The Week That Was: 2025-08-09 (August 9, 2025)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”— Winston Churchill, Nov 10, 1942, after the Second Battle of El Alamein, Egypt
Number of the Week: 1 equals 3?
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Scope: TWTW begins a fourth and final discussion of a paper by Howard Hayden on the difference between “climate science” and understanding the greenhouse effect. TWTW then discusses an alternative way of looking at the greenhouse effect in today’s atmosphere discussed by physicist Donald Rapp. TWTW briefly discusses the DOE report and Climate Oscillations. TWTW concludes with a discussion of the June heat wave by the WeatherBell team and effective propaganda.
*********************
A Few Notes (Part 4): Last week’s discussion of the paper by SEPP Director and Professor of Physics emeritus Howard “Cork” Hayden continued into an introduction of the Greenhouse Effect as it is currently understood by Atomic, Molecular, and Optical (AMO) physicists such as Hayden. This is in the field of Quantum Theory which is very different from classical physics. Hayden’s discussion follows the lines of the work of William van Wijingaarden and William Happer in Radiation Transfer – the study of how electromagnetic radiation (light) interacts with matter.
Specifically, this work includes how electromagnetic energy is emitted, absorbed and scattered as it travels through Earth’s atmosphere. For purposes of the greenhouse effect, it is how certain atmospheric gases, called greenhouse gases (GHG) interfere with, block, infrared radiation (IR) from the surface of Earth to space, and the important role played by molecular collisions. Yet the gases may be transparent, have little or no effect, to incoming sunlight except in the infrared range of frequencies (wavelengths).
Hayden begins the section “IR properties of GHGs” with [the table of formulas for carbon dioxide (CO2)] is omitted here but is in the paper]:
“The present CO2 concentration is about 400 molecules of CO2 per million molecules of air (400 ppmv is the standard notation). But let’s start with only 10 ppmv. The only part of the IR spectrum that matters (Fig. 10) is a very narrow region centered around that peak at 670-1 [number of wave cycles that fit into a one-centimeter distance]; for the rest, the mean free path at that low concentration is so great that IR from the surface escapes to space. But in that part of the spectrum, there is near certainty that the IR is absorbed. Now increase the CO2 concentration to 20 ppmv and you easily increase the absorption. After a while, the effect is largely saturated. Add more CO2 and you widen the absorption curve a little, but the cross-section is so small that it has little effect.
Figure 14 shows the results carried out with the HITRAN data from Figure 10 in units of net suppressed IR flux (W/m2) versus CO2 concentration. By about 20 ppmv—way over at the left—CO2 keeps about 15 W/m2 from going to space. To block the next 15 W/m2 from going to space requires adding 19 times as much CO2 (380 ppmv), reaching our present 400 ppmv and 30 W/m2 of net blockage by CO2. Doubling the present amount will increase the effect only 3 W/m2.
In IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001) [6], they give three formulas for calculating the “radiative forcing” (i.e., increase in ability to block IR) for CO2, all of which are in reasonable agreement, and all of which are based on the IR spectrum of CO2 known at the time (and probably using the red lines of Figure 10, as an approximation). The top formula yields 3.7 W/m2 for doubling of CO2, which is 20% higher than Happer and van Wijngaarden get with the best spectral data. My preference is for the result based on HITRAN, but, as we shall soon show, both results lead to the same overall conclusions.
Figure 14: Net IR blockage (seen from top of atmosphere) by CO2 versus CO2 concentration, adapted from van Wijngaarden & Happer.”
In Figure 14 we see that with very small amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, say 10 ppmv, significant forcing is achieved yet the ability of CO2 to promote forcing is quickly weakening. This illustrates that the effect of CO2 is a logarithmic, a characteristic that is ignored by many promoters of the fear of carbon dioxide creating “runaway global warming.” At 50 ppmv the effect of CO2 is a little above 20 forcing units (W/m2); at 100 ppmv, it is about 25 forcing units (W/m2) and so on. At today’s level of about 400 ppmv, the effect of CO2 is 30 forcing units (W/m2). Doubling today’s level to 800 ppmv has little effect. This is what is meant by the term “saturated.” It is different from the conventional meaning that the gas cannot hold more.
Hayden discusses the Greenhouse Effect in watts per square meter, then starts his discussion of IPCC scenarios with:
Let us begin with IPCC’s ‘Third Assessment Report (TAR).’ Figure 6.6 of that publication gives the total radiative forcing from all causes, 1750 to 2001, as 2.43 W/m2. The Summary for Policy Makers says that the measured temperature change, 1860 to 2001, is 0.8ºC. Therefore, the increase in surface IR emission must be 4.4 W/m2, fully 2 W/m2 more than the forcing can account for.
IPCC’s ‘most likely’ temperature rise to occur with a doubling of CO2 concentration (in almost all) ‘Assessment Reports’ is 3ºC, which would cause an increase in surface IR emission of 16.4 W/m2. How that is to be caused by CO2’s radiative forcing of 3 W/m2 (3.7 W/m2, according to IPCC) is a bit of a mystery. [Boldface added]
TWTW will not go into the various scenarios of the IPCC because as others have shown that the extreme scenarios are physically implausible, subsequent IPCC reports produce the same numbers under different names. However, Hayden’s comments on the latest Assessment Report (AR6, 2021) are important. He states:
“Let us take the example of SSP3-7.0 because it corresponds to CO2 approximately doubling by the end of the century. Figure 17 [omitted here] shows that case (made legible) with some annotation. The vertical axis shows the predicted temperature rise, and I have added the corresponding increase in surface IR emission calculated from the Stefan-Boltzmann law. For this case, the ‘total’ forcing—that is, the ‘total’ increase in the ability to block IR from going to space—is 7.0 W/m2. By contrast, the increase in IR emission occasioned by the predicted increase in temperature is 20 W/m2. How is that possible?” [Boldface added]
“It takes considerable imagination, looking at CO2 concentration and temperature in Figure 8, that the two quantities are correlated. However, the temperature rise is supposedly dependent upon the ‘logarithm’ of the CO2 concentration, which has considerably less variation than the CO2 concentration itself. Judd et al do not use the term ‘logarithm’ in their text, but they plot the temperature reconstruction versus the logarithm of the CO2 concentration, ‘presumably’ recognizing that the forcing is proportional (over the range) to ln(C/C0), as noted in the section ‘IR Properties of GHGs’. However, their graph (see Fig. 18) does not have a forcing scale. Notice that in Figure 18 a radiative forcing scale has been appended.
Another scale that should have been in the original is the increase in surface radiation due to increased surface temperature, calculated from the Stefan-Boltzmann law. That scale is now appended in Fig. 18. Notice that the entire change in CO2 radiative forcing, from the least CO2 to the most, is 12 W/m2. By some feat of magic, that is supposed to suppress a total increase in surface IR emission of 140 W/m2. What’s a factor of twelve among friends?” [Boldface added]
Figure 18
Hayden continues with:
“Judd et al say
There is a strong correlation between atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations and GMST [Global Mean Surface Temperature], identifying CO2 as the dominant control on variations in Phanerozoic global climate and suggesting an apparent Earth system sensitivity of ~8°C.
…Atmospheric CO2 exerts a dominant control on GMST, both today and in the geologic past.
… [Temperature reconstruction] PhanDA GMST exhibits a strong relationship with atmospheric CO2 concentrations (Fig. 4), demonstrating that CO2 has been the dominant forcing controlling global climate variations across the Phanerozoic. [Emphasis added.]
