Thursday, March 31, 2011

Global warming forecast significantly reduced, US gov. NSF scientists say-CO2 'self-correcting'

"'Global implications for climate research', says US gov."

"Antarctic ice breakup makes ocean absorb more CO2," UK Register, Lewis Page

"Some cheerful news on the climate change front today, as US government boffins report that ice breaking off the Antarctic shelves and melting in the sea causes carbon dioxide to be removed from the environment. This powerful, previously unknown "negative feedback" would seem likely
  • to revise forecasts of future global warming significantly downwards.

The US National Science Foundation (NSF) which funded the iceberg study, describes the results as having "global implications for climate research".

"These new findings... confirm that icebergs contribute yet another, previously unsuspected, dimension of physical and biological complexity to polar ecosystems," says Roberta Marinelli, director of the

  • NSF's Antarctic Organisms and Ecosystems Program.

A team of NSF-funded scientists examined the effects on an area of the Weddell Sea of a large (20 mile long) berg moving through, melting as it went and diluting the salty sea water - also adding key nutrients carried from the land. They found that after the iceberg had passed,

  • levels of CO2 had plunged and

much more chlorophyll was present. Chlorophyll is the substance in green plants which lets them suck in nasty CO2 and emit precious life-giving oxygen: in the Weddell Sea it was present in phytoplankton, tiny seagoing plantoids

  • which are thought to account for half the carbon removed from the atmosphere globally.

The scientists say that more and more icebergs are set to be found in the seas around the Anatarctic as more ice breaks off the shelves attached to the peninsula which reaches up from the polar continent towards South America. This should mean more phytoplankton

  • and thus less CO2.

The iceberg team consider that the increased number of bergs coming from the western Antarctic is the result of warming temperatures in the region, though recent research from British boffins has suggested that in fact other factors may be in play - at least in the case of the Pine Island Glacier, one of the major sources of sea ice in that area.

If the phytoplankton-boosting effect of the bergs is as big as the NSF appears to be suggesting, however, it would seem that any carbon-driven temperature rise

  • could be at least partly self-correcting.

Increased iceberg shedding would seem likely to be seen mainly or only around the western peninsula: antarctic sea ice shelves elsewhere are actually growing, not shrinking, and at such a rate as to outweigh the peninsular losses. The past three decades have seen the south-polar ice sheets grow by 300,000 square kilometres overall.

The NSF study was originally published in the journal Deep Sea Research Part II (subscription required). It was flagged up more recently in Nature Geoscience's top picks (again, subscription link). The NSF also has a
via Climate Depot

Sunday, January 16, 2011

How 'climate change' works: transfer billions of middle class American taxpayer dollars to rich guys

Americans are starving while their living in luxury government gives billions upon billions of their tax dollars
1/13/11, "The great 'climate change' taxpayer ripoff of 2011," "Unless I am seriously mistaken or misinformed, the rate of unemployment in the U.S. remains high and the foreclosure rate on homes is approaching the level of the Depression years." (Note, it has officially surpassed the Great Depression, and is heading for worse, -ed.) "Two major bond rating companies, Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s just warned that, if the federal government doesn’t stop spending and borrowing, America’s Triple-A highest ranking will be down-graded.

Along with all the other things in the federal budget wish list for 2011 are millions to be spent on climate change (actually, billions ed).

It helps to understand how obscene this is if you pause to consider (1) there is not one damn thing anyone can do about climate change, (2) climate change has been researched and studied since the late 1980s, enough to fill an entire wing of the Congressional Library to hold all the reports, and (3) the only climate change Americans really need to know about is what the weather will be tomorrow.

With a tip of the hat to and the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s (AAAS) report on “research development, fiscal year 2011”, let me share just a few of the ways
  • the Obama administration intends to squander your money.
The magic number is $2,481,000 and it represents specific amounts devoted to "climate change" research or other programs requested for the 2011 budgets by an alphabet soup of federal agencies that include the Environmental Protection Agency, NASA, Department of Energy (DOE), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Science Foundation (NSF), Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Department of Agriculture (DOA).

The figures cited all come from chapter 15 of the AAAS report and you can access it via

NOAA’s total budget request is for $5.6 billion, an increase of 17%. It intends to devote $437 million for climate research funding, an increase of $77 million over last year.

