Weather

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #487 – Watts Up With That?


The Week That Was: 2022-01-15 (January 15, 2022)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” – Attributed to Abraham Lincoln

Number of the Week: $433 trillion (20+ times the US GDP)

THIS WEEK:

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

Scope: Last week, TWTW emphasized three important developments during 2021: 1) Forty-three years of atmospheric temperature trends where the greenhouse effect occurs show a modest warming, not a drastic or dangerous one; 2) the calculations based on atmospheric observations by William van Wijngaarden and William Happer show that the effectiveness of all five major greenhouse gases on global temperatures (water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone, nitrous oxide, and methane) is largely exhausted, depleted, and that they do not have a major influence on global temperatures, and 3) contrary to what climate scientists assert, econometrician Ross McKitrick has shown that studies using Fractional Attribution of Risk (FAR) or Optimal Fingerprinting are not grounded on established probability theory and statistics. Probability assertions attributing the likelihood that an extreme weather event was caused by human emissions of carbon dioxide are meaningless. As discussed in the July 24 TWTW, one example was the flooding of the Ahr River Valley in Germany where climate specialists asserted that it was caused by human emissions of carbon dioxide, but a similar flood occurred in 1910 and a worse one in 1803.

This week, some other developments in 2021 are briefly discussed: 1) the January publication of significant problems with the US National Climate Assessment; 2) the August publication of the significant disagreement among solar scientists of the role of the changing sun on the globe’s climate; and 3) the February Texas Blue Norther, demonstrating that for public safety in the Great Plains, electricity generation needs to be winterized.

Issues regarding the credibility of government entities are discussed, particularly how government experts are undermining the credibility of their agencies. Also discussed are studies on the costs of making wind and solar power reliable with a Net Zero Policy showing that the costs are enormous, and that reliable and affordable wind and solar power are a myth.

******************

US National Assessments: The January 9 TWTW discussed that The Office of Science and Technology Policy under David Legates has published nine information briefs on climate change from various scientists and scholars in North America. These briefs embody the view expressed by Einstein that in the search for truth, the weaknesses as well of the strengths of a concept must be expressed. The weaknesses to the view that carbon dioxide is the primary cause of climate change are not expressed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), particularly in its politicized Summary for Policymakers, and this pattern continues through its followers including the US National Assessments. Pat Michaels gave an excellent overview of the problems in the four US National Assessments.

The esschangays cover issues such as surface temperatures, ability of computer models to predict climate, radiation transfer, the general circulation, hurricanes, and the claimed climate emergency. See links in the January 9. 2021 TWTW.

******************

The Changing Sun: On a number of occasions in September and October, TWTW discussed that twenty-three distinguished scientists made independent assessments of the role of the sun in the earth’s climate. There is considerable disagreement among these scientists. Their paper was published in the scientific journal Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (RAA). Immediately “fact checkers in social media began to censor the publication and falsely claimed that the paper was “incorrect” and “misleading.” The “fact checkers” blindly accepted the claims in the UN IPCC AR6, which asserted that solar variation has negligible effect on the earth’s climate since the 1800s.

Willie Soon gave presentations on this paper to the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness conference in August and the Heartland’s International Conference on Climate Change on October 16. The abstract of the paper states:

“Sixteen different estimates of the changes in TSI since at least the 19th century were compiled from the literature. Half of these estimates are “low variability” and half are “high variability”. Meanwhile, five largely-independent methods for estimating Northern Hemisphere temperature trends were evaluated using: 1) only rural weather stations; 2) all available stations whether urban or rural (the standard approach); 3) only sea surface temperatures; 4) tree-ring widths as temperature proxies; 5) glacier length records as temperature proxies. The standard estimates which use urban as well as rural stations were somewhat anomalous as they implied a much greater warming in recent decades than the other estimates, suggesting that urbanization bias might still be a problem in current global temperature datasets – despite the conclusions of some earlier studies. Nonetheless, all five estimates confirm that it is currently warmer than the late 19th century, i.e., there has been some “global warming” since the 19th century. For each of the five estimates of Northern Hemisphere temperatures, the contribution from direct solar forcing for all sixteen estimates of TSI was evaluated using simple linear least-squares fitting. The role of human activity on recent warming was then calculated by fitting the residuals to the UN IPCC’s recommended “anthropogenic forcings” time series. For all five Northern Hemisphere temperature series, different TSI estimates suggest everything from no role for the Sun in recent decades (implying that recent global warming is mostly human-caused) to most of the recent global warming being due to changes in solar activity (that is, that recent global warming is mostly natural). It appears that previous studies (including the most recent IPCC reports) which had prematurely concluded the former, had done so because they failed to adequately consider all the relevant estimates of TSI and/or to satisfactorily address the uncertainties still associated with Northern Hemisphere temperature trend estimates. Therefore, several recommendations on how the scientific community can more satisfactorily resolve these issues are provided.”

