRP. There should be no oversight or control exerted from the White House.
Second, the report should be led and written by experts chosen by an empaneling team. This team should be selected by a bipartisan group, as is typically done for reports on highly politicized issues. For instance, the majority and minority members of the House Science Committee could each select 6 members of this empaneling committee, with two co-chairs. The empaneling committee would then identify experts to lead and contribute to the report.
Third, before the writing starts, the assessment team should query decision makers — federal, state, local, in business and civil society — to identify what information they perceive to be most useful to their decisions related to climate mitigation and adaptation.
These three steps would ensure that there is no perception of White House influence on the report, that it is authored by experts assembled in a bipartisan manner and that the topics that the report focuses have direct relevance to decision makers. The NCA is far too important to be politicized, and politicization is a choice.
The only addition I’d make today is to explicitly recognize that any NCA should follow the guidelines of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and OMG [sic. OMB] and agency guidelines for scientific integrity and information quality.
I do not expect the Trump Administration to take this (very good) advice.”
To TWTW, Pielke’s recommendations ignore the most fundamental problem: the omission of physical evidence that contradicts the general conclusions. Omission of physical evidence has been a problem for years with the IPCC and the NCA, and with each iteration the problem has been getting worse. The IPCC reports on which the NCA is based have been politicized since “Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment” which Frederick Seitz asserted was the worst abuse of the peer review process he had witnessed in sixty years of American science. The National Climate Assessment is no better.
The problem of omission of physical evidence is deeply ingrained, and a generation of scientists have been conditioned to accept it. The reports have become more metaphysics (thinking of physics) and propaganda than physical science. The issue is not trust in “the science” or politicalized scientists, the issue is adherence to the scientific method, a process. If physical evidence is omitted, the work is no longer physical science.
Further, Pielke suggests cutting out the White House. The president is elected by the whole people, is accountable to them, and represents their interests. None of the other members of the panel he proposes are elected or accountable to all the people. There is no doubt that the influence of the White House in the past has not conformed to the principles of physical science, but then neither by and large has the pool of “experts” from which the other panel members would presumably be drawn. The only solution is to hold everyone to the principles of science and that can be done only by transparency and freedom of public comment. See links under Seeking a Common Ground.
***************
Science Supporting the Endangerment Finding? The National Climate Assessment is claimed to support the EPA’s Endangerment Finding. The EPA’s press release on February 27 states [Boldface in original]:
“Action
On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:
- Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
- Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution that threatens public health and welfare.
These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action was a prerequisite for implementing greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles and other sectors.”
An article in the British medical publication, the Lancet, states:
“In 2009, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed the science-rooted Endangerment Finding, stating that greenhouse gases “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations”. This finding became the cornerstone of most US climate policies and influenced many others globally.”
Carbon dioxide is essential for photosynthesis, which provides the food for all complex plant life and all animal life on Earth. Where is the physical evidence that it threatens the public health and welfare of current and future generations? (Note that the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor, is not mentioned.) The Endangerment Finding has no basis in physical science. Small corrections are not sufficient. It is wrong. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy.
***************
Radiation Transfer: In developing a method for estimating the greenhouse effect in today’s atmosphere, William Van Wijngaarden and William Happer use the work of physicist Karl Schwarzschild (1873-1916). TWTW came across a 1906 essay by Schwarzschild. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy – Radiation Transfer.
***************
Problems In World Economic Forum? An article in the Wall Street Journal begins with:
“World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab is under investigation by the organization he created after a new whistleblower letter alleged financial and ethical misconduct by the longtime leader and his wife.
The anonymous letter was sent last week to the Forum’s board and raised concerns about the Forum’s governance and workplace culture, including allegations that the Schwab family mixed their personal affairs with the Forum’s resources without proper oversight, according to the letter and people familiar with the matter.
It included allegations that Klaus Schwab asked junior employees to withdraw thousands of dollars from ATMs on his behalf and used Forum funds to pay for private, in-room massages at hotels. It also alleged that his wife Hilde, a former Forum employee, scheduled “token” Forum-funded meetings in order to justify luxury holiday travel at the organization’s expense.
Klaus Schwab in recent days argued against an investigation, telling board members that he denied the unsubstantiated allegations and that he would challenge them in a lawsuit, the people said.
The board of trustees decided to open a probe during an emergency meeting on Easter Sunday. Schwab opted to resign immediately as the chairman, instead of staying on for an extended transition period as previously planned.”
See Article # 1.
***************
Wind Power, Maybe? An article in the Wall Street Journal begins with (correction by TWTW):
“Germany has invested so many hundreds of billions of euros in its green energy transition over the years that no one can tally the precise amount. Yet the share of wind and solar power in the country’s energy mix in the first quarter of this year managed to fall—by a lot. There’s a lesson for the U.S. here.
Renewable sources made up some 47% of electricity consumption in Europe’s largest economy in the first three months of 2024 2025 the energy trade association BDEW reported Thursday. That’s down from 56% in the first three months of 2024. The drop comes despite Germany’s continuing build-out of renewable generation. The country has added 872 wind turbines with a capacity of 4.3 gigawatts since April 2024, yet wind-power output fell 16%. Ouch.
You can guess what went wrong. February and March were unusually wind-free, onshore and offshore. A lack of rain meant hydropower underperformed. March was sunnier than usual, which helped to boost solar-electricity output compared to a year earlier. But we’re talking about Germany in March. Relatively short daylight hours in a northern latitude meant this boost wasn’t enough to offset the decline in wind generation.
These climactic conditions happen regularly enough that the German language has a word for it: Dunkelflaute, or ‘dark stillness.’ It means renewables alone can’t power an advanced industrial economy, as even Berlin is starting to notice.”
Germany is further down the road of free energy from wind and solar than the US. Yet, many US politicians cling to the belief that wind and solar can power a modern economy, especially high-tech that requires reliable electricity. See Article # 2.
***************
SEPP’S APRIL FOOLS AWARD – THE JACKSON
It is time for voting on the Annual SEPP’s April Fools Award – the Jackson. The grand prize is a large lump of coal. Last year, the deserving winner of the lump of coal was the US National Science Teaching Association. In 2023, the Association banned the CO2 Coalition from its meeting which the Coalition members paid for and were approved because the CO2 Coalition exhibit pointed out that CO2 is essential for photosynthesis which is the food source of all complex life on Earth.
There are many strong candidates for this dubious honor including leaders of US scientific agencies who signed off on questionable reports on climate change. Get your votes in by June 29 with the reason why you recommend that person for the award. The award will be announced at the 43rd annual meeting of the Doctors for Defensive Preparedness on July 5-6. The decision of the judges is final.
***************
Increase of 11ºF by 2100. As stated above, the Fifth US National Climate Assessment asserts that under the high emissions scenario, by 2100 temperatures will be 11ºF (6ºC) warmer than today. See link under Defending the Orthodoxy.
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
Censorship
Why Has the Daily Sceptic Been Put on Tortoise Media’s Climate Naughty List?
