Monday, 18 December 2017

SUNSPOTS ARE GONE AND SUN IS DIMMING

This article explains what is going on. Also we are getting more cosmic rays hitting the Earth as the suns protective magnetic shield gets weaker. This is only expected to be a temporary phenomenon until the sun begins a new 11 year cycle.

Sunday, 17 December 2017

EPA GIVE US ALL THE RUNAROUND OVER ENDANGERMENT FINDING

This piece explains how in 2009 the EPA issued the Endangerment Finding, which created a statutory obligation to regulate carbon emissions. The EPA argued that even if it was an assessment, it was not “highly influential.” Since the Endangerment Finding was being issued on a “stand-alone” basis with no specific regulations attached, the investigation ended without resolution.

Saturday, 16 December 2017

LASER BORON FUSION - IS IT THE HOLY GRAIL OF ENERGY SOURCES?

This article gives the details of this breakthrough that would revolutionise our energy supply. But it is more than likely just another false dawn.

Friday, 15 December 2017

USA WILD FIRES SHOW A DECREASING TREND - NO LINK TO GW

This article explains that those who try to claim that wild fires are increasing due to global warming are quite wrong.

A 2016 study in published by the UK Royal Society reported, “There is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago” and the “global area burned” has seen a “slight decline over past decades.”  The study, by Stefan Doerr and Cristina Santin of Swansea University in Wales, noted “many consider wildfire as an accelerating problem, with widely held perceptions both in the media and scientific papers of increasing fire occurrence, severity and resulting losses. However, important exceptions aside, the quantitative evidence available does not support these perceived overall trends.”

Thursday, 14 December 2017

HOW THE COURTS ARE USED TO RAMP UP CLIMATE CHANGE FEAR

Here is an article that just shows how the legal system can be conned by spurious scientific "evidence" into backing up the climate change myth. Listing the Bearded Seal as Threatened: A Disturbing Victory for Untestable Hypotheses and Flawed Models.  This passage sums up the decision "It seems highly unlikely bearded seals will be endangered by reduced sea ice or warming temperatures. It is the Endangered Species Act (ESA) itself that is endangered because the Center for Biological Diversity and their ilk abuse the ESA to promote climate fear. Instead what should rightfully evoke our greatest concern is how climate change alarmism is eroding objective science, allowing untestable hypotheses and flawed models to become codified in our legal system."

Wednesday, 13 December 2017

CENTRAL EUROPEAN WINTERS HAVE COOLED OVER THE PAST 30 YEARS

Here is the evidence for this claim. It is an interesting one which flies in the face of what we are told on TV and in the press on a regular basis. This, as we expect, will never be told to us on the TV or in the press. 

Tuesday, 12 December 2017

DAVID ATTENBOROUGH GOES OTT OVER CO2

I have enjoyed David Attenborough's latest series, Blue Planet 2, immensely with its breath-taking photography and extraordinary insight into the behaviour of sea creatures. There is no doubt it has deservedly been a great success with very high viewing figures. Unfortunately David has gone way over the top (near the end) in this final episode  by showing hydrochloric acid reacting with sea shells and trying to compare this with the effect of adding extra CO2 to sea water. He failed to mention that sea water is alkaline and will remain so even if our emissions of CO2 were to carry on at their present rate for centuries. He also forgot to point out that shell fish can survive quite well alongside thermal vents bubbling CO2 in a constant stream.

It's a pity that Attenborough has done this as it diminishes his extremely high reputation as a trustworthy broadcaster. It may also serve to undermine his other valid claims that our oceans must stop being a dumping ground for plastic and other types of pollution.  

Monday, 11 December 2017

WIND FARMS LOSE OUT IN USA TAX REFORMS

This article explains the technical details of the tax reforms by the President. He very cleverly uses tax experts to end the massive subsidy to these wind farmers.

Sunday, 10 December 2017

SCOTTISH CLIMATE CHANGE HYPOCRISY

This article explains yet another example of government trying to wave their green credentials while hiding the inconvenient facts showing things are rather different in reality. 

Saturday, 9 December 2017

PLASTIC POLLUTION - THE WORST POLLUTERS ARE THE DEVELOPING NATIONS

This piece looks at the statistics on where the plastic pollution comes from and finds that all the worst polluters are the developing nations. So despite the fact that it is the developed nations that are the most aware and concerned about this, the problem largely comes from countries like China and Indonesia that do not have enough regulatory enforcement in place to deal with it. The ultimate answer to this problem is increased wealth through industrial development which leads to better government.  

Friday, 8 December 2017

GLOBAL TEMPERATURE INCREASING AT ONLY 1C PER CENTURY,NEW PAPER SAYS

This new paper claims that the true figure for  the rise in global temperature is much less than has been estimated by computer climate models.  The authors, including John Christy, identify and remove the main natural perturbations (e.g. volcanic activity, ENSOs) from the global mean lower tropospheric temperatures (T LT ) over January 1979 - June 2017 to estimate the underlying, potentially human-forced trend. The unaltered value is +0.155 K decade − 1 while the adjusted trend is +0.096 K decade − 1 , related primarily to the removal of volcanic cooling in the early part of the record. This is essentially the same value they determined in 1994 (+0.09 K decade − 1) using only 15 years of data.

Thursday, 7 December 2017

CLIMATE DEBATE SHOWS UP THE UNCERTAINTY

Here is a very interesting, (though rather lengthy) discussion between six expert scientists, three sceptics (John Christy, Richard Lindzen and Judith Curry) and three alarmists (Ben Santer, Isaac Held and William Collins). It could be a foretaste of the red/blue debates that are coming soon. I found it very revealing as it shows that, in private at least, the alarmists show themselves to be much less certain of their position than is the case in public.

This paragraph sets the scene: "The 2014 APS Climate Workshop: A Perfect Venue for Open Debate. Things are different when climate scientists are on the stand alongside their peers who know the science as well as they do, but disagree with the conclusions they draw from the same body of knowledge. Such open debate was on display at the 2014 American Physical Society (APS) climate workshop, which took place in Brooklyn and lasted just over seven hours. A unique event in the annals of the climate debate, it featured three climate scientists who support the climate change consensus and three climate scientists who do not. That format required an unusual degree of honesty about the limitations of the current understanding of the climate system. For the most part, circumspection, qualification, and candid admissions of lack of knowledge were the order of the day. Drawing extensively from the 573-page transcript of the APS climate workshop, this paper examines the gap between how climate scientists debate with each other and how they speak to the media and the wider public".

And here's an extract of one very pertinent exchange: " Steven Koonin, chairing the APS workshop, read an extract from chapter 10 of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report. Model-simulated responses to forcings—including greenhouse gas forcings—“can be scaled up or down.” To match observations, some of the forcings in some of the models had to be scaled down. But when it came to making the centennial projections, the scaling factors were removed, probably resulting in a 25 to 30 percent over-projection of the 2100 warming, Koonin said. Only the transcript does full justice to the exchange that followed.

Dr. Koonin: But if the model tells you that you got the response to the forcing wrong by 30 percent, you should use that same 30 percent factor when you project out a century. Dr. Collins: Yes. And one of the reasons we are not doing that is we are not using the models as [a] statistical projection tool. Dr. Koonin: What are you using them as? Dr. Collins: Well, we took exactly the same models that got the forcing wrong and which got sort of the projections wrong up to 2100. Dr. Koonin: So, why do we even show centennial-scale projections? Dr. Collins: Well, I mean, it is part of the [IPCC] assessment process.

“It is part of the assessment process” is not a scientific justification for using assumptions that are known to be empirically wrong to produce projections that help drive the political narrative of a planet spinning toward a climate catastrophe. [you just could not make this up!]