Asserting that solar variability has little or no role in the earth’s recent climate change is unjustified. We simply do not know. Note that this paper is different from the recent paper by Soon, et.al. “Group Sunspot Numbers: A New Reconstruction of Sunspot Activity Variations from Historical Sunspot Records Using Algorithms from Machine Learning” published in the journal, Solar Physiccreds with an earlier version published in Advances in Space Research. The latest paper makes predictions, the paper in RAA is an historical account. See link under Science: Is the Sun Rising? and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5kX4XeTmsA for Soon’s presentation.

******************

Blue Norther: In February what Texans call a Blue Norther hit as far south as the Gulf of Mexico. In Oklahoma they are called a Blue Darter and elsewhere called a Blue Whistler. In the US they come south from Canada on the east side of the Rocky Mountains and quickly drop temperatures in various sections of the Great Plains. Although severe, they are not unusual. It serves to show that in the Great Plains, electricity generators need to be winterized to be reliable. Unfortunately, in the false belief methane is a major contributor to global warming Texas natural gas producers were forced to obtain electricity from the grid rather than generate electricity from the natural gas they produce. Thus, the natural gas producers were knocked out by excessive regulation during this weather emergency. See links in the February 20 & 27 TWTW.

******************

Credibility: Two separate essays in the Wall Street Journal address the credibility problems that the current administrations in the US and the UK face. In “Omicron Has Killed Certitude” Daniel Henninger writes:

Thank you, President Biden. Your administration has achieved herd immunity. Alas, it has nothing to do with your promise to ‘shut down the virus’ or vaccinate all 330 million Americans. What you’ve done has long been thought even more impossible than finding a cure for Covid. You’ve immunized the American people against politics. Give this man the Nobel Peace Prize.

This happy news emerged from a question inside the recent Associated Press-NORC poll, which asked, ‘Thinking about the problems facing the United States and the world today, which problems would you like the government to be working on in the year 2022?’

Naturally some 68% said the economy—with the worst inflation since 1982—needed some thought. But astonishingly, the percentage who want the government to work on Covid-19 is 33%, a 20-point drop from a year ago.

Partisans whose job it is to stand in front of a microphone and explain Mr. Biden’s policies will say, ‘See, we’re winning. Our policies have removed Covid as a daily concern.’

Umm, no. Identified U.S. Omicron infections are arriving at hundreds of thousands a day. Sagas abound of burned-out hospital workers and depleted workforces. Holiday air travel was a historic nightmare. The promised supply of rapid antigen tests is today’s equivalent of the bridge to nowhere. Cloth masks worked, until they didn’t. School’s out—forever.

It was remarkable how often one saw people interviewed while standing in lines to be tested say: ‘I don’t understand how this can be happening after two years.’ People are flying the pandemic white flag: They’ve stopped caring what the government, the politicians or ‘science’ is telling them about Covid.

The Covid pandemic is altering many multiples of behavioral patterns, and one of the biggest, for which we should thank the virus, is the death of certitude.

From Covid’s start in 2020, public and scientific authorities across the world said: ‘Trust us. We know what we are doing.’ We now see that this unshakable, public-facing certitude was false.

Today, it’s fair to say that no one but the hopelessly credulous believe much of anything Mr. Biden, Jen Psaki, Anthony Fauci or Rochelle Walensky says about Covid and Omicron. The list of doubted authorities worldwide could extend to the horizon.

