ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING NEWSLETTER 24 MAR. 2014
This week's edition includes: If you need older URLs contact George at [email protected]. Please Note: This newsletter contains articles that offer differing points of view regarding climate change, energy and other environmental issues. Any opinions expressed in this publication are the responses of the readers alone and do not represent the positions of the Environmental Engineering Division or the ASME. George Holliday
This week's edition includes: 1. ENVIRONMENT A : SENATOR MARKEY HOSTS 100+ INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATORS PUSHING FOR CLIMATE LEGISLATION More than 100 legislators from 50 countries came together at the United States Senate to show growing momentum for climate change action in countries around the world ahead of the pivotal 2015 climate talks in Paris. In the high-level opening session of the summit, hosted by Senator Edward J. Markey (D-MA), senior officers of the United Nations, the World Bank, and the amassed legislators received the findings of the 4th edition of the GLOBE Climate Legislation Study, the world's most comprehensive audit of climate legislation (covering 66 countries, together responsible for 88 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions). The study, produced in partnership with the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics, shows that nearly all countries have (foolishly GHH) passed, or are advancing, legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase their resilience to the impacts of climate change. The 700-page study reviews almost 500 pieces of legislation that have been passed in the 66 study countries. It shows that 61 out of 66 countries have passed laws to promote domestic, clean sources of energy and 54 have legislated to increase energy efficiency (and raised energy cost GHH. The former legislation reduces reliance on imported fossil fuels, thereby mitigating exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices and increasing energy security. The latter legislation reduces costs and increases competitiveness. 52 of the 66 countries covered by the study have developed legislation or policies to improve their resilience to the impacts of climate change. The study makes it clear that the legislative response thus far is not yet sufficient to limit emissions to a level that would only cause a two degree Celsius rise in global average temperature (in want time period? GHH) the agreed goal of the international community. (the CO2 concentration continues to increase and the Earth’s temperature continues to decrease GHH). However, it also makes clear that the cumulative effect of the advances in national legislation outlined by the study is the creation of a strong foundation on which a post-2020 global deal can be built. Domestic legislation is establishing the institutional frameworks and policies to measure, report, verify, and manage emissions. The ambition of these policies and laws can be increased as countries experience the co-benefits of tackling climate change and discover that the costs are manageable. A 45-page summary and the complete study may be viewed at http://www.globeinternational.org/studies/legislation/climate. Country-specific excerpts are available by clicking on the map which also appears on the above-referenced link.
B. HOUSE VOTES TO PREVENT EPA POWER PLANT RULES Following up on previous articles in Capitol Update regarding Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed rules on power plant emissions, the House of Representatives voted on March 6th to block U.S. EPA's plans to limit power plant carbon emissions. Passed by a vote of 229-183, the measure would prevent the EPA from finalizing its proposal to require carbon capture and storage technology for all new coal-fired power plants and would make rules for existing power plants contingent on congressional approval. The bill, H.R. 3826, would require the agency to replace its September proposal for future power plants with a new one based on widely deployed technology and to wait for Congress to set an effective date for an existing power plant rule. The White House has said the president would veto if the bill if it came to his desk. In a statement Tuesday night, the Office of Management and Budget noted that Obama last year "directed [EPA] to work with states, utilities, and other stakeholders to develop standards to end the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from power plants". The new power plant proposal is open for public comment through May 9, and EPA is set to propose guidance for existing power plants by June 1. The existing power plant rule is due to be finalized by June 1, 2015. The legislation is expected to encounter resistance in the Senate
C. KERRY MAKES CLIMATE CHANGE A 'TOP-TIER DIPLOMATIC PRIORITY’(BUT, NO SUPPORTIG DATA INCLUDED) Secretary of State John Kerry, deeming climate change a “top-tier diplomatic priority,” has decided to make the controversial topic the subject of his first policy initiative and is instructing U.S. emissaries worldwide to push the agenda. “Protecting our environment and meeting the challenge of global climate change is a critical mission for me as our country's top diplomat,” Kerry wrote in his Policy Guidance, which was released Friday and marked his first since becoming secretary in February 2013. Kerry is pressing his case despite widespread, scientific disagreement on the issue -- particularly the argument that burning fossil fuel for energy has sent global temperatures on a permanent, upward trend, increasing natural disasters like hurricanes and monsoons. “The scientific facts are coming back to us in a stronger fashion and with greater urgency that ever before,” Kerry told diplomats and other State Department employees before laying out his seven-point directive, which largely calls for expanding and improving agreements with other countries on such related issues as “greenhouse gases" and “pollutants.” However, two of the seven directives address the issue of carbon emissions as related to the use of coal and other fossil fuels -- domestic energy sources that President Obama has pointedly tried to curtail as part of the country’s overall energy policy. In addition, Kerry told agency officials to try to "mobilize and leverage billion of dollars of funding" to transform energy economies. And he told them to promote efforts to “limit public incentives for high-carbon energy