John Christy’s Congressional Testimony. In 2017, Christy took his analysis of the model prediction of a tropical tropospherical hot spot to the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee. “To test this result we follow the traditional scientific method in which a claim (hypothesis) is made and then is tested against independent information to see if the claim can be sustained or whether it is falsified,” Christy told the committee.  Comparing model trends with the actual 38-year trend, the models failed to represent real world observations by “a highly significant amount.”  The IPCC had these results in time for inclusion in chapter 10 of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. What to do with them? The inconvenient findings were relegated to an annex of supplementary material and fashioned into charts that are hard to understand, Christy told the committee. They show model trends in which extra greenhouse gases are included lying completely outside the range of the observational trends, indicating that the GCMs, as hypotheses, failed a simple scientific-method test. It is hard to argue with Christy’s conclusion: “That this information was not clearly and openly presented in the IPCC is evidence of a political process.” The IPCC then went on to increase its confidence in asserting that humans were causing the majority of climate change based on those very same models.


Do read it all at the above link and see just how much doubt and uncertainty is expressed by those alarmist scientists, who in public express no doubt whatsoever.  

Wednesday, 6 December 2017

CLIMATE SCIENCE TO GO ON TRIAL

U.S. Justice Department In Talks With Scientists Over Looming Climate Court BattleClimatewire, 4 December 2017
 Scott Waldman, E&E News reporter

Justice Department lawyers are quietly courting climate scientists for a simmering legal fight that could have massive implications for government global warming policies.

In recent months, Department of Justice officials have met with Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric scientist in the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution for Science, as well as Judith Curry, a professor emeritus at the Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences who has broken with many of her colleagues in the field by questioning the extent of humanity's role in climate change.

The Justice Department officials questioned the scientists about the level of certainty in climate science, possibly in an effort to help formulate a legal argument that would maintain that climate change is not enough of a dire threat to require immediate government action. The case has the potential to be one of the first Trump administration legal showdowns over climate science. For now, the department is casting a wide net, consulting with climate scientists, environmental law experts and economists, according to the researchers.

A children's climate change case, known as Juliana v. United States, was filed in 2015 by 21 young plaintiffs who claimed their constitutional rights had been violated by government inaction on climate change.

Earlier this year, just days before Trump took office, the Obama administration Justice Department argued that there is no widespread belief among scientists that the world's climate becomes dangerous after passing the 350-parts-per-million mark for atmospheric carbon dioxide, a key metric in the case. Scientists have noted that the current level of CO2, which is about 410 ppm, has not been seen in at least 800,000 years.

Where the Trump administration will take the argument, if the case should proceed to trial, remains an open question. Trump and many top Cabinet officials have rejected the mainstream scientific consensus that humans are warming the planet at an unprecedented pace.

Phil Gregory, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, compared the case to the famous Scopes monkey trial of 1925, when a high school teacher fought for the right to teach human evolution in public schools. The difference now, he said, is that this case would be a showdown on climate science in a courtroom.

Ultimately, the case could have even broader implications than an upcoming "red team" climate debate exercise planned by U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt because it could yield future government action on climate change, according to Gregory. He said his plaintiffs have extensive evidence that glacial melt, coral reef destruction and rising temperatures pose a grave threat to future generations.

"What we're going to have is the youth of America and their climate scientists," he said. "The Trump administration can bring on any scientist it wants, and we can have that debate based on evidence in a courtroom, so it's better than the Scopes trial, because in the Scopes trial, it wasn't limited to scientific evidence; they talked about the Bible and waved that around."

The next step in the case is oral arguments on Dec. 11 before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The government, through a writ of mandamus, wants a review of a 2016 decision by a lower court not to throw the case out. If the government is not granted that review, the case could eventually head to trial and climate science could become a central part of a legal argument.

Trump has dismissed climate change as a hoax, and chose a number of Cabinet secretaries who question basic climate science. If the case proceeds to trial, however, government lawyers would be forced to argue that climate change does not pose an immediate threat, something mainstream climate science long ago determined is endangering humanity. There has been a significant focus from both critics and supporters of the Trump administration on whether Pruitt will challenge the endangerment finding, the legal undergirding of EPA's climate rules.

Taking on the endangerment finding would be a major legal fight, requiring the creation of a mountain of alternative research to challenge the significant body of peer-reviewed science that shows humans are warming the Earth at an unprecedented pace.

'Put the science on trial'

A few months ago, Justice Department lawyers went out to lunch with Caldeira, he told E&E News.

They asked if he would take the lead on assembling government witnesses for the case. He said the lawyers are career officials, holdovers from the Obama administration. The lawyers told Caldeira they thought the case was weak, but that proving climate change poses an irreversible harm to humanity would benefit the plaintiffs, he said. Their position was that energy policy is something for the legislative branch to grapple with, not the executive branch, he said.

The Justice Department likely reached out to Caldeira because he has been critical of the case, because he does not think the courts are the place to resolve climate policy. He said he would have worked with the Obama Justice Department because he feels a duty as a scientist to ensure that the best available research is used.

But he declined the Justice Department's request for help, he said, because he is concerned that his work would be distorted for political means by the Trump administration.

"Since so much science is publicly funded, scientists have some responsibility to help have good science considered by the judicial process," he said. "Things are terribly clouded because we have such an awful president and such an awful administration, even efforts to try to get good science into the process could result in negative consequences."

Caldeira is also concerned that if reputable scientists don't participate in the case, the Justice Department could use contrarian researchers to weaken established science.

"You could easily imagine the Trump administration arranging things to not having the best available science presented, but having a perverted view of science presented," he said. "So I think there is a conflict if all good scientists refuse to participate because they don't want to collude with the Trump administration, then that leaves only the hacks, and it's likely that the government's case will be buttressed by hack science."

A Justice Department spokesman declined comment. However, it appears the department is still talking to researchers.

Curry said last week that she was still interested in helping the government with the case, but only if it took place in a nonpartisan manner. Curry has broken from many in mainstream climate science by casting doubt on the belief that humans are the primary driver of climate change. She has also published a significant amount of peer-reviewed research in major scientific journals, including on the Arctic and the causes of the climate feedback that have shaped the region.

"I'm prepared to give my best expert advice in a nonpartisan way; they may not like some of it," she said. "You just have to give it your best, deepest, most honest shot of explaining what's what, what we don't know."

The plaintiffs in the case have already submitted an expert review by scientists, economists and other experts in the field that clearly shows the threat climate change poses to future generations, said Gregory, the co-counsel representing the plaintiffs. The government has not submitted a report that would challenge established climate science, and lawyers have essentially argued that producing such a report would be too burdensome, he said.

"Our position all along has been to put the science on trial, and we want for them to bring in recognized scientists and let those individuals submit reports and testify before the courts; that's exactly what we think should happen," he said. "Obviously what's occurring now in our climate should not be decided by politicians, but should be dictated by the best available science."

Tuesday, 5 December 2017

USA CLIMATE RED TEAM GETS A STEP NEARER

This article summarises the latest situation, as the USA's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prepares for the upcoming debates on the causes of global warming. It should make for compulsive viewing when it finally gets started.

Monday, 4 December 2017

DOES A VOLCANO CAUSE WARMING OR COOLING?

This article deals with this question in relation to the Bali volcano. There is no doubt that we still no very little about the number of active volcanoes, particularly those under the oceans.

Sunday, 3 December 2017

CLIMATE BULLIES ARE AT IT AGAIN

Here is the account of the treatment of an expert on polar bears, Susan Crockford, for daring to speak out against the false narrative that they are declining due to global warming affecting sea ice in the Arctic. What the so-called consensus scientists don't realise is that this behaviour actually undermines their own 'cause' by encouraging fair-minded people to rally around the person being bullied. 

Saturday, 2 December 2017

CLIMATE MODEL FAILURE THAT THE ALARMISTS TRY TO BURY

Here is a crucial piece of evidence that climate models have failed to predict the real temperature change that has happened in the mid troposphere. The evidence is unequivocal and as such is severely embarrassing to the politicians and climate scientists who continue to ignore it.

