JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Obama’s $2.5 trillion plan to kill jobs, coal, make a 0.1% reduction in CO2, and cool world by zero degrees

Welcome to the fairy-land world where we try to control the weather with our electrical generation sources.

Obama’s new plan to stop storms and hold back the tide could make the US poorer by as much as $2.5 trillion dollars, but will not make any difference to the global climate even if it is carried out (somehow) and even if the highly immature, overly politicized science is “right” (despite the evidence). The plan is for the U.S. to cut overall electrical power plant emissions by 32 percent by 2030, compared to 2005 levels.

This “ambitious” goal is purely symbolic. Here’s why. Electrical power plants make 37% of US emissions, which are about one-fifth of global human emissions, which are 4% of total CO2 emissions globally. So a 32% cut in US electrical emissions will result in a 0.1% cut in total global CO2 emissions (at best)*. If the Obama/EPA plan is “successful” and if the IPCC are right, Paul Knappenberger and Pat Michaels estimate that  Obama’s new plan will cool the world by an unmeasurable 0.02°C by 2100.

The theoretical, best case (fantasy) cost

“The Obama administration said it would cost $8.4 billion annually by 2030, but argued that power bills would decrease because people would use less electricity and rely more heavily on low-cost sources like wind and solar.” — AP

Wind and solar are “low cost” sources only if we assume an unforeseen paradigm breakthrough in technology occurs and is deployed by 2030, or we hobble coal power with heavy attainable impractical and pointless requirements like carbon sequestration. In the first situation we don’t need government legislation, because if it happens everyone will want “low cost” solar and wind. At the moment, wind and solar are both high cost electrical sources, and high cost at carbon abatement too. Doubly useless, you might say. In Australia carbon abatement through wind energy costs $50-$100 a ton, seven times more than other methods. (Only someone who really doesn’t like the environment would use wind and solar. Where does all that money go?)

NERA Economic consulting estimates US electricity prices will rise 12 -17%. The Heritage Foundation estimates that rising energy costs will have an economy wide effect and the  US will lose $2.5 trillion  in GDP.  Choosing expensive electricity as a form of global climate control will cost more than one million jobs.[2]

Currently wind and solar provide 4.4% and 0.4% (respectively) of US electricity, compared to 39% from coal.[1]

The new Obama plan makes wind and solar more competitive by hobbling coal. The plan effectively cripples new coal plants by making them “uneconomic” . If new coal fired plants have to use carbon capture or “sequestration” they will not even get into the planning stage. Carbon capture coal generators cost 60% more to build and then waste 40% of the energy produced by the plant to stuff a useful voluminous fertilizer gas back into the ground.

32% renewables is uncharted territory in a major (non-nuclear) economy

The legal situation

Obviously the battle is going to hit the courts, employ lots of lawyers, and take years to resolve.

LAWSUITS ABOUND

Threats of legal action started arrived within minutes of Obama unveiling his plan. In Texas, Kentucky, Kansas, Indiana and Wisconsin, to name a few, top officials said they would vigorously fight the rule, as did energy producers like Murray Energy Corp., a coal mining company.

In the coal-heavy state of West Virginia, state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey predicted that 20 to 25 states would join his suit against the government.

“Their legal foundation is very, very shaky,” Morrisey said of the Obama administration.

Morrisey echoed other critics in arguing Obama has exceeded his authority by requiring statewide steps like renewable energy use and reduced energy demand. He said under the Clean Air Act, the government can only require steps within a power plant.

In another hint of the likely legal strategy, Morrisey cited the Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which protects the states against undue intrusion by Washington.

PASSING THE BATON

Another key threat could come from Obama’s successor. Because of the lengthy timeline – states have 7 years to start complying – the next president will have ample time to unravel the rules if he or she chooses to do so. That means that a cornerstone of Obama’s presidential legacy rests in someone else’s hands.

There’s more on the legal question of Obama’s climate plan  here. As is the case in any sick democracy, it’s not about the legal clauses, or the constitution, so much as which judges were appointed by what type of politician. Who really runs the country?

Q: Which way is the appeals court likely to lean?

A: The fate of the regulation depends heavily on which randomly assigned three-judge panel hears the case. Until recently, the court had a majority of Republican-appointed judges. But Obama has appointed four of his own nominees in recent years, and Democratic appointees are generally viewed as more sympathetic to action by government agencies.

Q: Once the appeals court rules, the losing side will almost certainly seek a Supreme Court review. Is the high court likely to take the case?

A: The nine Supreme Court justices have shown considerable interest in the Obama administration’s air pollution regulations, hearing three cases in the last two years.

The rulings have been mixed. In April 2014, the court upheld a regulation limiting air pollution across state lines. In June 2014, it largely upheld the government’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from major utilities but did exempt some facilities that the agency wanted to regulate. Then, last month, the court ruled against the EPA for not considering compliance costs when it moved to limit emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants, mainly from coal-fired power plants.

Q: What is the likely outcome?

A: Industry lawyers say the high court has become increasingly skeptical of large-scale agency rule-making. The EPA’s “outside the fenceline” proposal could raise eyebrows among the court’s conservatives, who have already expressed concern about the government using the Clean Air Act as a tool to combat climate change.

So are the people making these plans gushingly inept. But there is a $1.5 Trillion dollar industry that depends on ineptitude.

To cool just a hundredth degree,
Costs the U.S. an outlandish fee,
As to power production,
With coal-mining reduction,
From Obama’s regulation decree.

–Ruairi


*The 0.1% reduction in global CO2 is a purely theoretical “highest possible estimate”. The US effect will be less if India or China produce more CO2 (they plan too).

REFERENCES

[1^] US Energy Information Administration, FAQ list: What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source?

[2^] Nicolas Loris, The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, July 7th, 2015. The many problems of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan and Climate Regulations.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Fact Sheet: “By the Numbers”.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (112 votes cast)
Obama's $2.5 trillion plan to kill jobs, coal, make a 0.1% reduction in CO2, and cool world by zero degrees, 9.3 out of 10 based on 112 ratings

256 comments to Obama’s $2.5 trillion plan to kill jobs, coal, make a 0.1% reduction in CO2, and cool world by zero degrees

  • #
    Harry Passfield

    Don’t you just love Obama-nomics! Your electricity bills will be cheaper because you will use less electricity – but the unit cost will be three times as much. That means, in order to get a lower bill you have to cut power use by two thirds! Paying more for less.

    700

    • #

      Those caves are looking ever more like reality. Perhaps not caves, but pre-industrial revolution style accommodation and lifestyle is certainly a possibility. As western society becomes third world (and I’m sure that there are pockets of that already), a new first world will emerge in China, India etc, and anyone that dares to produce cheap electricity.

      350

      • #
        Mike

        In many parts of the world, those caves, the accommodation and the lifestyle is called ‘austerity’. Greece’s environment minister is overjoyed with front-running the required cuts in carbon emissions in his country [sarc]. In the US, places like Detroit are going gangbusters at reducing anthropogenic emissions of all kinds too, in another instance.

        Central banks can create money out of thin air. If carbon is monetized, then that also can be added to the list of things that can be created or disappeared out of thin air.

        Just let me issue and control money…. and the carbon credits (Control your Carbon), and I don’t really care at all who writes the laws. Or something like that.

        80

    • #
      Peter Miller

      I listened to Obama’s announcement, it made my skin crawl.

      Either the most powerful man on the planet knew he was lying, or he is the most pig ignorant president the USA has ever had. Either way, it is scary concept.

      To paraphrase someone a little greater than myself, “Never in the history of human politics has so little been achieved at such a cost on the whim of someone so incompetent.”

      640

      • #
        Popeye26

        Peter,

        “Either the most powerful man on the planet knew he was lying, or he is the most pig ignorant president the USA has ever had”

        Simple answer – he’s BOTH: a LIAR AND PIG IGNORANT!!

        Worst US president EVER!!

        Cheers,

        400

        • #
          Gary Meyers

          If the media weren’t so far up Obama’s posterior, then he would be exposed as the ignoramus that he is.

          211

        • #
          Snowleopard

          It’s pretty well known that the CIA controls most major media, ex-director Bill Casey even bragged about it back in the 80s. They control much more today worldwide.

          Less known is that O’Bomber’s parents were CIA and he was company raised and trained. (Try finding a supposed college classmate who remembers him.) O’Bomber, though he handles power, is not really powerful; but an operative who does what he is told and is closely watched. Lying is just part of the job.

          61

      • #
        Manfred

        Pure ideologically driven posturing for Paris, and doubtless a cherished belief of seeing the World saved by UN eco-edict.

        Obama shouldn’t have the last laugh on carbon rules
        Washington Examiner

        Why are these rules so much more stringent than ones Obama had proposed earlier? The best explanation has nothing to do with science and everything to do with an administration seeking to boost its moral authority on the issue of climate change. There is a United Nations climate summit in Paris coming up this December. Obama does not believe he can bully developing countries into hobbling their economies unless he can claim he is hobbling his own country’s economy first.

        210

      • #
        James Murphy

        I have never really understood why people think he is such an inspirational public speaker. Maybe it’s a cultural thing, as I’m not an American, but all he inspires me to do, is to stop listening to him.

        From my perspective, Obama makes shonky used car dealers look credible by comparison.

        110

    • #
      Dennis

      Shorten-omics too, the three tier not a carbon tax emissions trading he announced at the ALP National Conference recently together with a fifty per cent so called renewable energy target.

      210

    • #
      OriginalsSteve

      It will benefit the elderly…you cant feel the cold when youre dead, due to energy poverty….

      110

      • #
        Angry

        I think that is their modus operandi – cull the population due to the fact that these lunatics see human beings as nothing but parasites on the Earth (except for themselves of course)…..

        110

        • #
          Just-A-Guy

          Eugenics was never rejected. It was put on hold until a more compliant population could be produced.

          Abe

          70

    • #
      Olaf Koenders

      “The Obama administration said it would cost $8.4 billion annually by 2030, but argued that power bills would decrease because people would use less electricity and rely more heavily on low-cost sources like wind and solar.” — AP

      Here in Albury we recently suffered the pointless exercise where our already tiny rubbish bins are now collected fortnightly and we were all allocated a large “green” waste bin. The council reckons they’ll reduce greenhouse gases and also increase the lifespan of the local tip.

      Morons.

      People don’t halve their rubbish simply because there’s half the chance of having it removed – waste product packaging size doesn’t halve in line with their plan.

      Obummer’s idea that wind and solar are low cost is incredibly out of touch. He’s probably never paid a bill in his life.

      America: prepare to rug up and eat your food raw and cold.

      Thing is, neighbouring Wodonga were wanting to implement this stupidity as well and never did as their council made the “foolish” mistake of testing the scheme first and were told to go jump.

      151

      • #
        Angry

        “Olaf Koenders”,
        Where we live in country NSW we have 3 bins.
        Green – emptied weekely
        Red & yellow – empties on alternate weeks.

