Seen elsewhere
Twitter
Support

 

Buy

Click images for more details

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
Thursday
Aug212014

UKIP target Climate Change Act

UKIP seem to be perservering in their opposition to the UK's insane climate and energy policies, according to an article in Prospect magazine.

The party is also committed to the abolition of the Climate Change Act, which he estimates costs Britain £18bn a year. “We are looking to shrink the Department for Energy & Climate Change,” he says, adding that, “there are elements of BIS [Business, Innovation and Skills] that we are looking into.” The plans to shrink these departments will be independently reviewed, though “not by the OBR [Office for Budget Responsibility], even though they are likely to tear it to pieces anyway.”

Thursday
Aug212014

In retwardian, "grossly misleading" means "correct"

Further to this morning's post about Bob Ward's New Statesman attack piece against Matt Ridley, take a look at this. In his article, Ward said the following:

...Ridley's article suggested that “there is no global increase in floods”, and “there has been a decline in the severity of droughts”. Both statements were grossly misleading. Climate change is increasing global average temperature, but its impact on extreme weather differs across the world. Some regions are becoming wetter while others are becoming drier.

Ridley's claim about drought was based on a paper that did the rounds of the internet a few months back. The key graph is this one:

Click to read more ...

Thursday
Aug212014

Oi, Lord Stern! Your boy took one hell of a beating

Bob Ward has one of his tedious disinformation pieces at the New Statesman blog, yet again attacking Matt Ridley.

Bob is getting something of a pasting in the comments.

Wednesday
Aug202014

Belgium asks "Can I borrow your power cable?"

Reader "Wellers" writes with an update from Belgium on the energy crisis there.

Yesterday there was more bad news regarding the two 1GW power stations already shut down in Belgium. They are probably shut down for good.

Predictably, the Energy Minister has come on air to try to allay the public’s fears. He appears to have a “cunning plan”, as Baldrick would say. Here is a quick translation I made from today’s De Standaard newspaper:

“There is an extra power station, but the cable is missing”

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Aug202014

The science of flooding

Anthony has an interesting report about a new paper that finds that increased flooding is mostly due to increased exposure - in other words that we are building homes closer to rivers than before. Flooding is therefore yet another area in which an impact from the warming at the end of last century is yet to be demonstrated.

Is there any justification for the kind of ambulance chasing exhibited by the Committee on Climate Change, for example this little gem from Lord Deben?

I hope floods will cause pause among dismissers. Can't forget "some woman Slingo" It revealed contempt they have for science.

Click to read more ...

Tuesday
Aug192014

On another planet - Josh 287

 

Click image for larger version

Terraforming Mars would be such good value - see here (about this blog post).

Cartoons by Josh

Tuesday
Aug192014

Paleoclimate, the movie

America's PBS has commissioned a documentary about paleoclimate science which will air at various times over the next few months depending on where you live. Entitled Taking Earth's Temperature, it features lots of familiar names, including Jonathan Overpeck (will he discuss getting rid of the medieval warm period?), Caspar Ammann (will he talk about Monte Carlo analysis?), Darrell Kaufman (will he be the right way up?), Bette Otto-Bleisner and Thomas Stocker.

Click to read more ...

Tuesday
Aug192014

Terraforming Mars

Andrew Lillico has put a rather brilliant blog post up at the Telegraph about terraforming Mars. His case is that the money we intend to spend on mitigating small amounts of climate change are vastly greater than the cost of terraforming Mars and would come to fruition on similar timescales.

There are two standard objections to such terraforming. First, it is said to be too expensive, altogether, to be plausible. Second, it is said to require too long a timescale to be plausible.  Both of these objections appear decisively answered by climate change policies and indeed energy policies in general. Between now and the 2035 alone, global investment in energy and energy efficiency (in many cases with a many-decades payback period) is estimated at about $40 trillion, of which $6 trillion is in renewables and $1 trillion in low-carbon nuclear. We are willing to spend many trillions on projects that could take over a century to come to fruition.

The post has only been up for a few minutes, but the reaction on Twitter has been hilariously splenetic and entirely devoid of any substance. Get yourself some popcorn.

Tuesday
Aug192014

Climate scientists' views on aerosols

A few days ago I linked to the new Verheggen (John Cook) et al paper, a survey of opinion among climate scientists. A tweet today reminded me of something I had noticed in skimming through the paper which is rather interesting. It concerns climate scientists' views on feedbacks, forcings and climate sensitivity.