Friday, 1 December 2017

GRENFELL TOWER DISASTER AND THE CLIMATE CHANGE PRIORITY

The main lobby group for the plastic insulation trade was, until November 2017, called the British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers’ Association [BRUFMA]. Partly in response to Grenfell Tower – or what it refers to as “events of this year” – BRUFMA changed its name to the Insulation Manufacturers Association.

They advertise that they are “influencing UK and local government, specifying authorities, relevant approval and certification bodies,” and have “high level involvement in the drafting and regular revision of British and European standards [and] the Building Regulations.” Its members are promised the “opportunity to influence Government bodies and NGOs” and “direct input into relevant British Standards committees.”

How that influence works in practice is exposed by examination of government efforts to meet the UK’s climate change commitments. Since the Kyoto agreement in 1997 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, successive governments have created rules about how new and refurbished buildings must be insulated to reduce heat loss.

In 2011 the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) turned to the insulation industry for help, inviting representatives onto a Green Deal committee to come up with ways to push more insulation into homes. We discovered that of the 10 firms and construction industry groups on that committee, four were members of BRUFMA. One of them was Celotex, the firm whose plastic insulation would be fitted to the outside of Grenfell Tower four years later.

Celotex technical director Rob Warren was a leading committee member who made his intentions clear on a now-deleted company web page. Under the heading “Celotex enter government,” he said his position on the DECC committee meant he was “working inside government” to “shape this critical policy enabling the insulation industry to maximise the benefits.” Construction expert Simon Hay who was also on the committee told us he was aware of the agenda: “The point from the insulation companies was that they were going to sell a lot more insulation,” he said.

A few years later Celotex revealed that the rules the plastics industry helps to write are key to company profits. Trade magazine Urethanes Technology International reported in 2015 that Warren had told them regulatory change was the “greatest driver” of plastic insulation sales. Without new regulations he was reported as saying: “You cannot give insulation away and the public are not really interested.”

Thursday, 30 November 2017

POLITICS VERSUS SCIENCE IN EU WEEDKILLER VOTE

EU member states have voted to extend the license for controversial weedkiller glyphosate. Germany’s approval was crucial in the vote, but it could derail coalition talks between Merkel’s conservative bloc and the SPD. 

Of the 28 member states, 18 voted in favour of the extension, nine voted against and one abstained. At least 16 votes were required to renew glyphosate’s license. The weedkiller is best known for its use in Monsanto-brand weedkiller Roundup.

The European Union renewed its authorisation of glyphosate for five years. The science was clearer than clear – the herbicide is one of the safest substances on the market. All but one research or regulatory agency gave glyphosate an unequivocal approval (and that one, IARC, was seriously conflicted and corrupted). For 40 years farmers have relied on glyphosate (off-patent, inexpensive and effective), giving them the means now to develop sustainable farming with no-till and complex cover cropping. Glyphosate is indeed the herbicide of the century and the very thought of banning it seems absurd. So why couldn’t the European Commission renew glyphosate for 15 years as originally planned? As the science was clear, then the regulatory risk assessment process should have been simple. But it was never about the science, facts or data. It was never about the benefits to farmers, the environment and consumers. It was about something much larger.

The ecological-industrial complex in Germany wanted to use the prohibition of Glyphosate — a difficult to replace product in modern agriculture — as a lever to bring about another  “Wende” (turnaround): the “Agrarwende” (‘agricultural turnaround’) would put an end to modern agriculture in Germany so that the German people would have to rely exclusively on organic food produced on German soil for the long term future. An idea as crazy as the Energiewende. 

The beauty of this row is that it produces exceptionally positive side effects. It is simply a victory for reason and modern agriculture and a bitter defeat for the Green Panic-Complex. Should a grand coalition of Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and Social Democrats (SPD) were to come about, the whole affair would be happily off the table. But in five years, when another EU vote over Glyphosate is expected, the political conditions in Germany and much of Europe will probably have changed so much that ideological fantasies of turning back the clock will no longer have much chance. The window of opportunity is closing which explains the dismay of the green lobby.

Wednesday, 29 November 2017

UK TRIES TO PUT THE BRAKES ON SPENDING ON RENEWABLE SUBSIDIES AS REALITY BITES

The latest release of the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook (2017)  suggests that there is massive spending world-wide on renewable energy. The UK has in the past been a leading part of this. However the government now seems to be trying to cut back on this. This does not mean that spending cannot rise above current levels, since the existing Contracts for Difference may, in fact, result in higher subsidies if wholesale prices fall. The real news here is that the existing schemes are now of historical interest only. The Renewables Obligation, of course, has been closed to new entrants since the 1st of April 2017, the Feed-in Tariff for small scale renewables is now subject to deployment caps and is steadily winding down. The Budget announcement suggests that this wind down will now end in firm closure.

But the aspect of global subsidies that would be troubling the cool heads in Treasury is the fact that, as the IEA says, “support for renewables remains concentrated in a small number of countries”. Indeed, 45% of global subsidy support for renewables is accounted for by the European Union, with the biggest subsidisers being German, Italy, France, Spain and the United Kingdom. The IEA does not provide an estimate of the UK’s share in global subsidy, but reference to the tables in the Treasury’s Autumn Budget text, “Control for Low Carbon Levies”, suggests that UK could be accounting for considerably more than 5% of the global total, significantly more than its share of global GDP. That alone is sufficient to suggest that the UK is doing more than its fair share, and given the need to reinforce competitiveness post BREXIT, needs to limit its contribution.

Tuesday, 28 November 2017

THE FUTURE OF ELECTRIC CARS

Here is another thoughtful piece from the excellent Scientific Alliance. I agree with much of their analysis. In fact I believe there will a lot of resistance to electric vehicles from ordinary motorists and I expect we will see them on our roads well beyond 2040. That is, if the government has not abandoned their climate change policy by then.

Monday, 27 November 2017

DOOM-LADEN PREDICTIONS WERE WRONG 25 YEARS AGO

This article looks at a recent doom-laden report saying urgent action is needed to save the planet and compares it to a similar report made 25 years ago. None of that reports predictions proved to be true, so why should anyone take any notice now?

Sunday, 26 November 2017

SOME SCHOOLS TEACHING JUNK SCIENCE ON GW

Here's an interesting piece that describes some phony experiments which are wrongly attributed to demonstrate the greenhouse effect of CO2. Of course the children are easily misled, and I would not be surprised if some teachers actually believe that they are giving a genuine demonstration. 

Saturday, 25 November 2017

BBC REFUSES TO CHALLENGE GW ALARMISTS

This article explains how the BBC simply allows lies to go unchallenged when they are put forward by those promoting global warming alarmism. Yet they issue grovelling apologies when an error is made by someone who opposes this alarmism.

Friday, 24 November 2017

DEATH OF THE "PAUSE" HAS BEEN GREATLY EXAGGERATED

This piece explains how some papers have attempted to show that the pause in global warming never existed, but these do not stand up to close examination. In fact it looks likely that the "pause" is set to continue despite all the hype that claims the opposite.

Thursday, 23 November 2017

CLIMATE SCIENCE IS MUCH MORE ABOUT POLITICS THAN SCIENCE

This article discusses this headline and explains very clearly what it is really all about. Once an issue has been embedded in political decisions it is then almost impossible to go back, as to do so would leave our political leaders looking very silly. If the climate does not show appreciable warming soon, questions will be asked leading to more and more bizarre explanations. Only the bravest leader would speak against it. Even Donald Trump is not prepared to completely deny the proposition that CO2 is dangerous.   

