Weather

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #539


The Week That Was: 2023-02-04 (February 4, 2023)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television–words, books, and so on–are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science.”Richard Feynman – “What is Science?” (1966) .

Number of the Week: 25%

THIS WEEK:

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

Scope: The issues discussed this week will include the following: Key points raised by Richard Lindzen, Sloan Professor emeritus at MIT in Atmospheric Science. Lindzen is best known for his work on the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He served as a lead author in the “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” chapter of the Third Assessment Report (AR3 or TAR, 2001) of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Lindzen is critical of the process and that although the main report contains some excellent work, the further one goes from the actual report, the more distorted the information becomes.

Writing in Climate Etc. Planning Engineer Russell Schussler discusses the failure of wind and solar projects in Germany and elsewhere to provide reliable, affordable electricity. Schussler asks the question all the promoters and their politicians are avoiding: When the great experiment fails, who pays the bill? It is irresponsible that many government entities have committed to Net Zero without a well-tested demonstration project showing the costs of generation and the storage needed.

Paul Homewood brings up that in 2017 the climate modelers at the UK Met Office simulated thousands of winter seasons for the UK. For over the last 3.5 million years, Earth’s climate has been in an Ice Age with glaciation at both poles. In those thousands of simulations, how many included severe glaciation covering the UK?

Mathematics is the language of science, but it can mislead and deceive. Then we have statistics. Henry Miller and S. Stanley Young discuss “How Scientific Is ‘Peer-Reviewed’ Science?” in medicine. There comments apply to the effort to ban stoves using natural gas for fuel.

The annual “Energy Outlook” by BP is highly respected. Several commentators noted that in its latest report, it appears that BP is backing down from its stated goal of “beyond petroleum.”

The Biden Administration has declared a climate emergency arising from carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. It has promoted heavy subsidization of alternatives to fossil fuels, such as wind and solar and electric vehicles. Yet, regulators in the administration appear to be restricting access to the minerals needed by these alternative forms of electricity generation and for batteries.

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

Proper of Measurement: The interview of Lindzen by Jordan Peterson begins with Lindzen discussing how misleading the claim of 97% agreement among climate scientists is. There is 100% agreement CO2 is a greenhouse gas and adding it to the atmosphere is increasing warming. The question is how much? Lindzen believes that the evidence shows it will increase by a little and claiming that it is an existential threat, a threat to the existence of humanity, is absurd. The issue is climate sensitivity (the impact on temperatures from a doubling of CO2) and there is little or no evidence that the climate is highly sensitive to increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide today.

The discussion goes into the tremendous expansion of university administrations since World War II with the increase in government grants and the observation that researchers waste 30% or more of their time writing proposals for grants that are largely meaningless. For example, Lindzen states that the Quarterly Journal of the Meteorological Society of the UK once had a rule that a reviewer could reject a paper for only two reasons: 1) an overt mathematical error; or 2) lack of originality.

Today, many “scientific” journals reject papers for failure to conform to government policy or failure to agree with the political “consensus.” Lindzen discusses how the editors of journals that had published two of Lindzen’s recent papers had been fired for doing so.

This is all part of an effort to get rid of the energy sector. First it was global cooling from aerosols produced by combustion, then it was acid rain, now it is dangerous global warming caused by CO2, the one chemical that users of fossil fuels cannot avoid. Yet, it is at the heart of industrial prosperity, and ordinary people wish to live better lives. For example, when India became independent it had a population of about 200 million and needed to import food. Now it has a population of about 1.2 billion and is a net food exporter. Most of the world is not so stupid to stop emissions of CO2, which will impoverish societies.

What global climate modelers seize upon is positive feedbacks: That is how a small warming will be amplified into a greater warming. This assumption is contrary to Le Chatelier’s Principle: (“A change in one of the variables that describe a system at equilibrium produces a shift in the position of the equilibrium that counteracts the effect of this change.” Although it was first applied to chemical solutions, it can also be applied to systems.)

Lindzen asserts that to address the problems brought by the modelers, one must examine the feedbacks. (Which the Jan 21 TWTW did when discussing the new book by Tim Palmer.) There are many deficiencies in IPCC reports; it is important to focus not on minor deficiencies but attend to the central deficiency.

To Lindzen this is that climate is controlled by two regions: the tropics (30 S to 30 N) and the extratropics.

