Saturday
Dec052009
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Unthreaded
Dec 5, 2009 Climate Some of the comments threads are going way off topic, so I'm setting up an unthreaded post for people who want to point to interesting stories or put forward their own theories.
Reader Comments (472)
Ocean Stored Significant Warming Over Last 16 Years - according to NOAA
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100519_ocean.html
Now call me a thick engineer if you must but when someone makes a statement like this:
“The ocean is the biggest reservoir for heat in the climate system,” said Josh Willis, an oceanographer at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and one of the scientists who contributed to the study. “So as the planet warms, we’re finding that 80 to 90 percent of the increased heat ends up in the ocean.”
It says to me that I am expected to beleive that heat prefers to migrate to the upper levels of the ocean rather than seeking equilibrium with air and land!
If this can be patented then my mug of PG in the morning will retain it's optimum temperature until the last sip has gone.
Interesting read from Monbiot.org on a report from a bunch of wonks calling themselves PIRC saying that Blighty could be a net exporter of windpower by 2050. Of course what was not mentioned that it would cost 3X more than the same capacity of nuclear etc.
Of course you don't have to scratch too deeply to realise that PIRC is a bunch of activisists based in Macynlleth, wales. Of course no relation to CAT, that well known group of Eco warriers who advise a families to huddle around the nearest LED lamp, or even better, just go to bed when it gets dark.
SDCS
What to make of this "the warmest April on record"?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250733414681958.html
Tony Blair advising Silicon Valley firm
http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2010/05/24/tony-blair-now-advising-silicon-valley-vc/
" Menlo Park, California-based Khosla Ventures is among the most active early stage investors in renewables and other alternative energy technologies. Founder Vinod Khosla, a well-known figure in the Silicon Valley technology circuit, himself was an early backer of biofuels."
EU sets toughest targets to fight global warming
Europe will introduce a surprise new plan today to combat global warming, committing Britain and the rest of the EU to the most ambitious targets in the world. The plan proposes a massive increase in the target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in this decade.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7136639.ece
@ martyn
I think that part of the headline got lost on the way to print:
EU sets toughest targets to fight global warming - but cannot afford them!
Lord B
Ah ha, Lord B, you know we can’t afford it, I know we can’t afford it most of Europe know they can’t afford it and probably the rest of the world realise its unaffordable. But we are talking…… European Commission dunderheads.
OSLO/LONDON (Reuters) - The United Nations urged rich nations on Tuesday to keep a pledge to give $30 billion to poor nations by 2012 to cope with climate change, saying it was "not an impossible call" despite budget cuts in Europe.
HHmm, so what we are trying to achieve here is to enable our children to grow up in a world without industrialisation, without jobs, without public services and if they get into debt it doesn't matter you just have to keep on spending on the frivolous things in life and all will be well.
It seems they have recently published the minutes of three additional email enquiry meetings on http://www.cce-review.org/Meetings.php
The bit I found interesting was this:
the UEA would seek to determine whether there is more information from the compromised CRU server that might still come into the public domain and which would be of relevance to the Review.
So does this mean they are not interested in data which might be relevant to the review UNLESS there is any chance it might yet come into the public domain?
Your Grace
It seems there are some benefits from coalition government after all.
"Today's vote at Holyrood – by 64 votes to 62 – now means that Scotland currently has no legally binding annual reduction targets. The annual targets were due to take effect next Tuesday, but it may take until the autumn before ministers are able to draft revised proposals able to win majority support."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/27/scottish-parliament-emissions-cuts
Spiegel has a new article "What to Do When the Earth Warms Up?" The article is primarily a photo essay on ways to cope with the devastating global warming that is soon to befall our vulnerable planet. One way is to build artificial islands for "climate refugees". Another practical recommendation has "people shrink-wrapped in plastic to separate them from an increasingly hostile environment".
Here is a challenge for skeptics: how can such a thing be parodied?
Sara
Surely this is beyond parody!
Elections are being held in The Netherlands on June 9th. Here is an interesting quote from the leader of the leading party, Mark Rutte, in Wednesday's televised debate.