By Ben Pile, The Daily Sceptic, Apr 12, 2025
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/
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/climate-change-reconsidered-ii-fossil-fuels/
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/why-scientists-disagree-about-global-warming/
Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate
S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008
http://www.sepp.org/publications/nipcc_final.pdf
Challenging the Orthodoxy – Radiation Transfer
The Role of Greenhouse Gases in Energy Transfer in the Earth’s Atmosphere
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Preprint, Mar 3, 2023
Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Preprint, December 22, 2020
Radiation Transport in Clouds
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Klimarealistene, Science of Climate Change, January 2025
Schwarzschild: About the equilibrium of the solar atmosphere
By K. Schwarzschild, January 13, 1906, Translated by Dr. Markus Ott, 2025, Accessed Apr 21, 2025
Challenging the Orthodoxy
Short Summary of Observations Until March 2025
By Ole Humlum, Climate4you, Accessed Apr 25, 2025
Is Arctic Amplification an Averaging Error?
By Kip Hansen, WUWT, Apr 19, 2025
Link to paper: Spatiotemporal Divergence of the Warming Hiatus over Land Based on Different Definitions of Mean Temperature
By Chunlüe Zhou and Kaicun Wang, Nature Scientific Reports, August 2016
Junk science and air pollution
By S. Stanley Young, Warren B. Kindzierski, American Thinker, Apr 14, 2025
Was the Sky Ever Falling? Vacating the Endangerment Finding in an Age of Clarity
Join scientists and economists with a rich history of expertise in climate science and policy as they examine the flawed assumptions, politicized science, and weak statistical foundations that fueled the Endangerment Finding.
May 13, 2025, Virtual registration
Why The “Emergency Drought” is No Emergency
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 15, 2025
In summary, the “drought emergency” talk is highly irresponsible and in contradiction to observed facts on the ground. It is used as a tool to scare people, often with unsupported attempts to connect the fictitious “drought” to climate change.
Nuclear Scientist Says CO2 Is Not Causing Rising Global Temperatures
Scientist Digby Macdonald said politicians need to rethink carefully what they’re doing by condemning CO2.
By Keegan Billings, The Epoch Times, Apr 20, 2025
“And the definition of climate is the weather integrated over three months. That also leads to many different climates, not one climate.”
[SEPP Comment: Thirty years, not three months.]
#LookItUp: Real time comparative tropical cyclone activity
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
Link to: Northern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Activity for 2025 (2024/2025 for the Southern Hemisphere)
By Staff, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Apr 23, 2025
Defending the Orthodoxy
The Fifth National Climate Assessment
The Fifth National Climate Assessment is the US Government’s preeminent report on climate change impacts, risks, and responses. It is a congressionally mandated interagency effort that provides the scientific foundation to support informed decision-making across the United States.
By Staff and the private group ICF International, U.S. Global Change Research Program, November 2023
From crisis to opportunity: a united response to Trump’s attacks on climate action
By Marina Romanello, et al., The Lancet, Apr 21, 2025
Link to: Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act
Press release, EPA, Last updated Feb 27, 2025
Global Warming Is Irreversible
By William D. Fletcher and Craig B. Smith, Real Clear Energy, Apr 15, 2025
The IPCC’s (International Panel on Climate Change) goal is to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C (3.6℉) above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C (2.7℉) above pre-industrial levels. The 2°C (3.6℉) limit is a best estimate of the maximum temperature rise beyond which the effects of global warming are unpredictable. It is a judgement call. The IPCC’s 1.5°C (2.7℉) goal was exceeded for the first time in 2024. [Emphasis in original]
The Science of Scapegoating: Nature’s Farcical Case for Climate Litigation
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 24, 2025
Link to editorial: Carbon majors and the scientific case for climate liability
By Christopher Callahan & Justin Mankin, Nature, Apr 23, 2025
The abstract begins with: Will it ever be possible to sue anyone for damaging the climate? Twenty years after this question was first posed, we argue that the scientific case for climate liability is closed.
The confidence game
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
Scientists React to US Climate Research Program Cancellation
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 13, 2025
Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science
Rapid flips between warm and cold extremes in a warming world
By Sijia Wu, et al., Nature Communications, Apr 22, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
[SEPP Comment: We are experiencing global warming except when we have global cooling? Is Earth’s climate stable except for periods of glaciation or D-O events?]
Atlantic Ocean currents are weakening — and it could make the climate in some regions unrecognizable.
By Sascha Pare, Science Spotlight, Apr 25, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
A cold blob of water in the North Atlantic is an ominous sign that a system of currents that regulate the planet’s climate could be weakening.
2024 Disaster Review From CRED
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 19, 2025
Link to: 2024 Disasters in Numbers: A Hot and Stormy Year
By Staff, Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) at University of Louvain (UCLouvain), April 2025
From Homewood: In terms of economic losses, 2024 showed a slight increase over some recent years, but the trend in real terms is if anything downwards:
Climate change triples extreme marine heatwaves in last 80 years
Compiling averages across the globe, scientists have revealed that in the 1940s the sea surface typically experienced around 15 days of extreme heat each year. Today – driven by climate change – that number has jumped to nearly 50 days per year.
By Rob Hutchins, Oceanographic, Apr 16, 2025 [H//t Bernie Kepshire]
Link to paper: Global warming drives a threefold increase in persistence and 1 °C rise in intensity of marine heatwaves
By Marta Marco, et al., PNAS, Apr 14, 2025
From article: A marine heatwave is defined as at least five consecutive days when sea temperatures are in the top 10% of temperatures for that day of the year.
Meanwhile, marine heatwaves caused Peruvian anchovies to move away from their usual waters, leading to the closure of commercial fisheries in 2023 and 2024 with estimated losses of $1.4bn.
[SEPP Comment: When has the climate been stable? During peak glaciation? The Peruvian “heatwave” is called an El Nino, which has been occurring for centuries.]
Climate trauma from wildfire exposure impacts cognitive decision-making
By Jason Nan, et al., Nature, Scientific Reports, Apr 16, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
[SEPP Almost 90 people were killed in this fire which exposed three major government policy failures: 1) failure to maintain power lines; 2) failure to conduct proper vegetation management of fuel and establish firebreaks; and 3) failure to maintain adequate emergency routes, California’s “road diet” was a disaster waiting to happen.]
High probability of triggering climate tipping points under current policies modestly amplified by Amazon dieback and permafrost thaw
By Jakob Deutloff, et al., Earth System Dynamics, Apr 23, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
We include those uncertainties in our analysis to derive probabilities of triggering for 16 previously identified climate tipping points within the Earth system.
[SEPP Comment: What happened when the tipping points were exceeded, did Earth disappear into an abyss?]
No Beef, Lamb, Milk and Cheese Within 25 Years Under Net Zero, Government-Funded Report Confirms
By Chris Morrison, Daily Sceptic Apr 16, 2025
Link to report: Agro-Food System Innovation without Greenhouse Gases
By Staff, UK Fires (Locating Resource Efficiency at the heart of Future Industrial Strategy), Mar 11, 2025
Questioning the Orthodoxy
Endangerment Finding endangers energy & freedom
By Craig Rucker, CFACT, Apr 18, 2025
Who put this lump in their stocking
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
History’s Biggest Liars?