Over at the National Science Foundation (NSF), its budget of $7.4 billion (that’s a lot of science!) includes a request for $480 million for Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, $765.5 million for NSF’s Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability program and $19 million for a joint program with DOE “to promote education in clean energy research. An additional $10 million would fund
  • “Climate Change Education” in the nation’s schools.
  • It’s not education, it’s indoctrination.
The Department of Energy which currently is projecting that permits for deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico won’t be forthcoming until,
  • maybe, June.
DOE seems oblivious to the fact that the price of oil is set to hit $100 a barrel and higher costs will hit everyone driving anything using gasoline or diesel fuel. Fuel oil prices will rise and any business that uses oil or anything made with oil
  • will be forced to raise its prices. In short, everything.
DOE, however, is in no hurry and, of course, the Obama administration is dead set against ANWR or off-shore exploration and extraction of the BILLIONS of barrels of crude oil projected to exist.
  • However, DOE is set to receive $28.4 billion in 2011 and
that includes $4.6 billion for research and development in its Office of Science and
  • $2.4 billion for energy research and development.
Its Office of Biological and Environmental Research is devoted to atmospheric science, including “climate modeling”, which would be allocated $627 million. Last time I checked, oil, coal, and natural gas were
  • not found in the “atmosphere”, but rather were extracted from deep within the Earth.
The entire global warming hoax was and is based on “climate modeling”, all of which consistently found that the Earth was warming at an alarming rate. Except that the Earth is NOT warming. It has been cooling since 1998.
  • And DOE intends to waste $627 million on more modeling.
It is worth noting that the most sophisticated models of the National Weather Bureau still cannot predict with any confidence what the weather—not the climate—will be next week.

The Environmental Protection Agency, gearing up to regulate all utilities that produce carbon dioxide and all other industries that do the same,
  • has zero authorization to do so under the Clean Air Act.
It is CO2 that is designated by the warmists as the chief culprit for the global warming that is NOT happening.

Despite this, EPA has requested $169 million “to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”, with $43.5 million in new funding for
  • “regulatory efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” through the Clean Air Act.
And it wants $22 million for its Global Change Research Program. It is time to shut down this rogue agency before it totally destroys the economy.

Even the Department of Agriculture wants $159 million for “climate change research”, an increase of 42% and $179 million for renewable energy, to “help farmers.” Farmers are heavy users of fossil fuels to operate the machinery needed to till, plant, and harvest crops. They need reliable energy, not "renewable" energy.

The Recovery Act of 2009 has managed to blow more than $600 million on climate change research and
  • billions on greenhouse gas mitigation.
This is just the tip of the ‘climate change’ rip-off in terms of billions wasted or soon to be wasted on “research” that can only be deemed an obscene diversion of taxpayer money that will
  • not benefit a single taxpayer,
  • generate any new jobs except for those in government agencies,
and further bankrupt a bankrupted nation about to have its credit rating reduced.
The “scientists”, “regulators”, and “administrators” feasting off this federal largess should be handed a shovel to earn a living on one of those “shovel ready” projects we were told about.

Beyond that, if Congress was really intent on cutting back on spending, they could begin by defunding or shutting down the
  • Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and all the other federal grifters with their snouts rooting around in the climate change trough."
  • ####

article by Alan Caruba

  • via Climate Depot

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Large dust particles missed by climate models act as 'warm blanket,' trap heat near Earth, PNAS study

12/30/10, "Climate Models Miss Effects of Wind-Shattered Dust," Wired Science, Lisa Grossman

"Clumps of dust in the desert shatter like glass on a kitchen floor. This similarity may mean the

  • atmosphere carries more large dust particles than climate models assume.

Dust and other airborne particles’ effect in the atmosphere is “one of the most important problems we need to solve in order to provide better predictions of climate,” said climate scientist Jasper Kok of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. Other researchers suspect current models also neglect a large fraction of

  • the climate-warming dust that
  • clogs the skies after dust storms.

Most climate models use dust data from satellites that measure how many particles of different sizes are suspended in the atmosphere. These measurements reveal an abundance of tiny clay particles roughly 2 micrometers across (about one-third the width of a red blood cell), which can reflect sunlight back into space and cool the planet.

But satellites may be missing larger particles, called silts, which don’t hang around in the air as long. Silts up to 20 micrometers in diameter can

  • act as a warm blanket to trap heat inside the Earth’s atmosphere.