production and fossil fuels,” which suggests cutting tax breaks for the coal and other industries, something the administration wants to do while increasing them for wind, solar and other so-called “green energy” initiatives. The State Department did not respond to a request to fully explain what Kerry meant in the directives. That Kerry made climate change -- or “global warming” -- his first policy initiative comes as no surprise, considering he and fellow Democrats have rallied around the concept and just weeks before the policy announcement, he urged residents in Jakarta, Indonesia to take action or face drastic consequences, including devastating floods. “It’s not an exaggeration to say to you that your entire way of life that you live and love is at risk,” said Kerry, who also suggested climate change was “the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.” However, his renewed push comes in the face of sharp criticism, led by Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain. "Why should he talk about climate change when we have got 130,000 people in Syria killed?" McCain said on Phoenix radio station KFYI. He also argued Kerry should redirect his efforts, since, he said, the administration has so far failed in negotiations on the Syria crisis, Iran's nuclear program and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Just this week, Senate Democrats including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, showed their solidarity on making climate change a priority with a 15-hour talk-a-thon on the issue on the chamber floor. The roughly 30 members of the so-called “climate cause” took shifts talking about the issue in a mostly deserted gallery from Monday night until early Tuesday morning. “I have not paid them a dime nor will I,” a defiant Johnson told FoxNews.com. “I will go bankrupt if I have to fighting it. My wife and I built [the pond] together. We put our blood, sweat and tears into it. It was our dream.” But Johnson may be in for a rude awakening. The government says he violated the Clean Water Act by building a dam on a creek without a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Further, the EPA claims that material from his pond is being discharged into other waterways. Johnson says he built a stock pond -- a man-made pond meant to attract wildlife -- which is exempt from Clean Water Act regulations. The property owner says he followed the state rules for a stock pond when he built it in 2012 and has an April 4-dated letter from the Wyoming State Engineer’s Office to prove it. “Said permit is in good standing and is entitled to be exercised exactly as permitted,” the state agency letter to Johnson said. But the EPA isn’t backing down and argues they have final say over the issue. They also say Johnson needs to restore the land or face the fines. Johnson plans to fight. “This goes a lot further than a pond,” he said. “It’s about a person’s rights. I have three little kids. I am not going to roll over and let [the government] tell me what I can do on my land. I followed the rules.” Johnson says he was “bombarded by hopelessness” when he first received the administrative order from the EPA. He then turned to state lawmakers who fast-tracked his pleas to Wyoming’s two U.S. senators, John Barrasso and Mike Enzi, and Louisiana Sen. David Vitter. The Republican lawmakers sent a March 12 letter to Nancy Stoner, the EPA’s acting assistant administration for water, saying they were “troubled” by Johnson’s case and demanding the EPA withdraw the compliance order. “Rather than a sober administration of the Clean Water Act, the Compliance Order reads like a draconian edict of a heavy-handed bureaucracy,” the letter states. The EPA order on Jan. 30 gave Johnson 30 days to hire a consultant and have him or her assess the impact of the supposed unauthorized discharges. The report was also supposed to include a restoration proposal to be approved by the EPA as well as contain a schedule requiring all work be completed within 60 days of the plan's approval. If Johnson doesn’t comply -- and he hasn't so far -- he’s subject to $37,500 per day in civil penalties as well as another $37,500 per day in fines for statutory violations. The senators' letter questioned the argument that Johnson built a dam and not a stock pond. “Fairness and due process require the EPA base its compliance order on more than an assumption,” they wrote. “Instead of treating Mr. Johnson as guilty until he proves his innocence by demonstrating his entitlement to the Clean Water Act section 404 (f)(1)(C) stock pond exemption, EPA should make its case that a dam was built and that the Section 404 exemption does not apply.” The authority of the EPA has recently been called into question over proposed rule changes that would redefine what bodies of water the government agency will oversee under the Clean Water Act. The proposed changes would give the agency a say in ponds, lakes, wetlands and any stream -- natural or manmade -- that would have an effect on downstream navigable waters on both public land and private property. “If the compliance order stands as an example of how EPA intends to operate after completing its current ‘waters of the United States’ rulemaking, it should give pause to each and every landowner throughout the country,” the letter states. For now, the matter remains unresolved. Johnson says he’s not budging and there’s been no indication from the EPA they will withdraw the compliance order. Regardless of the outcome, Johnson says his legal fight with the government agency is a teachable moment for his kids “This is showing them that they shouldn’t back down,” Johnson said. “If you need to stand up and fight, you do it.”
D. WYOMING WELDER FACES $75,000 A DAY IN EPA FINES FOR BUILDING POND ON HIS PROPERTY By Barnini Chakraborty All Andy Johnson wanted to do was build a stock pond on his sprawling eight-acre Wyoming farm. He and his wife Katie spent hours constructing it, filling it with crystal-clear water, and bringing in brook and brown trout, ducks and geese. It was a place where his horses could drink and graze, and a private playground for his three children. But instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, the Wyoming welder says he was harangued by the federal government, stuck in what he calls a petty power play by the Environmental Protection Agency. He claims the agency is now threatening him with civil and criminal penalties – including the threat of a $75,000-a-day fine.