The rotation of the Earth, the Coriolis effect, and other fluid dynamics result in great differences in the effects changing greenhouse gases and other causes of climate change. The tropics stay relatively constant, in the extratropics changes are significant. Within the tropics, the greenhouse effect is significant, but relatively constant.

But what occurs between the tropics and the extratropics has little to do with the greenhouse effect. Multiple causes – temperature differences cause dramatic changes in weather; prevailing winds change with latitude. Claiming increasing CO2 will cause a significant difference is false.

Lindzen emphasizes what Al Gore gets wrong. His timing is off by an average of at least 500 years. What causes a decline in temperatures when CO2 is high? (Until we can answer that, there is no reason to assume that a period of severe glaciation will not occur in the future.) For this interesting interview, see link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

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

Who Will Pay? Planning Engineer Russell Schussler discusses the failure of wind and solar projects in Germany and elsewhere to provide reliable, affordable electricity. He writes:

“When electric utilities or electric rates are used to accomplish any public good, any cost increase falls disproportionately upon those with lesser incomes and resources. Power costs tend to function as a highly regressive tax, putting the burden on those who struggle the most and having the least impact on the wealthy. As a practicing engineer I often worried what impact our projects would have on the less fortunate. Now I fear that poor struggling grandmothers will end up paying for the ‘green’ dreams of the financially well off.

When I look at the envisioned green transition, I worry about exorbitant costs less than I used to. I’m not sure anymore what I have a sufficient understanding around the abilities of nations to incur huge amounts of costs and debt for the ‘public good.’ It’s beyond my comprehension at times. I see so many billions spent on things that seem less consequential than the grid. So sometimes I think, why not spend that kind of big money on various assorted energy projects. Maybe we can dump huge sums of public money into longshot projects and hope for the best. But I can’t help wondering who will eventually pay for it, and hoping that poor and least able among us do not end up financing ill-considered pursuits.

After discussing what has changed in his thinking over the years and argues against burdening the poor with huge energy bills, he closes by discussing “Poor Oma in Germany”

“I’m afraid the ‘green transition’ has already done great harm to many poor German grandmothers. The German Energiewende, has been described as the ‘transition by Germany to a low carbon, environmentally sound, reliable, and affordable energy supply’. Many saw Germany as a showcase for what was possible. In earlier years it has been touted as a spectacular success.  Grid concerns associated with a ‘green’ transition were often dismissed by simply declaring ‘What about Germany’. In 2017 I coauthored this article entitled The Myth of the German Renewable Energy Miracle. In 2019 after spending over $150 billion in Euros, Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Schuller noted that the expenditures ‘are in extreme disproportion to the results.’ Although a lot of wind and solar were added, since then the results of the German transition appear to me more and more disappointing with time.

“While Germany did add a lot of wind and solar, their efforts have not provided sustainable benefits and they are now are stymied by their own increased use of coal and oil. They changed a lot, but it was not foundational change. Germany’s past energy policies have created international repercussions. But it is sad enough just to note the impacts upon the German population. Energy poverty has been a major problem for many, and it is expanding to where you now see headlines proclaiming that Energy poverty increasingly affecting Germanys middle class. In Germany and other parts of Europe we are seeing increasing problems of ‘Heat or Eat’ [Links given]

“It’s a tough situation. Who pays for that expensive failure? How should Germany balance what industrial customers pay, versus what residents pay? These are challenging painful weighty decisions. If power is too expensive for businesses, the economy may be wrecked for all. But forcing the cost on those less well-off is cruel. It’s much better to not go there to such an extreme and reduce the likelihood of such problems. Maybe I was correct to assume that you just can’t print up money to run costly experiments on the grid. Costs may matter after all. Let’s make sure we don’t drive our grandmothers toward ruin by unworkable technology based on overly hopeful dreams which ignore where the money will come from if they fail.”

When President Johnson committed hundreds of thousands of ground troops into Vietnam without a strategic plan, tens of thousands in the armed forces paid dearly. Washington is committing the country to an energy transition without a strategic plan or even a proven demonstration project on what is needed. Certainly, the politicians won’t pay, so who will? See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

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

“Who Needs Actual Data?” Paul Homewood brought attention to a 2017 press release by the Met Office which stated:

“1 in 3 chance of a new monthly rainfall record in at least one region each winter.