To figure out how much clay and silt is actually kicked up from the Earth’s deserts, Kok turned to a well-studied problem in physics: how glass breaks.

Cracks spread through breaking glass in specific patterns, creating predictable numbers and sizes of glass shards. The final distribution of small, medium and large glass fragments follows a mathematical law called scale invariance.

  • “It shows up all across nature, from asteroids to atomic nuclei,” Kok said. “It’s really just beautiful.”

In a paper published Dec. 28 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Kok showed that the physics of how dust clumps break apart

  • is similar to glass breaking....

Kok’s theory suggests that dust storms produce two to eight times more silt-sized particles than climatologists previously thought. Neglecting the boost in particles suggests that climate models, and even short-term weather models for dusty regions, are somewhat off. Until climate scientists better understand how dust changes over time, however, Kok said it’s tough to gauge the effects.

“I thought it was a breakthrough, a real original idea,” said atmospheric physicist Charles Zender of the University of California at Irvine, who was not involved in the new work. Similarities to fractured glass may show up in other earth science systems,

  • like earthquakes or glacier calving, he added.

“Whether it’s submicron and invisible to the human eye, or as large as Greenland, it doesn’t matter. It’s the same property.”

Dust expert Tom Gill of the University of Texas at El Paso thinks Kok’s theory is elegant, though it will have to be backed up by lab and field experiments. If it holds up, however, “it has the potential to make some real improvements in modeling how dust and dust-like things move around and disperse and fall out of the air. That has implications for everything

  • from global climate to volcanoes to hurricanes,” he said. “I’m very encouraged by it.”"
  • ####
From AlFin, 1/2/2011, "Climate Models Flying Blind, Deaf, Dumb"

"Top leaders of the US and the EU are prepared to send their respective economies into a fatal tailspin on the basis of climate pseudo-science. Obama and his fellow cargo-cultists across the pond are willing to destroy the futures of their nations on the claims and declarations of climate modelers whose models omit the most salient movers of climate.

Clouds and water vapour, for example, may be the most crucial determinants of how the climate adapts to genuine climate forcings -- yet climate modelers haven't a clue how to deal with these crucial factors.
is likely the primary determinant of melting of the Arctic ice and high latitude northern glaciers, yet climate models have not been savvy about modeling this crucial driver of melting.

Just as crucial in the overal scheme of climate is
Certainly recent winters are much colder with more snowfall than modelers have been predicting. And to top it off, a recent paper claims that
Finally, there is dust. Climate models seem to miss larger dust particles called "silts" altogether. How can they expect to get anything right when they keep missing the most important drivers of climate, and emphasise things like CO2 which may actually be confounders, or "pseudo-drivers?"
Kok’s theory suggests that dust storms produce two to eight times more silt-sized particles than climatologists previously thought. Neglecting the boost in particles suggests that climate models, and even short-term weather models for dusty regions, are somewhat off. Until climate scientists better understand how dust changes over time, however, Kok said it’s tough to gauge the effects. _Wired
Dust, soot, clouds, ocean cycles, cyclic solar activity, water vapour, and more. Climate models even do a poor job with aerosols, as recent analyses are discovering. If climate models over-emphasise CO2 and under-emphasise the real drivers of climate, what are they good for -- other than
  • providing a basis for carbon taxes, cap and trade, and the strangulation of energy supplies and industry for the US and the EU?
Remember, if energy supplies are choked off, the underlying economy gets strangled. Startups and new technologies go elsewhere. Job prospects shrivel and die.
  • Ever more people are unable to make mortgage payments or get away from dependency on government.
That seems to be what Obama and leaders of the EU want for their constituencies. But what do the people want? More debilitating cargo-cult
  • pseudoscience from their witch-doctors in chief,
or a fair chance to succeed in the world?"

via Tom Nelson

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Spanish government slashes subsidies for solar projects, industry sues Spain

To Mr. Springsteen: You eventually run out of other people's money. Most people from New Jersey know this.

11/23/10, "The Spanish government has launched a new regulatory framework that will result in subsidized tariffs for ground-mounted solar energy projects

  • drop 45% this year, killing future investment in the trade,

  • which industry leaders expect will be frozen in the next few years.