I & I Editorial Board, April 24, 2025
Hurricanes and Tornadoes and Wildfires
By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Apr 22, 2025
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/updates/
“Resolving Global Warming” (check your premises)
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Apr 25, 2025
Climate Change Myths Part 1: Polar Bears, Arctic Ice, and Food Shortages
Video by John Stossel, Transcript Via Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 24, 2025
Tidbits
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
Summertime Reality Twisted Into Climate Exasperation
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, Apr 21, 2025
EXCLUSIVE: Fishermen Urge DOGE-Style Reforms Of ‘Leviathan Bureaucracy’ That Throttled Industry Growth
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, Apr 16, 2025
Link to letter to Elon Musk, Department of Government Efficiency
From Attorney for New England Fishermen’s Stewardship Association (“NEFSA”), Accessed Apr 17, 2025
We Must End Climate Religion’s Hijack of Earth Day
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, Apr 22,2025
Humanity is not a plague on Earth but its greatest steward. Our ingenuity has cured diseases, doubled lifespans, and connected continents. To solve environmental challenges, we need optimism, not fear; innovation, not austerity; and freedom, not an anti-human dogma.
Exposing Renewable Lobby Lies
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 25, 2025
Video
Energy & Environmental Review: April 14, 2025
By John Droz, Jr., Master Resource, Apr 14, 2025
After Paris!
The crucial line that doesn’t matter
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
For years we were hectored that holding the world to the Paris Agreement limit of 1.5°C of warming from “pre-industrial times”, a term alarmists use to mean “75 years after the industrial revolution” started not “before there was industry”, was critically crucial in its vital importance. But alas their rhetoric was unpersuasive, their plans were unsound or both, and they admit 1.5 is “out of reach.” So now we’re told that while it was essential it didn’t really matter whereas 2.0°C is like this time for sure man unless it’s not.
Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide
It Is Easy Going Green
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 11, 2025
Video CO2, the magic medicine
IPCC – Summaries omit the benefits of increasing CO2
Percent dry weight (biomass) increases for 300 and 600 ppm increases in the air’s CO2 concentration: cotton
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
From the CO2Science Archive:
Orange man good for mandarin orange
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
From the CO2Science Archive:
Problems in the Orthodoxy
China to keep building coal plants through 2027, state planner says
By Colleen Howe, Reuters, Apr 14, 2025
Seeking a Common Ground
Trump Comes for Climate Research
Making sense of the USGCRP and NCA
By Roger Pielke Jr. His Blog, Apr 21, 2025
M. Anthony Mills on contemporary science policy in the United States
By Roger Pielke Jr., His Blog, Apr 17, 2025
Surprising as it might seem today, Republicans expressed higher trust in science than Democrats until the turn of the century, eventually dipping lower around 2008, according to the General Social Survey.
[SEPP Comment: The issue is poorly stated. It is trust in scientists, particularly politicized scientists, that is the issue, not trust in science or the scientific method, a process that must be strictly maintained.]
Reversing soil desiccation: cooler, moister, greener
By Douglas Sheil, Climate Etc., Apr 16, 2025
Link to article: Abrupt Sea level rise and Earth’s gradual pole shift reveal permanent hydrological regime changes in the 21st century
By Ki-Weon Seo, et al., AAAS Science, Mar 27, 2025
Science, Policy, and Evidence
Trump-appointed head of National Science Foundation resigns: ‘I have done all I can’
NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan’s departure comes amid sweeping cuts to the federal workforce and agency grants.
By Hayley Miller, MSNBC.com, Apr 25, 2025
NSF layoffs in 2025: Deep budget cuts headed for U.S. research sector
By Brian Buntz, R&D World, Apr 10, 2025
America returns to active forest management
By Duggan Flanakin, CFACT, Apr 13, 2025
Danna Smith, executive director at North Carolina’s Dogwood Alliance, called the Trump order “absolutely the wrong direction and a devastating blow.” Even as wildfires raged in the Carolinas, killing trees and wildlife, Smith claimed that selective logging and removal of dead trees would harm “standing forests” that are vital to fighting the climate crisis.
The irony appears lost to those clinging to the failed federal policy of yesteryear’s progressives.
Starmer’s Surrender To Brussels Will Force Up Energy Bills
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2025
But much more seriously we would lose all control over what happens to the carbon price in future. As we know, the Net Zero zealots in the CCC and elsewhere want to see a much higher carbon price in the near future, in order to force our cheap gas power once and for all.
Under Starmer’s craven surrender, there is nothing we could do if the EU wants to do the same.
Mad Miliband Resorts To Lies To Defend Net Zero Agenda
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 20, 2025
And in true Guardian style, Miliband resorts to his planet saving excuse warning that an anti-net zero agenda would risk “climate breakdown”, as if the UK’s 1% of the world’s emissions will make a jot of difference.
Models v. Observations
Mediterranean rainfall data vs climate models
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
Looking to the Pacific, scientists improve forecasts of atmospheric rivers
By David Hosansky, NCAR & UCAR, Phys.org, Apr 18, 2025
Measurement Issues — Atmosphere
Weather satellite operational, completes fleet to forecast severe storms on Earth
By Sheri Walsh, Terra News, Washington DC (UPI) Apr 8, 2025
The fleet of satellites is expected to provide valuable information about this year’s Atlantic hurricane season, which is forecast to rival 2024, one of the most devastating and costliest hurricane seasons on record for the Southeast and Florida, due to damage caused by Beryl, Helene and Milton.
[SEPP Comment: The hurricane season may have been costly for the Southeast and Florida, but not one of the most devastating ones in terms of wind speed. Information prior to 1964 is poor compared with modern information due to the lack of satellite coverage. Today, storms are routinely named that would have not been noticed without satellite coverage.]
Changing Weather
The hurricane dead zone: Map shows coastline that hurricanes can’t seem to reach
By Doyle Rice, USA Today, Apr 19, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
(It should, however, be noted that the map only shows the location at the moment of landfall, and not any impacts a given storm might have hundreds or even thousands of miles away from where the hurricane made landfall. Regions far away from a dot could still face the wrath of a hurricane.)
Hurricanes and Tornadoes and Wildfires
By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Apr 22, 2025
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/updates/
Most major hurricanes evah!
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
The second key point is that tropical cyclone landfalls exhibit high variability. And as everybody knows who cares to, the greater the variability, the harder it is to separate noise from signal and the longer the time series you need to develop even medium confidence about a trend.
Finally, the notion that major storms are surging proving a crisis and so forth is undermined by the fact that the trend for “Accumulated Cyclonic Energy” or total destructive horribleness of all storms in a year combined seems to be “flat as a pancake”.
Here we go again, windstorm edition
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
Supposedly it’s spring, despite various local headlines of the “Arctic air will spill into Ontario with possible 15-25 cm of April snow” variety. And with the seasonal upsurge in wind comes the seasonal upsurge in claims that windstorms are proof of man-made climate hysteria. For instance Matthew Wielicki notes that “It’s Tornado Season Again, Again, Again…
So can the dreaded CO2 add causing American tornadoes to become less destructive to its list of blessings? Well, no. Statistics are sharp on both edges and the fact that the United States has gone 11 years without a single EF6 event may be a blessing but it’s not a trend.
Early Atlantic Hurricane Season Predictions
By Kip Hansen, WUWT, Apr 25, 2025
German Droughts Were Much More Common Back In The Old Days, Before 1980!