2. HEALTH A MUMPS - USA: (OHIO) UNIVERSITY STUDENTS Date: Fri 7 Mar 2014 Source: WOSU, NPR News report [edited]
CPH medical director Doctor Mysheika Williams Roberts said the majority of the students who have mumps report receiving their childhood vaccinations.
"The mumps component of the MMR vaccine has traditionally been known to be 80-90 percent effective, so it's not unusual," Roberts said, for some people to contract the disease. "And when they've had other large outbreaks of this size or larger at college campuses, we have seen a considerable number of cases who were vaccinated." Roberts expects the number of cases to increase. She said at this time all students are recovering at home.
Mumps causes swelling of salivary glands and flu-like symptoms. It can lead to infertility in men, and women can have ovarian swelling. The disease also can lead to viral meningitis.
Communicated by: ProMED-mail
3. SAFETY A. NOTHING OF INTEREST
4. TRANSPORTATION. A. HEARING HIGHLIGHTS SHARP KEYSTONE XL DIVISIONS By Jennifer A. Dlouhy WASHINGTON — The fight over Keystone XL moved to the Senate on Thursday, as fans and foes of the pipeline battled over its link to climate change, the economy and U.S. security. Little was resolved during a two-hour Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the issue that only served to underscore the sharp divisions over TransCanada Corp.’s $5.4 billion project. University of Alberta energy policy professor Andrew Leach described it as a “largely fact-free debate.” Leach said both sides were “peddling complete falsehoods,” even as they were “calling for people to base their decisions on the facts.” Debates erupted about humanity’s link to climate change, with Karen Harbert from the Chamber of Commerce dodging a question about whether human activity contributed to the phenomenon. And Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., ended a tense exchange with former NASA climate scientist James Hansen by asserting that “the science is far from settled.” Senators also struggled with the final destination of diluted bitumen and Bakken crude that would flow through the pipeline linking Alberta with the Cushing, Okla., hub and, ultimately, giving it passage to Gulf Coast refineries. The gasoline, diesel and other products produced from refining the Canadian crude could easily be sold to customers around the globe. But there are greater restrictions to exporting both American oil — which is widely banned — and foreign-origin crude, which requires Commerce Department approval. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said he was introducing a bill to bar oil carried by the pipeline from being exported. He sponsored similar legislation while in the House. The State Department is weighing whether Keystone XL is in the national interest, a determination that wraps in economic, environmental and security concerns. Hansen, the climate scientist whose concerns about Keystone XL unlocking Alberta’s oil sands helped spur the environmental community’s fight against the project, used the hearing to make the case for a tax on carbon. He called it a “conservative solution” to the climate challenge, unlike more complicated “cap and trade” proposals that would impose limits on carbon emissions as well as systems for exchanging credits to emit the greenhouse gas. “Fossil fuels appear to the consumer to be the cheapest energy” because health and climate costs aren’t factored in, Hansen said. But a carbon tax would “make us honest” by adding those costs normally borne by the public “to the fossil fuels where they belong.” Harbert, president of the chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy, argued that the pipeline would mean jobs and a stable supply of oil from a North American ally — and would translate into fewer carbon emissions than alternative modes of transporting the Canadian crude. “If you are in support of the environment, you are in support of the pipeline,” she said. California billionaire activist Tom Steyer also released an analysis by the London-based not- for-profit think tank Carbon Tracker Initiative finding that Keystone XL is essential to unlocking a large volume of Alberta’s oil sands. That bucks the State Department’s conclusion in January that the project is unlikely to make a significant difference in the amount of bitumen harvested from the oil sands, given rail and other alternatives for getting that hydrocarbon to market.