New Scientist mag falls for climate spoof
Sailing ships could harvest fuel from the oceans
We read that... The ships would tow hydropower generators ... This motion would turn a crankshaft connected to a generator. The electricity this produces could then be used to split seawater into hydrogen and oxygen.
Sounds a bit complicated, and the justification...
... a roundabout way of generating electricity instead of converting wind or water flow energy directly into electricity using stationary windmills or hydroturbines," Platzer says. This will clearly lead to some losses, but he calculates that the electricity can be converted into hydrogen and back again with about 30 per cent efficiency.
The authors - both Professors - are spoofing this whole thing. It's like those round-robin emails about how fast Santa has to travel on Christmas Eve to visit every child in the world. It's just some Friday Fun. And New Scientist have bought the whole thing.
Here is a paper recently submitted to the Arxiv: "Are Uranus & Neptune responsible for Solar Grand Minima and Solar Cycle Modulation?".
If this is valid, this is BIG: Earth will be cooling for decades.
Weren't you at the Reith lecture, Bishop? Can you give your thoughts now it's been broadcast? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00sj9lh
It is widely suspected that changes in the sun's output induced the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. The changes in output were tiny though; so if the suspicions are correct, there must have been some feedback mechanism.
A possible mechanism is suggested in a recent story in the Wall Street Journal, “Mining for Cold, Hard Facts”. The mechanism is that the changes in solar output are enough to cause a slight warming in Australia and South America (and elsewhere); the slight warming is enough to increase forest fires; the forest fires produce lots of soot; the soot is dispersed and, being black, causes more absorption of sunlight. Cores from Antarctica show correlated variations in soot content, which is what suggested the mechanism.
If this is right, there are no climate models that model this correctly.
For those interested in the traditional very simple model of the greenhouse effect see section 1.3 in the online excerpt from David Andrews's book, which I think is reasonably clear. If you want an even simpler example take the limiting case of Tsw=1 and Tlw=0, so the atmospheric slab is assumed to perfectly transmit the incoming short wavelength light and perfectly absorb (re-emitting as a perfect black body) outgoing long wavelength light. In this case the solution is "obvious" as Fa=F0 and Fg=2*F0, and gives a temperature increase of 19%.
Jonathan,
This has been a recurring interest of mine over the last few months, particularly how you balance the heat flows with a semi-transparent shell surrounding a solid body. Referring back to PT 1A-1B type arguments the temperature of intervening layers change in response to the total emissivity of the system, which in this case is the earth/atmosphere system. At the moment I'm not sure I follow/agree entirely with the arguments set out in the paper cited regarding this compound emissivity.
BTW good reference, but he appears to skirt the issue of compound emissivity
SDCS
Cumbria:
A provocative thought exercise for you,
You are on a bus, some people who are on it, you know, some you don't. The driver comes down the aisle with sets of handcuffs, tells you you have a choice to put the handcuffs on, just in case you hurt yourself or someone else, or to get out of the bus.
The driver says it's going to be an interesting ride, plenty of entertainment, lots of good company, going some interesting places.
do you stay on the bus or get off immediatly?
Let's say you stay, but you notice that the driver did not put handcuffs on everyone, and those few without are wandering around. Sure, the driver is using his mirror, but he has other things to watch as well.
Do you stay on the bus or go to the front and ask to be released and get off?
Let's say that the guys who the driver left un cuffed were mostly decent enough looking people and you decided to stay, but then you notice that some really scummy looking characters have keys that they are passing around, taking their cuffs off,and they're picking other passenger's pockets, touching up the girls, and generally abusing people.
You might think that the driver and the people he left un cuffed would stop them, but they seem to be more interested in making the decent people keep their cuffs on and taking notes and making excuses for why they can't act when anyone complains.
Sound familliar?