[The Phanerozoic Eon is approximately the past 540 million years with CO2 varying from over 4000 ppmv to about 180 ppmv.]
No, Judd et al, you just proved that CO2 is a minor contributor to the temperature rise.” [Boldface added]
The Judd et al. paper, which concludes that CO2 is a major contributor of temperature rise but actually shows that CO2 is a minor contributor, was published by Science magazine (sponsored by AAAS, the American Association for the Advancement of Science). That is the same magazine that published Westerhold et al. paper, which drew similar conclusions covering the past 66 million years from deceptively presenting evidence showing that CO2 is, at most, a minor contributor to temperature rise. In the Judd et al. paper note the wide horizontal lines in the graph for a wide range of CO2 concentrations, with no corresponding increase in temperatures. At least the Westerhold paper presented the full data, although in meaningless clumps that needed to be unraveled.
Hayden finishes his paper with a discussion of measured heat balance using data from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) onboard satellites. He states that:
“The warming trend since 2000 is caused mostly by a decrease in albedo, not—repeat NOT—by an increase in the greenhouse effect due to CO2.”
Hayden’s conclusions are:
- “At equilibrium, the amount of heat radiated to outer space equals the amount of heat absorbed from sunlight.
- The amount of IR emitted to outer space is less than the amount of IR emitted by the surface, and the spectrum of IR emitted to space is a jagged one, unlike the smooth spectrum of IR emitted by the surface. The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, H2O, CO2, O3, and others are responsible for those differences.
- About 20% (ca. 30 W/m2) of the greenhouse effect (ca. 160 W/m2) is due to CO2; most of the rest is due to H2O.
- The warmth of the surface is not due to atmospheric pressure; however, the decrease in temperature with altitude (the lapse rate) is due ultimately to the decrease in pressure with altitude.
- The science behind the greenhouse effect is molecular spectroscopy, including quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics, subjects that are not in the climate science curriculum.
- Predictions made by climate models invariably overestimate future temperatures; in all cases (no exceptions!) the increase in surface IR emission far exceeds the radiative forcing that supposedly suppresses that radiation.
- The CERES project, specifically designed to measure the heat balance of the earth, has found that the present imbalance (leading to warming) is primarily caused by a decrease in albedo, NOT by the increase in atmospheric CO2.
- The CERES project specifically notes an increase in outgoing IR.”
For the full paper and references see link under Challenging the Orthodoxy, for discussion of the Westerhold paper by geoscientist Tom Gallagher see the TWTW from July 15, 2023 to August 5 beginning with https://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2023/TWTW%207-15-23.pdf
*********************
Another Explanation: Donald Rapp is an accomplished physicist with over 60 years of research experience. He was a full professor at the University of Texas and spent over 30 years at Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. He has written textbooks on quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics. Ron Clutz discussed a paper produced by Don Rapp in October 2024, “How Increased CO 2 Warms the Earth-Two Contexts for the Greenhouse Gas Effect” The abstract of the paper states:
“The widespread explanations of the greenhouse effect taught to millions of schoolchildren are misleading. The objective of this work is to clarify how increasing CO2 produces warming in current times. It is found that there are two contexts for the greenhouse gas effect. In one context, the fundamental greenhouse gas effect, one imagines a dry Earth starting with no water or CO2 and adding water and CO2. This leads to the familiar “thermal blanket” that strongly inhibits IR transmission from the Earth to the atmosphere. The Earth is much warmer with H2O and CO2. In the other context, the current greenhouse gas effect, CO2 is added to the current atmosphere. The thermal blanket on IR radiation hardly changes. But the surface loses energy primarily by evaporation and thermals. Increased CO2 in the upper atmosphere carries IR radiation to higher altitudes. The Earth radiates to space at higher altitudes where it is cooler, and the Earth is less able to shed energy. The Earth warms to restore the energy balance. The ‘thermal blanket’ is mainly irrelevant to the current greenhouse gas effect. It is concluded that almost all discussions of the greenhouse effect are based on the fundamental greenhouse gas effect, which is a hypothetical construct, while the current greenhouse gas effect is what is happening now in the real world. Adding CO2 does not add much to a ‘thermal blanket’ but instead, drives emission from the Earth to higher, cooler altitudes.” [Boldface added]
But the “higher, cooler altitudes” warm up if the surface warms up. The lapse rate—the decrease in temperature with increase in altitude—is basically a constant, so if the surface warms up by a degree, so does the temperature at all altitudes. In case the slight warming adds more humidity, the lapse rate decreases, meaning that the temperature at high altitude increases even more than one degree for a one-degree increase at the surface. This warming at high altitude increases IR emission to space.
This is an alternative way of explaining why the additional influence of additional CO2 on temperatures declines as the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere increases. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
DOE Report: TWTW is delaying further discussing the Report to the Department of Energy “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate” until next week. We hope that the transcript of an interview of Steven Koonin (one of the authors) by John Robson will be published by Climate Discussion Nexus. One statement by Koonin during the interview was particularly intriguing: Koonin asserted that as the grid sizes in weather forecasting systems become smaller, the systems become chaotic.
One can observe that during thunderstorm seasons, intense, slow-moving thunderstorms are highly localized. One area may be subject to extreme flooding, while another area may receive no rain although it is only 20 km (12 miles) away. If Koonin’s assertion is correct, then it is another reason why weather forecasting systems are not suitable for climate forecasting. The scales are completely different. For the DOE report and comments on it see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy – DOE Report.
*********************
Climate Oscillations: Petrophysicist Andy May continues his work on various Climate Oscillations posted on WUWT. In Climate Oscillations 12: The Causes & Significance, May makes a disturbing comment:
“In this post we will examine the idea that ocean and atmospheric oscillations are random internal variability, except for volcanic eruptions and human emissions, at climatic time scales. This is a claim made by the IPCC when they renamed the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) to the Atlantic Multidecadal Variability (AMV) and the PDO to PDV, and so on. AR6 (IPCC, 2021) explicitly states that the AMO (or AMV) and PDO (or PDV) are “unpredictable on time scales longer than a few years” (IPCC, 2021, p. 197). Their main reason for stating this and concluding that these oscillations are not influenced by external “forcings,” other than a small influence from humans and volcanic eruptions, is that they cannot model these oscillations, with the possible exceptions of the NAM and SAM (IPCC, 2021, pp. 113-115). This is, of course, a circular argument since the IPCC models have never been validated by predicting future climate accurately, and they also make some fundamental assumptions that simply aren’t true.”
That the UN IPCC justifies ignoring natural climate change cycles because it cannot model them demonstrates that the UN IPCC is not a scientific body trying to understand climate change and separating natural cause from human cause. Rather it is a political body trying to emphasize a few human causes and exaggerating them. It primarily exaggerates the influence of CO2. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
Heat Wave: At the end of June, the team of WeatherBell Analytics discussed the June heat wave. Joe D’Aleo posted their findings on his blog ICECAP. Among the findings were:
“Given the data, non-optimal temperatures are reasonably considered among the leading risk factors of mortality worldwide. A global analysis of 4.6 million deaths from cold and about 489,000 from heat, a ratio of roughly 9:1 of cold versus heat. This pattern is also consistent in regional studies.
Our climate changes on multi-decadal cycles. Based on past cycles we should soon return into our next cold period.”