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 23, 2025
The Day of No Weather and SuperBlue Skies
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 17, 2025
Changing Climate – Cultures & Civilizations
The Medieval Warm Period In Germany: Inconvenient And Very Real
By P Gosselln, No Tricks Zone, Apr 25, 2025
The Weather and Climate of World War II
By Andy May, WUWT, Apr 17, 2025
Brönnimann and colleagues believe that the unusual weather during World War II was related to the very strong and persistent El Niño that occurred at the time.
While the world as a whole was unusually warm during the war years on average, Europe, northern Siberia, and the central North Pacific suffered through three bitterly cold winters from late 1939 to 1942. The Southern Hemisphere was not spared, sea surface temperatures in the southern mid-latitudes were unusually cool and Australia suffered from a very prolonged drought from 1937 to 1945 (Hegerl, Brönnimann, Schurer, & Cowan, 2018).
Changing Seas
Atmospheric winds have surprising impact on ocean weather
New research improves ocean weather forecasts, enhancing public safety and economic growth
Press Release, NSF, Apr 21, 2025
Link to paper: Atmospheric wind energization of ocean weather
By Shikhar Rai, J. Thomas Farrar & Hussein Aluie, Nature Communications, Jan 30, 2025
Current Sea Surface Temperatures and the Sinking of the Titanic
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 19, 2025
Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
How long will the Arctic ice pause last?
By David Whitehouse, Net Zero Watch, Apr 15, 2025
Link to paper: Surprising, but not unexpected, multi-decadal pause in Arctic sea ice loss
By Mark England, et al., ESS Open Archive, Mar 29, 2025
From abstract: Over the past two decades, Arctic sea ice loss has slowed considerably, with no statistically significant decline in September sea ice area since 2005. This pause is robust across observational datasets, metrics, and seasons.
#LookItUp: Canadian Arctic sea ice
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
New Study: Plant Remains Embedded In A Modern Glacier Evidence A Warmer Antarctica 1000 Years Ago
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Apr 21, 2025
Link to paper: A warming pulse in the Antarctic continent changed the landscape during the Middle Ages
By Emanuele Forte, et al., Nature, Communications Earth & Environment, Apr 11, 2025
Blame the Vikings! Moss found in East Antarctica lived in warmer summers a thousand years ago.
By Jo Nova, Her blog, Apr 23, 2025
See link immediately above.
Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine
Climate change could deliver considerable blows to US corn growers, insurers: Study
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Apr 25, 2025
Link to paper: Climate-Driven Doubling of U.S. Maize Loss Probability: Interactive Simulation with Neural Network Monte Carlo
By A. Samuel Pottinger, et al., Journal of Data Science, Statistics, and Visualisation [sic], April 2025
From article: “We are already seeing more intense droughts, longer heat waves, and more catastrophic floods,” co-author Timothy Bowles, associate professor in environmental science at UC Berkeley, said in a statement.
[SEPP Comment: Study does not address a key question: After decades of global warming, why are grain yields increasing?]
The cocoa price crisis is a Big Government price fixing disaster, not a climate change one
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 24, 2025
Instead, African governments have fixed the price of cocoa for decades, forcing poor farmers to work for a pittance, and keeping the big profits for themselves. Not surprisingly, even though there is a wild price spike, farmers in Ghana are leaving the industry, smuggling crops out (because they get a better price). They didn’t plant new trees, they ran out of money for fertilizer, and didn’t try new varieties. Their children don’t want to farm cocoa, and the yields are falling on old sickly plantations.
Lowering Standards
King Charles wades into politics with letter to Ed Miliband
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 25, 2025
As has been rightly said, the late Queen would not have gone anywhere near such a controversial and overtly political topic.
BBC & Weather Attribution Models
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 12, 2025
I intend to pursue this with the ECU on two grounds:
1) That a obscure correction on an article published last June will not be seen by anybody. Instead a full correction needs to be logged on the BBC Complaints website
2) Now the BBC admits weather attribution is not based on facts, data or evidence, all future BBC reports quoting it must carry on warning notice to this effect.
The Mirage of Milestones: Debunking Ember’s 2025 Global Electricity Review
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 15, 2025
Link to: Global Electricity Review 2025
Record renewables growth led by solar helped push clean power past 40% of global electricity in 2024, but heatwave-related demand spikes led to a small increase in fossil generation.
By Euan Grahm, Nicolas Fulghum, and Katye Altieri, Ember, Apr 8, 2025
[SEPP Comment: At Ember, is the sun bright at midnight?]
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
Banking on it
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
But there’s a difference between welcoming support and hallucinating it. And thus it is that Scientific American bellows “Big Banks Quietly Prepare for Catastrophic Warming” when in fact big banks do not prepare for catastrophic warming, quietly or otherwise.
The New York Times’ Claim That Climate Change Threatens the Global Economy Is False
By Anthony Watts, Climate Realism, Apr 16, 2025
Small world
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
The New York Times warns us that “The Next Generation of American Scientists Is Losing Faith”. It is of course Donald Trump’s fault, the president being almost as big a bogey as climate change: “Amid sweeping cuts to federal research funding by the Trump administration” world ends, women and minorities hardest hit.
There’s just no pleasing some people
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 16, 2025
Tidbits
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
Wrong, ABC News, Climate Change Didn’t Cause 2025’s Severe Tornado Outbreak
By Linnea Lueken, Climate Realism, Apr 14, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?
Extreme Heat Is Coming. One Key Program Could Help Provide Energy Security.
By Christopher R. Knittel, Real Clear Energy, April 23, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Special pleading, summer is coming.]
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
The Flawed ICAT Hurricane Loss Dataset: A Call for Scientific Integrity in Climate Research
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 25, 2025
Link to paper: Do Not Use the ICAT Hurricane Loss “Dataset”: An Opportunity for Course Correction in Climate Science
By Roger Pielke Jr., Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, Apr 1, 2025
The Impact Of The Ukraine War On UK Energy Costs
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 20, 2025
In short, Miliband’s claim that his green transition would have saved consumers money is pure bunkum.
No, BBC, Electricity is Not Expensive Because of Gas But Because of Renewables Subsidies
By David Turver, The Daily Sceptic, Apr 16, 2025
Perhaps we should take Adam Berman at his word and offer to pay renewables generators just the market value of their output, which on summer days can often be negative. I don’t think we will see many takers. Remember, if something needs a subsidy, it’s more expensive.
[SEPP Comment: See link immediately below. Berman is the Director of Policy and Advocacy at Energy UK.]
BBC Ignore The Renewable Elephant In The Room
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 16, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Provides evidence supporting the issues discussed by the Daily Sceptic above]
Careful Research At BBC News
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 24, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda
BBC Prefer Propaganda To Facts
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 24, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda on Children
In crash-test dummy land, we solve teenage girl climate anxiety with $500b in fantasy weather experiments…
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 17, 2025
Expanding the Orthodoxy
Who owns the oceans? The UN wants to tax ships to reduce carbon emissions — a $40b windfall for unaccountable global bureaucrats
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr15, 2025
The US delegation left the proceedings, but apparently that doesn’t matter because they don’t have many boats (can we get an exemption too?)
End the UN. It has failed at the only tasks it was set up to do — stop wars and end pandemics.