        The stupid council does not want any plastic in the green bin or yellow.
        Therefor they expect green waste to be wraped in newspaper.
        Do they honestly expect people to wrap slushly food scraps in newspaper?
        Do they expect you to purchase newspapers just for this purpose after already paying rates?
        If you use garbage bags and put the green waste into the red bin it then sits there for 2 weeks festering into a stinking health hazard !

        PS We just put it into plastic bags left over from the grocery shopping and use whatever bin is to be emptied that week red or yellow. If yellow then recycling is put on the top.

        All this because the useless council won’t empty all bins on a weekely basis…….

        140

        • #
          Olaf Koenders

          Albury council also allocated us all a small kitchen tidy basket and a roll of small green bags for food scraps. That bag of scraps is supposed to go on top of the green waste in the green bin, collected weekly, separated and recycled. Trouble is, I don’t know what they’re gonna do with the food scraps. It’s illegal to feed to farm animals now.

          Lucky I’ve got 2 red bins but I no longer have a yellow recycle one as it was pinched. I’m thinking of simply painting the lids the appropriate colours.

          The council were hoping these measures would reduce CH4 (methane) being emitted from the tip as it’s 23 times as “dangerous” as CO2. God.. everybody run for my life!

          I wrote to them and told them that their “planet-saving” measures would amount to stopping a single fart in some 10,000 packed Olympic stadiums while costing us yet more money. Besides, aren’t they already tapping the gas and selling it? Sure they are, but we don’t see any benefit of that.

          100

        • #
          Hugh

          Do they honestly expect people to wrap slushly food scraps in newspaper?

          Err, no. You can use a paperbag, or a special plastic-like bag which decomposes. You buy them with $$$ and the eco-business ran by your uncle runs well. If you like origami, you can use newspaper.

          Of course, your work is required and you still pay more, and the collected waste is pretty worthless, but you get the warm fuzzy feeling because you at least do something.

          IMO, food waste and similar should be composted in a composter locally, no need to truck it away. It’s easy, provided your bin is not used by the white trash nearby as I have the case. The rest could be collected only when the container becomes fullish.

          30

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Ww have a general rubbish bin, collected weekly, a bin for plastics and paper, collected fortnightly, and a green crate for glass bottles (which is open and an embarrassment), which is also collected fortnightly, but on the weeks when the plastics and paper is not collected.

          We also have a worm driven compost bin, by choice, which has nothing to do with the council.

          The interesting thing is, that if you go to the tip, you can see the various trucks: General rubbish, plastics and paper, and glass bottles; all dumping their load in the same place.

          So the sorting has nothing to do with the environment, or recycling, but has everything to do with the efficiency (or otherwise) of collection.

          20

  • #

    If it went ahead it would certainly be the end of the US as a world super-power. But that is after all what countries like China have been wanting the US to do – sign it’s own death warrant as a superpower.

    671

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      Fear-mongering? Citations please.

      172

      • #
        gai

        I have the citations siting in moderation. And if that short piece isn’t enough I have a lot more.

        I have been following the demise of the USA for 20 years.

        ————
        Because of the length, and it being about the US rather than climate, I asked gai to resubmit lower. Gai’s answer is now at #27. Thanks, Jo

        331

      • #

        Harry Twinotter, please,

        save yourself the embarrassment.

        You don’t know enough about electrical power generation to offer informed comment here, other than meaningless one liners.

        Or perhaps you really would like to tell us how you are going to find 476TWH of power, and only use $8.4 Billion a year for 15 years to do it.

        Off you go then, oh, and umm, citations please!!!

        Tony.

        712

        • #
          Spetzer86

          TonyfromOz,

          There was this report from Finland that was arguing it was possible for them to hit over 100TWH with renewables: http://www.lut.fi/documents/10633/70751/LUT-Vision-and-initial-feasibility-of-a-recarbonised-Finnish-energy-system-for-2050.pdf

          Looks like they were calculating total funding at about 2.5X current costs, depending on scenario chosen. Some of their assumptions do seem a bit stretched.

          90

          • #

            Spetzer86, and everyone else too, I suppose.

            The U.S. has already got 539TWH already from renewables, and the breakdown is a little tricky to understand, using percentages.

            That total is 13% of U.S. Total generation.

            Take out Hydro and the percentage drops to 6.8%

            Just the Wind Component alone is 4.4%. (Total power generation of 181.8TWH from a Nameplate of 68,000MW at a Capacity Factor of 30%)

            All Solar adds up to 0.44%.

            So, cutting back on coal fired power by 32% means that they need to find a FURTHER 476TWH of delivered power, or the complete existing total U.S. wind inventory multiplied by 2.63.

            So, that’s now a (NEW) added Nameplate of 180,000MW.

            STARTING NOW, then that’s 12,000MW of Nameplate every year.

            A huge scale wind plant is 500MW, so that’s a NEW huge wind plant coming on line every 15 days ….. for the next 15 years. (Umm, good luck with that)

            Now, the current average cost, and trust me, finding out any accurate costings these days for wind is not easy, because, umm, all of a sudden, they have become pretty cagy about detailing wind plant costs in total. However, it is averaging around $2.25 Million per MW of Nameplate.

            So, at 12,000MW per year, they’re looking at, (er, sorry Mr. President) $27 Billion per annum, for the next 15 years, and that’s not the end of it, because the current wind fleet will be time expired by then, so they’ll then need to ramp it up further to replace them.

            So, besides the actual physical improbability that the construction rate can actually be achieved, I have serious doubts as to where the money will be coming from.

            Now, here I suspect that they have used the Nameplate instead of actual power delivered, because $8.4 Billion is related to $27 Billion by a factor of (around) three, and 30% is the current Capacity Factor rating of all wind power.

            I know that no one will believe a word I say, but hey I can only go on the actual data.

            Link to total power generation: (note the figure for coal fired power in the left column and with respect to 2014 in the top columns)

            Link to Renewables total generation: (wind in the left column and with respect to 2014 in the top columns)

            Also of note in that first link is the total power generation in the far right column, and note how that has risen over the last three years, and this is for generation only, and actual consumption (they are two different things) has risen over the last five years, giving lie to the fact that less power will be used, as this has been the period when this less power consumption is good meme has gained traction.

            Lastly, Harry Twinotter, this isn’t fear mongering at all. This is actual data.

            Like I said, who’d believe me when it’s President Obama who has said what he did with such earnest hand on heart belief that what he says is the true fact of the matter.

            This won’t be done, because it CAN’T be done. There’s not that much money, and it’s almost a physical impossibility.

            Tony.

            441

            • #

              From that first link above, (Net generation from every source) look at Nuclear Power, 797,067GWH. (incidentally, enough to power Australia four times over)

              That’s from 99 reactors at 61 Nuclear power plants, with a total Nameplate of 104,000MW.

              So wind power currently has two thirds of the Nameplate of Nuclear, and Nuclear generates 4.4 times the power as wind does.

              That wind Nameplate equates to around 150,000 PLUS individual towers.

              The total power delivered from all those towers is currently being delivered by eleven of those nuclear power plants.

              Makes you think, eh!

              Tony.

              281

        • #
        • #
          el gordo

          The mine in the Hunter Valley has now been passed by the NSW government, but the price of coal is a possible deterrent against massive investment.

          “The spot price of coal is about $60 a tonne. They sold a coalmine in north Queensland the other day for one dollar.

          “I’m sure there’s people vastly smarter than me back in China saying, ‘Why are we about to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into something that we can buy, if we really wanted one’.”

          Barnaby Joyce

          50

          • #
            ianl8888


            They sold a coalmine in north Queensland the other day for one dollar

            Isaac Plains

            The “take or pay” contract was the loss leader (no, I’m not excusing the previous JV partners for their lack of foresight in signing it as it was). It meant that the mine contracted to pay rail freight on a specific annual tonnage and was required to keep paying the full freight amount even when they wished to halve production rates

            The new owners of course are not bound by the older freight contract. They have negotiated their own

            60

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          TonyfromOz.

          Always trying to change the subject without answering the question?

          If someone makes an extraordinary claim, I am entitled to ask for evidence. Still waiting for Scottish Skeptic.

          020

          • #
            Angry

            Like you are so forthcoming with all your absurd statements “Harry Twinotter”.

            Hypocrite !

            101

          • #

            Oh dear, Harry Twinotter.

            The MAIN topic is the cutback in CO2 emissions by closing coal fired power plants for their emissions.

            That actually IS the subject, so I didn’t change it at all.

            Anyway, what is most heartening here is that you haven’t disputed my calculations. At least you know they are correct.

            You could have perhaps found some references that might dispute what I say, but hey, I know I’m safe there, because you’d have no idea where to start, and once you really did find out where to look, you’d find that they agree with me. And Harry, trust me on this. If you did find something to disprove those figures, you would have been back here doing just that, like a shot.

            I have no need to change the subject. (For once) I actually was on topic.

            Tony.

            220

        • #
          bobl

          I can answer that… it’s because the state governments have to pay. So yes it costs the federal government 8Bn, it costs everyone else 10 Trillion.

          20

      • #
        James Murphy

        Harry, when you start providing links to evidence for your arguments, then you’ll be in a position ask the same of others.

        Still, don’t go away, because it seems (to me at least) that people enjoy your particular brand of superficial commentary and deliberate (I guess) misrepresentation.

        292

      • #
        Manfred

        Climageddon?

        90

      • #
        James Bradley

        Harry Twatter,

        Same as Australia when the Carbon tax was introduced.

        Per kw price rose from 18cents 2008 to 32cents 2015.

        Daily supply fee went from nil to 95 cents in 2009 and rose to $1.26 in 2015.

        Cut your power use in half and you still pay more.

        You certainly have reality issues, Harry, either that or your still living at home with mummy.

        423

        • #
          GregS

          More likely is that Harry’s friends all liked the carbon tax and great warming scare on Facebook so it must be true.

          112

          • #
            Angry

            No doubt they all had investments in carbon trading and looked set to rake in the money !!!

            No wonder they want a carbon DIOXIDE (PLANT FOOD) tax!!

            73

        • #

          In fact that is exactly what they are doing with water supply. You pay by usage (per litre), but the service and waste water charges far exceed the actual water usage charge. BTW, our usage cost is around $56, waste water charge $258 and water service charge $56. The service charges are in the order of 85% of the total bill, a cost that cannot be reduced even if we used no water whatsoever.

          110

          • #

            That is done with electric bills in Wyoming. There are about 8 to 10 different fee schedules for usage plus a monthly fee. If the power company wants a rate increase but cannot get it with the electricity usage, they just up the monthly fee. I complained that there is no incentive to lower energy usage since that just results in more and more fees that have nothing to with usage. If conservation is what is wanted, the reality that income goes down when usage goes down needs to be explained to these persons. Asking people to conserve and piing fees on when they do is a losing idea.