Wednesday, 22 November 2017

SQUABBLING AT THE BONN CLIMATE TALKS

This piece looks at the splits that are now emerging at the Bonn climate talks between the EU and China over who is not doing enough. Now the USA has opted out the others are beginning to realise that their share of the pain has got quite a bit bigger. This has a lot of similarities to the Brexit negotiations where the UK is expected to come up with a lot of money to continue to bankroll the EU - except that the USA has nothing to lose.  

Tuesday, 21 November 2017

GERMAN COALITION TALKS COLLAPSE

This piece gives the details of the inability of the Germans to agree to form a new government. This is largely over disagreements about climate policies. It was always going to come to this in the end because it involves energy production which lies at the very heart of the economy. Reality versus some utopian ideal - reality must always win in the end, but it will be a long and hard fought battle.

Monday, 20 November 2017

BBC COMPLAINT RE: FALSE CLIMATE DATA IS UPHELD

This article gives the details of the complaint by Paul Homewood who had the perseverance to see the labyrinthine process through. Green activists are quick to complain of any errors made by sceptics that are very occasionally allowed to come on programmes, but very few complaints going the other way are upheld.

Sunday, 19 November 2017

CHINA LEADS THE WORLD - TO RECORD CO2 EMISSIONS


Financial Times, 13 November 2017


Stronger Chinese economic growth will push global greenhouse gas emissions to a record high in 2017 after remaining flat for three years, dashing tentative hopes of a turning point in the world’s efforts to curb climate change.


A new report by the Global Carbon Project, an international research consortium, predicts that carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry will rise 2 per cent this year. The report was released at the UN climate change meeting in Bonn on Monday.

The increase — which is largely caused by China and developing countries — suggests the world is straying further from the course set at the landmark UN conference in Paris two years ago. Countries agreed at the time to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2ÂșC from the pre-industrial era. But scientists warn that the emission reduction pledges made by individual governments since then do not go far enough to secure that overarching goal.

“Emissions are following what countries have pledged — but what countries have pledged is nowhere near enough to meet the Paris objective,” said Glen Peters, co-author of the report and research director at the Center for International Climate Research in Oslo.

This year’s rise is especially disappointing as it follows three years of almost no growth in emissions despite a world economy expanding at a steady clip. In 2016, emissions were flat even though the world economy grew 3.2 per cent. One explanation for the uptick is that China’s economic slowdown in the middle part of this decade was more pronounced than official figures suggested.

Emissions are following what countries have pledged — but what countries have pledged is nowhere near enough to meet the Paris objective

Saturday, 18 November 2017

SEA LEVEL RISE - AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM THE EXPERTS

This article contains an important update on the question of sea level rise in Fiji and other low lying atolls. It confirms what has been noted before -- that sea level is in fact stable.

Friday, 17 November 2017

HAS OUR ENVIRONMENT MINISTER BEEN CAPTURED BY THE GREEN BLOB?

Here is an interesting piece from the excellent Matt Ridley. e asks the very question that was on my lips when I read of his recent pronouncements since taking up his new cabinet post. Of course he he is in favour of the Paris Agreement and the Climate Change Act. That is a pre-requisite to getting the job, but he also wants to ban the petrol/diesel engine and now he talks of setting up new green quangos. I despair!

Thursday, 16 November 2017

BONN CLIMATE CONFERENCE - THIRD WORLD DEMANDS MONEY NOW!

There can be no doubt that there is one over-riding reason for the climate change issue to have attracted such support from the Third World nations and that, of course is the expectation that they will receive lots of money from the developed world nations.

With more than half the schedule of climate change conference already over, frustration was beginning to show at the lack of progress on any of the key issues under discussion, including the issues of finance, loss and damage, and ‘pre-2020 actions’. Developing country negotiators lamented the fact that the United States, which has decided to pull out the Paris Agreement, was continuing to block any meaningful breakthrough on these issues and that other developed countries were not helping matters either.

“Other developed countries are hiding behind the United States on loss and damage and finance issues. And, I think they need to be called out on this. They need to be asked whether they would side with (US President) Donald Trump or with the vulnerable countries of the world and meet their responsibilities,” Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, echoing what many country negotiators were saying off the record.

A demand from the developing countries, asking for inclusion of ‘pre-2020 actions’ — a reference mainly to the obligations of the developed countries under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that has still three years to run — in the official agenda of the negotiations has still not been decided on, despite the expiry of two deadlines. The matter was to be decided on Saturday and then on Monday, but till evening on Monday consultations with various country groups was still continuing.

“Informal meetings (on ‘pre-2020 actions’) have been happening throughout the day. I am not sure whether there will be an outcome in the form of any decision by the end of the day today. Things are moving slowly, and there is hardly any significant progress on any important issue till now. But this is not the first time this is happening. We have seen such things at previous conferences as well. There are still four days to go and a lot happens on the last days,” an Indian negotiator said.

One major disappointment has been over the lack of any headway on issues related to finance, particularly that meant for loss and damages. Developing countries, especially the smaller island nations which also happen to be the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, have been demanding the setting up of mechanisms through which then can access financial help in the event of destruction caused by extreme weather events. This financial help needs to be in addition to the US$ 100 billion that the developed countries are obligated to provide every year from 2020 to help developing countries deal with climate change.

One of the options being discussed is to raise money through taxes on fossil fuel industry. “Countries are looking for money that is additional to the US$ 100 billion, because loss and damage is additional to the mitigation and adaptation needs. The US$ 100 billion was agreed upon long before the issue of loss and damages became part of discussions at these negotiations. The kind of money we are looking at … has to come by levying taxes on fossil fuel industry that has caused climate change in the first place,” Mohamed Adow, International Climate Lead at Christian Aid, said.
But the developed countries, mainly the US, have not been quite agreed to look
at this, suggesting instead that insurance might be a good way to deal with the problem. “On loss and damage and finance, they (the US) have been taking a pretty hard line and that has started to cause some real anger,” Meyers said.


Even on the US$ 100 billion commitment, the demand that developed countries spell out the roadmap and enhance the proportion of public finance in their contributions, has largely been stonewalled. “Developed countries have not come prepared to put any new money on the table or make new pledges. So we are not expecting any strong outcome on this. The best we can hope for, we think, is to get some assurance that next year they will demonstrate stronger commitment,” Tracy Carty of Oxfam said.

Wednesday, 15 November 2017

HUGE ROW IN OZ ABOUT CLIMATE TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS

Read it all here. It centres on the accuracy of new electronic thermometers compared to the old liquid in glass (mercury) thermometers. In Australia there seem to be a number of knowledgeable sceptics who are digging into the data and uncovering a number of inconsistencies. I wonder if there are similar inconsistencies here?  

Tuesday, 14 November 2017

CLIMATE COSTS NOW 35% OF ELECTRICITY BILLS

This piece gives the details of how this comes about. Perhaps this will resonate more with the public than the £400 billion total cost of the Climate Change Act, which seems so enormous that it becomes incomprehensible to an individual, whereas telling someone that over a third of their bill is caused by government policies on climate change is only too easy to understand. 

Monday, 13 November 2017

ELECTRIC CARS NOT AS GREEN AS YOU THINK

This piece in the Mail reminds readers that electric cars are not as green as some people think. With a wide circulation this is a timely reminder that government policy is not leading us to any green utopia.

Sunday, 12 November 2017

UPDATE ON THE CURRENT CLIMATE CONFERENCE IN BONN

The update below is from CFACT

What's missing at this year's big UN climate conference?

The American pavilion.

When President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the UN's Paris Climate Accord, he also cut back on the American presence in the UN process. Sure, the official State Department representatives are here, but the sideshow is tellingly absent.

In past years the U.S. put on big displays where NASA trotted out its “hyperwall” which stacks nine computer monitors for multimedia presentations. CFACT's friends may remember the time at COP 20 in Peru, when CFACT approached a group of Obama administration staff running the hyperwall. They were prepared to dismiss CFACT as “flat-Earther, climate deniers,” until they realized who had marched in at the head of our delegation and fell over themselves with respectful greetings. Colonel Walt Cunningham flew in space on Apollo VII, the mission that launched America's quest for the moon. Walt saw the curvature of the Earth first hand from the window of his command module. No flat-Earther he.