My purpose is not to discredit public authority or science. We need both. Public authorities in 2020 cleared the regulatory path for Operation Warp Speed, which let private-sector scientists develop protective vaccines. My intention is to re-establish a necessary virtue that looks altogether lost to public life and its scientific representatives: intellectual modesty.

Political leaders try to convey the impression of control over events, insofar as most are always on thin ice with the public. With the pandemic, the most visible faces of U.S. authority across two years—Donald Trump, Andrew Cuomo, Joe Biden—became caricatures of the in-control public figure. In their world, we were always winning.

At the center of this collapse of public confidence sits science, which has a lot to answer for. The problem is not the process of scientific discovery as understood for centuries. The problem is ‘science,’ a politicized totem now used routinely to silence legitimate challenge, for example regarding what happened in Wuhan.

Science triumphalism didn’t begin with the National Institutes of Health’s Anthony Fauci. Science as a political weapon originated with the battle over climate policy.

After discussing the complexity of medical issues, Mr Henninger concludes:

Of its nature, public health is authoritarian, ordering the masses into compliance for some larger social good, such as food-handling hygiene. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, now fitfully run by the White House-compliant Dr. Walensky, occupies a gray realm between issuing directives and serving as a scientific clearinghouse. During the pandemic, serious scientists—in and out of public life—have let their status as discoverers of important but ever-contingent knowledge be hijacked by the authoritarians of certitude. Omicron has ended their reign.

Entering our third year with Covid, the AP-NORC result effectively means some two-thirds of the population is telling its government, ‘Thanks for nothing.’ That is an overstatement, but not by much. And it won’t get better until doubt and dissent get more respect than they have now.

In “Boris Johnson’s Other Disaster” the editors discuss the other problem:

Boris Johnson is fighting for political survival amid a scandal over parties during pandemic lockdowns in 2020. And if only that were the U.K. Prime Minister’s only problem. ‘Party-gate’ is proving so damaging because the news has landed on an electorate already exasperated with Mr. Johnson over soaring energy costs.

The government estimates the average household’s energy bill rose 6% in 2021 for electricity and gas combined, to £1,339 ($1,837). That may conceal much bigger increases for some households. Some 25 suppliers have failed since August, pushing thousands of businesses and some two million domestic customers (8% of all households) to new suppliers potentially at higher rates.

The cause of this fiasco is green-energy favoritism amid a global surge in fuel prices. Retail suppliers were unprepared for surging wholesale gas and electricity prices, thanks to a cap on household energy prices imposed by Mr. Johnson’s hapless predecessor Theresa May. That cap, which became Tory Party orthodoxy, prevented retailers from accruing higher profits when wholesale prices were lower to protect themselves from supply shocks. But it also offers little lasting protection for consumers. Rising wholesale prices could force regulators to increase the price cap by 50% at its six-monthly review in February.

Britons are paying the price for decades of green policies that have made their energy grid less resilient and less affordable. Mr. Johnson didn’t start this bad-policy trend, but he has done his best to make it worse.

The main culprit is chronic preferential treatment for renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. Since the early 2000s, the government has mandated that utilities buy from renewable generators an increasing share of the power they sell to consumers. London also subsidizes new renewable capacity by guaranteeing suppliers a higher-than-market price for the electricity they plan to sell. The cost reaches to about £10 billion a year.

Renewables other than nuclear now account for nearly half of Britain’s installed electric-generating capacity, compared to 4% in 2000. The problem is that the wind doesn’t always blow, and the sun definitely doesn’t always shine in the famously rainy U.K. Nuclear capacity has fallen to 8% of electricity generation from 16% two decades ago, leaving gas to fill the gap—the same gas that has seen rapid price increases.

It’s expensive to ramp up electricity supplies in a hurry. The national grid operator expects to spend £3 billion in the current fiscal year in so-called balancing costs. That’s what it needs to pay to backup suppliers to fill temporary gaps between supply and demand, most of which these days are caused by insufficient renewable generation.