            150

            • #
              OriginalsSteve

              I think once enough people go solar ( plus batteries ) I think the power companies will really really hurt. But serves them right.

              However, the bigger game as I see it isnt about power cost, its about crippling our economy, and introducing power rationing.

              As our infrastructure collapses, we will become weak.

              All I can think of is China who would love to walk in and administer the coup-de-grace economically and take Oz for itself….heck thay already own a great chunk fo the place legally….

              60

              • #

                The only way that we, and quite a number of neighbours could go solar is if our council cut down a very large number of large, old, trees. Trees are sacred, so that’s unlikely to happen.

                30

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                No, the power companies won’t hurt.

                They have “fixed” service overheads, and loans to replay plus interest, and salaries for staff, and office and land rental, and …

                None of which is actually linked to the amount of electricity supplied or used.

                If you want to go solar with batteries, fine. But if you want the assurance that you can still draw power from the grid, as and when you require, or if you want to feed back into the grid when you have excess power you want to get rid of, then you need a connection, and you have to pay the fixed charges, to cover the service overheads.

                Also, if you don’t have a connection, you will find that electric clocks don’t keep very accurate time, and other appliances may also not work as expected.

                The cost of an erg of energy is the least of it.

                00

          • #
            Angry

            Just as an aside are all Australians aware of this ?

            Power bills to rise by $560 a year if electricity networks get their way :-

            http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/power-bills-to-rise-by-560-a-year-if-electricity-networks-get-their-way-20150802-gips50.html

            To bad about the increasing number of consumers having their electricity disconnected on a daily basis in this country due to the unaffordable electricity prices !!

            These companies must be reined in.

            How much are their CEOS and executives being paid ????

            73

          • #
            bobl

            Thats nothing, my service charge is $56 and usage charge varies between zero and $5.70.

            00

          • #
            James Murphy

            Bemused – I don’t know where you’re located, but in South Australia, the water bill is similar in breakdown, but the disposal/sewerage charge is based on property value – which might be OK for some people, but for most, it means the bill is pretty much a wealth tax, because the actual water charges are miniscule by comparison.

            I guess that’s what we deserve for being impudent enough to want to own our own homes, and not sponge off the state…

            10

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          James Bradley.

          Name calling.

          215

          • #
            Yonniestone

            [snip]

            93

          • #
            James Bradley

            Harry Twatter,

            You got nothin’ but an Oedipus complex.

            31

          • #

            Harry, you need to check out what name calling is. If I call you ***** (saving the moderator a snip there), that’s name calling. If I say you are detached from reality or live in your mother’s basement (which is a compliment in the USA—remember “pajama boy”, hero of Obamacare?) that is commenting on your behaviour or state of mind. These are not equivalent.

            I can see how that could be confusing to someone who believes in AGW, since science/politics/bullying/powerplay are all one. However, when you get outside that little fiefdom, that’s not how the real world of science works.

            31

            • #
              Michael Collard

              “Harry Twatter” is not name calling?

              20

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Perhaps James has selective dyslexia, brought on by having to put up with twerps and morons, who add nothing of intellectual value, including interjections on matters of trivia?

                And who could blame him?

                01

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        I wouldn’t normally bother but 50 seemed such a nice round number for a SPACER.

        KK

        10

    • #
      Leonard Lane

      And Mike, Obama has said repeatedly that the influence and power of big nations should be reduced because one country should not be over another one. Like other mad tyrants, Obama clearly means to do what he said he would do. People scoffed at the books of WW II tyrants and suffered millions of death and untold destruction as a result.
      The Republican Party has offered no significant opposition to Obama on Obamacare, his secret trade deals, appeasing Iran, and wrecking the US economy.
      Of those Republican candidates running for President, only one or two would try to undo Obamarule. The others would happily go along with it. Things look very bad in the US for the next 3 years.
      On another subject, Obama is hollowing the US Military by reducing Army and Nave personell levels to pre- WW II levels.

      251

  • #

    Well India announced recently that it was doubling its domestic coal production.

    350

    • #
      tom0mason

      Bernd Felsche,

      Not just India, quite a few more non-Western governments are waking-up to the fact that buying coal delivers the power they need at a cost they can afford.

      A few more new projects showing the rest of the world that low cost coal does efficiently deliver the power they need.

      Many others are >>>noted here<<<
      For instance 1100 MW of new coal-fired power plants planned for Philippines.

      200

    • #
      King Geo

      Quoting Bernd: “Well India announced recently that it was doubling its domestic coal production”.

      Well India will go from strength to strength thanks to cost effective coal fired base load energy generation. Meanwhile Obama’s “grandiose idealistic decarbonisation plan” will do the total opposite to the USA Economy and drive it down into the abyss like the EU Economy thanks to its fast tracking to RE [wind & solar]. A case of economic self destruction based on idealistic AGW Theory which in reality is merely a myth – extraordinary!!

      But don’t despair. A good campaign by the Republicans in the 2016 USA Presidential Election is likely to see the red party returned to Govt – one hopes for the USA’s sake.

      210

      • #
        Leonard Lane

        Returning the presidency to a Republican will only make a difference if it is not Bush, Christie, and the other Democrat-lite RINOS. Only 2 show any chance of changing things.
        Trump and Cruz. The rest are worse than useless.
        We don’t need a King Bush, or a Queen Clinton or any Democrats hiding as Republicans.

        140

        • #
          King Geo

          So Leonard, Trump is the Republican’s “Trump Card”.

          Alternatively GOP could Cruz to victory with your other recommended candidate.

          I thought Jed Bush would be like the former Bush Prezzies, ie back fossil fuels and dispense with the “Economy Wrecking” alternative (RE) currently being promoted by Obama and his likely successor Hillary.

          00

    • #
      David Maddison

      Good for them! At least they know what they’re doing.

      10

    • #
      Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia

      Oh, Bummer

      00

  • #
    turnedoutnice

    Recently, in my self-imposed task of revealing all aspects of Hansen’s and the IPCC’s Climate Fraud, I came across a fact, in plain sight, which invalidates all the modelling. I am insisting the IPCC withdraws all its papers on climate modelling!

    Because the addition of 333 W/m^2 mean ‘back radiation’, really an exitance incapable by itself of doing thermodynamic work, to real 63 W/m^2 net surface IR, all going to Space, the climate models vastly exaggerated predicted lapse rate. So, in 1981_Hansen_etal.pdf, they created a non-existent 5-6 km OLR energy source to offset the 333 by 238.5, leaving 94.5 W/m^2.

    The non-existent 40% extra energy over reality is supposed to partition 94% to oceans, the rest, 5.7 W/m^2 to the local atmosphere. That 5.7 is really 3.5 x real partial CO2 atmospheric exitance increase in the industrial era. The 3.5 feedback is another fraud in hind-casting. Modern models misuse Kirchhoff’s Law of Radiation to get the Down |OLR|.

    However, they even got the bl**dy fraud wrong! Because ~42% of OLR is in the 8 – 14 micron ‘Atmospheric Window’, real Down |OLR|, if it existed, is limited to 138 W/m^2. Therefore, instead of 40% extra energy, it should be 82% or ~195 W/m^2. These prize chumps have two choices; either spend anotyher 34 years fiddling past data to pretend twice real heating, or give up!

    00

  • #
    Lars Silen

    There is a very simple solution. Shut down all coal fired plants for a single day and let people feel the resultat …

    300

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      We used to do that, and for more than a day, too, in the 1970s when Hawke was president of the ACTU. That is why hospitals and businesses which can’t afford to shut down altogether, e.g. freezers, exiting buildings, &c now have generators for emergency supply.

      It was Joh Bjelke-Petersen who eventually put a stop to it.

      170

      • #
        Manfred

        Been there, done that.
        The coal miners strikes of the 1970′s in the UK led to times during winter when childhood was punctuated by black outs. And that was when folk still remembered just enough to sit around candle lit pianos and sing to keep warm and slightly amused.

        A power impoverished future that awaits those unable to afford power as they gather to keep warm at community centers when their furniture and the city park trees are long gone. On reflection, it is doubtful that this could last long. The eco-marxist elite must inevitably be swept away as rebadged pollutants.

        200

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Manfred , for some reason your comment made me feel very nostalgic for the old days.

          Perhaps it was the image of community singing from the bus on the way back from pub picnics.

          Very melancholy!!

          KK

          30

    • #
      Ian George

      So true. My suggestion for coal stations is to shut down for winter. That should be about a 32% reduction in emissions.

      110

  • #
    bobl

    Obama’s plan is a lot like Short on. They count in nameplate, and don’t take account of land or backup, or losses, or transmission equipment or three fold equipment replacements over the lifespan of the equivalent coal or Nuke plant or even insurance on the fragile darlings. Like Short On’s plan Obama’s plan costs at least Trillions in direct cost commitments if they want a real rather than a nameplate 32%.

    The reason Obama can claim such a low cost is that the states have to bear the real multi Trillion dollar costs, it’s a lie, a fiddle a deceipt on the states.

    Not only that, noone takes account of the fact that land around wind turbines needs to be stripped of trees, which means a loss of CO2 sinking capacity and wildlife habitat. Then there’s the lifecycle carbon dioxide costs meaning that at best the turbine saves 20% of its nameplate x capacity factor, or about 0.2 x 0.2 0.04 or 4% of the nameplate capacity and at worst increases CO2 emissions this amount of reduction wont even offset demand growth over the period. And as I’ve previously mentioned when Obama sends US power costs to 50c per kWh what is to stop people from generating their own at 25c per kWh using oil. US diesel is much cheaper than here! On the evidence it’s actually better in CO2 terms to switch to USC Coal than to use wind power. Of course that wouldn’t satisfy the la la land dwellers in Obama’s universe (because clearly he doesn’t live in the same universe as I).

    One more point for our American friends, some states like Alaska, Florida, Oaklahoma will NOT be able to use such fragile tech because of cyclones, snow and ice or low solar insolation. This rule is not equal as it applies across the country. The costs to these state could be much much higher. Is that constitutional to impose near impossible criteria on just some states?

    430

    • #
      gai

      Bobl,

      Most states have weather or other problems.

      The east coast has hurricanes and blizzards. The mid-west has tornadoes and the west coast has earthquakes.

      Hail, which can do a number on Solar panels, hits any where. I have to replace my roof soon because of the hail damage. In 2011 the largest hailstone recorded fell near Gotebo, Oklahoma. AFTER melting in the guys freezer (electric was off) it was 7-inch (17.8-centimeter) diameter and almost two pounds. Hail has flattened crops in many countries.

      Lab tests found solar panels incorporating clear silicon material were likely to be damaged by 1-inch diameter hailstones, while solar panels covered in acrylic were able to withstand stimulated hailstones of up to 2 inches in diameter.