InterAcademy Council Committee Reviewing IPCC Procedures To Hold Next Meeting in Montreal
Seeks Input on IPCC Process via Online Questionnaire
The InterAcademy Council (IAC) committee conducting an independent review of the procedures and processes of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will hold its next meeting on June 15 at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. Presentations are expected in open session by scientists with varying perspectives of IPCC assessment processes. Meanwhile, the committee has posted a series of questions to its website to offer the public the opportunity to provide input on specific steps in the IPCC process.
http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/IACIPCCMontreal.htm
SDCS, I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "PT 1A-1B", or by "compound emissivity", or what is the "paper cited". Any chance of a few more details?
Note also that the question of whether a grey-body slab radiatively coupled to the ground is really a sensible model of the atmosphere is quite different from the question of what fluxes you get in such a model.
"ASA Charged in New Climate Fakery: Greenhouse Gas Data Bogus"
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/23800
Schmidt merely repeated the errors shown in the Kiehl and Trenberth diagram (1997). The Kiehl-Trenberth graphic calls Schmidt’s “up and down” effect the ‘back-radiation’ with a heat flux. Thus we may reasonably infer that Schmidt’s shenanigans are inextricably intertwined with those of his fellow warmist climatologists, K. E. Trenberth and J.T. Kiehl who, 13 years ago, first applied the bogus “full surface energy balance equations.”
What is this all about? I find it hard to believe that NASA's climate scientists could make an error involving basic physics - and then continue to deny they had made an error.
If any BH reader with the right background has looked into this, a very brief summary would be interesting to other BH readers, I am sure.
Stott continues blogging away- his piece on the Royal Society is particularly recommended.
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Entries/2010/5/30_Global_Warming%2C_The_Royal_Society%2C_and_William_Hazlitt.html
Martin A, as far as I can tell it's complete drivel and not worth wasting time on.
I'm not sure if it has been included somewhere already but the videos of the Heartland Conference presentations are available at
http://www.heartland.org/environmentandclimate-news.org/ClimateConference4
There are a large number of excellent videod presentations that you can download some up to one hour. Includes Pat Michaels, Richard Linzden, Steve McIntyre and etc..
the link was given on Climate Audit but a lot of people may have missed the link. Is it worth repeating.
Well worth watching most of them.
“As a scientist, I want to see peer-reviewed journal articles, so I can look at procedures and data …”
—quoted in Nature
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100526/full/465412a.html
The End of an Era------ oh how I will miss the Alarmists!
The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 - 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations. Approximately 130 participants will attend of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America. About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, industry, labor, education, and communications. The meeting is private in order to encourage frank and open discussion.
My bold emphasis!
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meeting2010.html
" as far as I can tell it's complete drivel and not worth wasting time on."
Jonathan, many thanks. I read section 1.3 of the Andrews book. It makes it clear that having upward atmospheric radiation = downward atmospheric radiation is not violating any physical law (as claimed in the Climate Fakery article). The total power emitted = the total power absorbed, so there is no claim that energy is being conjured out of nowhere.
Martin, glad it helped.
Yer Grace
Your book is mentioned in this paper (the final text was under embargo until 11 June) -
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27939/1/HartwellPaper_English_version.pdf
Page 6, footnote 3 which can be found on page 37.
Found this through P Gosselin's blog.
Yer Grace
Apologies. I realise the Hartwell paper was mentioned here in early/mid May.
Restating the IPCC's reason for being
Dr R K Pachauri
As the latest meeting of the InterAcademy Council's review into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change convenes in Montreal, IPCC chairman R K Pachauri says the past year has been "momentous" for the organisation, and not always for the right reasons. In this week's Green Room, he sets out how and why the panel was established, and argues that it plays a vital role in the global climate policy debate.
I would like to start by saying that I am not deaf to those who do not agree with the scientific consensus on man-made climate change.
Nor, indeed, to those who do not agree with the findings - or, in some cases, the existence - of the IPCC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8740049.stm
From the email inquiry web site:
Publication date confirmed
The publication date for the Independent Climate Change E-mails Review report has been set for 7 July. Full details of publication arrangements will be given nearer the time.