See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
Effective Propaganda: TWTW reader Clare Goldsberry sent two reports reflecting the extent to which certain US government organizations and others were willing in support of the dangers of CO2-caused warming. One report was: Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance, A Consensus Study Report of
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The second report was: Congressionally Mandated Research Plan and an Initial Research Framework Related to Solar Radiation Modification, By Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), White House and NOAA.
Apparently the consensus of these organizations is that longer growing seasons are harmful to life on Earth. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy.
*********************
Number of the Week: 1 equals 3? In reports by the UN IPCC and comments by climate modelers it appears that the number one is treated as the number three. For example, in his paper Hayden discussed that a warming of 3 C will produce an increase in infrared radiation from the surface of about 20 W/m2. Supposedly, this is the result of a blocking of infrared radiation of about 7 W/m2. (20 is about 3 times 7). Similarly, Tim Palmer, a pioneer of the ensemble method of using weather models to forecast climate change, wrote:
“The direct warming due to a doubling of carbon dioxide is a little over 1°C. However, if we add this water vapor feedback, the warming doubles to just over 2°C (3.6°F)”
Then he adds in the disappearance of snow and ice to get to 2.5°C (4.5°F), which others round up to 3°C (6°F).
But neither the additional warming from water vapor nor the disappearance of snow and ice has not been supported by physical evidence. Yet a 1°C that can be estimated from both laboratory experiments and observations from satellites and weather ballons is claimed a 3°C (6°F) warming by the UN IPCC.
See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy and The Primacy of Doubt: From Quantum Physics to Climate Change, How the Science of Uncertainty Can Help Us Understand Our Chaotic World, by Tim Palmer, Basic Books, 2022, page 114.
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/
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
Challenging the Orthodoxy
A Few Notes about Climate and the Greenhouse Effect
By Howard “Cork” Hayden, SEPP, July 15, 2025
http://www.sepp.org/science_papers/A%20Few%20Notes%20about%20Climate.pdf
Why Current GHG Effect is Simply Not Scary
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Aug 4, 2025
Link to paper: How Increased CO 2 Warms the Earth-Two Contexts for the Greenhouse Gas Effect
By Donald Rapp, IgMin Research, October 2024
Short Summary of Observations Until June 2025
By Ole Humlum, Climate4you, Accessed July 9, 2025
Heat Wave of June 2025
By Joe D’Aleo, et al., ICECAP, Aug 7, 2025
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/heat_wave_of_june_2025/
Climate Oscillations 12: The Causes & Significance
By Andy May, WUWT, Aug 5, 2025
Climate Oscillations 11: Oceanic Niño Index (ONI)
By Andy May, WUWT, Aug 3, 2025
The Oceanic Niño Index or ONI is NOAA’s primarily indicator for monitoring the sea surface temperature (SST) anomaly in the critical Niño 3.4 region. It is a 3-month running mean of ERSST.v5 SST anomalies in the Niño 3.4 region, defined as 5°N-5°S and 120°W-170°W.
Climate Change and Economic Growth: Evidence from Local Income Proxies
By Devina Lakhtakia and Ross McKitrick, Accepted for publication by Climate Change Economics, preprint June 25, 2025
Climate Fact Check for July 2025
By Staff, CEI, Via WUWT, Aug 6, 2025
New Study: A City’s Industry Center, Airport Up To 12°C Warmer Than Nearby Forests, Vegetation
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Aug 7, 2025
Link to paper: Urban Microclimates in a Warming World: Land Surface Temperature (LST) Trends Across Ten Major Cities on Seven Continents
By Yiğitalp Kara and Veli Yavuz, Urban Science, April 5, 2025
From abstract: Airports exhibited a mean daytime land surface temperature (LST) that was 2.5 °C higher than surrounding areas, while industrial zones demonstrated an even greater temperature disparity, with an average increase of 2.81 °C. In contrast, cold spots characterized by dense vegetation showed a notable cooling effect, with LST differences reaching −3.7 °C.
Challenging the Orthodoxy – DOE Report
A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate
By Climate Working Group, United States Department of Energy, July 23, 2025 https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/DOE_Critical_Review_of_Impacts_of_GHG_Emissions_on_the_US_Climate_July_2025.pdf
Chris Wright on Climate Change Chess
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Aug 7, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Video of Ben Shapiro interviewing Secretary of Energy Chris Wright last week. Ron Clutz provides transcript with his emphasis.]
Climate change: the next phase?
By David Whitehouse, Net Zero Watch, Aug 7, 2025
Will this new report and its dose of reality stimulate more debate about data? Will it foster a return to observations and a focus on the empirical, and not just reading the entrails of climate models? It might take a while, but science has a way of self-correcting.
Department Of Energy Report On The Impacts Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Aug 2, 2025
Devastating Official US Report Lays Bare The Abuses of ‘Settled’ Climate Science And Its Role in Net Zero
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, Aug 3, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Net Zero is dead in the United States and the last rites have been administered in the devastating official report from the Department of Energy. Released earlier this week, the report cancels the decades-long censorship imposed by so-called ‘settled’ climate science. It is compiled by five eminent scientists and is a systematic take-down of the claims, methodologies and motivations driving activist scientists, politicians and opinion formers promoting the hard-Left Net Zero fantasy. Despite its ground-breaking importance, to date it has been largely ignored by mainstream media including the BBC and Guardian.
Defending the Orthodoxy
Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance
Staff, Committee on Developing a Research Agenda and Research Governance Approaches for Climate Intervention Strategies that Reflect Sunlight to Cool Earth
Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, Division on Earth and Life Studies, Committee on Science, Technology, and Law, Policy and Global Affairs
A Consensus Study Report of National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.2021 [H/t Clare Goldsberry]
Congressionally Mandated Research Plan and an Initial Research Framework Related to Solar Radiation Modification
By Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), White House and NOAA, 2023 [H/t Clare Goldsberry]
This document focuses on atmospheric-based approaches to solar radiation modification (SRM), specifically stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and marine cloud brightening (MCB), following the recent and extensive 2021 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Yet Another Misleading Report on “Low-Cost” Wind and Solar
By Jonathan Lesser, Real Clear Energy, August 04, 2025
Link to: Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2024
The latest cost analysis from IRENA shows that renewables continued to represent the most cost-competitive source of new electricity generation in 2024.
By Saied Dardour, et al., International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), 2025
Link to speech: A Moment of Opportunity
By UN Secretary-General António Guterres, July 22, 2025
Link to report: Seizing the moment of opportunity: Supercharging the new energy era of renewables, efficiency, and electrification
By the Climate Action Team in the Executive Office of the United Nations Secretary-General. Ploy Achakulwisut served as the lead author. 2025
[SEPP Comment: No estimate of the costs of powering modern civilization 24-7.]
Questioning the Orthodoxy
Major climate-GDP study under review after facing challenge
By Manon Jacob, Washington (AFP) Aug 6, 2025
The global warming hysterics talk about the climate. Let’s talk about the weather!
By Lothar W. Pawliczak, EIKE, Aug 2, 2025 [H/t John Shanahan]
When The Climate Zealotry Runs Hot
I & I Editorial Board, August 6, 2025
Oreskes’ Embrace of the “Victory Will Be Achieved” Memos, Redux, in Honolulu v Sunoco – Big, big mistake.