      Wind Turbines:

      ABSTRACT
      …..a blade could dynamically unbalance the turbine, which could destroy the entire machine. Besides the huge financial loss if a turbine fails, safety is a concern for anything near the turbine. Loads on turbines are stochastic and include wind, ice, hail, gravity, tower shadowing, and gyroscopic forces. The complex loading makes it difficult to predict the exact life of the turbine. Also, since the turbines are so large, they are difficult to inspect for imperfections that occur during remote manufacturing and for damage that occurs during operation……
      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470061626.shm116/abstract

      220

      • #

        When it’s cold, damp and still, wind turbines are turned using electrical power to prevent the wings from icing up which, when the wind returns, would result in (lethal) ice throws of very large lumps over distances of hundreds of metres.

        That electrical power consumption (or the gas heating) is on top of that used to keep the hydraulic and lubricating oils warm enough (in the usually uninsulated nacelle around 100 metres above the ground) so that the machinery doesn’t self-destruct. Brakes, to prevent over-speed of the rotating wings, are hydraulically actuated. It should go without saying that those measures don’t always work.

        40

    • #
      Manfred

      There is an irony here. Take a look at the Gaia goddess herself, California, a super Economy state where…

      in-state renewable generation is comprised of biomass, geothermal, small hydro, wind, and solar generation sites that make up approximately 17% of the total in-state generational output.

      and yet….

      California produced 70% of the electricity it uses; the rest [30%] was imported from the Pacific Northwest (10%) and the U.S. Southwest (20%). Natural gas is the main source for electricity generation at 45% of the total in-state electric generation system power.

      Pull the plug and let ‘em get on with enjoying the delusion.

      170

    • #
      David Maddison

      When you think about it, coal and gas is the true green energy, and especially nuclear.

      50

  • #
    cheshirered

    This “ambitious” goal is purely symbolic. Here’s why. Electrical power plants make 37% of US emissions, which are about one-fifth of global human emissions, which are 4% of total CO2 emissions globally. So a 32% cut in US electrical emissions will result in a 0.1% cut in total global CO2 emissions (at best)*. If the Obama/EPA plan is “successful” and if the IPCC are right, Paul Knappenberger and Pat Michaels estimate that Obama’s new plan will cool the world by an immeasurable 0.02°C by 2100.

    Now that’s what you call a killer statement, and the completely feeble, utterly pointless nature of this ‘policy’ is laid bare for all who choose to see.

    As a result I know I’m not the only one whose now wondering whether the President actually has America’s best interests at heart.

    370

    • #
      gai

      cheshirered
      “…now wondering …”
      ………….

      It has taken you this long?!?

      200

    • #

      Agree with Gai—Cheshirered, you’re just now wondering?

      160

    • #
      bobl

      Next time you write to your representative, ask him how reducing CO2 and making it colder, both which reduce plant ( food ) yields by about 1% per 2ppm fall or making Alaska uninhabitable and propelling N. America into an ice age, which would happen if the IPCCs 3.3 deg per doubling is correct, for a mere 100ppm reduction can be in the best interests of US citizen….

      Phew, long sentence

      When the CO2 was at the “ideal” preindustrial level of 270ppm – what was the populuation of the USA surviving off that level? What is it now? What would happen if the USA food yield were halved? Is it even possible to make a profit in agriculture with yields that low?

      Our motto should be

      Sustainability is completely unsustainable

      These are questions for your state and federal representatives.

      90

      • #

        I can’t even get our senators to protect Wyoming, let alone anything else. They sit there, spineless creatures and watch their state pillaged. Of course, my guess is they intend to stay in Washington and could not less about Wyoming. Our representative has backbone and King Boehner had her thrown off committees for standing up to his tyrant behaviour. Washington is run by politicians nearly all of the same ilk. You can’t vote them out. You just get another deceitful replacement. I have told my senator that if people cannot vote in representation, the only other opinion will not be pretty. He sent me a nice hand-written note saying “Thank you for your input” and the voted the same selfish way he always has. Again, these people are unreal. They care nothing about anything but themselves, and that includes not caring about wives and children. Having their face on the TV and being “famous” is all they care about. They lie constantly. It’s a very bad situation and it would not take much to turn it very ugly indeed.

        130

        • #
          gai

          Sheri — “… It’s a very bad situation and it would not take much to turn it very ugly indeed.”

          Unfortunately the politicians in the USA are very well aware of that and they are seriously afraid of Americans and are moving against us.
          CAGW is only one part of a whole package. Most people are too narrowly focused to see all the bits and pieces and put them together. I talk of the USA but similar stuff is going on in other countries if you look for it.

          You can see how US politicians are afraid of the public because ALL but three voted for the Anti-Occupy Law that puts us in “free speech zones” This places protesters in remote area nowhere near the people they are protesting. The law makes it easy for the US government to criminalize protest. It is now a federal offense, punishable by up to 10 years in prison to protest anywhere the Secret Service might be guarding someone. The government gets to decide what constitutes “disorderly or disruptive conduct” or what sorts of conduct authorities deem to “impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions.” What does the law cover? Any occasion that is officially defined as a National Special Security Event and calls for Secret Service protection. NSSE’s can include basketball championships, concerts, and the Winter Olympics, which have nothing whatsoever to do with government business, It can be official functions, or improving public grounds. Every Super Bowl since 9/11 has been declared an NSSE.

          ….while these changes to the law are not the death of free speech, they aren’t as trivial as the administration would have you believe. Rather, they are part of an incremental and persistent effort by the government to keep demonstrators away from events involving those at the top of the political food chain….
          http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/03/the_anti_protest_bill_signed_by_barack_obama_is_a_quiet_attack_on_free_speech_.html

          Here is a new one I just found. This from the American Bar Association Public Education Initiatives It is an essay I find chilling because these are the lawyers and prosecutors and judges who make up our judicial system. As the Peter Gleick vs Heartland case showed, if the prosecutor decides not to bring the case to court you are sunk even if you hire a battalion of lawyers.

          Debating the “Mighty Constitutional Opposites”

          Debating Hate Speech

          Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits. Should hate speech be discouraged? The answer is easy—of course! However, developing such policies runs the risk of limiting an individual’s ability to exercise free speech. When a conflict arises about which is more important—protecting community interests or safeguarding the rights of the individual—a balance must be found that protects the civil rights of all without limiting the civil liberties of the speaker.
          [This is not true it is the individual who has rights that must be protected. It is the government aka community whose DUTY it is to protect those individual rights. This turns that concept, written into our Declaration of Independence, upside down.]

          In this country there is no right to speak fighting words—those words without social value, directed to a specific individual, that would provoke a reasonable member of the group about whom the words are spoken. For example, a person cannot utter a racial or ethnic epithet to another if those words are likely to cause the listener to react violently. However, under the First Amendment, individuals do have a right to speech that the listener disagrees with and to speech that is offensive and hateful…. [Again the US Constitution has NO LIMITS on freedom of speech except for slander, sedition or assault - threat of violence however hate speech is not included. If you take offense that is your problem not mine.]

          Acts Speak Louder than Words
          One way to deal effectively with hate speech is to create laws and policies that discourage bad behavior but do not punish bad beliefs. Another way of saying this is to create laws and policies that do not attempt to define hate speech as hate crimes, or “acts.” In two recent hate crime cases, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that acts, but not speech, may be regulated by law.

          Once you start on the course of limiting speech where do you stop? An MP in the UK was arrested for reading a speech by Winston Churchill. We already have Lewandowsky and Cook trying to link Realists to the Extreme Right-wing and other fringe groups.

          Unfortunately it is not only Lewandowsky targeting and labeling US Citizens, now DHS is playing up ‘Extremists’ and ‘Homegrown terrorists’

          DHS Warns Local Law Enforcement Of New Homegrown Terrorist Threat

          …The general consensus in the intelligence community is that the homegrown terrorist threat during the last year has supplanted plots that originate overseas, said Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary of Intelligence and Analysis Caryn Wagner….

          Local law enforcement officers are “going to be as important, maybe more important, than the larger intelligence community in helping us identify, detect and deter these different type of attacks,” she said.

          “We are trying to educate them to think and plan because they are very much part of the enterprise,” she added….

          Statement by U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on the Threat of Right-Wing Extremism As Far as the Obama Admin is concerned THAT IS US FOLKS!

          Thursday, April 16, 2009 …The report drew sharp criticism from Republican lawmakers, conservatives and veterans groups, who said it unfairly targeted returning military veterans and gun rights advocates without citing specific threats. The report said the return of military veterans facing challenges with reintegrating into their communities “could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

          “To characterize men and women returning home after defending our country as potential terrorists is offensive and unacceptable,” House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement. “The Department of Homeland Security owes our veterans an apology.”…

          DHS backed down publicly but that is all. The Department of Defense document entitled: AFSS 0910 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT INCIDENTS (EOTI) LESSON PLAN names the Southern Poverty Law Center as a main Go To source on ‘Extremists’
          Guess Who Is Now Listed in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s ‘Extremist Files’ Among Neo-Nazis, KKK Members and Many Others? “Famed neurosurgeon and potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson has been granted many honors, but his latest designation is anything but flattering.

          Carson has been added to a list of “extremists” being populated and compiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based group “

          These people are really running amuck and starting to get dangerous.

          30

          • #

            These people have been running amok for decades. They were always dangerous. However, no one seemed to care or to believe this was happening. It’s an interesting characteristic of human beings that they will stand there and watch their lives destroyed and do absolutely nothing. Even prey animals run. Not humans. They just stand there and pretend nothing is wrong. Incredible.

            40

  • #
    Harry Twinotter

    Obama’s plan is to reduce the US’s growth in CO2 emissions – it is the growth in emissions which is dangerous.

    This is the US doing it’s bit to combat global warming. Other countries will also do their bit if a good international treaty can be written up.

    The important thing is to keep the earth off the high emissions growth pathway.

    156

    • #
      gai

      No, The important thing is to completely cripple the West and re-institute serfdom and a totalitarian world government.

      Those who wish to fully enslave us are using peripheral concerns, carefully orchestrated, to keep people from seeing that is the actual goal. They are very carefully building the cage and it is almost complete.

      What was the defining characteristics of a medieval serf? Someone not allowed to travel and not allowed to own land. We are seeing the implementation of the modern version of the same system only now it is called Agenda 21.

      The other point you are missing is our would be masters do not want a lot of humans to govern so they want to wipe out a major portion of the population.

      Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, said point blank a collapse of the US electrical grid (from an EMP pulse) would wipe out 90% of the US population.

      Ted Turner, founder of CNN (news) and the UN Foundation said ”A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

      Ex-Senator and current President of the above UN Foundation Tim Wirth said, ”We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

      This is the same Tim Wirth who organized the 1988 Senate hearing at which James Hansen addressed global warming. Wirth also led the U.S. negotiating team at the Kyoto Summit. These are his words about how he scammed Congress:

      …Believe it or not, we called the Weather Bureau and found out what historically was the hottest day of the summer…

      …. Dukakis was trying to get an edge on various things and was looking for spokespeople, and two or three of us became sort of the flacks out on the stump for Dukakis, making the separation between what Democratic policy and Republican policy ought to be. So it played into the presidential campaign in the summer of ’88 as well….