“In the last few years several rainfall events have caused widespread flooding in the UK. In winter 2013/14 a succession of storms hit the UK leading to record rainfall and flooding in many regions including the southeast. December 2015 was similar, and Storm Desmond hit the north-west causing widespread flooding and storm damage.

“By their very nature extreme events are rare and a novel research method was needed to quantify the risk of extreme rainfall within the current climate.

“Professor Adam Scaife, who leads this area of research at the Met Office said “The new Met Office supercomputer was used to simulate thousands of possible winters, some of them much more extreme than we’ve yet witnessed. This gave many more extreme events than have happened in the real world, helping us work out how severe things could get.”

“Analyzing these simulated events showed there is a 7% risk of record monthly rainfall in south east England in any given winter. When other regions of England and Wales are also considered this increases to a 34% chance.

“Dr Vikki Thompson, lead author of the report, said “Our computer simulations provided one hundred times more data than is available from observed records. Our analysis showed that these events could happen at any time and it’s likely we will see record monthly rainfall in one of our UK regions in the next few years.”

“The authors have named this novel research method the UNSEEN* method to emphasize that this analysis anticipates possible events that have just not yet been seen.  It was also used as part of the recent UK Government National Flood Resilience Review (NFRR)+ when the Met Office was asked to estimate the potential likelihood and severity of record-breaking rainfall over the UK for the next 10 years.”

[* – UNprecedented Simulated Extremes using ENsembles [Boldface added]

According to Tim Palmer a pioneer in the Ensemble method of modeling, all models are predicting a rise in temperatures. Yet, the dominant condition of climate for the past 3.5 million years is an Ice Age with extended 100,000-year periods of glaciation and short, 10,000 years or so, warm periods. According to USGS, “Glaciers extended over much of Europe during the last ice age” including Scotland and Wales and most of England and Ireland. See links under Model Issues and https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/glaciers-extended-over-much-europe-during-last-ice-age

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

Ridiculous Mathematics: In Lectures on Gravitation, Richard Feynman wrote:

“If there is something very slightly wrong in our definition of the theories, then the full mathematical rigor may convert these errors into ridiculous conclusions.”

One area in which ridiculous conclusions frequently appear and are taken seriously is in the application of statistical methods. Writing for the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) “How Scientific Is ‘Peer-Reviewed’ Science?” Henry Miller, and S. Stanley Young expose some of the tricks used including Multiple Testing and Multiple Modeling and ‘p-hacking” where a random finding has “statistical significance.” They point out that:

“This is a significant problem for the scientific community because if published articles are unreliable, we do not really know what we think we know.

“The cause for all this cheating is simply greed — the desire of the research community to tap into the huge reservoirs of research funds, the pressure on scientists to publish or perish, and publishers of scientific journals seeking to maximize profits.”

Faulty statistics are used to support calls for banning natural gas appliances such as stoves, water heaters, furnaces, etc. For example, one statistical trick is Population Attribution Fraction (PAF) for childhood asthma. Another ACSH article states:

“The two largest PAFs are the presence of a pet, and atopy, a predisposition of allergic reactions, in the parents.”

For scientific integrity these need to be separately identified and eliminated from the study but are not. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, EPA and other Regulators on the March, and Washington’s Control of Energy

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

Beyond Petroleum? The BP “Energy Outlook, 2023” pays typical lip service to the fad for renewables. For example, under “Core Beliefs” it states:

“This year’s Outlook can be used to identify aspects of the energy transition that are common across the main scenarios. These trends help shape core beliefs about how the energy system may evolve over the next 30 years.

  1. The carbon budget is running out. Despite the marked increase in government ambitions, CO2 emissions have increased every year since the Paris COP in 2015 (bar 2020) …
  • Government support for the energy transition has increased in a number of countries, including the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act in the US. But the scale of the decarbonization challenge suggests greater support is required globally, including policies to facilitate quicker permitting and approval of low-carbon energy and infrastructure.
  • The disruption to global energy supplies and associated energy shortages caused by the Russia-Ukraine war increases the importance attached to addressing all three elements of the energy trilemma: security, affordability, and sustainability.
  • The war has long-lasting effects on the global energy system. The heightened focus on energy security increases demand for domestically produced renewables and other non-fossil fuels, helping to accelerate the energy transition.
  • The structure of energy demand changes, with the importance of fossil fuels declining, replaced by a growing share of renewable energy and by increasing electrification. The transition to a low-carbon world requires a range of other energy sources and technologies, including low-carbon hydrogen, modern bioenergy, and carbon capture, use and storage.”