COMMENTS: A. THE WEEK THAT WAS: 2014-03-15 (MARCH, 15 2014)
Challenging the Orthodoxy: Last week, TWTW linked to two new papers that challenge the climate science as represented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2013 Assessment Report (AR5), particularly the Summary for Policymakers. TWTW discussed “Bounding GHG Climate Sensitivity for Use in Regulatory Decisions” by The Right Climate Stuff team (TRCS), which found that if governments did nothing to restrict carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the upper bound of temperature increase by 2100 is 1°C above today’s temperatures, and may be significantly less. This calculates to a warming of about 1.8°C since 1850, well below the contrived 2°C that IPCC supporters and some politicians claim must be prevented. In short, drastic, economically destructive emissions controls are not justified. Also, the TRCS team states that the correct metric is the transient climate sensitivity (the effect of current atmospheric CO2) and not the equilibrium climate sensitivity used by the IPCC and its followers. The latter fails to account for the ongoing absorption of CO2 by the biosphere. In effect, the process used by the IPCC calculates what will happen if a doubling of CO2 happened overnight. This week, TWTW hits some of the main points of the second paper written by Nicholas Lewis and Marcel Crok, “A Sensitive Matter: How The IPCC Hid The Good News On Global Warming”, and some of the criticisms of this paper by the climate establishment. Similar to the TRCS team report, Lewis and Crok rely on surface data, not the more comprehensive and rigorous satellite data, which covers more than 30 years. IPCC uses surface data to reach its conclusions. Lewis and Crok emphasize that the full report of Working Group I, the scientific section, mentions the possibility that the earth’s climate is not is as sensitive to CO2as stated in the Summary, but it does not adequately discuss the sensitivity. Lewis and Crok assert the recent studies show a far lower sensitivity to CO2 and to the cooling effect of aerosols (droplets and fine particles in the atmosphere). These findings contradict the climate models. The models have a high cooling effect for aerosols offsetting a high warming effect for CO2 and enhanced atmospheric water vapor. If Lewis and Crok are correct, then the low end of the IPCC range of warming of 1.5 to 4.5°C from a doubling of CO2 would be appropriate, or, perhaps, even too high. Further, the IPCC report failed to give a best estimate for climate sensitivity. It may be that a best estimate based on empirical data would be 2°C, or less, while most models show about 3°C or more. If a doubling of CO2 produces a warming of 2°C or less, then all the effort to calculate dire consequences for warming becomes largely meaningless. With this report, the TRCS team report, and the NIPCC report, the public has strong reasons to question the rigor of the IPCC reports and its followers. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, http://www.therightclimatestuff.com/ , and http://nipccreport.org/reports/ccr2a/ccr2physicalscience.html. ************* Push Back: As expected, the climate establishment is reacting harshly to the Lewis and Crok report. Among the strange assertions from the climate establishment was that Lewis and Crok place more weight on studies using observational data rather than on model analysis. As long as climate science is a physical science, the focus of effort should be on the data from observations, and not analysis of climate models. Also, Lewis and Crok were accused of “cherry picking” ,an all-too-familiar accusation against those who engage in hypothesis testing using data. For 35 years, the climate establishment has failed to narrow the range of its values of climate sensitivity of 1.5 to 4.5°C and it will continue to fail to narrow this range until the climate establishment adopts procedures of weeding out climate models that fail to successfully forecast, or predict, the future. Lewis and Crok provided something that the climate establishment has failed to provide. Another objection was that the reported sensitivity was still within range the IPCC reports, thus the paper is consistent with the IPCC and means little. This criticism ignores that fact that the low-end estimate of 1.5°C does not indicate any danger to humanity from warming. But, the high end estimate of three times that warming, 4.5° C, should be a matter of significant concern. A paper by Drew Shindell of NASA-GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) states that: “Here I analyze results from recent climate modeling inter-comparison projects to demonstrate that transient climate sensitivity to historical aerosols and ozone is substantially greater than the transient climate sensitivity to CO2.”Shindell uses models to support models, rather than use observations to support models, which is a major issue if climate science is an empirical science. Further, as Anthony Watts points out, Shindell is a public employee, yet his study is pay-walled, hidden from the public. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy and Questioning the Orthodoxy. ************* Solar Irradiance: The only natural cause for climate change discussed by the IPCC in its Summary for Policymakers is change in Solar Irradiance, chiefly ultraviolet and visible light. The IPCC dismisses solar irradiation as a major cause of 20th century warming and considers its effect as very small. A new paper based research from Cardiff University is titled: “Sun's energy influences 1,000 years of natural climate variability in North Atlantic.” The paper suggests that low solar irradiance promotes frequent and persistent blocking of the westerly winds that may have contributed to the cold European winters of the Little Ice Age. In Climate History and the Modern World, HH Lamb discussed the possibility of wind pattern variation as a possible cause of the severe cold periods in the Little Ice Age. See links under Science: Is the Sun Rising? ************* Tipping Point? Europe may be at a tipping point, not the type discussed in climate science, which seems to be unrelated to physical science. Europe’s tipping point, or points, relate to the questioning of “green energy” policies and the opposition to hydraulic fracturing of dense shale to extract natural gas. P. Gosselin reports that Sigmar Gabriel, Chairman of the socialist SPD Party and Vice Chancellor of Angela Merkel’s coalition