Article from the New Scientist about the Sun's output.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627640.800-whats-wrong-with-the-sun.html?full=true
'Lockwood's latest study shows that when solar activity is low, the jet stream becomes liable to break up into giant meanders that block warm westerly winds from reaching Europe, allowing Arctic winds from Siberia to dominate Europe's weather.
The lesson for climate research is clear. "There are so many weather stations in Europe that, if we are not careful, these solar effects could influence our global averages," says Lockwood. In other words, our understanding of global climate change could be skewed by not taking into account solar effects on European weather.'
If we are not careful, these solar effects could influence our global averages, is the sort of statement that shouts out that the data has to fit the model or the data is wrong. When are we going to get back to the days of science studying the climate rather than creating it.
My interpretation of the overall comment is that there will be a reduction in European stations utilised in the dataset with more homogenisation inflence from neighbouring stations such as North Africa, Middle East and other desert regions.
How about we forego any future problems and just use one station in the middle of Nevada that fits the theory and forget about all the rest. Just a suggestion to save time and money in these days of recession.
From the don't know whether to laugh or cry department, Nature Research Highlights has this gem:
Chemistry: Potent potato power
Schoolchildren are routinely shown how to convert potatoes into makeshift batteries using copper and zinc electrodes. Haim Rabinowitch at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel and his colleagues now report a way to rev up the power output: by boiling the potatoes first.
The original article online here is even worse.
ZEROCARBONBRITAIN2030
A new report out recommending that we can all have a zero carbon society by 2030 if we follow the guidlines in the 384 page report available at:
http://www.zcb2030.org/downloads/ZCB2030.pdf
I haven't finished reading it in depth yet but certain suggestions stand out.
80% reduction in our dietary requirements from meat
50% reduction in importing foodstuffs
Arable land reclaimed from 'animal' farming to be utilised for bio-fuel production
29% of current farm land along with reduced imports would be enough to sustain the population.
All non domestic buildings to be zero carbon rated by 2016
Domestic aviation eliminated and international aviation decreased by two thirds
This is what is being proposed to the new Government to ensure a less than 2 degree rise in temperature by 2100!
The mind it does boggle.
ZEROCARBONBRITAIN2030
The report suggests that shifting to electric or battery-powered vehicles would help cut transportation energy demand by 63 percent; insulation of every building and use of natural construction materials would reduce heat and electricity requirements by 50 percent; and an 80 percent cut in consumption of beef and livestock products would drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions. The blueprint also calls for a 50 percent reduction of food imports, the replacement of short flights with rail and buses, and greater reliance on renewable power supplies. According to the report, such a shift could occur through strict penalties on carbon emissions and incentives for use of clean technologies.
That shift does not have to drastically alter lifestyles, said Rob Hopkins, founder of Britain’s Transition Towns movement and author of the study by the UK’s Centre for Alternative Technology.
Ha ha ha ha ha, it gets better and better.
Some time ago a few members/posters at this blog had the pleasure of calls and visits from the police regarding Climategate.
At least, some people believed that a crime had been committed. This morning this story appeared in Wind Concerns Ontario regarding police of The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) visiting members of Wind Concerns Ontario (WCO) to determine if a crime was being contemplated.
It makes for an interesting morning read over coffee when you realize that you are now likely the target of background searches and criminal investigations for a crime that you might contemplate in the future. I have variously seen this in fantasy and science fiction described as "Future Crime" and "Thought Crime". What more could I say?
An interesting column by Margaret Wente in today’s Globe and Mail:
“The man who’s tutoring Bill Gates …”.
Yer Grace
1. Possible to start a new 'Unthreaded'?
2. See Hans von Storch's latest Klimazwiebel posting on the IPCC Sea Level Meeting in Kuala Lumpur.
http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.com/2010/06/ipcc-sea-level-meeting-in-kuala-lumpur.html#more
Question :
In a New Zealand newspaper today there was an article quoting figures for reduction in green house gases for UK agriculture ( 21% from 1990 - 2008) .I e-mailed the journalist to ask where the figures came from -- it was on the UK Farmers Union website quoting the Department of Energy and Climate Change figures. In it they also said overall figures for the UK are a 19% reduction in this time period. Does this seem realistic to you and if so what's the panic all about -- they seem to be very impressive figures to me. ( NB. I'm not a AGW supporter ).