Walt has worked diligently to reform NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies which first James Hansen and now Gavin Schmidt made into a platform for presenting politicized views of climate science. A large number of astronauts and NASA veterans co-signed a letter demanding NASA knock off the propaganda.

At COP 23, at least, the propaganda spigot has been turned off.

Like last year's COP 22 in Marrakesh, President Trump remains the talk of the conference. Campaigners worked for years to bring America and its wealth under the UN climate regime. They were shocked when only a year later America broke free. What does this mean for their dreams of redistribution and control? They don't know, and in the long run, neither do we.

President Obama made a huge mistake when he signed onto the Paris climate agreement and Trump did the right thing getting out. The UN climate elite are doing all they can to drag us back in. They've enlisted a group of American politicians led by California Governor Jerry Brown and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who are on their way to Bonn to put on their own American climate show.
CFACT is your eyes and ears at the UN talks. We'll be speaking up and fearlessly laying out the facts as well.
Getting out of Paris was right.

Saturday, 11 November 2017

SLOWLY THE US EPA IS BEING CLEANSED OF ITS GREEN ACTIVISTS

This piece explains what is happening, and not before time. The real question is whether President Trump will have time to embed a new independent culture at the EPA before his time runs out. Also, will his eventual successor have the courage and the inclination to stick to this policy?

Friday, 10 November 2017

CO2 RESIDENCE TIME - A CRUCIAL FACTOR IN THE CLIMATE DEBATE

This piece looks at a new paper on this important subject. It is not as straight forward as some might think because the atmosphere is in constant flux with CO2 being absorbed at the same time as it is being  released. One important factor that I have not seen discussed is the role of rain which must constantly be washing the CO2 out of the air, just as it washes solid particles too, cleansing the air. When some scientists claim that CO2 remains in the air for hundreds, or thousands of years, I cannot believe that they really believe this. It seems quite likely that human emissions of CO2 are responsible for most of the current increase, but we know that not all the human emissions remain in the air. About half are removed by natural sinks like rain and plants. So, if our emissions were to drop we should expect to see the level in the air drop quite quickly. This is not what alarmists want us to believe, as it would mean that there was no long term problem.

Thursday, 9 November 2017

VOLCANIC MAGMA UNDER ANTARCTICA

This article looks at the discovery of volcanic activity under Antarctica and ponders whether this may explain some of the warming in certain parts there. Overall Antarctica is not warming, despite this volcanic activity.

Wednesday, 8 November 2017

SEA LEVEL RISE SCARE - LATEST UPDATE

This piece offers a good look at the arguments relating to whether sea level rise is a serious problem or simply a long term issue. The alarmist argument comes from computer modelling whereas the actual data seems to suggest it is more of a long term issue.

Tuesday, 7 November 2017

CLIMATE NUTS CALL FOR DICTATORSHIP TO BRING IN STRINGENT CO2 REDUCTIONS

These people are far more dangerous than the imaginary climate disaster they keep banging on about. This article looks at the latest outburst by one climate fundamentalist. Luckily for the rest of us he is not going to be able to get his way due to the little matter of overthrowing democracy, and I doubt he and his small band of eco-loons is powerful enough.

Monday, 6 November 2017

US EPA NEVER SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED THE SCIENCE IN ITS CO2 ENDANGERMENT FINDING

Scott Pruitt is right: the US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) never seriously considered the science used in its 2009 GHG/CO2 endangerment finding. That is the conclusion of  Dr Alan Carlin. You can read his thorough and well argued narrative here on his excellent blog. Alan is  a sceptical former Sierra Club activist and USEPA senior analyst, so he is well qualified to give his opinion.

Here is an excerpt from an interview with EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt: “So it really draws down into [this] question: Did this Agency engage in a robust, meaningful discussion, with respect to the Endangerment that CO2 poses to this Country? And I think by any definition about process they didn’t.” —Scott Pruitt in interview with Justin Worland of Time Magazine, as reported on October 20, 2017 and transcribed here

Sunday, 5 November 2017

HERE'S A "MUST SEE" VIDEO

Sadly Bob Carter is no longer with us, but his legacy of great videos live on and I recently re-discovered this one. It is only about 30 minutes but it packs in so much useful information that I thought I would share it with you. If only the mainstream TV companies would show it to the populous it could open their eyes and stimulate so much independent thought.  

Saturday, 4 November 2017

THE RELIGIOUS FOLLOWERS OF GLOBAL WARMING

It is often said that belief in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) is more akin to a religion than to science, and I tend to agree with this. This essay about how climate science is taught in schools is very long and tedious, but what can be ascertained by reading it is that the author is so utterly convinced in her cause that she simply is unable to countenance that there could be any other side to it than her interpretation. She totally rejects that teachers should acknowledge or give credence to doubts.

Yet it is plainly obvious to most adults who study this subject that there are plenty of perfectly legitimate concerns, some of which are raised by the IPCC themselves. The primary one is the degree of warming which the IPCC say can be from 1.5 to 4.5 degrees C for a doubling of CO2.  Once someone has understood that then everything else is put into question.

A bright child would pick up on this and think, if there is such a wide variation, then how much else is in doubt? A little reading will soon find that there are learned and much respected science professors such as Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer who can make out a good case for the 1.5 degrees C to be even lower in which case the warming will be no more than has been experienced in the 20th century. Once trust has been undermined then the teacher will lose respect and the pupil will become more sceptical.

That is the dilemma facing the climate activist. If they are too hard-line in their approach they risk being discovered as being too doctrinaire and may be accused of indoctrinating their pupils. On the other hand if they admit the flaws in the hypothesis that risks undermining the urgency that is claimed to be needed to combat it.    

Friday, 3 November 2017

AIR POLLUTION - LET'S TAKE A RATIONAL LOOK

There has been a lot of very scary headlines recently about air pollution. This one for example. Once again some great research by Paul Homewood has put this into perspective - see this piece . Of course any pollution poses a risk, but nature itself produces much of it and there is no escape from it. Those who are ill and have no tolerance have to be very careful and use masks etc. For most of us here in the West are living in the most unpolluted air in the past hundred years or more with levels of pollutants so low that they would have been undetectable just a few decades ago. Further reduction in human-caused pollution will have to be balanced against the cost to us all in the availability of affordable personal transport. 

Thursday, 2 November 2017

GERMANS FORCED TO SELL ELECTRICITY AT A LOSS AS STRONG WINDS OVERDRIVE TURBINES

This account looks at the electricity market madness caused by too much reliance on wild and unreliable wind in Germany. Most of the time the poor Germans have to pay a high price for their electricity, but apparently they are now producing a large excess when there are strong winds and so they have to pay some consumers to accept it, though what they can do with more electricity than they need is a question I cannot answer. Read the link for further details.

Wednesday, 1 November 2017

WIND FARMS WOULD NEED TO COVER THE WHOLE OF SCOTLAND TO POWER UK ELECTRIC VEHICLES

This Express article looks at the implications of Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon's, announcement that Scotland is to stop selling new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2032, eight years before England. It is an impossible pledge to make, but then she is not going to be in power to see it through.

Tuesday, 31 October 2017

THE ENDEMIC CLIMATE CHANGE CULTURE HERE IN THE UK

Yesterday I attended a Southern Water Stakeholder Workshop, by invitation as a local councillor. I did so in order to be better informed about the latest innovations in the water industry and to give my feedback on the future plans of the private company to tackle its various challenges. Top of its list of challenges is, guess what? Of course, it is climate change!