By Russell Cook, Gelbspan Files.com, Aug 1, 2025
Asian Forests Victims of Intolerable ‘Green’ Lie
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, Aug 5, 2025
Energy & Environmental Review: August 4, 2025
By John Droz, Jr., Master Resource, Aug 4, 2025
Problems in the Orthodoxy
Barclays follows HSBC in exit from banking industry’s net zero alliance
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 2, 2025
It’s actually much simpler than the Guardian suggests
At the outset, banks smelled the lure of bountiful subsidies for anything Net Zero related. One by one, they are now realizing that they cannot make a profit out of the Net Zero scam without those subsidies, which could dry up any time, just as they are now in Trump’s US.
Shh! Chinese solar firms sacked one-third of their workers — 87,000 solar jobs gone
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Aug 5, 2025
Quietly, the world manufacturing base for solar panels has been shrinking for nearly two years and hardly anyone knows. Especially not the Prime Minister of Australia who set up the $1 billion [Australian] Solar Sunshot a year ago to artificially create an Australian solar panel manufacturing industry, twenty years too late, and with the worst possible timing.
China has already captured the solar market and killed it.
Delays, Rollbacks, and Diverging Paths: The Global State of Power Plant Emissions Controls
By Sonal Patel, Power Mag, Aug 1, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Discussion of plans in China, India and South Korea.]
Seeking a Common Ground
Cloud Seeding History: Looking Back at the Colorado River Basin Pilot Project
By Art Rangno, Climate Etc., Aug 8, 2025
In summary, the CRBPP had no prospects of confirming that cloud seeding would increase snowfall due to the illusory results it tried to replicate. We were too ready to believe.
I was the only meteorologist/forecaster with the CRBPP for all five of its seasons.
Postrel vs. Free Market Electricity: Exchange and Comment
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Aug 6, 2025
“Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” – Milton Friedman
Even since the Great Texas Blackout of February 2021, I have tried to engage classical liberal scholars with the lost tradition of free market electricity in theory, practice, and public policy. An interesting exchange with economist Steve Postrel on social media some months ago is worth preserving, in this regard.
Measurement Issues — Surface
ENSO: Recent Evolution, Current Status and Predictions
Update by Staff, Climate Prediction Center/NCEP, NOAA, Aug 4, 2025
Measurement Issues — Atmosphere
UAH v6.1 Global Temperature Update for July, 2025: +0.36 deg. C
By Roy Spencer, His Blog, Aug 2, 2025
The Version 6.1 global area-averaged linear temperature trend (January 1979 through July 2025) remains at +0.16 deg/ C/decade (+0.22 C/decade over land, +0.13 C/decade over oceans).
Global Temperature Report, July 2025
By Staff, Earth System Science Center The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Aug 4, 2025
Map: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2025/July2025/202507_Map.png
Graph: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2025/July2025/202507_Bar.png
Text: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2025/July2025/GTR_202507JULY_v1.pdf
SH Drives UAH Temps Cooler July 2025
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Aug 5, 2025
OCO Satellites: Fancy Tools, Empty Pockets
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Aug 5, 2025
If you want a tale of cosmic hubris stitched to pure bureaucratic ambition, look no further than NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellites—OCO by name, not by actual carbon content.
Changing Weather
La Niña Continues … Globe To Keep Cooling For Another Year
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Aug 8, 2025
No global warming this year, and likely next year as well
[SEPP Comment: Actually, the ENSO index is Neutral.]
If Global Warming is a Problem, Why is there So Much Snow in Australia?
By Eric Worrall., WUWT, Aug 5, 2025
It Ain’t Half Cold, Mum!
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 4, 2025
Must be global warming!
“Several towns in eastern Australia were blanketed with their thickest layer of snow in decades as wild weather swept the area this weekend.”
NOAA: Prediction remains on track for above-normal Atlantic hurricane season
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Aug 7, 2025
Changing Climate
BBC & Melting Glaciers In Switzerland
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 4, 2025
Link to: The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History 1300-1850
By Brian Fagan, Basic Books, 2019
The BBC might like to consider that none of these villages were there three hundred years ago because the glaciers were there instead.
I somehow doubt anybody in Switzerland would want a return to those days.
Homewood quotes from Brian Fagan’s book:
“In the 16th Century the occasional traveler would remark on the poverty and suffering of those who lived on the marginal lands in the glacier’s shadow. At that time Chamonix was an obscure poverty-stricken parish in ‘a poor country of barren mountains never free of glaciers and frosts…half the year there is no sun…the corn [wheat] is gathered in the snow…and is so moldy it has to be heated in the oven’. Even animals were said to refuse bread made from Chamonix wheat. Avalanches caused by low temperatures and deep snowfall were a constant hazard. I
Changing Seas
Great Barrier Reef in great health, but climate change is killing science institutions
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Aug 8, 2025
It’s clear that The Australian Institute of Marine Science’s (AIMS) is not even trying to give Australians the most meaningful information they can on the reef. When the media exaggerates the crisis, the experts are happy. AIMS don’t ring up the journalists and correct them. They don’t explain the bigger perspective.
AIMS researchers surely know but won’t mention things like the extraordinary genetic adaptability of reefs: corals already have the genes to survive another 250 years of climate change. They can use epigenetic tricks to adapt to warmer and “more acidic” water and that the Great Barrier Reef has 112 protected tough spots that survive and replenish after the bleaching.
Corals got bleached way back in 1862, before the first coal plant, and long before the Ford Model T. [Boldface added]
Long-Term Monitoring Program
Annual Summary Report of Coral Reef Condition 2024/2025
Substantial impacts from 2024 mass coral bleaching and cyclones reduce regional coral cover to near long-term average
By Staff, Australian Institute of Marine Science, Aug 6, 2025
In 2025, 48% of surveyed reefs underwent a decline in percentage coral cover, 42% showed no net change, and only 10% had an increase. Reefs with stable or increasing coral cover were predominantly located in the Central GBR.
Coral on Great Barrier Reef at Fifth Highest Level Since Records Began – but Mainstream Media Still Spin ‘Tipping Point’ Narrative
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, Aug 7, 2025 [H/t Bernie Keppshire]
The Reef’s Problematic Polyp
By John Mikkelsen, Quadrant.au, Aug 9, 2025
It [report from the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS)] says the Reef retains higher levels of coral than most others around the world but faces a “volatile” future. However, the report also states that while coral losses were significant, they came off a high base, with observed coral cover now sitting at “near to long-term average levels.”
Oops! How did that slip out?
Great Barrier Reef suffers most widespread bleaching on record
By AFP Staff Writers, Sydney (AFP) Aug 5, 2025
Scientists documented the “most spatially extensive” bleaching since records began almost 40 years ago, driven by sweltering ocean temperatures in 2024 that triggered “unprecedented levels of heat stress”.
The Australian Institute of Marine Science surveyed the health of 124 coral reefs between August 2024 and May 2025.
Update: Strange Sea Ice Data July End 2025
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Aug 2, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Clutz asserting that if calculations are revised from one year to the next, they should be revised for the entire dataset and so noted.]
Lowering Standards
The Carbon Footprint of Your Heart Surgery: When Climate Zealotry Invades the Operating Room
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Aug 7, 2025
Link to paper: Carbon emission analysis of aortic valve replacement: the environmental footprint of transcatheter vs. surgical procedures
By David Blitzer, et al., European Heart Journal, July 2, 2025
From “study”: The intraoperative footprint of SAVR was driven by biological waste, post-operative length of stay, and inhaled anesthetic gases.
Conclusions
The carbon footprint of SAVR is about twice as high as those from OR–TAVR or CATH–TAVR. These findings should potentially be considered when making population level decisions and guidelines moving into the future.