The essay goes into specifics such as Mr Johnson wanting to ramp up “decarbonization” before concluding with:

But the energy-price debacle is giving his party another reason to oust him on top of the Covid garden-party scandals. All of this is a warning to parties of the right around the world [political consertives] tempted to indulge green illusions at the expense of kitchen-table realities.

Mr. Johnson has foolishly believed the popular press on the cost of wind and solar. It is neither affordable nor reliable. It makes delivering reliable electricity extremely expensive. See links under Questioning European Green, Energy Issues – Non-US, and Articles 1 & 2.

******************

Destroying Credibility: Possibly nothing will destroy the credibility of experts in the US government more completely than the false claims of reliable and affordable wind and solar as the government continues to subsidize and promote them. No government agency has published a systematic analysis of the costs of Net Zero or “clean energy” in totally replacing fossil fuels. That is left to independent private analysts who do not have a stake in the outcome.

The late engineer Roger Andrews provided exceptional reviews of efforts to make certain islands “energy independent.” The planners grossly underestimated the extent to which wind power fails. A look at wind generation in the “windy” Columbia River Gorge shows that for the past week wind power briefly achieved one-third of its rated nameplate capacity. Except for that period of less than 24 hours it has been generating less than 15% of capacity. It is now flatlining – generating little or nothing. Those who use nameplate capacity for actual capacity or use average capacity without discussing extremes mislead the public.

Writing in Manhattan Contrarian, Francis Menton discusses estimates by independent engineer Ken Gregory of the Friends of Science in Calgary using various scenarios. The cost of Net Zero in the US is staggering. Boris Johnson is beginning to discover that his great plans to lead the UK and free world to Net Zero may cost him dearly. The UK public is slowly becoming aware that Net Zero, or “clean energy,” is an economic disaster.

Instead of using resources to calculate the costs of Net Zero or “clean energy” to the US public, the Department of Energy is using its $62 Billion windfall in the infrastructure bill to create a federal Clean Energy Corps to produce “’solutions to climate change,’ the Clean Energy Corps will seek to ‘create good paying jobs’ and ‘spur economic growth.’” As seen in reviews of the US National Assessments, Washington cannot state the problem correctly, thus it cannot find “solutions.” See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, Change in US Administrations, Article # 4, and https://transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Operations/Wind/twndbspt.aspx

******************

Number of the Week: $433 trillion (20+ times the US GDP). Ken Gregory estimates that pure Net Zero will cost the US public $433 trillion, or more than twenty times the 2020 US Gross Domestic Product of $20.9 trillion. Can we expect to see realistic estimates from the Department of Energy on the costs of Mr. Biden’s Green New Deal? To understand the limits of these estimates see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, especially the assumptions discussed by Mr. Menton.

Science: Is the Sun Rising?

Group Sunspot Numbers: A New Reconstruction of Sunspot Activity Variations from Historical Sunspot Records Using Algorithms from Machine Learning

By Víctor Manuel Velasco Herrera,·Willie Soon, Douglas V. Hoyt.and  Judit Muraközy, Solar Physics, January 10, 2022

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11207-021-01926-x

Censorship

In Face of Big Tech Censorship, Free Speech Alternatives Emerge Online

By Douglas Blair, The Daily Signal, Jan 14, 2022

Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013

Summary: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

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

http://climatechangereconsidered.org/climate-change-reconsidered-ii-biological-impacts/

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

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

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

http://store.heartland.org/shop/ccr-ii-fossil-fuels/

Download with no charge:

http://climatechangereconsidered.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Climate-Change-Reconsidered-II-Fossil-Fuels-FULL-Volume-with-covers.pdf

Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

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

http://climatechangereconsidered.org/

Download with no charge:

https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/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

Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data

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

Challenging the Orthodoxy

Calculating The Full Costs Of Electrifying Everything Using Only Wind, Solar And Batteries

By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Jan 14, 2022

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2022-1-14-calculating-the-full-costs-of-electrifying-everything-using-only-wind-solar-and-batteries

Link to report: “The Cost of Net Zero Electrification of the U.S.A.”

By Ken Gregory, Friends of Science, Calgary, Updated Jan 10, 2022

Are Portions of Washington State in Severe Drought?