Here is a link to the report which runs to 47 lavishly illustrated pages. The section on climate change is from page 11 to 13 for anyone who is interested. It was written by a firm of consultants called MWH. What it reveals is how completely and utterly these businesses have absorbed the doctrine of human caused climate change. It was not as if the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the merits of the climate change hypothesis, so there was no point in my standing up to decry it - anymore than if I was to denounce the existence of god in a wedding service. Many attending a wedding may not believe in the religious aspects, but sit through it as a duty. Similarly there may be some in my workshop who have serious doubts about the climate hypothesis, but, like me, they want to find out if the waste water system is going to be more effective.

Just to pick out one of the worst excesses in the report. " Above all, the global climate is increasingly volatile.  2017 is forecast to be amongst the hottest on record.  In 2016, CO2 concentrations breached the scientifically and symbolically important 400 parts per million level, widely regarded as a potential trigger point". -  I don't no where to start here. First there is no evidence of increasing volatility in the global climate. There are and have always been extreme weather events. As for 400ppm of CO2 being a "trigger point", this is complete nonsense without any scientific merit at all. It is simply a round number.

Monday, 30 October 2017

THE COST OF TRYING TO COOL THE PLANET (AND FAILING!)

Here is the speech from Benny Peiser in the Cambridge Union debate on the motion, This House would rather cool the planet than warm the economy’. Benny, who is director of the GWPF opposed the motion and his speech contains a lot of excellent arguments. Well worth reading.

Sunday, 29 October 2017

OCEAN COOLING CONTINUES THROUGH SEPTEMBER

This report gives the details.  September NH temps almost erased a three-month climb; even so 9/2017 is well below the previous two years.  Meanwhile SH and the Tropics are setting new lows for this period.  With current reports from the El Nino 3.4 grid sector, it seems likely October will go even lower, with downward moves across all oceans.

Saturday, 28 October 2017

BBC GIVE EX POLITICIAN ED DAVEY FREE REIN TO MAKE DODGY CLAIMS ON RADIO

This article explains the hypocrisy at the BBC who only a few days ago issued an apology for allowing Lord Lawson to make a slight error on air have now allowed Ed Davey to indulge in wild speculation on the same Today programme - but of course his words were in support of the government's climate change policy, whereas Lawson was undermining it.  

Friday, 27 October 2017

UK CONSUMERS ARE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR ELECTRICITY SAYS REVIEW

This report explains how our electricity bill should be changed to try and reverse the escalating costs that consumers are faced with.
Professor Helm, who carried out the review, believes the legacy costs from the Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs), Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) and Contracts for Difference (CfDs) are a “major contributor” to rising prices and suggests ring-fencing and placing them in a “legacy bank”.
He says they should be charged “separately and explicitly” on customer bills and industrial customers should be exempt.

UPDATE
More on this here.


Thursday, 26 October 2017

SCIENCE BECOMING MORE SCEPTICAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE ALARM

This piece looks at the way science has moved to a more sceptical position in 2017. The tide appears to be turning, if this is the case it is a welcome development

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

NEW REPORT ON UK ELECTRICITY HIGHLIGHTS CONCERN OVER RELIANCE ON IMPORTED SUPPLIES

The key conclusions from the report by the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) include that:

• Interconnector capacity will almost quadruple by 2030, allowing 20% of UK electricity to be imported from Europe.

• Interconnectors can be a useful way of delivering secure and cheap supplies across Europe, given they can be used to import and export. But in Britain’s case it is increasingly one-way traffic.  In the 12 months to March 2017, the UK imported 17.22 TWh but only exported 2.78 TWh.

• There are concerns about growing reliance on imported electricity from Europe as surplus supplies there decline. This is particularly the case in light of the German elections. Germany is already decommissioning its nuclear plants. If the Greens form part of the governing coalition, as is likely, they will demand the closure of fossil-fuel plants.

• The more reliant Britain becomes on energy imported from Europe, the more vulnerable we become to disruptions in supply, to sudden price spikes, or a wider tightening of capacity which pushes up prices. (This is already set to happen.)

• This imported electricity also has an unfair competitive advantage, as it is not subject to the GB Carbon Price Floor or transmission charges faced by British generators.

• Indeed, rather than cutting carbon emissions, Britain is to some extent “offshoring” them – closing down our own coal fired power plants but continuing to buy energy from Europe which is likely to have come from plants of the same type.

All in all our electricity supply appears to be dodgy to say the least. All this is going to rebound on the government, pushing voters into the arms of our very left-wing Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn, which is another looming disaster that could have been avoided.

Tuesday, 24 October 2017

DATA FIDDLED TO GET A BAN ON CHEMICAL WEEDKILLER

This piece looks at the scandal around glyphosate (roundup) weedkiller and the attempt to get it banned. It is worth noting that none of this has been shown on any mainstream news channel here in the UK, though there was plenty of space to mention a spurious report on the decline of insects. 

Monday, 23 October 2017

UK ELECTRICITY FIRMS BEING DRIVEN OUT BY GOVERNMENT

This article explains the pressures facing the main electricity firms. There is the role out of smart meters, reputed to cost around £6 billion, then there is the prospect of coping with a massive expansion of electric vehicles and now the government's proposed cap on prices. Oh, and then there are all the green taxes to pay for the renewable (or should I say unreliable?) energy. Who would want to invest in the electricity industry in the UK today?

Sunday, 22 October 2017

THE WORLD BANK FAILS THE POOR

This piece explains how Donald Trump and the Global Warming Policy Foundation are both highlighting the failure of the World Bank to help third world countries to use the most cost-effective fuels to get power to their people.  Of course the reason is that they want to force them to develop using wind and solar energy, rather than coal or gas. In other words they are prioritising a hypothetical problem that might affect generations far into the future over the urgent needs of the poor people of today.  

Saturday, 21 October 2017

THE FAILURES OF GREEN ENERGY

This article looks at the shortcomings of green energy by studying the example of Minnesota where $15 billion has been spent on wind farms to replace electricity that already was being produced by coal, nuclear and natural gas plants.

Minnesota’s colossal investment in wind energy has been a total failure, in its own terms–a failure for which the state’s consumers and businesses have paid dearly. Historically, Minnesota enjoyed the advantage of relatively cheap electricity. Generally, electricity prices were around 18% lower in Minnesota than the national average.  Since then the billions spent on windmills and transmission lines has led to this cheap electricity advantage disappearing. In fact, 2017 is the first year on record in which the price of electricity in Minnesota is above the national average

Friday, 20 October 2017

FIRST OFF SHORE WINDFARM RETIRES - LESSONS MUST BE LEARNT

looks at the lessons that should be learnt from its performance. Here is one important paragraph:

"The secret of the fossil fuel success in the world economy is the high calorific value of the fuel. A ton of coal costing £42.50 produces of the order of 2000 kWh of electricity in a new coal-fired power plants (up 30% from older plants). This sells for £400 wholesale, with an energy return on energy invested (EROEI) of 10:1. A therm of natural gas costs £0.40, and produces 30 kWh of electricity, which sells for £6, representing an EROEI of 15:1.  Fuel-less technologies do not have this advantage."

Thursday, 19 October 2017

PETITION TO US EPA CHIEF TO REVOKE CO2 ENDANGERMENT FINDING

This post looks at the letters sent to US EPA chief, Scott Pruitt, urging him to revoke the endangerment finding for carbon dioxide which underpins so many other policies to clamp down on uses of fossil fuels. 

Wednesday, 18 October 2017

PUBLIC INDIFFERENT TO CLIMATE NEGOTIATIONS, SAYS SURVEY

This report gives the background to this headline. I am inclined to agree with commenter, jeandemeung, who writes of the Paris agreement to limit CO2 emissions:

"First, there were no binding commitments. This is a huge strike against it right there, the only way the commitments, such as they are, would have been met would have been if they were binding.