[SEPP Comment: Not what is best for the patient, but what is best for the climate?]
UK Met Office Flirts With Conspiracy Theory as it Slams Critics of Its ‘Junk’ Temperature Measuring Sites
By Chris Morriaon, The Daily Sceptic, Aug 6, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Back To The Future
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Aug 5, 2025
The National Academy of Sciences asks “When could scientists have first known about climate change?”
Oxford Lecturer: Authoritarian China is less susceptible to petroleum-obsessed dogma
By Eric Worrall., WUWT, Aug 4, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
“records going back to 1961”
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Aug 3, 2205
Nordic countries hit by “truly unprecedented’ heatwave
Scientists record longest streak of temperatures higher than 30C in region in records going back to 1961″
“In 1927, a group of women tried to drive to the Arctic Ocean. Hot weather, melting permafrost and forest fires forced them to abandon their expedition.
the motor party journeyed 270 miles north of the Arctic Circle, prepared for freezing weather. To their continued astonishment the temperature was never’ less than 90 [32C] degrees in the shade
BBC Great Barrier Reef Disinformation
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 7, 2025
Climate Change Is Not to Blame for the Rising Costs of Natural Disasters, NBC
By H. Sterling Burnett, WUWT, Aug 5, 2025
Guardian Downgrades the Climate Crisis, Chemical Pollution a “Comparable” Threat
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Aug 6, 2025
No, Florida Today, Climate Change Isn’t Boosting Fire Ants in Florida
By Anthony Watts, Climate Realism, Aug 6, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?
The Cape Wrath Storm
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 5, 2025
But what is absolutely clear about all of this is that powerful storms are not particularly unusual in August.
But what is wrong is the attempt by the Met Office and others to portray Floris and so many other storms now as if they were.
Strong Gale Floris
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 7, 2025
The Met Office are now so desperate to promote climate alarm that they are prepared to lie about it.
This was from the BBC news feed yesterday:
“Floris could bring ‘strongest ever’ August gusts – Met Office
Storm Floris: Do not open doors unnecessarily, Met Office warns
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 3, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
The Gulf Stream is ‘closer to collapsing than ever before’: Current that stops never-ending winter in Europe has been weakening for 200 YEARS longer than thought, scientists say
By Jonathan Chadwick, Daily Mail, Aug 8, 2025 [H/t S.J. Cvrk]
http://mail.haapala.com/interface/root#/email
Link to other article: Bermuda stalagmite reveals how the Gulf Stream shifted – and what it might do as the climate changes further
By Edward Forman, PhD Candidate, Climate Tipping Points, University of Southampton, and James Baldini, Professor in Earth Sciences, Durham University, The Conversation, Aug 7, 2025
Link to paper: The Gulf Stream moved northward at the end of the Little Ice Age
By Edward C. G. Forman, et al., Nature, July 14, 2025
From abstract: Understanding Gulf Stream path and strength variability on pre-instrumental timescales is vital to contextualize its proposed present-day weakening and to better appreciate its sensitivity to external forcing.
From article: As global temperatures pass 1.5°C over the next few years, many climate models predict further weakening of the Amoc [Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation Current] – and potentially even a collapse this century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the global committee assessing climate science, estimates there is up to a 10% chance of collapse before 2100 – but new research suggests this probability could be even higher.
[SEPP Comment: Drawing conclusions from speculation using models that cannot be validated and are contradicted by physical evidence. The stalagmites provide physical evidence of physical climate change without human influence that the UN IPCC ignores.]
LRE Starts Construction of 152 MW of Solar Power in Oklahoma
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, August 6, 2025
“As America’s energy needs grow, projects like Twelvemile 1 & 2 are critical to ensuring reliable, affordable power,” said Eran Mahrer, chief commercial Officer at LRE. [Boldface added]
[SEPP Comment: No mention of the subsidies needed or how part-time power is made reliable.]
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda
False Stories in the New York Times and the Seattle Times on Western Washington Megafires
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Aug 7, 2025
To put it succinctly: the NY Times and Seattle Times not only got the story wrong, they got it REVERSED. Global warming will reduce the potential for western Washington mega-wildfires because the necessary easterly winds are weakened.
Chinese Media: AI Investment Should be Diverted to Climate Action
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Aug 3, 2025
Journalist Anthony Rowley got one thing right. Nations and regions which prioritize climate action have no chance of winning the AI race. Just look at Europe, Canada and Australia’s lack of progress.
Questioning European Green
Ditching Ed Miliband’s Net Zero Madness Could Save Every Family £1,000 a Year
By Richard Eldred, The Daily Sceptic, Aug 3, 2025
Questioning Green Elsewhere
Bad News Getting Worse For New York’s Struggling Grid With Looming Green Buildings Mandate
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, Aug 4, 2025
Green Jobs
China’s Solar Sector Has Slashed 87,000 Jobs Since 2024
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 4, 2025
Funding Issues
Trump Takes on Big Science
Critics who claim that the president is politicizing the National Science Foundation ignore its long history of funding left-wing research.
By Heather Mac Donald, City Journal, Summer 2025
The Political Games Continue
There’s a Fiery Electric Bill Coming to You, and the Arsonists Are Already Blaming Trump
By Larry Behrens, Real Clear Energy, August 06, 2025
Litigation Issues
Despite international courts, climate science is not the law in the U.S.
By Gary Abernathy, Empowerment Alliance, Aug 6, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Judge Crushes Charleston [SC] Climate Case
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Aug 8, 2025
Link to post: South Carolina State Judge Skeptical of Climate Cases: “I Don’t Know Where this Ends.”
By Kyle Kohli, Energy in Depth, May 30, 2025
Via a ruling on Wednesday, Judge Roger Young dismissed the case with prejudice – meaning Charleston cannot refile the claims – dealing a substantial blow for law firm Sher Edling and the Rockefeller-backed climate litigation campaign.
Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Taxes
Starmer’s £4.5 Billion Net Zero Flight Tax
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 4, 2025
“The Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) mandate means airlines that do not comply with the green policy face heavy fines likely to be passed on in part to passengers.
Costs associated with the new levy are expected to reach £4.5 billion by 2035, according to a new analysis by Public First.”
EPA and other Regulators on the March
Seismic Shift in Climate Change
By Susan Goldhaber, ACSH, Aug 04, 2025
Link to: Clean Air Act §202
CAA §202(a) allows EPA to prescribe standards for air pollutants from mobile sources that may cause or contribute to air pollution that endangers public health or welfare. EPA has used this authority to set per-vehicle nitrous oxide and methane standards for light duty passenger vehicles as well as heavy-duty vehicles. Mobile sources, however, make up only approximately 4% of national nitrous oxide emissions.
Comment Submitted On EPA Proposal To Revoke Biden-Era Power Plant Regulations
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Aug 6, 2025
Well, needless to say, lots of environmentalists are also filing comments, and most of them are outraged at the idea that fossil fuels are going to be around for the long term for electricity generation.