      So a number of things came together…

      What we did it was went in the night before and opened all the windows, I will admit, right? So that the air conditioning wasn�t working inside the room and so when the, when the hearing occurred there was not only bliss, which is television cameras in double figures, but it was really hot.

      So Hansen’s giving this testimony, you’ve got these television cameras back there heating up the room, and the air conditioning in the room didn’t appear to work. So it was sort of a perfect collection of events that happened that day, with the wonderful Jim Hansen, who was wiping his brow at the witness table and giving this remarkable testimony. …
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/wirth.html

      Then you have VP Al Gore’s political moves in the same time frame.

      ….“I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism. I did not need the job that badly,” Happer said…

      Happer, who served as the Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy in 1993, says he was fired by Gore in 1993 for not going along with Gore’s scientific views on ozone and climate issues. “I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy,” Happer explained in 1993….
      Senate Minority Report 2013

      If you useful innocents were not going to include me I would happily shove you into the cage you so desperately seem to want and slam the door. Unfortunately you insist on dragging the rest of us into that [self-snip] cage with you.

      485

      • #

        As one of my siblings once told a coworker: I don’t care if your stupidity kills you, but wait until I’m out of range first.

        370

        • #
          gai

          Sheri,

          My sentiments exactly.

          We have spent over 20 years telling people this is nothing but fertilizer. At this point I think the only way these people will learn is in the same tragic way that the German people learned in the 1940s. The only problem is the aim is to drag the whole world down the rabbit hole so there will be no one to rescue us from the Meglomanics any time soon.

          271

    • #

      Seriously? You live in Neverneverland with Obama, it seems. China and India will NOT reduce emissions. They are not run by a narcissistic person who hates the country he rules. They are also not nearly as stupid as Americans who apparently cannot do math, science or anything other than play apps on smartphones. We’re in real trouble when those smart phones go out.

      The important thing is to keep the environmentalists and others off their path to destroy the “parasite” called humans. Very, very important.

      353

      • #
        gai

        What happen was the International Corporations picked up their factories and took off to greener pastures in China, India, Brazil and Mexico where CO2 will not be constrained.

        The Movers and Shakers who control those International Corporations do not care if they trash the USA. Actually if you look at the Wildlands Map drawn from the UN ‘Biodiversity Treaty’ you can see their idea is to push Americans into small dense cities so the Elite can have a nice hunting preserve without the danger of catching a nasty disease like in Africa. They even want to ‘rewild’ the USA with Pleistocene animals. Tigers, wolves, camels elephants lepoards…

        Pleistocene Rewilding

        In a 2006 article [PDF] in The American Naturalist, a small herd of perfectly respectable conservation biologists advocates a bold ecological restoration project they call “Pleistocene Rewilding.”….

        …Although the American cheetah and many other Pleistocene megafauna are long gone, advocates of Pleistocene rewilding believe we can use “extant conspecifics and related taxa” (read: kinfolk) to represent extinct species in North American ecosystems. While the several species of Pleistocene tapirs are extinct, for example, they could be represented by the mountain tapir, which survives today in South America. The extinct North American camel could be replaced by the dromedary out here in the desert, and by the vicuña or guanaco in the more mountainous parts of the West….

        Actually, Pleistocene rewilding has already begun in North America, if we count several successfully reintroduced species….

        They have introduced wolves in my area and though they deny it melanistic leopards (A pair on their way to release in the North Carolina Mountains was spotted and here in flatlands, NC several people I know have also spotted these cats.) Any Surprise that Ted Turner is one of the guys behind this big push? Also Russia is working on recreating mammoths according to a Russian my husband corresponds with. The Russian’s specialty is recreating the Mongolian horse but he says he has room for the mammoths too.

        This site has the US legislation aimed at creating the Elites Hunting preserve. This site has how the cities for the serfs will operate and this site has the ‘new zoning regs for California (I have seen this new building style – YUCK!) and the 275 to 300 sq. ft. pack ‘em and stack ‘em Agenda 21 Micro-Apartment Scheme Being Beta-Tested in NYC and also in San Francisco.

        ….SAN FRANCISCO — The tiny apartments are touted as “affordable by design.”

        New York City has launched a pilot project to test them out. Boston is doing it too. But here in San Francisco, where a growing number of residents are being priced out of the housing market by a revived tech economy, city leaders are considering the smallest micro-units of all.

        At a minimum 150 square feet of living space — 220 when you add the bathroom, kitchen and closet — the proposed residences are being hailed as a pivotal option for singles…..
        expected rents on the proposed 220-square-foot units… to range from $1,200 to $1,500

        http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/24/local/la-me-micro-apartments-20120924

        150 ft is 12 ft by 12 ft (3.73 meters X 3.73 meters)
        220 ft is less than 15 ft by 15 ft (4.52 meters X 4.52 meters)

        Last but not least is the demonstration of how the push will be implemented in Christchurch NZ

        In the USA:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK2sZUs2l_U

        00

    • #
      James Murphy

      Harry, can you enlighten us with a value, or a range of values which would define the ‘high’ in “high emissions growth pathway”?

      How is it calculated? What are the units? is it per capita? per year? per country…?

      232

      • #
        ianl8888

        There will be no responsive answer to this question. As I’ve said, Harry is glib and uninformed – the Green Blob franchise

        122

      • #
        Harry Twinotter

        James Murphy.

        I am referring to RCP 8.5 – I am surprised you are not familiar with it if you are into discussions about global warming.

        The dangers are a rising global average temperature, sea level rise and ocean acidification.

        120

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          Ocean acidification is only a danger to those who know no chemistry, but you could replace it with hobgoblins, witches, Salmonella & Listeria, Dioxin, Y2K, Bird flu etc.

          124

          • #

            Ocean acidification is a major problem. Acidification = making something less alkaline and so more acidic.

            Ocean acidification is causing problems for exeskeleton–forming invertebrates now. Anyone with junior HS science could work that out!

            216

            • #
              Hugh

              I think there is about 22,600,030 problems more major, including a thunderstrike at the barn, and cracking my skull after slipping in Paris.

              61

            • #
              gai

              Ocean acidification is NOT a problem. What is a problem is no understanding of chemistry. No understanding of the oceans

              You can not dump sea life in an aquarium full of water, salt and a strong acid and scream about the effects of ‘Ocean’ Acidification and have anyone with any background in chemistry read the paper and believe it… Unless of course they are PAID to believe it.

              So Maxine LOOK up BUFFERS!

              60

            • #

              Maxine: Those of us who went beyond high school chemistry know this is a farce. The way you use the term “making something less alkali” only applies to titrations. It is not used to describe an increase or decrease in alkalinity unless it’s global warming and you’re trying to scare people. I see this done all the time. It’s incorrect usage of the term to achieve a political goal. No way can the ocean become acidic and no scientist is claiming such. Do you know what the pH of the ocean is and what that number means?
              I will refer you to: http://
              http://www.climate4kids.blogspot.com/2014/07/ocean-acidification-part-one-acids-and.html and http://www.climate4kids.blogspot.com/2014/07/ocean-acidification-part-2-should-we-be.html for a simple explanation of ocean acidification.

              Did you know the carbonic acid molecule exists only for a fraction of a second in the ocean? A fraction of a second.

              As noted by gai, look up buffering. That’s important.

              60

        • #
          Angry

          “ocean acidification”……….. A Physical Impossibility !!

          103

        • #
          James Murphy

          Harry –
          with regards to your comment:
          “…I am referring to RCP 8.5 – I am surprised you are not familiar with it if you are into discussions about global warming…”

          Well, whether or not I am familiar with “RCP 8.5″ is completely irrelevant. You made a statement which, in the context of the conversation, you should be able to back up with some sort of evidence.

          Why do you refer to RCP 8.5 specifically, when (according to your wikipedia link), there are 4 to choose from, and 8.5 is the most dramatic – Does this mean that you think it is the most accurate (or likely) of the 4?

          (Credit where credit is due, you did eventually post a link – it’s not so hard to do, is it?)

          61

          • #
            Harry Twinotter

            James Murphy.

            RCP 8.5 is the business as usual pathway – exponentially increasing CO2 emissions. It is the pathway the world is on now.

            010

            • #
              gai

              “…It is the pathway the world is on now.”

              No it is not. 18 plus years of no statistically significant temperature change says the ‘pathway’ aka models was overestimated.

              ………….

              For what it is worth:

              The entire CO2 forcing is 32 Wm-2 to 44 W m–2 with the anthropogenic forcing (mankind’s contribution) being 1.5 W/m 2 [cf., Reid, 1997].

              NOAA gives the 60N summer solstice Insolation values.

              Holocene peak insolation: 523 Wm-2
              ………………………….decreased = 47 Wm-2
              NOW (modern Warm Period) 476 Wm-2
              ………………………… decreased = 12 Wm-2
              Depth of the last ice age – around 464 Wm−2
              …………………………………….

              11,000 years ago…………… 523.16 Wm-2
              Wisconsin Ice age- Holocene transition
              12,000 years ago…………… 522.50 Wm-2

              It took the entire forcing of 522 to 523 Wm-2 to kick the earth out of the last ice age. We are now only 12 Wm-2 from the depths of the last ice age.

              The Holocene interglacial is now 11,717 years old. That’s two centuries or so beyond half the present precession cycle (or 23,000/2=11,500). So the little Ice Age was about the right time for glacial inception. However we had the Modern Grand Solar Minimum – A History of Solar Activity over Millennia

              Will the earth descend into glaciation or be a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ interglacial? That is still being argued although Lisiecki & Raymo (2005)- see below- carries a lot of weight and has not been refuted. A newer paper from the fall of 2012 Can we predict the duration of an interglacial? agrees and gives the calculated solar insolation values @ 65N on June 22 for several glacial inceptions:
              Current value – insolation = 479W m−2 (from that paper)

              MIS 7e – insolation = 463 W m−2,
              MIS 11c – insolation = 466 W m−2,
              MIS 13a – insolation = 500 W m−2,
              MIS 15a – insolation = 480 W m−2,
              MIS 17 – insolation = 477 W m−2

              All the evidence says the earth is certainly not going to warm catastrophically for another 65 kyr. Cooling catastrophically is another matter.