Second, the biggest and fastest growing emitters made no commitments to reduce, even within the voluntary and good will nature of the agreement.

Third, all the studies done since have come to the same conclusion, that the result of the agreement, even if fulfilled to the letter, will have no measurable effect on global warming. Tiny fractions of a degree C are usually quoted."

What he is saying makes sense, in that the Paris agreement will (if you believe that urgent and draconian action is essential to save the planet) be too little to have any effect.

Jean then goes on to say: "This may have had something to do with the fact that the world's biggest polluter (China) was not prepared to sign up to making any reductions. An example which will have encouraged the entire developing world, and which is a significant indicator that actually the Chinese political and intellectual establishment are not persuaded that there is any real problem. I don't think there is any evidence the Russians are either for that matter, nor the Indians.

Lets be more constructive, admit the failure, and ask what sort of international event it would take to reverse the public indifference.

Surely it would be a really draconian agreement? Surely it would be one where all governments signed up to binding, real tonnage reductions. And these should be very large, they should be ones that will only be possible with very big and visible lifestyle changes. Like, for instance, closing down the automobile industry and investing heavily creating an environment in which work and leisure can take place using public transport.

One in which the biggest emitter talks to its people, tells them that economic growth of the kind they have enjoyed so far has come to an end, and that they must all work together on a different kind of great leap forward, and go back to the bicycle."

So Jean believes a much more draconian agreement is needed. But this has no chance of happening as the leaders of these countries either do not believe it is a real or urgent problem, or they know that they could not sell such an agreement to their people.

All the surveys show that, even though a significant number of people claim to believe that urgent action is needed, they are not prepared to make major changes to their lives to achieve it. That is the reality.


Tuesday, 17 October 2017

AUSSIES TO DUMP CLEAN ENERGY TARGET

This post explains the reasoning. This is excellent news on top of President Trump quitting the Paris agreement. It is, perhaps, the start of cracks appearing in this scientific fraud. There is still a long way to go, but it shows that when governments make decisions that adversely impact peoples lives by hiking electricity prices, for example, they soon find the pressure mounting to reverse those decisions. This is particularly true when there is an opposition party ready to offer an alternative.

Monday, 16 October 2017

UK TAXATION POLICY POST 2020 - DOMINATED BY CLIMATE CHANGE

This piece gives the details of the policy that gives a clear though only sketchy indication that electricity sector policy will move towards carbon taxation post 2020. £1.2 billion will be spent “to make cycling and walking the natural choices for shorter journeys”. The government is actually considering an annual “Green Great Britain Week” which will, the Strategy tells us:
Focus on climate and air quality issues across the UK
Share the latest climate science
Demonstrate our progress and successes on climate action
Highlight and promote economic opportunities arising from clean growth especially to international investors 

I think it may be that before long people will come out to protest as their energy price increases start to become more obviously due to government policy. 





Sunday, 15 October 2017

PRESIDENT TRUMP APPOINTS A CLIMATE SCEPTIC TO TOP WHITE HOUSE JOB

This article explains the details. Although progress in unravelling all this climate alarmist bureaucracy seems very slow, at least it is heading in the right direction. If only we in the UK had made half as much, but, sadly there is no one in a position of power here to stop the mad dash for high energy prices.

Saturday, 14 October 2017

RELAX ABOUT SEA LEVEL RISE

Jo Nova has an excellent index on her blog and under the heading of "sea  level" there are a number of excellent posts which will bring you up to speed with this aspect of the global warming narrative. The general message is in the title of this post.



Friday, 13 October 2017

TWO BIG CRACKS IN THE CLIMATE CHANGE HYSTERIA EDIFICE IN ONE DAY

This article puts the case for major setbacks for climate alarmism. While no doubt these are serious setbacks, there is still some way to go. Nevertheless it is welcome news and it helps to stiffen the sinews of those in front-line politics who might otherwise be too timid to put their true views in the public domain. 

Thursday, 12 October 2017

USA EPA TO SCRAP CLEAN POWER PLAN

This article gives the details. At last the EPA is on the side of the people.  My hope is that if this goes ahead other governments may follow, but it's not guaranteed.

More details here.

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

CAN YOU HELP A STUDENT WITH HIS CLIMATE CHANGE SURVEY?

The following email came into my councillor's inbox on Monday, so, of course I took part.

Dear Councillor,

I am a PhD Student at Northumbria University, currently researching under the title of "Climate Change Perception, Reaction and Engagement in the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies: the case of youth participation”. My research would benefit greatly with input and opinions from councillors within the local government sector. I was hoping if you had some spare time you would be willing to complete a questionnaire. The questionnaire should only take roughly 10 minutes to complete, it follows all the Data Protection Laws, and only over 18 year olds can complete it.

The Questionnaire Link: here

If you are able to, why not help this research student with his PhD. I am sure he would welcome the views of others who are not councillors.

Looking at the title of his project I was surprised to see that it was about "the case of youth participation" in climate change (even though he says the survey is only open to those over 18) and yet he had asked the views of councillors, most of whom are far beyond the youth category, sadly. I suspect that my answers were not what he was expecting. I ticked the box at the end, saying that I would like to see his finished survey results. If I get them I will put them on the blog.


Tuesday, 10 October 2017

COLDEST EUROPEAN WINTER OF THE 21ST CENTURY PREDICTED

Here is the article giving this prediction which I am merely reporting. We will all be able to see how good a prediction this was in a few months time. 

Monday, 9 October 2017

AUSSIE CLIMATE SCEPTICS WEAR DOWN THE BoM

This article highlights the dogged way in which climate sceptics in Australia are keeping up the pressure on the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) to come clean over their data. Thanks to the campaigners and press backing, the BoM have been forced to answer some awkward questions. Progress is slow, but at least the public are beginning to see that there are serious issues over the integrity of the data. If only a similar light could be shone on our own Met Office. 

Sunday, 8 October 2017

WORLD WIND SPEEDS ARE SLOWING DOWN SINCE 1960 SAY SCIENTISTS

This article gives the details of this little known phenomenon. "Stilling" as it is called has important effects, the article explains. Of course some suggest that climate change may be behind the drop due to changing patterns in the way air circulates around the planet. Others say it could be due to ageing wind speed instruments producing inaccurate results. It sounds like there is much more research to be done - requiring more government funding no doubt!

Saturday, 7 October 2017

DECEITFUL CAMPAIGN BY UK OFFSHORE WIND LOBBY TO INFLUENCE MPS LEADS TO COMPLAINT

This piece explains how the claims of a reduction in the price of electricity from offshore wind farms is untrue. In most cases the prices paid for electricity from the UK’s offshore wind fleet have not fallen at all, and though there were small cuts to subsidies for new offshore projects built from 2015 on, this amounted to a reduction of around 5%.  The ads at Westminster station are deliberately misleading MPs and the wider public into thinking that existing wind farms have been cutting their prices by 50%.

Friday, 6 October 2017

USA EPA TO PROPOSE REPEALING THE CLEAN POWER PLAN

This piece provides the details. The Clean Power Plan, or CPP, was challenged in court by 27 states after Obama’s administration launched it in 2015. It is currently suspended by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which set a deadline of Friday for a status report from the EPA on how it plans to proceed.

Thursday, 5 October 2017

COMMON SENSE ON GW FROM A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING PHYSICIST

This 30 minute video is delivered in a very understated manner but it contains a lot of simple truths.  It was delivered by Ivar Giaever , born in 1929, who is a Norwegian-American physicist who shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1973. He is not a climate scientist, but he raises a lot of issues that need to be given more consideration.