Questioning European Green
The Green Revolution is Destroying UK Jobs, Livelihoods and Communities
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, Apr 24, 2025
Sticking plasters for the energy crisis
By Andrew Montford, Net Zero Watch, Apr 17, 2025
The most important step in getting back to cheap electricity is to face reality and close down all the renewables.
Questioning Green Elsewhere
Offshore Wind: GAO Report Reveals the Fallout of Biden’s Green Industrial Gamble
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 16, 2025
Link to: Offshore Wind Energy: Actions Needed to Address Gaps in Interior’s Oversight of Development
By Staff, Government Accountability Office, April 2025
What Does It Cost? The Consequences of the Net Zero Energy Agenda
By Staff, Discovery Institute, Apr 23, 2025 [H/t Willie Soon]
Video
Earth Day Reminder: Fossil Fuels Feed the World
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, Apr 22, 2025
However, what many analysts and climate activists do not acknowledge is that these life-saving fertilizers are made with the help of fossil fuels. Yes, the same fossil fuels that they blame for destroying our planet and which they brand as “anti-green.”
Non-Green Jobs
Let Ed Run It
The British steel industry’s final days devolve into a cynical game of blamestorming.
By Doomberg, Apr 23, 2025
Steal mill
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
As here, in fact, because for someone to speak of the debacle of British deindustrialization as the product of the free market would be a prime example of ideology overriding facts if indeed thought worked that way.
Funding Issues
Science Subsidy Trap: Why Public Research Funding Needs to End
By Cameron English, ACSH, Apr 16, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Government did not fund the industrial revolution in Britian and America.]
Memo Details NOAA Climate Research Cuts, Shift to Fossil Fuels
By Michael Katz, Newsmax, April 11, 2025 [H/t Gordon Fulks]
Claim: US Companies Will Stay True to Climate Commitments
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 12, 2025
What happened to the Net Zero Banking Alliance again?
Litigation Issues
The Plagiarism Problem Plaguing the “ExxonKnew” Lawfare Lawsuits — Summary for Policymakers
By Russell Cook, Gelbspan Files, Apr 23, 2025
‘Flagrantly Unlawful Action’: Universities Sue Trump’s Energy Department Over Latest Funding Cuts
By Jaryn Crouson, The Daily Caller, Apr 15, 2025
Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Freeze on Climate, Infrastructure Grants
The judge said agencies following the president’s direction cannot ‘hamstring in perpetuity two statutes passed by Congress during the previous administration.’
By Zachary Stieber, The Epoch Times, Apr 16, 2025
[SEPP Comment: The court is US District Court for the District of Rhode Island.]
EPA granted appellate stay after judge rules to end GGRF funding freeze
A judge ruled Tuesday to end the freeze and allow grantees to access their funding, but appellate judges granted EPA a stay on that injunction late Wednesday.
By Diana DiGangi, Utility Dive, Apr 17, 2025
The stay came after the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday granted an injunction to the Climate United Fund, Coalition for Green Capital, and Power Forward Communities — nonprofit “green banks” which received $6.97 billion, $5 billion and $2 billion, respectively, from the Inflation Reduction Act’s GGRF.
[SEPP Comment: According to its website: “Climate United is a national public-private investment fund removing financial barriers to clean energy projects so every American benefits from good-paying jobs, lower energy bills, domestic manufacturing, and cleaner air.”]
New Trump Executive Order Threatens California’s Climate Ambitions
By Marc Joffe, Epoch Times, Apr 16, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
When Trump was last in office, his Department of Justice (DOJ) tried and failed to kill the cap-and-trade program. In 2019, the DOJ sued on the basis that California usurped federal authority by implementing its program in conjunction with the Canadian province of Quebec. But a District Court [Eastern District of California] judge ruled in favor of California.
Supreme Court Case Could Spell The End For California’s EV Mandate
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, Apr 23, 2025
Subsidies and Mandates Forever
“Solar Madness In Germany”: Gigawatt-Hours Of Subsidized Electricity Gets Dumped Abroad For Free”
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 16, 2025
Trump Energy secretary: Clean energy tax credits a ‘big mistake
By Ashleigh Fields, The Hill, Apr 22, 2025
“I think it’s a big mistake,” Wright told host Stuart Varney, referring to energy tax credits.
“That term ‘clean energy’ is just a marketing term. There’s no clean energy. All energy sources involve trade-offs,” he continued.
EPA and other Regulators on the March
EPA firing 280 staffers who fought pollution in overburdened neighborhoods
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 22, 2025
These staffers worked in an area known as environmental justice, which helps communities that face a disproportionate amount of pollution exposure, especially minority or low-income communities.
Trump’s EPA Grants Dozens of Coal Plants Exemption From Emissions Rules
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, April 16, 2025
Energy Issues – Non-US
UK Electricity Grid Rescued by Gas as Massive Winter Wind Droughts Disrupt Supply
By Chris Morrison, Daily Sceptic, Apr 18, 2025
Shetland’s Viking Windfarm Scandal
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 19, 2025
Revealed: Why UK Electricity Costs So Much
By Sallust, Daily Sceptic, Apr 15, 2025 [H/t Paul Homewood]
£400 Million Bill For Wind Constraint Payments Last Year
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 14, 2025
In future however, if wind capacity is tripled as planned, there will be too much wind power for much of the year across the whole of the country, as on windy days it will exceed demand.
South Africa needs all the products and transportation fuels that renewables cannot provide
By, Ronald Stein, Robert Jeffrey, and Olivia Vaughan, America Outloud News, Apr 7, 2025
Energy Issues – Australia
Name Your Poison, Australia
Originally published in Quadrant Online, April 2025
By Alan Moran, His Blog, Apr 16, 2025
Energy Issues — US
Bookmark This: Buried Biden-admin Bombshell 2.0
By Staff, Government Accountability & Oversight, Apr 22, 2025
New York Just Can’t Catch A Break On The March To Climate Utopia
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Apr 17, 2025
The bottom line is that of New York’s grandiose plans for 9000 MW of off-shore wind projects, only South Fork Wind (130 MW) is actually finished, and only Sunrise Wind (924 MW) is actually legitimately under construction. Empire Wind and all the rest have gone into limbo, probably never to come out.
Kentucky Energy Group Breaks Ground for New RICE Power Plant
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, April 16, 2025
A Kentucky energy provider has broken ground for a new 75-MW power plant that will use reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) technology from Wärtsilä.
The plant is engineered for both continuous and peaking services, with the capability for multiple quick starts and stops per day. “
[SEPP Comment: No estimates of cost of reliable power given.]
Implication of Assessment of Extreme Renewable Resource Lull
By Roger Caiazza, WUWT, Apr 13, 2025
[SEPP Comment: DEFR is the imaginary dispatchable emission free resource technology that New York State agencies are claiming will meet extended periods of low wind and solar and limited electricity storage.]
Blue State Green Energy Overreach Will End Under Trump
By Larry Bell, Newsmax, Apr 21, 2025
In short, when American energy suffers from regulatory overreach and penalties, we all do.
Burgum Takes the Wind Out of the Empire State’s Plans
By Beege Welborn, Hot Air, Apr 17, 2025
Washington’s Control of Energy
Trump administration to fast-track fossil fuels and mining on public lands
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 24, 2025
The Interior Department announced late Wednesday that it will drastically cut down timelines for environmental reviews of projects that produce coal, oil, gas, uranium and other minerals.