EPA Makes the Right Call: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Should Not Be Regulated Under the Clean Air Act
By Brent Bennett, Cullen Neely, Real Clear Energy, August 05, 2025
Energy Issues – Non-US
Ed Miliband refuses to publish details of green energy deal with China
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 3, 2025
Heat pump installations 90pc below Ed Miliband’s target
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 7, 2025
Energy Issues – Australia
Green Dreams, Grid Realities: Renewables -v- The Rest
Address to the Western Heritage Round Table Forum: held at NSW Parliament House August 5th, 2025
By Alan Moran, Regulatory Review, Aug 6, 2025
Those countries which are opposed to action or in fact do very little include China, India, USA, Russia, and Indonesia. That’s over 70% of the world’s emissions. Those that are doing something – the EU, South Korea, South Africa, UK – account for about 13% of global emissions.
At present we get about 35% of our energy from renewables and AEMO is working on plans to double this. The respected consultancy, GlobalRoam, which works largely for Green energy firms, has estimated that to run a grid that is basically wind and solar would would need $6 trillion – 3 times GDP – in back up storage to meet present day reliability. [Boldface added]
Energy Issues — US
Evaluating the Reliability and Security of the United States Electric Grid
By Staff, DOE, July 2025
From Report’s Key Takeaways: The 104 GW of retirements are projected to be replaced by 209 GW of new generation by 2030; however, only 22 GW would come from firm baseload generation sources. Even assuming no retirements, the model found increased risk of outages in 2030 by a factor of 34.
Utility Bills Spiking As America’s Power Demand Takes Off
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, Aug 4, 2025
Why Is Cheap Electricity So D@mn Expensive?
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Aug 6, 2025
If energy policy were ever honestly debated, LCOE would be confined to the footnotes, right next to unicorn sightings and promised Powerball payouts.
But as long as reality is subordinate to narrative and the cost of electrons is calculated by the people selling you the next miracle, the first thing to get blacked out will be the truth.
Domestic Power Burn, Not LNG Exports, Is the Real Culprit Driving Natural Gas Price Volatility
By Grant Gunter and Bailey McLaughlin, Power Mag, Aug 1, 2025
No two sectors embody the natural gas price volatility more than the demand growth seen in LNG feedgas demand for exports and for domestic natural gas-fired electric generation—or power burn—which now collectively account for nearly half of all gas demand in the lower 48 U.S. states. But of those two, it is the less predictable and more decentralized increased demand for domestic power burn that will continue to be a more significant lever for future natural gas price volatility.
All Spin Aside, the Emerging AI Data Centers Will Rely on Natural Gas
By Gary Abernathy, Real Clear Energy, August 06, 2025
Washington’s Control of Energy
Trump Admin Moves To Curb ‘Environmentally Damaging’ Green Energy Projects
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, Aug 1, 2025
Link to Department of the Interior Order: SO 3438 – Managing Federal Energy Resources and Protecting the Environment, Effective immediately
By Doug Burgum, Secretary of the Interior, Aug 1, 2025
Link to: Evaluating the Reliability and Security of the United States Electric Grid
DOE, July 2025
Celebrating a Big Beautiful Victory With America First Energy Policies
By Kevin Mooney, Real Clear Energy, August 05, 2025
Trump reverses Biden approval of Idaho wind project
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Aug 6, 2025
Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?
South American Cold Underscores Role of Oil and Gas
By Vijay Jayyaraj, CO2 Coalition, Aug 7, 2025
Nuclear Energy and Fears
DOE Approves Fifth Loan Disbursement to Holtec for Historic Restart of Palisades Nuclear Plant
By Sonal Patel, Power Mag, Aug 7, 2025
The fifth installment under DOE’s $1.52 billion loan guarantee follows key Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approvals that authorized Holtec to transition the 805-MW Palisades Nuclear Plant from decommissioning status back to an operating license.
The Palisades restart comes amid a flurry of high-profile corporate and state‐level commitments to revive idled U.S. reactors. In June 2025, Constellation Energy, backed by a 20-year PPA with Microsoft, celebrated progress toward a targeted restart as early as 2027 of the Crane Energy Center (previously known as Three Mile Island Unit 1) in Pennsylvania under PJM’s expedited interconnection approval. Constellation reports the site, now 64% staffed with nearly 400 hires, has completed major system inspections and training upgrades.
Nuclear power in a free enterprise environment is the pathway to abundant low-cost electricity
By Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis, America Outloud News, Aug 5, 2025
Protected from competition, utilities have a minimal incentive to innovate or control prices. Increased expenditures associated with integrating unreliable, intermittent, and low-energy-density renewable energy sources, volatility in fossil fuel markets, and heightened regulatory requirements are passed on to consumers.
[SEPP Comment: Falsely attribute price increases from mandates and subsidies to wind and solar as the examples of entrenched utility monopolies. Operating on a cost-plus system, utilities have no incentive to object to costly mandates and subsidies. When has nuclear power demonstrated it objects to subsidies?]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
Lightstar Announces Agrivoltaics Project at New York Farm
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, August 6, 2025
[SEPP Comment: No mention of the extent of subsidies used.]
When the Wind Stops Blowing: Trump Administration Restores Sanity to Offshore Energy Policy
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Aug 2, 2025
NOAA petitioned to stop offshore wind killing whales
By David Wojick, CFACT, Aug 5, 2025
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other
I was Wrong – Green Europe is Building at Least One US Scale AI
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Aug 2, 2025
A 230MW AI campus to be powered by Norwegian Hydro has been announced – but competition for electricity and rising prices are already causing political unrest.
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Storage
Australia becomes a Top Five Battery Nation just as we find out how expensive batteries are — $478/MWh!
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Aug 6, 2025
“Australia’s growing fleet of big batteries are now entrenching themselves as the major force behind the huge price spikes that have become a regular feature of Australia’s National Electricity Market, and which were the dominant factor in soaring wholesale prices in the June quarter.
Big batteries had been expected to be a softening influence on price spikes on the grid, given their cost of fuel (charging) is significantly lower than peaking gas stations, and based on the assumption that they would bring new competition to the market.”
[SEPP Comment: A regulated market is not a “free market” with no unwarranted government restrictions.]
Arevon Starts Construction of $600-Million California Energy Storage Project
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, Aug 4, 2025
A 300-MW/1,200-MWh installation represents a $600-million investment.
[SEPP Comment: Capital cost of four hours of backup power cost is $500,000/MWh.]
Europe’s Biggest Battery Supports More Renewable Energy on the UK Power Grid
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, Aug 1, 2025
Energy storage systems are crucial for effectively integrating wind power into the grid, because wind energy is inherently variable and unpredictable.
[SEPP Comment: No mention of the costs of the 200MW/400MWh facility now operating.]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
EVs Stuck Below 22% [UK]
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 5, 2025
Electric Boat Explodes On Canal
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 7, 2025
Carbon Schemes
More Subsidies Announced For Carbon Capture
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 5, 2025
And who will pay for these jobs?
California Dreaming
The Case for Carbon Sequestration via Forestry and Mass Timber
By Edward Ring, What’s Current, Accessed Aug 6, 2025
Meanwhile, throughout the Western United States, rates of forest mortality have risen in direct proportion to the enforced reduction in timber harvests, and now actually exceed rates of growth.
