Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace


The Daily Mail is onto the latest Climategate leaks.

University staff vetted BBC scripts, used their contacts at the Corporation to stop sceptics being interviewed and were consulted about how the broadcaster should alter its programme output.

But can this really be right?

Last night Prof Hulme denied he was trying to deny space to sceptics, saying: ‘What I wanted to “starve” at source was “this type of reporting” – in which the important and complex issues raised by climate change are reduced to an argument between two voices representing different positions on climate science, as though there is one right and one wrong answer to climate change.’

Far from wanting to narrow it, he said, he had tried to widen debate about the issue for years.

I am sure there are numerous emails which shred this bit of self-delusional defence. Not least the story from

Amongst those involved in corruption of peer review are Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Jim Salinger, Tom Wigley, Barrie Pittock, Mike Hulme + others

Nov 27, 2011 at 8:33 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

The Telegraph reports that Chris Huhne is still making grand gestures with taxpayers' money. Do we read into this that he has dreamed up a scheme that also benefits the insurance industry?

The UK is set to pour up to £1 billion of taxpayers money into helping African countries fight climate change.

Among the projects to be funded will be schemes to help African farmers insure their crops against flooding and drought while other projects include installing solar power in rural villages

Dr Benny Peiser, director of the The Global Warming Policy Foundation, the sceptical think tank set up by former chancellor Nigel Lawson, said: "I am very cynical about this climate fund idea.

"This funding is not about adaptation that will help African people, but about forcing useless technology on these countries."

Nov 27, 2011 at 8:21 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

The Independant covers the same story Rich nations accused of climate-change 'bullying'

Britain and other rich countries are using aid money as a lever to bully developing countries over climate change, according to a new report by an anti-poverty pressure group.

Murray Worthy, of the World Development Movement, said: "The US, UK and EU are using the same strong-arm tactics to bribe developing countries that we saw at Copenhagen. Abandoning their previous commitments to provide finance to help developing countries deal with climate change, they are now saying finance will only be available to countries that agree to a new deal that effectively abandons the Kyoto treaty."

The report accuses countries such as America and Britain of using "unfair, undemocratic and even deceitful means to skew the climate change negotiations in their favour".

Do I get a sense that articles that would never have seen the light of day in certain broadsheet newspapers are now being published with increasing regularity? Almost as if the underlying agenda which has changed.

And what is this "new deal that effectively abandons the Kyoto treaty"?

Nov 27, 2011 at 8:12 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

The Guardian reports how Western nations 'used bullying tactics' at climate talks

Leading figures in western governments have been accused of using bullying tactics with developing countries during climate change summits.

One diplomat from the tiny Polynesian island of Tuvalu said at the time: "Can I suggest that it looks like we are being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our people and our future? Mr President, our future is not for sale."

Nov 27, 2011 at 8:05 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Somebody kindly linked to a post on the climategate emails that I have been looking at, and I have made an update. I have put the first half of the narrative in order, and added more commentary. I hope that it makes a better read than the original:

It is the story of a plot by the 'team' to get Chris de Freitas sacked for allowing 'contrary' articles to be published in journal of Climate Research. In addition to key member of the team being involved, Pachauri is copied in as cc in many of the most outrageous comments. He does nothing to stop his out of control 'leading scientists'.

Nov 27, 2011 at 3:03 AM | Unregistered CommenterNZCLimate

Chinese Solar Industry Goes Belly Up,

“Demand has not lived up to expectations and pricing has collapsed over the last three quarters,” Aaron Chew, an analyst at Maxim Group LLC in New York, said today in an interview. “Most of the major cell, wafer and module manufacturers are poised to report four quarters in a row of losses and this is just the first one.”

Good job Mr Huhne is around to throw them a life line.

Nov 27, 2011 at 1:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterDung

Following on from the post by Justin Ert, I found a report on American Thinker which links the fall of Enron and the sovereign debt problems of Greece, Portugal and Spain to wind farm subsidies.

The voices of Kamaoa cry out their warning as a new batch of colonists, having looted the taxpayers of Spain, Portugal, and Greece, seeks to expand upon their multi-billion-dollar foothold half a world away on the shores of the distant Potomac River. European wind developers are fleeing the EU's expiring wind subsidies, shuttering factories, laying off workers, and leaving billions of Euros of sovereign debt and a continent-wide financial crisis in their wake. But their game is not over. Already they are tapping a new vein of lucre from the taxpayers and ratepayers of the United States.

Nov 27, 2011 at 1:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterDung

Peter B
I have wondered about the same source and magnitude, and have not seen much on it, only local UHI. Surely there must be a coalesced residual UHI impact on the northern hemisphere.

Very certainly, the rather trivial recent warming is predominantly a northern hemishere phenomenon. I am intrigued primarily by the possibility of a natural solar driven geomagnetic moderated link, as also for the so-called ozone hole in the Antarctic, but I suspect climate science has not matured sufficiently into integrating astrophysical research to do much more than speculate.

Nov 26, 2011 at 10:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

@ Peter B - Out of interest I did some rough calculations on this a couple of years ago. My conclusion was that globally the 'anthropogenic heat output' (as I think I labelled it) was totally insignificant compared with the insolation we receive from the Sun. However, irrc, I did conclude that over major population centres (e.g. London, Toyko etc), the heat energy from buildings, cars, factories etc, after a day or two of windless conditions, would in theory lead to an increase of 5-6C compared with surrounding sparsely populated areas. (This isn't far off what some UHI studies have shown, although UHI is also a function of land use change e.g. concrete/asphalt as much as heat from anthropogenic sources). Hence I concluded that in densely populated areas such as the south-east of England and other parts of the world, when winds are low or non existant, the effect from AHO could be not just local but regional. A friend in academia I discussed it with suggested I did a paper on it but I suspect someone may have already done so, and I in any case I have a business to run and a family to feed.

Nov 26, 2011 at 9:54 PM | Unregistered Commenterlaopgus

I was wondering if someone had any views on the following.

I'm a chemical engineer, and I've made some rough, back-of-the-envelope calculations to investigate whether the 20th-century warming - especially in the northern hemisphere - could not be due to the heat generated from industrial development - that is, from the same origin is the increased CO2 emissions (correlation). That is, the heat generated directly from combustion engines, power stations, industrial plants, etc.

It's not a straightforward calculation - there are factors like the varying heat capacity of the atmosphere, the percentage of how much of the energy generated is actually lost to the atmosphere as heat (rather than used as mechanical or electrical energy, etc) - but it seems to be that at least the order of magnitude is about the same - that is, the northern hemisphere has gotten a bit warmer since the 19th century because, well, there have been a lot more engines, power stations, lights etc on - and that introduces heat into the atmosphere.

Is anyone aware of any study on this?

Nov 26, 2011 at 7:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter B

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>