Trump administration moves to expand offshore drilling — including in the Arctic
By Rachel Frazin, Then Hill, Apr 18, 2025
Ambushing American Oil
By Jay Hakes, Real Clear Energy, April 23, 2025
[SEPP Comment: The author does not understand that different greenhouse gases influence atmospheric temperatures differently.]
Trump’s Energy Policies Will Help U.S. Lead in Global AI Race
By David Holt, WUWT, Apr 20, 2025
Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?
Affordable, Reliable, Clean Scorecard: Natural Gas Is Tops, Wind and Solar Are the Worst
By James Taylor, Real Clear Energy, April 22, 2025
Trump administration moves to expand offshore drilling — including in the Arctic
By Rachel Frazin, Then Hill, Apr 18, 2025
Return of King Coal?
U.S. Coal Production Continues Steady Decline as Generation Capacity Falls
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, Apr 23, 2025
Link to report: U.S. production of all types of coal has declined over the past two decades
By Staff, US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Apr 8, 2025
Nuclear Energy and Fears
China builds world’s first working thorium reactor using declassified US documents
By Aamir Khollam, Interesting Engineering, Apr 17, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Chinese scientists have completed a major breakthrough in clean energy by reloading fresh fuel into a working thorium molten salt reactor.
California net-zero leaders want to shutter its only zero-emissions electricity-generating plant
By Ronald Stein and Gene A. Nelson, America Outloud News, Apr 21, 2025
Washington’s Only Nuclear Power Station Will Be Shut Down for Two Months, Can Wind Energy Fill The Gap?
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 22, 2025
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
China Has Chokehold on Minerals, US Must Break It
By Larry Bell, Newsmax, Apr 17, 2025
Facility Decommissioning
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Apr 15, 2025
“This is where the next frontier of solar energy lies—not in installing the next 100GW—it’s rescuing the first 100GW.” – Cesar Barbosa
Offshore wind developers risk trouble with Trump
By Collister Johnson, CFACT, Apr 14, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Politics aside, can offshore wind produce reliable, affordable electricity?]
Siemens Gamesa Installs World’s Most Powerful Wind Turbine at Denmark Test Site
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, Apr 3, 2025
Siemens Gamesa reportedly received €30 million ($32.2 million) in funding from the European Union for testing of the prototype at the National Test Centre for Large Wind Turbines at Østerild. The new turbine, called the SG DD-276, has a 276-meter rotor. [905 feet]
Wake Physics: Large Wind Farms Are Making Downstream Turbines Unprofitable
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 20, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Will there be a race on who can capture the wind first?]
The Blade Stops Here: France Holds Wind Industry Accountable at Last
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 20, 2025
[SEPP Comment: For deaths of soaring birds such as eagles.]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Storage
America’s Last Stand: China’s Smart Battery Dominance
By Andrew King, WUWT, Apr 16, 2025
Police investigation launched into second fire at battery recycling plant
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 15, 2025
Video
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
Only Four Electric Car Manufacturers Worldwide Are Making A Profit!
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 12, 2025
The Electric Car Rot
By Jennifer Marohasy, Her Blog, Apr 25, 2025
Celebrate Earth Day by not burning a Tesla
By Anthony J. Sadar, American Thinker, Apr 25, 2025
Car Leasing Association Wants Govt Support As EV Second Hand Prices Plummet!
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 14, 2025
[SEPP Comment: EV subsidies forever: subsidize the production, the purchase, and the resale.]
Carbon Schemes
Back-Breaking Taxes
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Apr 20, 2025
Project To Suck Money Out Of Taxpayers Begins In UK
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 21, 2025
Why are UK taxpayers forced to pay for this pointless nonsense, when the rest of the world does not give a toss?
[SEPP Comment: Will sucking carbon from the seas stop primary production areas?]
California Dreaming
Ways to Rein in the California Coastal Commission
By Edward Ring, What’s Current, Accessed Apr 17, 2025
Can EVs Make Up for Gasoline Shortages?
By Edward Ring, What’s Current, Accessed Apr 23, 2025
The energy reality in California is that 50 percent of California’s energy remains petroleum based.
Gavin Newsom’s Grid Impossible (With Eight Charts)
Gov. Gavin Newsom will run for the White House in 2028. But under his leadership, California’s energy prices have skyrocketed.
By Robert Bryce, His Blog, Apr 18, 2025
Link to report: California’s Poverty Rate Soars to Alarmingly High Levels in 2023
New Census Data Show Disproportionate Hardship for Black and Latinx Californians, as the End of Pandemic-Era Policies Reverses Progress
By Alissa Anderson, et al., California Budget and Policy Center, September 2024
From Bryce: People are leaving the Golden State in droves. According to U-Haul, California has come in last place for one-way traffic for five years in a row with more people moving out than moving in. Poverty in Newsom’s state — which already has the highest poverty rate in the country — is increasing.
[SEPP Comment: Bulk of article is paywalled.]
From Refineries to Fiefdoms: Is Newsom Orchestrating a State Takeover of California’s Oil Industry?
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 18, 2025
Buried in the California Energy Commission’s May 2024 Draft Transportation Fuels Assessment is an eye-popping section outlining “highly complex implementation policies” for managing gasoline supply. Among these is a plan for state-owned refineries, described in detail as a fallback option in the event of market “failures.” [Emphasis in original.]
Gavin Newsom Begs Regulators To Keep Refineries In Biz After California Dems Ran Industry Out Of Town
By Nick Pope, Daily Caller, Apr 23, 2025
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
Trump administration formally loosens restrictions on shower head flow
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 14, 2025
UK Gov spends £50 m to dim sun to create slightly less beach weather
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 24, 2025
The Gods in the UK Parliament plan to spend £50 million in a quest to control sunlight, because obviously, the UK is too sunny
Beam them down, Scotty
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
Claim: Forcing Substandard Climate Friendly Appliances on People Saves Money
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 18, 2025
EPA Chief Sounds Alarm On Rogue Climate Group Launching Sulfur Dioxide Balloons To Geo-Engineer Earth
By Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Apr 16, 2025 [Bernie Kepshire]
.
Experts discover weather has always happened
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 23, 2025
Greening Without CO2? More Selective Science
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 12, 2025
Geoengineering To Save The Planet
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 23, 2025
Text: https://realclimatescience.com/2025/04/geoengineering-to-save-the-planet/#gsc.tab=0
Video: New Video : Man Made Climate Emergency
Fifty years ago climate scientists wanted to melt the polar ice caps to save us from global cooling. Now they want to blot out the sun to save us from global warming.
Psychoanalysis on Climate ‘Denial’? (stranger and stranger)
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Apr 23,2025
ARTICLES
1. World Economic Forum Opens New Probe Into Founder Klaus Schwab
Founder quit after board moved to investigate whistleblower allegations, which he denies, including use of luxury property and travel
By Shalini Ramachandran, Jenny Strasburg, and AnnaMaria Andriotis, WSJ, Apr 22, 2025
2. When the Wind Didn’t Blow in Germany
A years-long renewables push leaves the economy hostage to the weather.