We expect new ground-mounted projects will be paralyzed because there won't be any new investments," says Tomas Diaz, communications director of a trade lobby AsociaciĆ³n de la Industria Fotovoltaica (ASIF). "Last year, many projects were cancelled. Banks did not provide financing because of the regulatory uncertainty and electricity companies' growing campaign against the sector," he said,

  • adding that utilities are working to bolster subsidies for their own renewable projects, most of which involve wind power.

Indeed, the Spanish solar industry has seen investment plunge in the past two years with only 100 MW of generating capacity having been installed in 2009 and 2010 - compared to 2,700 MW in 2008.

In addition, approximately 75,000 jobs have been lost with countless firms moving abroad to find new growth opportunities.

The industry is so frustrated that it has sued Spain's government, arguing that that new regulation is way too harsh and even "unconstitutional" as the tariff cuts are

  • expected to apply to both new and existing projects,

  • meaning the industry may have to make retroactive payments.

A recent study showed that Spain stands to lose €4.9bn until 2020 as well as 40,000 "quality and stable" jobs because of the new law. However, if it where to change the legislation and boost tariffs, 1000 - 1500 MW of solar generating capacity could be installed annually, resulting in as much as €14bn in proceeds. Proceeds would come from the reduced need to import energy from neighboring countries,

  • CO2 reduction benefits, higher tax revenues, labor social security contributions

  • and other energy distribution and transport savings.

Cutting renewable energy spending

The new decree is on the brink of becoming law, with the Spanish congress expected to approve it in mid- or late November.

Spain has needed to curb spending as it was hit with one of the biggest recessions ever to rock the country in its long history. The government wants to cut renewable subsidies, which reportedly

  • cost public coffers €6.2bn last year.

Of this, €3bn went to the solar power industry, which meets just 2% of Spain's power needs, according to government representatives. Moreover, there are claims that

  • the industry has engaged in "fraudulent" management of state subsidies, which it disputes.

Madrid's decision is also the result of the sector's rapid development in recent years, in which 3,800 MW of generating capacity was installed, nearly half the 2020 target of 8,673 MW. As of the first half of 2010, 39% of Spain's electricity came from renewable sources, bringing the country very close to its 2020 goal of 47%.

  • "We can certainly do 4,000 MW by 2020," Diaz says, adding that not everything in the law is bad for the sector. Indeed, he said the tariff cuts for rooftop projects still make them profitable and he expects investment to increase sharply next year for these projects.

Rooftop projects will see 35 MW of capacity installed this year but that should surge to 250 MW in 2011 and 260 MW in 2012 as investors pour into the space, where there already are a flurry of planned projects, observers say. The new law will see tariff drop 5% for small installations and 25% for large ones. Regarding ground-mounted projects, Diaz says these projects may become profitable again in a few years when solar system prices fall strongly.

Moving abroad

Still, many companies whose business depends on ground-mounted projects will need to look for opportunities elsewhere. And given, their know-how and technological expertise, this should be feasible, industry participants say. These firms are expected to firm up markets in

"Approximately 50% of our companies are present in the foreign markets so ground-mounted companies are going to do whatever they can to grow even more there now," Diaz points out, adding that

  • most Spanish firms are currently operating in Italy, Czech Republic, France and the U.S.

While Spain is expected to see 100 MW of solar power installed this year (down from a meager 70 MW in 2009), France, Italy and Germany are forecast to add 500 MW, 1,500 MW and 7,000 MW, respectively.

  • In addition to the lawsuit, which the government would not comment on, ASIF continues to pressure the government to be easier on the sector. After all, Spain has Europe's highest insolation rates.

Greenpeace is highly critical of the government. "Spain's government is making a historical mistake by deterring investments in our country's photovoltaic industry because the economic, employment and CO2 emission-reduction benefits will now go to other countries."

"Solar power falters in Spain: Is this lights out?" Photovoltaics World, 11/23/10, Ivan Castano, contributor, shares this article with the Renewable Energy World network.

via Tom Nelson

Monday, October 25, 2010

Humble representative Obama consumes 570 rooms at Taj Majal, scolded us not to drive SUV's or have thermostat above 72, other countries would be mad

US citizens have been softened up to the point they're guilty they're even alive, collapse in tears if they use a piece of paper, go to a ball game, or drink a glass of water. They are well-primed to hear
  • Obama's message that "other countries" aren't going to allow us to be as bad as we have been, eating so much, driving so much. They've really had it.
If we give them more millions of our dollars and live in a gutter, they still won't like us but we deserve it. Obama has said this over and over, and no one questions him.
"Pitching his message to Oregon's environmentally-conscious voters, Obama called on the United States to "lead by example" on global warming, and develop new technologies at home which could be exported to developing countries. From "Obama camp spies end game in Oregon," AFP, 5/16/08:
"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added."...
post via Tom Nelson, "The first green president travels to India"

P.S. It's wonderful the Yankees didn't get to the World Series, because it would have been selfish. Discretionary driving of course must be cut out completely, which means ball games. As Obama said, other countries won't allow it. So it's good fans won't be selfish and go to more games. ed.