government wrote on his Facebook that Germany and all of Europe is facing a huge challenge from the high price of electricity as compared to the USA. Germany and Europe face deindustrialization. The governments must think about how to reduce state-induced burdens on industry. The second tipping point is gas from shale. The EU Parliament voted to impose more stringent rules of extraction of oil and conventional natural gas, but specifically excluded gas from shale from these rules. Russia’s take-over of Crimea seems to have energized some politicians into thinking that natural gas production is not the most undesirable of activities. Of course, "The Greens believe there is already sufficient evidence to ban fracking, but ensuring informed permit decisions through the environmental impact assessment procedure must be the absolute minimum," Sandrine Belier, environment spokeswoman for the European Greens, said. The Greens have yet to back up their words with action. See links under Energy Issues –Non-US ************* Hydrocarbon Revolution: Much has been written about the revolutionary developments in extraction of oil and gas from shale, and from other formations. But techniques such as fracturing, hydraulic fracturing, directional drilling, have been used for decades. What is really new is the high technology of supercomputers and other technology including precise sensors. See link under Oil and Natural Gas –the Future or the Past? ************* Additions and Corrections: Last week, TWTW presented an analysis of wind power in Germany that showed the 2012 production to be 17% of installed capacity. TWTW suggested EIA may wish to re-analyze its estimate of productive capacity of 34% (now 33%). Reader George Taylor, Director of Palmetto Energy Research, pointed out the 2013 USA annual average capacity factor was about 32% and that the USA has some of the world’s best resources for wind, after South Australia. However, the capacity factor varies by season and region. Also, capacity factor is meaningless by itself and becomes meaningful with a given costs. Taylor emphasized that unreliable (non-dispatchable) wind is a poor competitor with reliable sources of electrical generation, such as gas, coal, and nuclear. In the absence of hydro generation, wind fails to move developed countries beyond fossil fuels. Taylor drew attention to a study he co- wrote on the hidden costs of wind power. As always, TWTW appreciates readers who make additions and corrections. See link under Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind ************* Number of the Week: $7,140,000 per hour. Tom Steyer, a wealthy contributor to the Democratic Party promised party leaders $100 Million in campaign contributions for the 2014 election if he could see action in fighting climate change. Twenty-eight Senators gave him 14 hours of speeches from the Senate floor on the imagined horrors of global warming/climate change. This works out to be about $7,140,000 per hour. Now we have the going rate for renting the Senate floor, including 28 Senators. See links under The Political Games Continue. http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2014/TWTW%203-15-14.pdf
B. NIAGARA FALLS BECOME NIAGARA POPSICLE Niagara Falls came to a freezing halt last week, becoming the latest casualty of this winter’s historic cold. Six million cubic feet of rushing water per minute was no match for the bitter March temperatures that froze the water in place. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572681/Niagara-Falls-comes-frozen-halt-AGAIN- subfreezing-temperatures-freeze-millions-gallons-water-normally-flow-Falls.html
C. CALIF. CARBON REGS WOULD CAUSE SPIKE IN PRICES AT THE PUMP, CHEVRON EXEC SAYS A bill that would regulate carbon emissions from automobiles in California would increase the cost of gasoline in the state, leaving fuel distributors with no choice but to pass the burden on to consumers, said Michael Wirth, Chevron's executive vice president for downstream and chemicals. "It's a cost, frankly, that Chevron can't absorb. No matter how big and successful we are, we can't absorb that cost. We'd have to pass that on to consumers," he said. http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/03/12/chevron-california-idINL2N0M81FN20140312
EDITOR’S NOTE: The figures below show the CO2 concentration constantly increasing, but the Earth’s temperature decreasing since about 2000 AD. I see no dependence of increased temperature on increased CO2 concentration. But, I see the probability of increased cost of fuel with decreased concentration of CO2. GHH
D. DOCUMENTARY: HOW THE GLOBAL WARMING SCARE BEGAN Posted on March 13, 2014 by Anthony Watts Here is an entertaining and well researched video documentary from my friend John Coleman at KUSI-TV about the history of the Keeling Curve and its founder. A great scientist named Roger Revelle had Al Gore in his class at Harvard and the Global Warming campaign was born. Revelle tried to calm things down years later, but Gore said Revelle was Senile and refused to debate. John Coleman documents the entire story and shows how our tax dollars are perpetuating the Global Warming alarmist campaign even though temperatures have not risen in years. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/13/documentary-how-the-global-warming-scare- began/#more-105107
E. AN ARTICLE AND STUDY FROM 1974 SUGGESTS GLOBAL COOLING WOULD CAUSE MORE EXTREME WEATHER Posted on March 13, 2014 by Anthony Watts Steve Goddard tips me to this article in the Canberra Times on May 16th, 1974: SUPPORT FOR A THEORY OF A COOLING WORLD It has some interesting claims in it that sound much like climate change claims made today. Apparently they detected large albedo changes via satellite, with a 12% increase in snow and ice in the Northern Hemisphere that started in 1971, and continued through 1974 when this article was published: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/13/an-article-from-1974-suggests-global-cooling- would-cause-more-extreme-weather/#more-105083