By The Editorial Board, WSJ, April 25, 2025
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer –
Well, gee. An atmosphere of any gases will demonstrate convection. Maybe the authors live in an alternate universe.
Clueless – they are probably delusional enough to believe that adding “greenhouse gases” to the atmosphere makes it hotter. Have people stopped thinking for themselves? Or does this sort of nonsense only occur in the USA?
Nobody who contributes to WUWT, not even Michael Flynn, could possibly check the veracity of all the issues raised by this enormously convoluted and over-referenced post.
What the hell is it about?
I don’t understand the purpose of hosting it.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Bill Johnston,
http://www.bomwatch.com.au
‘An atmosphere of any gases will demonstrate convection.’
Let’s consider an atmosphere of O2 and N2 only that allows thermal radiation from the Earth’s surface to pass directly to space. Please provide a citation from a competent source that explains how such an atmosphere will convect given that it can’t dump heat to space.
It would convect in the instance of a surface temperature that varied from one place to another due to day/night, for one thing, latitude, surface slope for more, and so forth.
I guess the follow-up questions would be to what extent would it convect and why wouldn’t the bulk of the atmosphere effectively become isothermal after some interval of time. The good news is that qualified academics like you and vW&H can differ re. these type of questions, meaning ‘The Science’ really isn’t settled to the point that we should be recklessly messing around with how we obtain energy.
Don’t guess. Look at Richard Feynman’s lectures, where he says “It is not an isothermal atmosphere”, and how he comes to that conclusion. Observation supports the non-isothermal nature of the atmosphere.
As to “what extent”, what has that to do with anything? Are you trying to resile from your previous blanket statements? None of this nonsense is going to back up any silly idea that adding CO2 to air makes it hotter!
Lets’s stick to reality, if you don’t object too much. Both O2 and N2 emit and absorb infrared. Prof John Tyndall established this by experiment more than 150 years ago, and compared the absorption qualities of CO2 and H2O (for example) to dry air, purged of CO2.
You can’t show me an experiment that demonstrates that your fantasy represents reality in any way. Next you’ll be telling me that adding CO2 to air makes it hotter!
‘Lets’s stick to reality..’
Yes, let’s – show me a bona fide citation that O2 and N2 absorb and emit IR, i..e., show me their emission spectrums if you have any idea what those are. Otherwise, stop being an obnoxious troll who continuously spews nonsense to the delight of climate alarmists.
Frank, you probably won’t accept Penn State as “bona fide”, but here’s something from Penn State –
So I’ll wait for you to find some matter which does not emit or absorb infrared radiation. I won’t hold my breath waiting.
It looks like you overlooked the words “troposphere” and “tropopause” in you criticism of van Wijngaarden and Happer.
The Earth’s stratosphere does not have any significant convection, thus falsifying your assertion that “An atmosphere of any gases will demonstrate convection”.
Significant atmospheric convection is precluded when an atmosphere develops warmer layers above cooler layers, which can even occur temporarily in Earth’s troposphere under the weather phenomenon known as a “temperature inversion”
Now, you were saying something about clueless . . .
From the paper –
Surface to tropopause.
You wrote –
You are agreeing with me at this point? You have not managed to “falsify” anything I said. An atmosphere of any gas will demonstrate convection. You may play all the silly semantic games you wish, but the presence of “greenhouse gases” is not necessary for convection to occur.
Inversions occur under a few different conditions, none of which have anything to do with so-called “greenhouse gases”, as far as I as I am aware.
You might read your attachment – “suppresses convection” presupposes convection in the first place. Do you not agree? Or maybe you are claiming that inversions cannot occur without the presence of “greenhouse gases?
Hopefully, you are not clueless enough to believe that adding “greenhouse gases” to air makes it hotter!
No, isn’t that obvious?
(repeated claim, to be sure!)
No, but I’ll make the falsification of that statement even more obvious . . . see attachment.
Humidity plays a significant role in the formation and characteristics of temperature inversions. While inversions are primarily defined by temperature differences between layers, humidity levels can influence the strength and persistence of inversions, particularly near the surface. (Hint for you: humidity is a measure of the average amount of water vapor content in a given parcel of air, and water vapor is the strongest of all greenhouse gases currently present in Earth’s atmosphere.)
Adding “greenhouse gases” to a mixture of N2, O2 and Ar gases makes that mixture more capable of both absorbing and emitting LWIR radiation . . . whether or not the resulting mixture becomes “hotter” or “colder” depends on many other independent factors.
As I sad, greenhouse gases have nothing to do with inversions. CO2 is denser than air, H2O is less dense. You burble that –
Strongest? Strength compared to what, precisely?
You are on the right track when you say –
Indeed. Adding so-called greenhouse gases has no quantifiable effect on temperature.
By the way, your AI quote happens to mention that the Moon’s atmosphere lacks the characteristics of a “conventional dense atmosphere” – no mention of lighter H2O, or heavier CO2. Strange, that.
Taking all that into account, tell what you think this mythical “greenhouse effect” is supposed to do? “It all depends”? Not much use at all, in that case.
“Why Has the Daily Sceptic Been Put on Tortoise Media’s Climate Naughty List?”
You do realise what Tortoise media is? James Harding is a co-founder of the slow one, and was…. Director of BBC News and was in the post from August 2013 until January 2018.
“James Harding’s slow news outlet Tortoise Media reported a loss of £3.8 million for 2023, down a bit from a loss of £4.6 million the year before. It looks like things might be getting worse…
Analysis of internet traffic on SimilarWeb shows a massive drop in Tortoise readership from 465,560 in January to 242,328 in March. A 48% decline…
A newsroom insider tells Guido that senior staff are taking their “eye off the ball” and internal numbers also show a circa 50% reduction in podcast listenership.
https://order-order.com/2025/04/11/slow-news-tortoise-media-sheds-readers-at-breakneck-speed/
Now, who could the spotty 6th formers at The Guardian flog the Observer off to, to reduce their annual losses?
“After the approval by the Scott Trust – which owns the Guardian Media Group – of the sale of the Observer to James Harding’s Tortoise Media last week nerves are far from calming. 125 Guardian and Observer staff have penned a letter – published on the Guardian website – accusing Scott Trust chairman Ole Jacob Sunde of being far from accurate in his claim that the sale of the paper was agreed only after “extensive internal and external consultation.” The staff were having none of it:”
https://order-order.com/2024/12/09/guardian-in-meltdown-as-staff-accuse-bosses-of-untruths-over-observer-sale/
A BBC stalwart, of course.
Given that the Daily Sceptic is not on message…. it’s on the naughty step.
O/T On Thursday this week many local authorities and Mayors are up for election. Needless to say, the car crash known as the Labour party is expected to do rather badly..
Doncaster – Miliband country
“Labour’s never been for the working class – they’ve swapped. They’re not the party they were, and that’s why I like Reform. They’re the common-sense party, exactly what we want.”
…
“I wrote to Ed Miliband and told him about the fuel allowance.” “I got a letter off him, and he said that pensioners have never been as well off. I ripped the letter up, and said I would never vote Labour again.”
…
“I feel very disappointed in the Labour government,” [she says]. “I thought I’d give Labour a chance again, only to be bitterly disappointed.” “I think that for pensioners and the disabled, [Labour] are really doing a disservice to working class people who have contributed a lot to this country over the years. My trust in them has gone.”