It then goes into some of the more fanciful ideas such as blue and green hydrogen (as if H2 has a color), carbon capture and storage, carbon dioxide removal, etc. All designed to appease the greens who wish to destroy the fossil fuel industry, which provided the basis for modern prosperity. The fundamental problem is that there is no demonstration project that alternatives other than nuclear and hydropower can deliver affordable, reliable energy, particularly for transportation. Commentators such as Paul Homewood and Robert Bradley think that BP is not giving up on fossil fuels. It may be all an illusion until political leaders gain some degree of common sense that the general public seems to have. See links under Questioning the Orthodoxy.

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

Keep It In The Ground: An editorial in the Wall Street Journal implies that despite massive subsidies to alternative energy, particularly wind and solar, the administration does not intend to permit the US manufacture of the necessary equipment for wind, solar and necessary storage. The editorial begins:

“The Biden Administration is heavily subsidizing electric vehicles, but at the same time it is blocking mineral projects needed to produce them. Another example of this head-scratching contradiction came Thursday when Interior Secretary Deb Haaland walled off much of Minnesota’s Superior National Forest from mining.

“Minnesota’s Duluth Complex has one of the world’s largest undeveloped mineral deposits, including copper, nickel and cobalt that are needed in vast quantities for EV batteries. Ms. Haaland is assuring the deposit stays undeveloped by signing an order withdrawing more than 225,000 acres in the Superior National Forest from mining for two decades.

“The order says the withdrawal is necessary to protect ‘fragile and vital social and natural resources’ as well as the ‘traditional cultural values’ and ‘subsistence-based lifestyles’ of Native American tribes. But mining needn’t compromise these other interests, and individual mining projects must undergo rigorous federal environmental reviews.

“Ms. Haaland is dancing to the tune of green lobbyists who want to keep minerals in the ground as they do fossil fuels. She’s making their job easier by pre-emptively vetoing projects. Now federal agencies won’t have to conduct laborious environmental reviews for proposed mines, and greens won’t have to sue to block them. How politically efficient.

“Other mining projects in Minnesota, Arizona, Nevada, and Alaska have been stuck in permitting purgatory and the courts. Ms. Haaland’s Superior National Forest withdrawal sets a precedent that could expedite the process of blocking other mining projects. Call it anti-permitting reform.”

After discussing the enormous subsidies being given to processing facilities that need materials to be mined, the editorial concludes:

“The reality is that if minerals aren’t mined in the U.S., they will be extracted in countries with far less stringent environmental and labor standards. Not that this seems to bother the White House. The State Department this month pledged to help build EV battery supply chains in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia. The DRC produces more than 70% of the world’s cobalt, and Zambia is the world’s sixth-largest copper producer.

“Wouldn’t it be better for American workers and the environment to mine these minerals in the U.S.? At least the Administration is consistent on one point: It wants to keep all U.S. natural resources that could be strategic energy assets in the ground.”

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

Beyond Groupthink: The 15th Climate Change Conference by The Heartland Institute will be held from February 23 to 25, 2023, at the Hilton Lake Buena Vista in Orlando, Florida. It will feature over 40 speakers, including members of the SEPP Board of Directors, Willie Soon and David Legates. Tom Sheahen, Howard “Cork” Hayden, and Ken Haapala will address the question: “Is Climate Science Scientific?” See https://climateconference.heartland.org/

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

Number of the Week: 25%. According to the USGS the last glacial maximum occurred about 20,000 years ago and covered 25% of the Earth’s land area,

“Beginning about 15,000 years ago, continental glaciers retreated, and sea level began to rise. Sea level reached its current height about 8,000 years ago and has fluctuated ever since.”

TWTW adds that sea levels have risen very slowly over past 8,000 years. See

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-does-present-glacier-extent-and-sea-level-compare-extent-glaciers-and-global-sea-level#:~:text=The%20Last%20Glacial%20Maximum%20(LGM)%20occurred%20about%2020%2C000%20years%20ago,25%25%20of%20Earth’s%20land%20area

Commentary: Is the Sun Rising?

Solar energy

By Steve Hurley, Explaining Science, Mar 9, 2019

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