F. MODELLING AEROSOL-CLOUD INTERACTIONS CORRECTLY (11 MAR 2014) We’ve yet a long, long way to go before it can be done. According to the authors of this study, “fully resolved, global, multiyear simulations are not likely to become feasible for many decades.” And this analysis of the situation makes one wonder if the policy cart is being pushed way before the horse, when it comes to pushing for such drastic CO2 emission reductions that are continually promoted in order to prevent what may eventually be found to actually be no problem at all. In a recent Perspective piece in Science, Rosenfeld et al. (2014) write that "aerosols counteract part of the warming effects of greenhouse gases, mostly by increasing the amount of sunlight reflected back to space." However, they note "the ways in which aerosols affect climate through their interaction with clouds are complex and incompletely captured by climate models." And as a result, they indicate "the radiative forcing (that is, the perturbation to Earth's energy budget) caused by human activities is highly uncertain, making it difficult to predict the extent of global warming," citing Anderson et al. (2003) and Stocker et al. (2013). So what's new? For one thing, the four researchers report "recent advances have revealed a much more complicated picture of aerosol-cloud interactions than considered previously," and they say "further progress is hampered by limited observational capabilities and coarse-resolution models." For another, they acknowledge "little is known about the unperturbed aerosol level that existed in the preindustrial era," noting "this reference level is very important for estimating the radiative forcing from aerosols," citing Carslaw et al. (2013) in Nature. Also holding up progress is the fact, as Rosenfeld et al. put it, that "understanding of the formation of ice and its interactions with liquid droplets is even more limited, mainly due to poor ability to measure the ice-nucleating activity of aerosols and the subsequent ice-forming processes in clouds." And in this regard they say "improved observational tests are essential for validating the results of simulations and ensuring that modeling developments are on the right track." But they state that what they call "a major challenge" in this area is the fact that "the most important aerosol nucleation region is at the bottom of a cloud, which is obscured by the rest of the cloud if measured from above." And so it is no surprise that Rosenfeld et al. conclude "fully resolved, global, multiyear simulations are not likely to become feasible for many decades." Yes, that's right - many decades. And this analysis of the situation makes one wonder if the policy cart is being pushed way before the horse, when it comes to pushing for such drastic CO2 emission reductions that are continually promoted in order to prevent what may eventually be found to actually be no problem at all.
Reference Rosenfeld, D., Sherwood, S., Wood, R. and Donner, L. 2014. Climate effects of aerosol-cloud interactions. Science 343: 379-380
Additional References Anderson, T.L., Charlson, R.J., Schwartz, S.E., Knutti, R., Boucher, O., Rodhe, H. and Heintzenberg, J. 2013. Climate forcing by aerosols - a hazy picture. Science 300: 1103-1104. Carslaw, K.S., Lee, L.A., Reddington, C.L., Pringle, K.J., Rap, A., Forster, P.M., Mann, G.W., Spracklen, D.V., Woodhouse, M.T., Regayre, L.A. and Pierce, J.R. 2013. Nature 503: 67-71. Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.K., Tignor, M.M.B., Allen, S.K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V. and Midgley, P.M. (Eds.). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Archived 11 March 2014
G. MONCKTON’S LETTER TO THE ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY REGARDING ASSISTANT PROFESSOR LAWRENCE TORCELLO Posted on March 14, 2014 by Anthony Watts Earlier, I had mentioned Assistant Professor Lawrence Torcello’s despicable climate ugliness and offered some links to addresses on where to complain to. Monckton took the lead on that. I urge others to write such factual and courteous letters.
14 March 2014 The Provost and Senior Vice-President for Academic Affairs Eastman Hall Rochester Institute of Technology New York, New York, United States of America [email protected], [email protected] Sir, Breaches of Principles of Academic Freedom (Policy E2.0) and of the mission statement of the Institute by Assistant Professor Lawrence Torcello Principle of public law relied upon The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States applies to all. It says: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/14/moncktons-letter-to-rochester-institute-of-technology- regarding-assistant-professor-lawrence-torcello/#more-105184
H. MODELING EUROPEAN TEMPERATURES: CMIP5 BIASES AND UNCERTAINTY (12 MAR 2014) In light of the fact that the parameters evaluated in this study were rather basic - almost mundane, in fact - it is surprising to find that the latest and greatest in GCMs did not come through with flying colors. According to Cattiaux et al. (2013), "recently, modeling groups have provided an ensemble of new simulations for various future [CO2] concentration scenarios, within the framework of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5)." And they thus take it upon themselves "to document the performance of this new generation of GCMs in simulating present-day features of European temperatures." In this self-imposed task, Cattiaux et al. evaluated 33 GCMs that participated in the CMIP5 project, based on comparisons they made between various model output parameters for the period 1979-2008 and corresponding real-world observations. In doing so, the three researchers report that (1) "on average, CMIP5 models exhibit a cold bias in winter, especially in Northern Europe," that (2) "they over-estimate summer temperatures in Central Europe," that (3) they predict "a greater diurnal range than observed," and that (4) "in winter, CMIP5 models simulate a stronger North Atlantic jet stream than observed." In light of the fact that the parameters evaluated by Cattiaux et al. were rather basic - almost mundane, in fact - it is surprising to find that the latest and greatest in GCMs did not come through with flying colors. Reference Cattiaux, J., Douville, H. and Peings, Y. 2013. European temperatures in CMIP5: origins of present-day biases and future uncertainties. Climate Dynamics 41: 2889-2907
I. INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS
Web Version | Update preferences | Unsubscribe Like Tweet Forward
Exclusively on InsideClimate News, This Year's Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting Climate Change Showdown in Florida Governor's Race Florida, the most vulnerable state in the country to climate change, faces a key election this November that could have significant ramifications for its ability to cope with the challenge of rising seas and intensifying coastal storms. Read more.