Would she contemplate voting Reform as a result? “I think Nigel Farage has some good points: what you see is what you get,” she says, admitting that “Reform or the Conservatives are a better bet for me than Labour at the moment.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/04/27/the-labour-stronghold-that-could-fall-to-reform/
One headline caught my eye….
“Labour Peer Predicts Party Will ‘Get its Head Kicked In’ by Farage over Failure to Address Working Class Concerns”https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/04/27/labour-peer-predicts-party-will-get-its-head-kicked-in-by-farages-reform/
His choice of language makes his feelings on the matter quite clear. It’s thuggish street fighting talk. Football fans even put it into song for the opposition.
“You’re Gonna Get Your F[n]ucking Head Kicked In”, sometimes pluralised to “You’re Gonna Get Your F[n]ucking Heads Kicked In”, is a football chant originating in England. It is also used, apparently, as a case study in psychology and sociology.
He could have said we will get trounced, lose badly etc etc etc. The inference is obvious, low class thugs vote Reform.
“To me” that’s a bit unfair to Roger.
The copy of the “Official Federal Definition of Scientific Integrity” … which came with the recommendation that “federal agencies should adopt this definition, incorporate it into their
scientific integrity policy, and communicate it to their workforce” … that I came across was for the HHS “federal agency” (direct link) :
I think that “the omission of physical evidence” is therefore covered when Roger wrote :
.
Any “Real Scientist” (TM) who sees the words “honesty” and “scientific integrity” will also be reminded of Richard Feynman’s public lecture about “cargo-cult science”, which includes :
Unfortunately, GHE believers are not scientists, as Richard Feynman describes science. Fanatical cultists would seem to be a more appropriate description. They have some bizarre notion that thermometers becoming hotter is not due to increased man-made heat, but rather the outputs of the combustion of hydrocarbons, namely CO2 and H2O.
No amount of either, added to air, will make it hotter. Unbelievable gullibility, except that it is widely believed by people who are well educated and highly qualified. It just goes to show that intelligence is no protection against self deception.
Roger Pielke did get this one wrong:
ALL federal agencies are part of the executive branch and subject to oversight and control from the White House.
‘ALL federal agencies are part of the executive branch and subject to oversight and control from the White House.’
You need to add provisos to the effect that this statement only holds if the Executive Branch is headed by a Democrat, and that if this condition is not met, oversight and control of these agencies will pass to the Democrat National Committee and/or such assignees as they may name.
Why is that?
Not true according to Google’s AI bot which outputs the following:
“There are federal agencies that operate independently from the Executive Branch, primarily those classified as independent regulatory agencies and some independent agencies within the executive branch. These agencies are not subject to direct presidential control, although they do maintain some form of relationship with the executive branch.
“Here’s a more detailed explanation:
Independent Regulatory Agencies:
These agencies, like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), are established by Congress and have the power to make regulations and enforce laws, often without direct presidential oversight.
Independent Agencies within the Executive Branch:
Examples include the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which operate with a degree of independence from the direct control of the President.”
{my bold emphasis added}
From the Fifth Climate Assessment Report: Somehow, I remain “skeptical,” if by skeptical, I mean gagging on propaganda.
The findings in this report are based on a comprehensive review and assessment of information sources determined to meet the standards and documentation required under the Information Quality Act and the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (App. 2), including peer-reviewed literature, other literature, Indigenous Knowledge, other expert and local knowledge, and climate data processed and prepared for authors by NOAA’s Technical Support Unit (TSU; see Guide to the Report section below and App. 3).
NCA5 was thoroughly reviewed by Federal Government experts, external experts, and the public multiple times throughout the report development process. An expert external review was performed by an ad hoc committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.3 Additional information on the development of this Assessment can be found in Appendix 1: Assessment Development Process.
The great genius of the founding fathers was that they didn’t set up one government, they created the federal government as essentially three governments. Each with its own powers. The three branches were set up in opposition to the others, such that no branch could do anything on its own.
They also set up the state governments to be in opposition to the federal government.
To our regret, later generations decided that efficiency was more important, so they tore down many of the walls the founders had set up.
As a result, we now have the Beast of Columbia, that rules over all of us with an iron fist.
‘They also set up the state governments to be in opposition to the federal government.’
Not true. The original idea was that the people of the sovereign states agreed per ratification of the Constitution to set up a limited federal government. Unfortunately the latter has been highly successful in re-defining ‘limited’ over time, although I think some people are starting to wake up.
Under the above article’s subheading of Science Supporting the Endangerment Finding?, the British medical publication the Lancet is quoted as stating:
“In 2009, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed the science-rooted Endangerment Finding, stating that greenhouse gases ‘threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations’. This finding became the cornerstone of most US climate policies and influenced many others globally.”
“Science-rooted Endangerment Finding” . . . who are they (both the EPA and the Lancet) kidding?
Also, underneath this quote are these statements from the article’s TWTW author(s):
“Carbon dioxide is essential for photosynthesis, which provides the food for all complex plant life and all animal life on Earth. Where is the physical evidence that it threatens the public health and welfare of current and future generations? . . .The Endangerment Finding has no basis in physical science.”
Some hard facts to go along with that:
Given the current (2025) concentration of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere is only at around 425 ppm, the Lancet, with its asserted focus on human health, should have noted the following regarding ACCEPTABLE levels of CO2 in air that humans breath over very long time periods:
— in general indoor environments (homes/bedrooms, offices, theaters, auditoriums . . . all without overcrowding), the typical CO2 level can be up to 800 ppm CO2
— in school classrooms, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers(ASHRAE) recommends that CO2 levels not exceed 1000 ppm
— The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) specifies that industry workers have an allowable 8-hour time-weighted-average of breathing air not to exceed 5,000 ppm CO2 concentration, and going further stating a “short term” exposure limit in breathing air at 30,000 ppm CO2 is acceptable (note: these are specialized work environments, such as work in confined spaces or near CO2-emitting equipment where such high concentrations may be present)
— US Navy submarines routinely operate with allowable concentrations in the their breathable air having up to 11,000 ppm CO2; their maximum, non-emergency upper limit for CO2 concentration is 30,000 ppm (3%); the Navy conducted numerous studies in the 1960’s–1970’s and found that two weeks of continuous breathing of air with CO2 concentrations at 40,000 ppm did not affect performance on multiple tests of cognitive function in physically fit young men
— Aboard the International Space Station, the minimum CO2 concentration in the ambient, breathable air is approximately 3,000 ppm, but can reach values greater than 6,500 ppm. The mean concentration is not reduced below 3,000 ppm due to the stations’s limited supply of electrical energy and the capacity of its “air scrubbing” equipment to do such.
In addition to the above, when just sitting around humans exhale air having a CO2 concentration in the range of 4–5%, that’s 40,000–50,000 ppm!
Yet the EPA Endangement Finding declares CO2 at a value of 850 ppm (the measured atmospheric level back in 2009) threatens the public health and welfare of current and future generations???
Obviously, there was no science whatsoever supporting the EPA’s “Finding”.
A “bipartisan” commission to repair the NCA, per Roger Pielkie Jr., will probably fix nothing. I point to the example of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (or Simpson–Bowles). Did that do any good?