              A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic D18O records
              Lisiecki & Raymo (2005)

              ABSTRACT
              We present a 5.3-Myr stack (the ‘‘LR04’’ stack) of benthic d18O records from 57 globally distributed sites aligned by an automated graphic correlation algorithm. This is the first benthic d18O stack composed of more than three records to extend beyond 850 ka,…

              RESULTS
              Recent research has focused on MIS 11 as a possible analog for the present interglacial [e.g., Loutre and Berger, 2003; EPICA Community Members, 2004] because both occur during times of low eccentricity. The LR04 age model establishes that MIS 11 spans two precession cycles, with d18O values below 3.6% for 20 kyr, from 398 – 418 ka. In comparison, stages 9 and 5 remained below 3.6% for 13 and 12 kyr, respectively, and the Holocene interglacial has lasted 11 kyr so far. In the LR04 age model, the average LSR of 29 sites is the same from 398– 418 ka as from 250–650 ka; consequently, stage 11 is unlikely to be artificially stretched. However, the 21 June insolation minimum at 65°N during MIS 11 is only 489 W/m2, much less pronounced than the present minimum of 474 W/m2. In addition, current insolation values are not predicted to return to the high values of late MIS 11 for another 65 kyr. We propose that this effectively precludes a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ interglacial [e.g., Raymo, 1997] in the Holocene without human influence….

              61

              • #
                Harry Twinotter

                Gai.

                Gish Gallops are boring.

                I tell you what. Write a short piece on the difference between “warming” and “statistically significant warming”.
                [The term "Gish Gallop" is pejorative and ad hominem. You will be moderated if you continue in this way] Fly

                05

              • #

                Harry Twinotter: Thank you for the wonderful idea. I’ll be producing one for my blog ASAP (ASAP is a technical term, yes).

                However, in the meantime, I have what I call “Statistical Significance for the nonmathematically inclined”:

                Where you work, your boss promises to give you a raise every week! You are overjoyed! You thank him for his idea. A raise every week!! At the end of the first week, you look at your net pay (after “adjustments” pay) and you made one dollar more than last week. WHAT?? Okay, you wait another week and you find you make one dollar more than the previous week. You are enraged!!! What is this about a raise per week and you end up with a buck a week. You confront your boss who says “I promised you a raise every week. You now make one dollar more each week. That is a raise a week.”
                Now see the difference? A dollar a week is not “statistically significant”.

                31

              • #

                that dollar is measurable and precise. Just because it is a small amount compared with the total does not mean it is not an increase.

                Maybe you need to go back a step and describe what you mean by statistics. Just in case it is different from what is generally taught becfause as you’ve applied it above, it is at variance with the usual definition.

                12

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Gee Aye,

                Try it with one cent. It is still measurable and precise, and so it is correct, by the letter of the law. But your boss can’t actually pay you that cent, because there is no one cent coinage in the country where you work. And in fact, the accepted accounting practice is to round cents to the nearest coinage value, which in this case might be zero or five cents.

                So the first week, you get a pay rise based on last weeks pay, plus one cent, which gets rounded down to zero. The following week, the same thing happens. So you are still getting a pay raise every week, but have nothing material to show for it.

                The point Sheri was making is that the figures being quoted in scary terms regarding temperatures are so small as to be insignificant, and the timeframes being discussed are so long as to be immaterial.

                41

              • #

                Gee Aye: Don’t know where you learned statistics, but this is not at odds with statistics as I was taught. Granted, I think “P” values are used more for propaganda than actual science, but I can back that up with all kinds of examples, if you like. It’s especially bothersome when two experiments with opposite, mutually exclusive outcomes are both statistically significant. The input parameters and assumptions are what produce the “P” value.

                Rereke W did an excellent job of futher defining “not significant” in his reponse. Thanks, RW.

                21

            • #
              Just-A-Guy

              Harry Twinotter,

              You wrote:

              Gish Gallops are boring.

              Your ‘twatter‘ is boring.

              Abe

              31

      • #
        Harry Twinotter

        James Murphy.

        Wikipedia gives a good summary. Full details are in the IPCC AR5 reports.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_Concentration_Pathways

        119

        • #
          Popeye26

          Otter,

          From YOUR Wiki link:

          “The pathways are used for climate modeling and research. They describe four possible climate futures, all of which are considered possible depending on how much greenhouse gases are emitted in the years to come”

          From above:

          modeling/possible/considered possible/depending/how much/years to come

          ARE YOU KIDDING – in two sentences – ROTFLMAO!!

          Grow up – start some CRITICAL thinking – one day your eyes will be opened!!

          Cheers,

          103

          • #
            Just-A-Guy

            Popeye26,

            Harry Twinotter wrote:

            Full details are in the IPCC AR5 reports.

            As you pointed out, the use of weasel words permeates the whole of climatology.

            From the wiki on weasel words:

            Weasel words can be used in advertising and in political statements, where encouraging the audience to develop a misleading impression of what was said can lead to advantages, at least in the short term (in the longer term, systematic deception is likely to be identified, with a loss of trust in the speaker).

            My bolding.

            The IPCC, Inc.’s AR5 is replete with weasel words from start to finish. No chapter is left unscathed by the use of these deceptive rhetorical devices.

            It’s all just computer models simulations based on assumptions which are backed up by conjectures.

            Abe

            133

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          The IPCC AR5 Report is no more than a work of fiction.

          21

    • #
      Radical Rodent

      …it is the growth in emissions which is dangerous.

      Is it? What evidence do you have to support that claim?

      As for “combatting global warming”… well, wake up and look around – whatever we have been doing for the past couple of decades must be the solution, as there has been next to no warming over that time. Success! Oh, except that whatever it was we have been doing, it wasn’t greatly different from what we had been doing before. It’s almost enough to make you think that perhaps you have been taken for a mug. Ask yourself, have you, Harry?

      324

      • #
        Harry Twinotter

        Radical Rodent.

        References are above.

        ” been next to no warming over that time.”

        There has been plenty of warming over the last couple of decades, you had better check your references. You appear out of touch with reality.

        And someone who calls themselves “Radical Rodent” should go easy on the insults, unless you want people to think you are a rat.

        118

        • #
        • #
          gai

          “…There has been plenty of warming over the last couple of decades, you had better check your references….”

          Gee, Harry Twitter,

          I think it is YOU that needs to check your references!

          A list of CAGW scientists who say there is a ‘Pause’

          Dr. Phil Jones – BBC – 13th February 2010

          [Q] B – “Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming”[A] “Yes, but only just”.
          __________________

          Prof. Shaowu Wang et al – Advances in Climate Change Research – 2010 – “…The decade of 1999-2008 is still the warmest of the last 30 years, though the global temperature increment is near zero;…”
          __________________

          Dr. B. G. Hunt – Climate Dynamics – February 2011 – “Controversy continues to prevail concerning the reality of anthropogenically-induced climatic warming. One of the principal issues is the cause of the hiatus in the current global warming trend.”
          __________________

          Dr. Robert K. Kaufmann – PNAS – 2nd June 2011 – “…..it has been unclear why global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008…..”
          __________________

          Dr. Gerald A. Meehl – Nature Climate Change – 18th September 2011 – “There have been decades, such as 2000–2009, when the observed globally averaged surface-temperature time series shows little increase or even a slightly negative trend1 (a hiatus period)….”
          __________________

          Met Office Blog – Dave Britton (10:48:21) – 14 October 2012 – “We agree with Mr Rose that there has been only a very small amount of warming in the 21st Century. As stated in our response, this is 0.05 degrees Celsius since 1997 equivalent to 0.03 degrees Celsius per decade.”Source: metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012
          __________________

          Dr. James Hansen – NASA GISS – 15 January 2013 – “The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing.”
          __________________

          Dr Doug Smith – Met Office – 18 January 2013 – “The exact causes of the temperature standstill are not yet understood,” says climate researcher Doug Smith from the Met Office.[Translated by Philipp Mueller from Spiegel Online]
          __________________

          Dr. Virginie Guemas – Nature Climate Change – 7 April 2013 – “…Despite a sustained production of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, the Earth’s mean near-surface temperature paused its rise during the 2000–2010 period…”
          __________________

          Dr. Judith Curry – House of Representatives Subcommittee on Environment – 25 April 2013 – ” If the climate shifts hypothesis is correct, then the current flat trend in global surface temperatures may continue for another decade or two,…”
          __________________

          Dr. Hans von Storch – Spiegel – 20 June 2013 – “…the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) — a value very close to zero….If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models….”
          __________________

          Professor Masahiro Watanabe – Geophysical Research Letters – 28 June 2013 – “The weakening of k commonly found in GCMs seems to be an inevitable response of the climate system to global warming, suggesting the recovery from hiatus in coming decades.”
          __________________

          Met Office – July 2013 – “The recent pause in global warming, part 3: What are the implications for projections of future warming?………..Executive summaryThe recent pause in global surface temperature rise does not materially alter the risks of substantial warming of the Earth by the end of this century.”
          Source: etoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/3/r/Paper3_Implications_for_projections.pdf
          __________________

          Professor Rowan Sutton – Independent – 22 July 2013 – “Some people call it a slow-down, some call it a hiatus, some people call it a pause. The global average surface temperature has not increased substantially over the last 10 to 15 years,”
          __________________

          Dr. Kevin Trenberth – NPR – 23 August 2013 – “They probably can’t go on much for much longer than maybe 20 years, and what happens at the end of these hiatus periods, is suddenly there’s a big jump [in temperature] up to a whole new level and you never go back to that previous level again,”
          __________________

          Dr. Yu Kosaka et. al. – Nature – 28 August 2013 – “Recent global-warming hiatus tied to equatorial Pacific surface coolingDespite the continued increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, the annual-mean global temperature has not risen in the twenty-first century…”
          __________________

          Professor Anastasios Tsonis – Daily Telegraph – 8 September 2013 – “We are already in a cooling trend, which I think will continue for the next 15 years at least. There is no doubt the warming of the 1980s and 1990s has stopped.”
          __________________

          Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth – Nature News Feature – 15 January 2014 – “The 1997 to ’98 El Niño event was a trigger for the changes in the Pacific, and I think that’s very probably the beginning of the hiatus,” says Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist…
          __________________

          Dr. Gabriel Vecchi – Nature News Feature – 15 January 2014 – “A few years ago you saw the hiatus, but it could be dismissed because it was well within the noise,” says Gabriel Vecchi, a climate scientist…“Now it’s something to explain.”…..
          __________________

          Professor Matthew England – ABC Science – 10 February 2014 – “Even though there is this hiatus in this surface average temperature, we’re still getting record heat waves, we’re still getting harsh bush fires…..it shows we shouldn’t take any comfort from this plateau in global average temperatures.”
          __________________

          Dr. Jana Sillmann et al – IopScience – 18 June 2014 – Observed and simulated temperature extremes during the recent warming hiatus“This regional inconsistency between models and observations might be a key to understanding the recent hiatus in global mean temperature warming.”
          __________________

          Dr. Young-Heon Jo et al – American Meteorological Society – October 2014 -“…..Furthermore, the low-frequency variability in the SPG relates to the propagation of Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) variations from the deep-water formation region to mid-latitudes in the North Atlantic, which might have the implications for recent global surface warming hiatus.”

          81

          • #
            Harry Twinotter

            Gai.

            Name calling and another Gish Gallop.

            [Harry, You contradicted a statement, and said that the person making it should check their references.

            gai then gave you a list of references in support of the statement that you contradicted, and you used the pejorative term "Gish Gallop" as a way of dismissing the evidence presented to you - that is troll behaviour.