Spat-tacular
Delingpole, North and Monbiot. Quite a good scrap.
Must have a cartoon...
Judithgate looks like a nice sunny story
Yer Grace
The University of Western Australia (Perth) is holding a free lecture tonight, Monday 28 June, on 'Climate Change and Scepticism' in the Social Sciences Lecture Theatre.
From the University's website
"Some of The University of Western Australia's top scientists will discuss the current debate about whether climate change is real and answer questions at a public forum on Monday, 28 June.
Speakers include Fellow of the Royal Society, Premier's Research Fellow and coral reef expert, Professor Malcolm McCulloch, who will examine the scientific consensus: data from a warming planet.
Australian Professorial Fellow Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, from UWA's School of Psychology, will discuss the perils of ignoring consensus in science and Professor Kevin Judd from UWA's School of Mathematics and Statistics, an expert in climate modelling, will look at the fallacies associated with denial and "sceptical" junk science.
Dr Volker Oschmann, a senior German government official currently doing research at UWA's Centre for Mining, Energy and Natural Resources Law, will also discuss economic growth in a clean energy future.
After the four speakers, audience members will be able to ask questions and discuss the issues with a panel of experts."
http://www.news.uwa.edu.au/201006152574/business-and-industry/climate-change-scepticism-under-spotlight
A Quadrant Online article on the lecture has the heading "Climate of McCarthyism".
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2010/06/climate-of-mccarthyism
Any WA readers going?
Date: 26/05/10
Type: Written submission
Number: 0103
Author: various
Independent Climate Change Email Review, May 26, 2010.
“Any fair evaluation of CRU scientists’ conduct must take into account the conditions
under which they have been forced to work. Sharing information to promote good-faith scientific debate is one thing. Laboring under constant, intrusive oversight by hostile groups who harass scientists and interfere with their ability to carry out their research is another matter entirely. If CRU scientists felt besieged, it’s because they were – including, we now know, illegal spying on their private communications. Their emails and actions must be considered in this light.
Finally, we note that several of our own submissions to the ICCER were held up or
redacted out of concern that someone might claim that something in them was defamatory. It does not appear that a similar filter was applied to the numerous submissions that falsely accuse legitimate climate scientists of dishonesty and misconduct. We hope you are able to remedy this inconsistency”.
RAY BRADLEY, MALCOLM K. HUGHES, MICHAEL E. MANN, MICHAEL OPPENHEIMER.
Pass me the bucket please!
It seems there is another 10 submissions published on the ICCER site if it is of interest.
Martyn: Indeed it is. I will look at them later. I wonder why they are posted so late after the deadline.
I checked out the new ICCER submissions at http://www.cce-review.org/Evidence.php?order=e_date .
Only four after the Bradley et al. submission. I didn't find anything interesting. There's a submission by McIntyre, but he published it already at
http://climateaudit.org/2010/06/10/supplemental-submission-to-muir-russell/
Mike Haseler's submission was the same as that submitted to the Parliamentary (Willis) report earlier this year. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387b/387we32.htm
I hadn't read it at that time, and while I don't think there is any novelty to its content, I did find his phrase "Weather of Mass Destruction" very amusing.
Oh, and his footnote #7: (ibid.)
"7. Strictly speaking the opposite of man-made warming is non-man-made and not natural the difference being the possibility aliens-caused warming." Can't you just imagine that line being delivered in a Monty Python sketch?
CONGRATULATIONS
The Global Warming Policy Foundation has criticised the Independent Climate Change Email Review for a lack of openness and transparency in its inquiry. In response, the GWPF has announced that it has commissioned its own investigation into the way the three Climategate inquiries have been set up, how they were conducted an how they arrived at their conclusions.
The investigation will be conducted by Andrew Montford. Andrew Montford is the author of The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science, a history of some of the events leading up to the release of emails and data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. The findings of the report will be published at the end of August.