Tuesday, 3 October 2017

"PLAN B" CLIMATE ALARMISTS WANT TO FORCE 100% EMISSIONS CUT BY 2050 ON UK

This article reveals yet more lunacy from a small group of climate alarmists here in the UK calling themselves "Plan B", including the former chief scientist to the government, Prof Sir David King. "Ministers should tighten the UK's official climate change target - or face the courts", the government's former chief scientist has said. I wish he could have his day in court, if only the government took a different view, but I fear they actually agree with him and so will probably simply amend the current 80% target to 100%. What could be easier than that? I particularly liked this: "The science has clearly hardened since the Climate Change Act was agreed," said Tim Crosland, a former government lawyer. Jonathan Crow, Attorney General to Prince Charles, and a former senior Treasury lawyer, would be the man to argue the case in court.

Perhaps some sceptics should take the government to court instead to try and get them to reduce the target. Let's abolish the target altogether and call it "Plan C" for common sense.  Far from the science hardening, the fact is the recent evidence is that warming has been a lot lower than predicted and the expected future warming is also expected to be lower. Not only that, but also other nations are not reducing their emissions in line with our present target. In fact the biggest emitters are planning to increase their emissions for the next decade or more. Any cuts that we make would be wiped out by the likes of China and India in one year. 

Monday, 2 October 2017

GREAT BARRIER REEF DAMAGE GREATLY EXAGGERATED

This article refers to the exaggerated statements by alarmists and how recent studies now contradict them. What we are seeing, yet again, is an attempt to get the public to support punitive measures to restrict the use of fossil fuels by making out that the damage they are causing is far worse than is the case. The more these attempts are found out the less support they will get. It is a classic story of the boy who cried wolf. 

Sunday, 1 October 2017

JUDGES DECISION MAY FORCE TRUMP TO REVERSE ENDANGERMENT FINDING

This piece sets out the reason why the President may have to act. Despite the 20-year non-warming, which clearly shows that the models are worthless for prediction, the Federal Appeals Court in Washington recently blocked a new natural gas pipeline’s regulatory approval. This ruling encourages Greens to keep thinking they can regulate gas and oil production and transport into oblivion.

Saturday, 30 September 2017

AT LAST - THE GOVERNMENT IS STARTING TO NOTICE THE HARMFUL EMISSIONS FROM BURNING WOOD

This article explains how particles of soot are increasing in UK cities as more people are switching to wood-burning stoves to heat their homes. Having encouraged the take-up of these stoves to cut emissions of CO2 our government is now waking up to the pollution they cause. Yet more foolishness in a pointless attempt to save the planet.

Friday, 29 September 2017

EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO PROTECT US FROM EXTREME WEATHER - OR REDUCE CO2?

This piece looks at the alternative to spending $ billions on reducing CO2 emissions. It is making  our cities more resilient to extreme weather. It is a very important consideration and most people who were asked this question would (with a little forethought) select the one that offered real protection, as opposed to something that offered pie in the sky. I leave the reader to decide which is which!

Thursday, 28 September 2017

PREDICTIONS OF CONTROLLING BEHAVIOUR OVER SMART METERS COMING OUT IN UK

This Daily Mail article shows the behaviour of our power companies in their quest to get us to change over to smart meters. All this is so predictable. When the majority have been hooked the rest will become subject to even more coercive tactics. So don't give in.

Wednesday, 27 September 2017

BOOSTS FOR CLIMATE SCEPTICS

This article explains how climate sceptics are beginning to win the scientific arguments against climate alarm. Gradually the alarmists are being forced to concede that their models have exaggerated the degree of warming. 

Tuesday, 26 September 2017

GREEN ACTIVISTS DECLARE WAR ON PIPELINES

This piece looks at the increasingly desperate and dangerous methods being employed by eco-fanatics to try and disrupt the flow of fossil fuels in the USA. Lt us hope the forces of law and order can prevail as this is also a method that could be adopted by the Muslim fundamentalists crowd too. 

Monday, 25 September 2017

AUSSIE CLIMATE SCEPTICS GET SERIOUS ABOUT CHALLENGING ALARMISM

This piece shows the large "advertisement" in a major Australian newspaper paid for by climate sceptics. I wonder if or when we shall see anything similar in the British press? 

Sunday, 24 September 2017

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTIONS?

This article attempts to explain the contradictions at the heart of the climate change hypothesis. What I want to know is, how long can they keep this pretence going?

Saturday, 23 September 2017

GERMANY'S $800 BILLION MERKEL-MADE CLIMATE DISASTER

This article looks at how the Germans are paying three times the price of USA electricity and yet 40% of it comes from coal. At a cost of $800 billion it's a wonder that Merkel has any chance of getting re-elected, yet she has. Clearly the opposition are missing something

Friday, 22 September 2017

DON'T BET ON THE GOVERNMENT RETURNING TO SANITY ON CLIMATE

This article is by UK Labour MP, Graham Stringer, who as a trained scientist has long been sceptical of the climate change hypothesis. He has been attacked for his stance and even though the climate scientists have revised their opinion on the need for immediate action (slightly), he does not expect any change of direction.

Thursday, 21 September 2017

PATRICK MOORE'S BACKGROUND AND HIS GREAT LECTURE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Patrick Moore was a leading figure in the Greenpeace organisation and he now gives talks where he opposes many of the things they now advocate. In this lecture he explains his journey and why he now believes that banning fossil fuels is wrong. It is a very interesting lecture, well delivered. A real tour-de-force.

Wednesday, 20 September 2017

ELECTRIC CARS ARE STILL A LONG WAY OFF FOR MOST OF US

This piece looks at the reality of the introduction of electric vehicles in the UK. In short it will take a lot longer than the 2040 year announced by the government, otherwise we will have chaos. For a start there are nowhere near enough charging points available, and even if there were there is insufficient capacity in the grid to power them. Also there is a lot of resistance by the public to buy them for a whole number of reasons including cost, fear of being left stranded with a flat battery being two.

The public will need a lot of persuading. I expect we will see a gradual ban on non-electric cars being allowed into cities as well as increased taxes on petrol and diesel. That will change hearts and minds, as well as a gradual drop in the number of petrol stations. Bu I still think it will be at least 2050 before fossil fuelled cars become a rare sight - that is if the government does not change its mind before then as global warming becomes even more of a sick joke.  

Tuesday, 19 September 2017

GLOBAL WARMING "NOT AS BAD AS WE THOUGHT", SAY SCIENTISTS

This piece in today's Mail explains the latest thinking of these climate alarmist scientists. Are they getting their excuses in early, knowing that their previous predictions are now so way out that they know they will be rumbled? I note they seem to think that China is slowing down its emissions much faster than predicted. The sounds like a pretty weak excuse as world emissions are still continuing to rise. How long before they have to admit they were completely wrong? Perhaps another decade will force their hand.

More comment on this story at the GWPF

And a good summary on JoNova's website

Monday, 18 September 2017

SMART METERS - MORE GRIEF COMES TO LIGHT

This piece gives a good overview of the issues. Basically the government are desperate to get the public to install these meters. They claim it's to "help them cut their bills", but the truth is that the likely savings are minimal, whereas the cost of installing them is £420 per house.

This article gives more details. At the end of the article is a piece about the smart meters project being way behind target. The article mentions "an end to estimated billing" and "real-time information" being sent from these meters. What they don't say is that this is likely (almost certain) to lead to real-time pricing and automatic switching off of smart appliances. These meters will lead to customers finding it virtually impossible to check their bills and lay them open to being over-charged. Before this can happen the government need the majority of people to sign up. Let's hope they continue to be wary of this "big brother" project, disguised as a money-saving scheme.  

Sunday, 17 September 2017

TRUMP SAYS "NO CHANGE" ON PARIS AGREEMENT

This headline may seem as though he is changing his mind on quitting the Paris climate accord, but in reality nothing has changed. He always said he would look at substantial renegotiation to give the USA much better terms, but this was never a realistic option. Donald Trump has proved himself to be a man of his word and I believe he will see this through, despite the enormous pressure he is under to change his mind.