Health, Energy, and Climate
New Study: Heatwave-Related Deaths Have Been Declining In Recent Decades
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Aug 4, 2025
Link to new paper: Outpacing climate change: adaptation to heatwaves in Europe
By Marcin Piotr Walkowiak, et al., International Journal of Biometeorology, Feb 19, 2025
Other Scientific News
Weather-tracking advances are revealing astonishing extremes of lightning
By Joe Rojas-Burke for ASU News, Tempe AZ (SPX) Aug 01, 2025
Link to paper: A New WMO-Certified Single Megaflash Lightning Record Distance: 829 km (515 mi) occurring on 22 October 2017
By Michael J. Peterson, et al., Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, July 31, 2025
Abstract: The World Meteorological Organization has recognized a new world record lightning discharge distance of 829 km ± 8 km (515 ± 5 mi) that extended from eastern Texas to near Kansas City MO USA within a 22 October 2017 thunderstorm
Scientists finally solve the mystery of what triggers lightning
Press Release, Penn State University, Aug 1. 2025
Link to paper: Photoelectric Effect in Air Explains Lightning Initiation and Terrestrial Gamma Ray Flashes
By Victor P. Pasko, et al., JGR Atmospheres, July 28, 2025
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
Most Hilarious Reaction to Trump Admin’s EPA’s repealing the CO2 Endangerment Finding: Dem Congressman Sean Casten: ‘Trump will have been responsible for more deaths than Stalin, Mao & Hitler combined’
By Marc Morano, Climate Depot, Via WUWT, Aug 2, 2025
The Moon will get a nuclear plant before Australia does (NASA aims for 2029)
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Aug 7, 2025
Study Finds Possible Connection Between Current Heatwave And Giant Flaming Orb In The Sky
BabylonBee.com, Aug 6, 2025
At publishing time, climate scientists around the world were busy researching how to tax the sun to prevent catastrophic climate change.
Media Math Fail: Why Everywhere Can’t Warm Faster Than the Global Average
By Anthony Watts, Climate Realism, Aug 7, 2025
Only in Lake Wobegon where “All the women are strong, all the men are handsome, and all the children are above average.” (Garrison Keillor)
Met Office’s Junk Weather Station at Cavendish
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Aug 7, 2025
ARTICLES
No Articles in TWTW this Week
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Winston Churchill
We could do with his kind right now.
“What if Starmer had been prime minister in the second world war?
https:/ /www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-is-starmer-had-been-prime-minister-in-the-second-world-war/
We’d all be expected to goose step – and in time. But rather than National Socialism, Starmer prefers the Chinese way: “Ed Miliband refuses to publish details of green energy deal with China.”. To be fair it isn’t just Labour, the Tories went for Chinese lockdown – gosh, we can get away with it – after the Wuhan incident.
BP has been bucking the Miliband line, not only did it eject its disastrous green CEO for a common sense CEO, it has found a huge field off Brazil and reopened a North Sea field – a direct contravention of “government policy.”
They are still all over the place with green ideas and policies. Hitherto, the line has been getting houses insulated to save energy with added grants etc:
Home insulation and the net zero target
https:/ /lordslibrary.parliament.uk/home-insulation-and-the-net-zero-target/
But now…
Analysis
Overheated homes: why UK housing is dangerously unprepared for impact of climate crisis
Fiona Harvey
Environment editor
Building rules have been focused on keeping warm in winter and saving on energy bills, not cooling down
Low-income and minority ethnic people in England most at risk from dangerously hot homes
From shutters to reflective paint: how to prevent UK homes overheating
https:/ /www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/aug/10/overheated-homes-why-uk-housing-is-dangerously-unprepared-for-impact-of-climate-crisis
Virtually all the ‘ethnic minorities’ in Britain have come here from far hotter countries and places than we experience. And we are expected to believe that they, adapted as they are, are at most risk from heat?
So, rip out all the insulation? Grenfell was for nothing?
The Met Office calculates the average temperature by averaging both daytime and nighttime temperatures. This is done by taking the daily maximum and minimum temperatures recorded at weather stations and computing their mean (average) to determine the daily mean temperature. These daily mean temperatures are then averaged over the entire month or year for climate analysis.
It gets much colder in the Sahara at night.
Is the correct way to get the temperature of the Sahara to take a maximum of 42 during the day and a minimum of 8 at night (sometimes below zero in winter) and average them, Met Office style?
The Met Office calculates
Why bother when we know that anything the Met Office says is total nonsense based on infilling, extrapolation and blatant fakery?
The data they are using is pure junk and from junk weather stations – where they actually exist.
I’m surprised anybody gives them the time of day.
So harsh. Anyone would think you don’t value their sane, well-balanced approach to forecasting.
Since there is very low humidity in the desert, there is no greenhouse effect to slow cooling at night.
Story tip. The war on food production:
Context – In the UK, allotments are small parcels of land rented to individuals usually for the purpose of growing food crops. There is no set standard size but the most common plot is 10 rods, an ancient measurement equivalent to 302 square yards or 253 square metres.
The land itself is often owned by local government (parish or town councils) or self managed and owned by the allotment holders through an association. Some allotments are owned by the Church of England.
…
Allotment and home food production is highly productive in terms of land use. During the war allotments were estimated to contribute some 1.3 million tonnes of vegetables from 1.4 million plots.
https://www.allotment-garden.org/allotment-information/allotment-history/
Angela Rayner’s allotment sell-off is an act of class treacheryThese tiny parcels of land have deep roots in Britain’s working-class culture.
Rayner, our very own working-class hero, has told cash-strapped local authorities to add allotments to the Great British Sell-Off.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/08/10/angela-rayners-allotment-sell-off-is-an-act-of-class-treachery/
Well worth the read, if it can be flogged off – without impacting identity groups, of course – then, flog it.
The end of the Great Climate Con is nigh. It will go down in history as the greatest and costliest cons of all time. The only question is, will the perpetrators be held accountable? Some sort of “Climate Nuremberg”, perhaps, as proposed by David Roberts nearly 20 years ago. Irony can be so – ironic.
RE: Climate Nuremberg
The first scientists to be arrested should be Jim Hansen and his collaborators.
— vs. —
In their own words, ‘Congress is a Crime Scene‘ —
— suggests a good place to start now … if the Beginning has indeed Ended.
Spare a thought for UK freedom of expression
” subjects that are not in the climate science curriculum.”
The only science in the climate science curriculum, is political science.
Is the picture headlining this story real? If so, I want to be there.
In your “Number of the week”:
“But neither the additional warming from water vapor nor the disappearance of snow and ice has not been supported by physical evidence.”
Has a curve like figure 14 ever been created for water vapor?
I haven’t ever seen one. The reason is that there is so much water in the air that the absorption of LWIR light by H2O is always saturated. In Fig. 7, is shown (See below) is the IR absorption spectrum of Philadelphia inner city air from 400 to 4000 wavenumbers (wns). Only the CO2 and H2O peaks from 400 to 700 wns are involved in the greenhouse effect. Not how small and narrow the CO2 peak is. It is absorbing little IR energy. Also the are additional peaks for H2O from 400 wns down to 200 wns The spectrometer has a cut off atv 400b wns.
The calculation for CO2 used only the peak at ca. 660 wns and would not be complex. For H2O , the calculation would be more difficult do the fine structure of the absorption.
NB: Fig. 7 was taken from the essay “Climate Change Reexamined by Joel M. Kauffman. The essay is 26 pages and can be downloaded for free.
PS: If you click on Fig. 7, it will expanded and be come clear. Click on the “X” in the text to return to comment text.
PS: Scroll down and read my reply to Ron C.
I’ve copied a link to my comment from last week’s roundup (#652), below, in the hopes that SEPP might explain to a laymen like myself why radiative transfer models (RTM) predominate in climate science even though an excited GHG molecule in the lower troposphere is much more likely to undergo non-radiative deactivation than it is to spontaneously emit a photon.