            If you want to keep on contributing to this site you are going to have to lift your game, and play by Jo's rules.

            This is a formal warning] Fly

            05

            • #
              gai

              Harry YOU need to get a dictionary and start looking up the definition of words….

              OH, I am sorry no wonder you use the word Gish Gallop. You are incapable of following more than a sentence or two without getting confused.

              Here I will help you:

              Full Definition of NAME-CALLING
              : the use of offensive names especially to win an argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or project) without objective consideration of the facts
              http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/name-calling

              Stating: I think it is you that needs to check your references and then providing a list of those who say the temperature has been stable is not name calling. It is informing.

              Now if, for example, I called you the illegitimate son of a syphilitic camel and a bowlegged donkey THEN I would be name-calling.

              See the difference Harry?

              33

              • #
                Harry Twinotter

                Gai.

                I got to your first “reference” (really a quote taken out of context), and it is a misrepresentation of what Dr Phil Jones said. He said the dataset showed warming. Also that was 2010, it is now 2015.

                The surface temperature datasets show warming.

                12

        • #
          tom0mason

          Harry,

          There has been plenty of virtual warming over the last couple of decades, you had better check your computer modeling references. You appear out of touch with current climate virtual reality.

          There, fixed it for you! ;)

          82

    • #
      Bill

      Just when you think Obama and his blind supporters can’t be any dumber…. they prove they can!

      233

  • #
    Tom O

    Don’t be concerned. It’s just a case of one Dumbocratic leader, Obama, trying to “one up” another Dumbocratic leader, Jerry Brown. Everyone knows that California leads, and the federal government follows by trying to jump ahead. To you folks in Australia, that means that you may lose a customer, if you ship to the US (no energy, no money; no money, no can buy) you lose out a little. Just don’t be dumb enough to follow in our footsteps.

    The good news is that no matter what comes of it, the rich will be basically unaffected. The poor and retired may die of hypothermia, but that’s a small price to pay for “leading the world in the fight against devil CO2.” Sort of like a drone strike. You know, they pull the trigger but never really know who is going to die from the explosion.

    300

  • #
    Dave in the states

    Obama is a liar. I heard his announcement yesterday. He lied all the way through it. He kept saying that this year so far is the hottest year ever. That last year was the hottest year ever before that. That most of the records have been set in the last 15 years. That there has been no pause. He implied that his program could stop climate change. That climate change was the greatest challenge human kind have ever faced. That renewables can replace fossil fuels. All lies. Lies, lies lies.

    He has always been deceptive. When he first ran for president he proclaimed that he could stop the seas from rising. He is far left to the core but he has successfully kept that hidden from general public. Of course deception is in a politician’s DNA. Just like with pushing Obama Care down the peoples throats, he relies on deception and public ignorance, reinforced by propaganda.

    Obama is also incompetent. How easily is he lead by his leftest advisers? Or does he really believe this and he is author of it? His illiteracy of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, state security, national sovereignty, and economics is glaring.

    He is however, like Hitler, one heck of a politician and is lawless in its application. He has trampled the US Constitution. He wields power ruthlessly and is an emotional bully in dealing with people.

    The political question of the upcoming election is interesting. Hillary promises to carry the baton on the CAGW policies, but for the public this issue is hardly on the radar screen. At least until yesterday. Once they understand the costs they could reject these policies vehemently. Obama hopes to have these policies deceptively locked in, as well as the Paris Accords, before they do.

    372

    • #
      gai

      Obama was put in the White House to make sure the USA surrendered her sovereignty to the UN/World Bank/IMF via a ‘Global Warming Treaty’ He failed miserably at Copenhagen so this is his last chance.

      How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room

      This is why Obama made a deal with China, giving away the farm, ahead of Paris. He does not want China scuttling the deal again. However I am not sure that China is going to go for a world government unless it is a Chinese controlled world government.

      That is the goal that Maurice Strong and Clinton and Al Gore and Obama have been aiding. They have all jumped onto the tail of the Chinese Dragon not realizing the depth of China’s dislike for all things British/USA.

      The idea of China’s humiliation at the hands of foreigners is almost one hundred years old. There was even an official holiday in Nationalist China called National Humiliation Day.

      The current Chinese leader is Xi Jinping.

      In any case, Xi Jinping, despite his genial smile, good English, and familiarity with the United States, is no reforming liberal. Shortly after assuming the presidency, he took all the members of his politburo with him to the bizarre museum the Party has built in Tiananmen Square – the museum of national humiliation and revival. He pointed out to them the exhibits showing the arrival of the Jesuits via Macao in the sixteenth century and how this had been the beginning of the infiltration and humiliation of China by the West. He pointed out the exhibits showing the Japanese invasions of China and making the unfounded assertion that the Japanese were defeated by the Communist Party with a little help from “good” Nationalist generals. The Americans, he said, then became the enemy. “Against this external enemy,” he told China’s inner group of top leaders, “we must stick together. — – From an essay by Australian defense analyst Paul Monk

      An independent verification: Lessons of history: China’s century of humiliation: The repercussions of British opportunism in China during the Opium Wars can be felt in geopolitics even today

      282

      • #
        tom0mason

        Also before the first Gulf War the big news was China negotiating with Arab leaders and exporters about paying for oil in non-petrodollar currencies. Around 1997-8 things started moving, about 2 years later some guy called S Hussein was front and center of the frame. Apparently contracts were said to be ready for signing…
        This move truly tweeked the US administration’s feelings that its reputation was as an inert world power with poor competence in international politics. For why petroDollars floats the US economy see http://ftmdaily.com/preparing-for-the-collapse-of-the-petrodollar-system-part-3/

        But ultimately China still won out with getting the majority of Iraq’s oil output, however China is now tied into the US petroDollar system. :?:
        Now this really annoyed Putin, but that’s a different story… in the “The New Great Game” aka “New World Order” (google search term). 8O But now Obama has negotiated Iran back into play, and they will move in to spoil the Chinese gains…

        So is the US/China and Europe/Russia struggles just part of a larger power struggle for economic and political world power with the UN is the pawn in the middle? Or is it the UN as the defacto power trying to keep the players in check by playing each of them against each other… ummm, who knows?

        60

      • #

        Gai,

        That is rather sad nonsense, tho most here take refuge in that sort of nonsense because it is harder and harder to hide from the fact AGW is hitting us now. Even the Antarctic, long safe from AGW because of its circumpolar winds and currents is now being affected by deep warm currents and glaciers are melting more and more rapidly.

        Open your eyes, see what is happening and stop engaging in silly conspiracy theories.

        215

        • #

          What facts of global warming? The Antarctic glaciers are melting at varying rates, just as they always have. Glaciers are more affected by snowfall, wind and the ground below them than surface temperatures. It’s seems rather pretentious to claim we “know” how fast glaciers melt, since they are multicentury phenomena and we haven’t even begun to study most of them. No one has been around long enough to know what the “correct” rate of melt on a glacier is nor whether the rate is constant, which seems highly unlikely. It stands to reason over the centuries glaciers sometimes melt faster and sometimes slower. Not a big deal.

          It’s intellectually dishonest and a sure sign one lacks any real evidence when the words “conspiracy theories” come up—especially since global warming advocates proudly engage in conspiracy theories about oil companies and AGW.

          Again, there are no facts of global warming. No evidence that CO2 is raising temperatures, no evidence that storms are increasing (they’re actually decreasing), heat waves have redefined to it being “really hot” which is just called the reality of summer. People live in 100+F weather in many places. It’s not a crisis. Crop yields are up. I see no evidence of any crisis or coming crisis based on the facts as we now know them.

          (Note: This post was about Obama and his worthless, even damaging, plan to shut down coal plants in the US. Any political commentary is separate from the science of AGW. What people believe about political motivation for actions in no way changes the facts of AGW or the lack thereof.)

          132

        • #
        • #
          gai

          Maxine,

          …Gai…. stop engaging in silly conspiracy theories….

          I back my theories up with history, science and news articles. (Most of which I do not post here)

          Maxine on the other hand doesn’t even bother to look outside her cage at the real world before spouting off.

          Antarctica? – RECORD SEA ICE THREE TIMES in september 2014! & Active Volcanoes under the ice — “Researchers Find Major West Antarctic Glacier Melting from Geothermal Sources” — All you have to do is google the terms.

          China? All you have to do is google “one hundred years of humiliation”, Clinton, China and nuclear weapons….

          The BRICS countries (Brazil, Russsia, India, China, & South America)?

          All you have to do is google each one and gold to see who is stockpiling and who is mining (Australia is too.) Then look at the BRICS development bank that is challenging the IMF/world Bank for position in Africa and South America. Then google China, Africa and South America and Farmland…..

          Heck Brazil ( Batista family) bought out U.S.-based National Beef Packing Co., Smithfield Beef, JBS Swift, Pilgrims Pride, and Canada’s XL Foods and is now the largest meat packer in the world. China bought the rest of Smithfield and now owns 1/4 of US produced hogs.

          If you want to really get into ‘conspiracy theories’ how about this one?
          Gadhafi’s Gold-money Plan Would Have Devastated Dollar

          It remains unclear exactly why or how the Gadhafi regime went from “a model” and an “important ally” to the next target for regime change in a period of just a few years. But after claims of “genocide” as the justification for NATO intervention were disputed by experts, several other theories have been floated.

          Oil, of course, has been mentioned frequently — Libya is Africa‘s largest oil producer. But one possible reason in particular for Gadhafi’s fall from grace has gained significant traction among analysts and segments of the non-Western media: central banking and the global monetary system.

          According to more than a few observers, Gadhafi’s plan to quit selling Libyan oil in U.S. dollars — demanding payment instead in gold-backed “dinars” (a single African currency made from gold) — was the real cause. The regime, sitting on massive amounts of gold, estimated at close to 150 tons, was also pushing other African and Middle Eastern governments to follow suit.

          72

        • #
          Bill

          Obviously you don’t understand either the science or even what circumpolar means. Nice try, but you retain your failing grade.

          50

  • #

    [...] states to file suit as well as refuse to participate in this silly plan. And, it is very silly, as Jo Nova points out This “ambitious” goal is purely symbolic. Here’s why. Electrical power plants make 37% of US [...]

    140

  • #

    Obama and the Insane Left (my term for them; they were finally driven over the edge of mass insanity, after decades of Left-Right battling, by their frustration over the Bush presidency, as Bush was an idiot unworthy of the presidency too) are waging war against America. And all of our institutions are suborned by the false climate science narrative, so it is seen as “politically correct” by all the mainstream voices. However it all plays out, the fundamental lesson in this, for every person in the world today, is that unquestioned dogma (in Obama’s case, the radical activist Left’s dogma, of which Obama is not a principled master at all, as he thinks, but a religiously-deluded acolyte) is ascendant over good, honest reason in every sphere of endeavor today, and is destructive of civilization itself (not just America).