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Jan 13, 2022

https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2022/01/are-portions-of-washington-state-in.html

“Virtually every data source shows just the opposite (and there is more I could have provided to you).

“Unfortunately, this exaggeration of drought by [NOAA’s] Drought Monitor is found in other areas as well. The nation is not well served by exaggerating drought.   As a result, poor decisions are made.”

Shipping Liquid Hydrogen Would Be At Least 5 Times As Expensive As LNG Per Unit Of Energy

All of the projects proposing to manufacture hydrogen where sunshine and wind are constant and cheap and ship it to where energy is consumed are clearly based on hand-waving, ignorance, sheer #hopium or outright larceny.

By Michael Barnard, CleanTechnica, Dec 20, 2021

https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/20/shipping-liquid-hydrogen-would-be-at-least-5-times-as-expensive-as-lng-per-unit-of-energy/

“Assuming the same-sized ship, the delivered BTUs of energy would be about 27% of the LNG. This is because even liquified, hydrogen has less energy by volume than LNG, but also because liquifying hydrogen takes about 33% of the energy in the liquified hydrogen, as opposed to the 10% required for LNG. Different gases, different temperatures required for liquification. Amazing stuff with liquid oxygen for space travel, but not so much anywhere less exacting.”

Will the Climate Industry Move the Goalposts Again?

Global temperature was on course to meet the 2-degree target without any emissions cuts.

By Benjamin Zycher, Real Clear Energy, Jan 13, 2022

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2022/01/13/will_the_climate_industry_move_the_goalposts_again_811874.html

Being a Climate Alarmist Means Never Having to Admit You’re Wrong

By H. Sterling Burnett, The Heartland Institute, Jan 13, 2022

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/being-a-climate-alarmist-means-never-having-to-admit-youre-wrong

Nearly 140 Scientific Papers Detail The Minuscule Effect CO2 Has On Earth’s Temperature

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Jan 13, 2022

“As of 2016 this list had only 50 papers on it (as indicated by the web address). In less than 6 years the list has grown to 137 (as of today).”

Plastics Over the Bounding Main? Not Primarily the US’s Doing

By William D. Balgord, Townhall, Jan 14, 2022

https://townhall.com/columnists/williamdbalgord/2022/01/14/plastics-over-the-bounding-main-not-primarily-the-uss-doing-n2601846

[SEPP Comment: The report by NSF is horrid.]

Defending the Orthodoxy

IPCC AR6: Streamflow, Unspun Edition

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Jan 12, 2022

IPCC AR6: Streamflow, Unspun Edition

“In summary, the sign of global streamflow trends remains uncertain, with slightly more globally gauged rivers experiencing significantly decreasing flows than significantly increasing flows since the 1950s (low confidence).”

Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science

How much water is in Earth’s atmosphere?

By Joe Phelan, Live Science, Jan 10, 2022 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]

https://www.livescience.com/how-much-water-earth-atmosphere

“Our atmosphere holds a lot of water.”

“As a result, global warming could conceivably speed up. Water vapor is a very effective greenhouse gas, and when more of it is in the atmosphere, it will contribute to warming and enhance the greenhouse effect.”

[SEPP Comment: Obvious the author read the Charney Report or did not understand it. The “speed up” is not happening!]

Rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations globally affect photosynthesis of peat-forming mosses

Press Release, Umea University, Via WUWT, Jan 14, 2022

Link to paper: Global CO2 fertilization of Sphagnum peat mosses via suppression of photorespiration during the twentieth century

By Henrik Serk, Nature Scientific Reports, Dec 31, 2021

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-02953-1

From the press release: “Although peatlands have dampened CO2-driven climate change so far, the changes have already had devastating effects. If human CO2 emissions are not strongly reduced, the atmospheric CO2 concentration will further increase by hundreds of ppm by 2100, and average global temperatures will rise several degrees C above pre-industrial levels. It is unclear how peatlands will be affected by this.” [Boldface added]

[SEPP Comment: The physical evidence does not support this claim.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Matt Ridley on Net Zero

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Jan 10, 2022



Source link

news7g

News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button