Taj Majal Hotel, photo via Weasel Zippers

Sunday, October 17, 2010

$615,000 US taxpayer dollars to brainwash children in Massachusetts with global warming propaganda, see internet as enemy

"“In today’s media world of twitter, blogs, and sound bites,

“We aim to change this""...(with tax dollars taken from chump American tax payers)

science of global climate change. The award was announced today at a climate change “Teach-In” at UMass Lowell.

“Engaging students in the development of new and different ways to communicate the science of climate change is key to a deeper understanding of this critical global issue,” "...

  • (That's their new thing. If they just explain this giant fraud better, we'll drink the Kool Aid). ed.

(continuing): "said Chancellor Marty Meehan. “As a university,

  • we are committed to cutting our carbon footprint.

We are making strides by constructing LEED-certified buildings, using electric cars and installing solar energy systems on four campus buildings.”

The project “Climate Change Education: Science, Solutions, and Education in an Age of Mediawill get underway this month.

It will integrate climate change science with video to create a unique and stimulating approach to global climate change education. Students will gain an understanding of

  • cutting- edge science and of the media through which they access information.

Congresswoman Niki Tsongas, who kicked off the Climate Change Teach-In event today at UMass Lowell, said “I want to congratulate Chancellor Meehan and university faculty for leading this unique initiative. Expanding understanding about climate change is the first step in finding solutions to its harmful impacts. Not only is tackling climate change critical for our planet’s future,

  • but the clean energy technology that allows us to do so holds tremendous economic opportunity for our country and the Fifth District, in particular, which has one
  • the highest concentrations of clean energy employers in New England.”

Under the grant, videos produced by students will incorporate their peers’ questions, concerns, and perspectives on climate change. Students will learn to ‘write’ in the language of video and, through this experience, they will gain a deeper and more sophisticated literacy in a medium that is emerging as a major means of communication."...

  • (Ah, yes, that pesky internet. They can't stand the internet, because they don't control the message there. They want to control the discourse on global warming. With trillions of dollars at stake, I guess so. ed.)

continuing: “In today’s media world of twitter, blogs, and sound bites,

  • confusion about the scientific reality of climate change frequently dominates the discourse in classrooms and communities,

said Associate Prof. Juliette Rooney-Varga who is the lead researcher on the project and an expert on the ecological consequences of climate change.

“We aim to change this by integrating climate change science with the expressive power of video to create a unique and stimulating approach to global climate change education.”

  • The expected outcomes of the project include new climate change courses at UMass Lowell, the development of a high school summer video program and professional development training for teachers. UMass Lowell students will have an opportunity to apply for paid summer internships working with Cambridge high school students during a climate change video production summer program.

UMass Lowell is partnering with Cambridge Educational Access TV, TERC, Sage Fox Consulting Inc., Carleton College and filmmaker Randy Olson."...

  • ####
  • Great that NASA taxpayer funds are being used for the purpose of manipulating the message for the greatest crime against mankind in history--because they're fed up that they don't have the power they had before the internet.
It has nothing to do with science-this giant criminal fraud has been up and running with or without any 'science.' Organized crime has already made billions. More billions of US tax dollars have funded the so-called 'science.' How many 'scientists' would be out of jobs if they said there was no global warming? How many millions would colleges lose? Soros is a firm believer in taking whatever amount of time it needs while spending whatever amount of US taxpayers' own money is needed to get the job done. Congress doesn't care. By using up every available unit of time and space in a culture over decades (taxpayer funded), allowing only one message into the mind, well you can convince everyone to drink the Kool Aid. Those who don't will be isolated by ridicule. They start brainwashing children at the age of 5, continue throughout college and you've got them. The problem is, many of us don't like the fact that our country has been stolen from us via this and other scams, and we plan to get it back. ed.