N.Y. Embraces Plan to Climate-Proof Its Power Grid New York regulators are requiring the state's biggest electric utility to armor the grid against all sorts of sweeping global warming impacts that could black out the nation's financial capital and disrupt services like cell phone networks and water and gasoline supplies. Read more.
The Best Source of Daily News on the Emerging Clean Economy:
U.S. Propane Shortage Provides Lessons For Debate Over Oil and Gas Exports As the nation charges toward energy independence, many Americans learned an important lesson this winter: Just because the country is awash in domestic fuel doesn't mean it will be there when they need it most. Read more.
Youth Climate Activist Believed Kidnapped in Ukraine A Ukrainian youth climate activist was reportedly apprehended by Russian military forces on Sunday, Mar. 9, while trying to enter Crimea, the autonomous Ukrainian republic that has been under siege by Russia since late last month. Read more.
Eyeball A Dozen Headlines Every Morning and You're Good to Go:
Please Follow Us on Facebook and Twitter Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!
Top Stories from Around the Web Today's Climate U.S. President Obama, EU Leaders to Stand Together on Climate Change Draft (Reuters) Senate Dems Stage All-Nighter to Wake Up "Stubborn" Climate Deniers in Congress (The Hill) Another Firm That Evaluated Keystone For State Department Had Ties to TransCanada (Huffington Post) U.S. Nuclear Agency Hid Concerns, Hailed Safety Record as Fukushima Melted (NBC News) Ohio Fracking Operations Halted Near Site of Small Quakes (Columbus Dispatch) In Fracking, the Energy Business Gets Neighborly (Wall Street Journal) For China, an Oil Sands Investment That Can't Be Blocked (Globe and Mail) Breaking News U.S. Agrees to Allow BP Back Into Gulf Waters to Seek Oil (New York Times) New York County Issues Moratorium on Expansion of Crude Oil Processing (Reuters) Wyoming High Court Reverses Ruling on Fracking Fluids Disclosures (Casper Star- Tribune) Two Dozen Arrested in Philly Oil Pipeline Protest (AP) New Ozone-Destroying Chemicals, Which Are Also Potent GHGs, Found in Atmosphere (Guardian) U.S. Govt Creates Incentives to Rebuild Flood-Hit Coastal Homes, Over and Over (New England Center for Investigative Journalism) Clean Economy Wire Indiana Senate Votes to Turn Off the Lights on Energy-Saving Program (Indianaplis Star) Oklahoma Senate Passes Moratorium on Wind Farms in State's Eastern Half (The Oklahoman) Austin Energy Close to Signing World's Cheapest Solar-Power Deal (Austin American-Statesman) Poll: 75% of U.S. Homeowners Say Utilities Shouldn't Block Solar (Greentech Media) Teslas in California Help Bring Dirty Rain to China (Bloomberg) Germany's Aggressive Push for a Clean-Energy Future (Christian Science Monitor)
Edit your subscription | Unsubscribe 16 Court Street #1210, Brooklyn, NY 11241
David Sassoon
J. RECORD DAILY TEMPERATURES AND UHI IN THE USA Posted on March 14, 2014 by Paul Homewood By Paul Homewood
https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/1036/record-high-temperatures-far-outpace-record- lows-across-us Every so often, the hoary old chestnut of record daily temperatures is wheeled out, as evidence of global warming. The above chart is from the NCAR study by Gerard Meehl in 2009, and the NCAR Press Release stated: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/14/record-daily-temperatures-and-uhi-in-the-usa/
K. CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE BIODIVERSITY CRISIS Posted on March 16, 2014 by Anthony Watts by Dr. Craig Loehle, NCASI Naperville, IL The climate change “biodiversity crisis” is like a whack-a-mole game (a carnival game where plastic animals pop out of holes and you try to whack them with a mallet), with an almost-daily claim popping up about this species or that at risk from climate change. Not just polar bears and coral reefs, but even avocados are going to disappear! Whacking each silly claim one by one is an impossible task, and the claims get into public consciousness whereas the refutations do not. I like to unpack the assumptions in any study, and doing so in the case of claims made about biodiversity endangerment have led me to conclude that there are a few simple flaws common to most of these studies that entirely determine their outcomes: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/16/climate-change-and-the-biodiversity-crisis/#more- 105344
L. GLOBAL SEA ICE AREA ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED OVER 35 YEARS
Don Shaw
M. SOCIAL COST OF CARBON Posted on November 21, 2013 | 354 Comments by Judith Curry The debate on the social cost of carbon is heating up. White House The White House has recently issued a Technical Support Document on the Social Cost of Carbon [link]. Excerpts from the Executive Summary: The purpose of the “social cost of carbon” (SCC) estimates presented here is to allow agencies to incorporate the social benefits of reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions into cost-benefit analyses of regulatory actions that impact cumulative global emissions. The SCC is an estimate of the monetized damages associated with an incremental increase in carbon emissions in a given year. It is intended to include (but is not limited to) changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damages from increased flood risk, and the value of ecosystem services due to climate change. http://judithcurry.com/2013/11/21/social-cost-of-carbon/