At first glance the survey results on ECS are unremarkable, with the modal position being right in the middle of the official IPCC range, centred on 3°C. However, recall that if GCM output is to correctly hindcast the observations, there is a balance to be struck between climate sensitivity and aerosols: to the extent that sensitivity to carbon dioxide is high and therefore warming is large, you have to have a big cooling effect from aerosols in the twentieth century to prevent the GCM hindcast of warming outpacing what happened in the real world.

Click to read more ...

Tuesday
Aug192014

Diary dates, fracking edition

Some more dates for your diary.

On Wednesday at 8pm, BBC Radio 4 is going to look at fracking, in the first of a new series that looks at intractable differences and sees where common ground can be found:

Most discussion formats set out to define opposing points of view and offer the listener a choice between them - maximum disagreement, minimum consensus. Agree to Differ is Radio 4's new discussion programme where the aim is to give listeners a completely new way to understand a controversial issue and to decide where they stand. Often when it comes to debates in these contested areas the protagonists spend more time attacking and caricaturing each other than they do addressing the heart of the issue. Agree to Differ will use techniques from mediation and conflict resolution to discover what really divides them - and just as important - if there's anything they can agree on. The mediator is Matthew Taylor the chief executive of the RSA and subjects for this first series will be fracking, vivisection and the future of Jerusalem.

Matthew Taylor has deeply "right-on" views, and indeed had the RSA doing research into individual carbon allowances - what I call "carbon communism" - at one time. Nevertheless I have always had the impression that he favours open debate, so I hold out considerable hopes for this programme.

Then on Friday we have a debate on fracking at the Edinburgh Book Festival (tickets here). This will feature a geologist, Zoe Shipton of the University of Strathclyde, against Richard Dixon of Friends of the Earth. Shipton seems to be thoroughly mainstream, both on global warming and on fracking (she also features in an edition of Life Scientific here). Friends of the Earth need little introduction of course, being one of the most disreputable of the green groups. I'm looking forward to the outrage from the sci-policy people about a scientist being given equal billing with a pressure group.

Monday
Aug182014

Heroic projections

Updated on Aug 18, 2014 by Registered CommenterBishop Hill

The Responding to Climate Change website has one of the perennial "climate change impacts on exotic south seas island" stories today. This time it's about the Solomon Islands.

A small community in the Solomon Islands is preparing to relocate entirely to a neighbouring island, as the pressures of climate change threaten to overwhelm the town and its inhabitants.

As usual, the link to climate change is a complete fabrication, as the author of the piece notes that the plan was prompted by the 2007 tsunami.

I particularly enjoyed this bit:

The Solomon Islands, along with other small island nations in the Pacific, are among the most vulnerable to climate change. Since 1993, the sea level around the islands has been rising by about 8mm every year – three times faster than the global average.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Aug182014

Imperical - Josh 286

Monday
Aug182014

Spot the troll - Josh 285

There's been a bit of closet trolling recently, a pretence of being polite but blatantly not, and generally trying to derail posts. Fortunately we have a helpful cartoon for that.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Aug182014

Cooling off at the Grantham Institute

A reader writes:

I had reason to visit Imperial College last week. I must say, Imperial is a lot sleeker than it was when I did some research there in the 1980s: some funky modern buildings among the concrete and a raised plaza with tables to sit in the sun.

As we sat there waiting for our contact to collect us, I noticed the Grantham Institute For Climate Change. It's based in the Sherfield Building, next door to the faculty that I was visiting. There was a big green sign over the entrance, but no indication of how much space they occupied, or on how many floors. It all looked very impressive, though I couldn't help wondering why they didn't name themselves the Institute AGAINST Climate Change.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Aug182014

The cost of wind

An article in the Australian Financial Review takes issue with the Abbott government's plans to scale back subsidies for the renewables industry. The counterargument goes that renewables doesn't actually add very much to the cost of an electricity bill, but I was interested in the graphic that accompanied the article, which breaks down the typical Australian electricity bill.

As far as I can see, nearly every single component cost of the bill is increased by renewables.

  • Conventional power stations are forced to ramp their output up and down to compensate for mometary drops in wind, making them much less efficient. Worse, if wind power is subsidised sufficiently to get a lot of turbines connected to the grid, the economics of conventional power stations can be sufficiently adverse to prevent any new investment in new power stations that would take advantage of price reductions in other forms of energy and would also bring more efficient and therefore cheaper power to consumers. In the UK, this has led to the capacity market, in which all market participants will be subsidised.
  • Wind is a dispersed form of energy generations, requiring prodigious quantities of power lines to connect the turbines to the grid.

Only the costs of the retail end are not obviously inflated by renewables.

It would be interesting to know how much of the 52% represented by network costs is inflated by the need to connect wind turbines to the grid.