I know that Dr Hayden has long pointed out that the IPCC’s estimates of CO2 ‘forcing’ don’t square with their projected estimates of surface warming. Could it be that RTMs don’t accurately describe the actual physics of energy transfer through the troposphere?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/08/04/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-652/#comment-4101941
Frank, suggest you take a look at the Donald Rapp paper mentioned in TWTW. Donald Rapp makes things clear and concise in his 2024 paper How Increased CO2 Warms the Earth-Two Contexts for the Greenhouse Gas Effect.
My synopsis is :
https://rclutz.com/2025/08/04/why-current-ghg-effect-is-simply-not-scary/
Thanks, Ron! Prior to framing my lament, above, I went to your web page, where I noted that you had also given space to the Shula-Ott analyses. I’ll be sure to go back to check out the work you’ve cited (Rapp), but in the meantime I’ll remain skeptical that RTMs have any utility in climate modeling other than their tractability and confirmation of the alarmist view that CO2 emissions are bad.
Ron, I have looked at the Rapp paper, but don’t see anything in it that would upset the alarmist narrative, aside from maybe asserting that the amount of warming to be expected from increased CO2 emissions would be small due to its approaching saturation in the lower atmosphere. In fact, he specifically notes that ‘[e]xcellent studies by Dufresne, et al. and Pierrehumbert provide detailed physics’.
While I’ll give him some credit for noting that the lower and upper troposphere operate differently, I don’t think he connects that with the idea that collisional dynamics are vastly different between the two regions. If that’s the case, then he is probably comfortable with the implicit assumption of radiative transfer models, which is that the absorbtion and spontaneous emission of photons take place in accordance with Kirchhoff’s Law at every point within the atmosphere.
Frank, I’m not seeing a contradiction between what you and he are saying. He says the lower atmosphere is opaque to radiation, meaning that CO2 and H20 capture upwelling IR and through collisions transfer energy to N2 and O2 in parcels of air where each CO2 molecule is surrounded by 2500 IR-inactive molecules. So the surface sheds heat up through the troposphere by means of evaporation and convection, not radiation. Toward the top H2O has frozen out, the air is thin, and CO2 can radiate into space.
Ron, perhaps I’m looking at the wrong article, but in the link to Rapp’s paper you provided, I didn’t find the word ‘collision’ or any reference to ‘2500 IR-inactive molecules’ therein.
As for the following quotation…
‘Yet, as we have shown, the addition of more CO2 to the atmosphere at present with a CO2 concentration > 400 ppm does not produce significant warming by thickening the blanket. Instead, analysis indicates that adding CO2 to the present atmosphere raises the altitude where the Earth radiates to space and that is the source of the current greenhouse effect. It is my experience that > 99% of all discussions of the greenhouse effect miss this important point, and I suspect that even most climate scientists don’t understand this.’
…I would argue that far from missing this ‘important point’, the vast majority of climate alarmists specifically say that adding CO2 emissions to the atmosphere will raise its so-called effective radiating level (ERL), thereby causing the Earth’s average surface temperatures to increase.
In fact, Rapp himself says as much here:
‘If the CO2 content of the atmosphere is increased, there will be a higher concentration of CO2 molecules in the upper atmosphere (at the same density), and IR radiant energy low will persist up to a higher altitude. The region that radiates to space will be at higher altitudes (where it is colder) and by the radiation law, the Earth will not be able to radiate as much energy per unit time. The Earth and the atmosphere will warm until the region of emission is warm enough to radiate all the solar input to Earth out to space.’
I applaud anyone who can make a case that climate alarmism is way overdone, but we are absolutely kidding ourselves that it’s going away if we continue to ignore the completely different impacts that collisions between IR-active and non-IR active gas species have in the lower and upper troposphere, respectively.
Again, is there no one in the skeptic ‘mainstream’ who is willing to engage Shula-Ott on their premise that radiative transfer models mischaracterize the physics of how the thermal radiation from the Earth’s surface that is absorbed by GHGs actually makes its way to space?
Frank, we had this discussion in March at WUWT
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/03/09/beyond-co%e2%82%82-unraveling-the-roles-of-energy-water-vapor-and-convection-in-earths-atmosphere/
Ron, indeed we did, complete with an unusual pre-article disclaimer that the ideas therein did not conform with accepted theory. Stepping back through the comments, I see there were more than a few of us skeptics who firmly believed that Shula & Ott (S&O) had made a compelling case against applying radiative transfer models to a convective troposphere.
Unfortunately, it seems to be very difficult to get any of the better known climate skeptics to engage on the question of whether collisions of GHGs with non-IR active species makes the current angst over CO2 emissions moot.
Personally, I don’t understand the hesitancy – if S&O have a point, then the entire CAGW edifice collapses in short order. If demonstrably not, then people like me will at least be more inclined to oppose CAGW on the basis of its high mitigation costs, rather than pursuing a dead end criticism of the consensus science.
Harold The Organic Chemist Says:
“CO2 Has Caused No Global Warming Since 1930”.
Shown in the chart (See below) are plots of temperatures at the Furnace Creek weather station in Death Valley since 1922 to 2001. In 1922, the concentration of CO2 in dry air
was ca. 303 ppmv (0.59 g CO2/cu. m.), and by 2001, it had increased ca. 371 ppmv
(0.73 g CO2/cu. m.), but there was no corresponding increase in surface air temperature at this remote desert. The reason there was no increase in surface air temperature at this arid desert is due to the saturation of absorption of out-going LWIR by CO2. This saturation of absorption of IR starts when the concentration of CO2 is at 300 ppmv. This concentration was reached in 1930. This means that increasing the concentration of CO2 above 300 ppmv will not result in an increase surface air temperature.
At the MLO in Hawaii, the concentration of CO2 is currently 427 ppmv. One cubic meter of this air has mass of 1.29 kg and contains 0.84 g of CO2 of STP, 15% increase since 2001.
Note how little CO2 there is in the large mass of air and that 71% of earth’s surface is covered by H2O, the one and only the one greenhouse gas of importance. There is too
little CO2 in the air to have any effect on weather and climate.
RE: “The Saturation of the Infrared Absorption by Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere”
by Dieter Schildknecht available at: https://arixiv.org/pdf/2004.00708v1 and
https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00708. He found that saturation of the absorption of IR light by CO2 occurs when the concentration of CO2 is 300 ppmv.
The above empirical data and analysis falsifies the claims (i.e., lies) by the IPCC and unscrupulous collaborating scientists (aka welfare queens in white coats, cf, quip by
Rustum Roy) that CO2 causes global warming and is control knob of climate change.
The purpose of these claims is to provide the justification for the UN to distribute, via the UNFCCC and the UN COP, donor funds from the rich countries to poor countries to help them cope with global warming and claim change. President Trump is putting an end to the great green scam that has cost the people many billions if not trillions of funds and is wrecking the economies of the UK, Germany, and Oz.
NB: The chart was taken from the late John Daly’s website: “Sill Waiting For Greenhouse” available at: ww.john-daly.com. From the page, page down to the end and click on:
“Station Temperature Data”. On the “World Map”, click on region or country to access temperature data from over 200 weather stations located around the world which show no warming up to 2002. For example, if click on Oz, there is displayed a list of weather station. Click on a weather station and the temperature chart is displayed. Click on the back arrow, and list of stations is displayed. Click on the back arrow to return to the “World Map”.
PS: If you click on the chart, it will expand and become clear. Click on the “X” on the circle to return to comment text.