N. Global Warming "Science"; What Investors Need To Know, Don't Just Trust The "Experts" Feb 20, 2014 2:06 PM Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. Science isn't about joining the herd. Science isn't about confirming someone else's work. Science is about looking at the world, looking at the current explanation, deciding that the world is wrong and you are right, and then going out and proving it. In real science the status quo is the null hypothesis to be rejected, not confirmed. Never in my life have I seen scientists going out to prove the null hypothesis is true...except in the field of climate "science." In real science studies are done to reject the null hypothesis, not confirm it. It is called the "scientific method," something people that blindly accept the man made climate change theory apparently know nothing about. Like medieval inquisitors, supporters of climate change "science" don't debate the issue, they insult, intimidate, smear and ridicule. Real scientists are by nature skeptical, it is a defining characteristic of science. Somehow in Orwellian fashion being a "skeptic" has become an insult, not a merit is climate "science." Skeptics are called "flat earthers," "deniers," and climate "heretics." Skeptics are to be shunned and ignored, and ironically the ones who don't have science on their side. http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/7360901-robert-wagner/2685271-global-warming-science- what-investors-need-to-know-dont-just-trust-the-experts
O. WHITE HOUSE UNVEILS CLIMATE DATA WEBSITE TO 'EMPOWER AMERICA'S COMMUNITIES TO PREPARE' The White House is set to unveil a new Climate Data Initiative on Wednesday to make government-held data more available to researchers and businesses, and improve climate change preparedness across the country. President Barack Obama had already mentioned the data initiative in a list of new programs announced in his big climate speech at Georgetown University last June. Wednesday is its official unveiling. One part of the data initiative is a new climate-focused section within the Data.gov website -- called Climate.Data.gov -- which the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will run. The climate data site will also offer infrastructure and geographic mapping data sets -- showing bridges, roads, canals, etc. -- from such agencies as the U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of Homeland Security. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/obama-climate-data-initiative_n_4988748.html
P. PROCRASTINATING ABOUT THE PAUSE The world is entering the 16th year of the greatest climate science embarrassment in modern history—the pause in global warming. Despite rising IPCC confidence levels and hundreds of computer model predictions, that darned old climate is just not behaving like the boffins say it should. After all, CO2 keeps rising, and we all know that CO2 drives Earth's climate like the thermostat in a house... or not. http://theresilientearth.com/?q=blogs/doug-l-hoffman
Q. UN-CHERRY-PICKING AND THE SINGER EVENT Posted on March 19, 2014 by Guest Blogger By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley The dwindling number of paid or unpaid trolls commenting here – dwindling because the less dishonest and less lavishly-funded ones realize the game is up – do not like The Pause. They whine that in order to demonstrate a long period without global warming I have cherry-picked my start date. No, I have calculated it. I have not, as they suggest, naïvely cherry-picked 1998 as my starting- point so as to take unfair advantage of the Great El Niño of that year. I have not picked 1998 at all. Instead have determined by iterative calculation the earliest month in the record that shows no global warming at all as far as the present. On the RSS dataset, which I shall use for the analysis to follow, that month is September 1996, giving 17 years 6 months without any global warming. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/19/un-cherry-picking-and-the-singer-event/#more-105581
R. AAAS’S GUIDE TO CLIMATE ALARMISM AKA ‘WHAT WE KNOW’ Posted on March 19, 2014 by Anthony Watts By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger Back in the Bush II Administration, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) nakedly tried to nudge the political process surrounding the passage of the environmentally-horrific ethanol fuel mandate. It hung a large banner from the side of its Washington headquarters, picturing a corn stalk morphing into a gas pump, all surrounded by a beautiful, pristine, blue ocean. They got their way, and we got the bill, along with a net increase in greenhouse gas emissions. So it’s not surprising that AAAS is on the Washington Insider side of global warming, releasing a report today that is the perfect 1-2-3 step-by-step how-to guide to climate change alarm. This is how it is laid out in the counterfactually-titled AAAS report “What We Know”: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/19/aaass-guide-to-climate-alarmism-aka-what-we- know/#more-105542
S. The Next Great Famine…or Age of Abundance? One of the most annoying things about climate forecasts is the apparent need to predict catastrophe. Of course, it makes good press, like the latest from Bryan Walsh at Time, Climate Change Could Cause the Next Great Famine. While such theories can always find a home with some learned academics, for those who ‘do’ rather than ‘teach’, the world is a very different place. Here in the U.S, as well as globally, grain production as well as yields (in bushels per acre) have been on an upward linear trend for at least 50 years, primarily due to improvements in varieties (e.g. with greater drought tolerance) and growing practices http://www.drroyspencer.com/
Regards George NOTE: There will be no Newsletter for 31 March or 7 Apr. I will be on vacation. GHH