    171

  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    The only priority for progressives is to gain and hold power. (In fairness, other political strains may do this also.) Power is increasingly held by pretending to the form of democracy, whilst increasing dependence. OF course this wrong headed policy will impact the poor, and create more poor. These poor will need heating subsidies, already a feature of advanced progressive societies. They will need energy subsidies to charge their Obama-phones. And another “the bad conservatives will turn off your goodies and pollute to kill your children” pitch will be added to the (in the US) quadrennial claptrap. The redistribution of wealth will continue until the accumulated parasites break the back of the productive economy, at which point the state will fail. Greece. Puerto Rico. Argentian. Venezuala. The old Soviet Union. Chicago. California. etc.etc. etc.

    The only good news may be that it is probably too expensive to do more than mothball the old infrastructure, thus it will still be a recommissionable salvation when these schemes fail.

    In the US, we shall probably see progressive “blue” states, fully on board with this nonsense, needing to buy power from holdout red states.
    When the margin is gone, there may be non for sale. We already see gasoline $1 higher in California that neighboring states…a price that still does not motivate out-of-state refiners to retool of their botique blends…hence spot shortages while the rest of the US is awash in cheap fuel.

    The clean free power from the great Hoover dam seems to be hitting a snag called drought…no problem, though, as there is plenty of solar and wind, except when there isn’t.

    California is something of a special case, though. While our federal government makes the world headlines, in most of our state jurisdictions if you can’t keep the snow plowed, the potholes filled, the pension plan up to snuff and the budget balanced you get thrown out of office.

    With luck this carbon crap will be a bridge too far for the mostly sensible leaders we have at the state level, and we will rebalance the power away from a totally-gone-looney bunch of gentle for-your-own-good facists in Washington.

    A long-time source of progressive power, the philosophically pure one-man-one-vote-one-time labor union that locks in union dues to fund progressive power has been eroding at the state level. The universities, apparently on a world wide basis, have reached a nadir of foolishness and are seeing erosion of their market to more focused and efficient on-line services, as are such additional government monopolies as taxi medallions.

    Let’s be optimists, and hope that this blind worship of the climate God finally creates a myth the public won’t buy, and that our officials are forced to give up destroying great swaths of the economy and are returned to the petty graft and corruption that they are so good and experienced at.

    180

    • #

      Yes, it’s about power. And power works a lot like a pyramid scheme—lots of clueless lackies at the bottom and the real winners at the top. While the pyramids themselves, as physical entities, are very stable, pyramids in the human behavioural area are highly unstable and those at the bottom eventually rebel. It usually doesn’t happen until the society has been severely pillaged by those at the top and I can’t see it breaking that pattern in today’s case. I’d love to be an optimist, but then I’d be sharing fairyland with Obama and that is not going to happen.

      160

      • #
        Mark Hladik

        The Federalist, Number One, paragraph five [in part] (authored by Alexander Hamilton, under his ‘pen name’ of Publius):

        ” … ;and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people, than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found to be a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number began their careers by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.”

        Note that this was written well before Marx, Lenin, and (too numerous to mention) despots had come into existence.

        130

    • #
      gai

      Hate to tell you, Duke Energy, the largest provider in the USA is run by a Warmist. Duke Energy already blew up the Cape Fear NC Coal plant so for that plant at least there is no going back.

      Now what was that about burning one’s bridges or in this case blowing then to smithereens?

      70

  • #
    Neville

    Ken Stewart has calculated the length of the pause in warming for different regions using UAH V 6 and it is worth a look. https://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/call-that-a-pause/
    Australia hasn’t shown any warming for 17 years 6 months and USA even longer. And Antarctica has paused for at least 35 years. But Arctic about 13 years 2 months.

    180

  • #
    Planning Engineer

    Keeping with the fairyland/fantasy theme of this piece, an Obama appointed FERC Commissioner (Tony Clark) said the following in a released statement.

    “Whatever EPA believes are the environmental benefits of this regulation, it cannot be said that it will be easy or inexpensive. Such is the stuff of unicorns and leprechauns. For if EPA’s energy vision was the most reliable and affordable means of providing power, we would not need the rule. Engineering experts, markets, utilities and their regulators would already be choosing these resources without EPA dictates. No amount of political posturing changes that fact.”

    Also:

    “Setting aside arguments about whether this plan meaningfully improves the environment or addresses climate change, EPA’s new regulation is undeniably an enormous task for the people who actually plan, finance, construct, operate and regulate this complex US power system. Though EPA officials are writing these regulations, EPA officials are not responsible for ensuring reliable, affordable power. That task falls to America’s utility regulators, engineers, and operators. I am concerned there is an assumption that these dedicated experts will get the job done simply because they always have before. They are the best in the world, but no one should think reliability and affordability are slam dunks, lest we deny the science of electrical engineering. Make no mistake, this work is extraordinarily difficult and it will be even more so should this regulation come to pass.”

    150

  • #
    Michael Collard

    I suspect pure politics at work here.
    It increases support from the environmentalists, and looks good on his record.
    If the Republicans win in 2016 and try to reverse this, the Democrats can claim that the Republicans want to “destroy the planet”.
    The same tactic was used at the end of Clinton’s term when he reduced the allowable levels of arsenic in drinking water to an impractically low level. When the Republicans raised the level back to the previous (safe) level, the Democrats claimed they were trying to poison the water.

    160

  • #
    john

    Germany gets 30% of electric power from renewables Norway much much higher Jo Nova better do more research before sounding off

    138

    • #

      Do your own research. Germany’s power costs twice as much as US power does. Companies are leaving. That’s exactly my point.

      Norway is 99% hydroelectricity. I don’t think the US could get there even if it dammed every river valley on the continent.

      France is nuclear. Can’t see that being popular with the Greens.

      No one is running a large modern industrial nation on wind and solar.

      560

      • #
        bobl

        And Germany only “Sometimes” gets 30%. When will the useful innocents like John get it, that since wind power varies between nothing and 3 times what you need at the time, that it’s COMPLETElY USELESS ™ to the task of delivering 24x7x52 power to an industrial nation. Windmills can be becalmed for a month, what do you do when that happens John? ?.. I know, switch off John’s place, since you’re so concerned you’ll be happy to be disconnected when renewables aren’t generating their full ratings hey John? Or is it only “OTHER PEOPLE” like the grannies who die from fuel poverty in winter who should bear the cost of your zeal John?

        160

      • #
        shortie of greenbank

        … and if the environmentalists/desal plant builders are anything like here in Australia (take Victoria for example), then viable dams will be blocked anyway.

        70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      The percentage of electricity generation by renewables doesn’t mean that is the percentage used in that country. Look at Denmark, I think their latest figure was 34% wind, but over half of that goes to the Norwegian and Swedish grids where they can balance by reducing their hydro generation. Then when the wind stops, they sell it back to Denmark at 5 times their buying price.
      The Germans are having troubles with their neighbours; the Poles and Czechs are installing equipment to stop them dumping surges from wind and destabilising their grids. They don’t like the blackouts. When those blockers start then Germany will get blackouts every time the wind strengthens, or have to pay the turbines to NOT deliver electricity. Up will go their electricity bills.
      Why don’t you check the cost of a kWh of electricity? Are you paying 46-47¢ ? Parts of the USA pay 13¢ ( figures in $Aus). Wind is cheap? Rubbish.

      230

    • #
      Planning Engineer

      A major question is how much renewable energy can a “power system” can handle. Systems can handle a lot of hydro – but its not available many places. They can not handle high levels of intermittent wind and solar. Germany is not a power system but a component of a power system where renewables make up much less than 30% of the total. The US has 3 power systems (with Canada). While individual States might be able to accommodate 30% renewable the independent integrated grids can not. The US would indeed be entering unchartered territory.

      160

    • #
      James Murphy

      Do more research about what, exactly?

      Let me know when Germany gets to 100% renewables, 100% of the time, while maintaining current levels of industry, at reasonable prices (you know, prices low enough that the poorest section of the community can still afford to heat their home to some degree of comfort in winter).

      270

    • #
      tom0mason

      john,

      The German dream is for 40% by 2020, it is only a modeled theory that they can ever get there.

      … we get the de-fantasized figures on the share of total power (2012) that wind and sun have in Germany:

      Wind: 8%
      Solar: 5.3%
      Total wind and solar: 13.3%
      Gore’s claim: 37%
      Factor of exaggeration: 178%

      In fact, all the renewable energies combined, i.e. solar, wind, biogas, hydroelectric, etc. amount only to 25% share of Germany’s total energy supplied as of 2012. Already leading officials concede there is little chance of reaching 40% total renewable energy by 2020, let alone 50% with only solar and wind.

      And yes this is a quote from last year which is quoting earlier figures but if you can show better go ahead.

      140

    • #
      Spetzer86

      As for Germany, pick your day: http://www.agora-energiewende.de/en/topics/-agothem-/Produkt/produkt/76/Agorameter/

      Today, wind isn’t cutting it.

      100

    • #
      Ross

      john

      The other bit about Germany you neglect to mention is that they have recognised their attempts at renewables have failed ( along with delays in replacing older nuclear plants) so they are now building another 20 coal fired power plants which will burn Germany’s brown coal.

      110

    • #

      Germany gets 30% of electric power from renewables

      Only according to your imagination. The official figure is 26%

      Wind+Solar provided 15% when it was convenient to supply; not to consume.
      Substantial “renewables” in Germany consist of water – no more room for hydro-electric of any significance anywhere in Germany and “biomass” which is burning food and forests to make electricity.

      Oh … and they’re burning money like it’s going out of style. They’ll have malinvested 2 trillion Euros by 2025 which is when the current contracts expire. And most of that money has not yet been paid. Nor has much of the compensation due to the nuclear generators for early shutdowns. Nuclear still provides 16% of Germany’s electrical power needs. Germany is building coal-fired plants to replace them, fearing a tsunami from the Mediterranean over the Alps; or something.

      Should one venture to the source of the national keepers of statistics in Germany and look up the category “Energy”, one finds a feature titled “43% of electricity came from brown and hard coal in 2014

      In 2014 approximately 43% of the total gross electricity production was based on coal. This is a marked decrease from 1990 when brown and hard coal accounted for 57% of the power generated. In the past few years, gross electricity production from coal has gone up again: for example, power generation from hard coal rose from 108 to 109 billion kilowatt hours (+1%) compared with 2009, and electricity generation from brown coal increased from 146 to 156 billion kilowatt hours (+7%).

      I’ve put the key in bold, just in case your eyes have glazed over from lack of comprehension. With coal replacing nuclear, coal’s share will go from about 43% to nearly 60% in the next 5 years or so. So another giant leap to come on top of the 8% or so of increase in the past 5 years. i.e. about 30% increase in coal-fired power generation.

      With subsidies for new wind and solar collapsing, so it the expansion of them throughout Germany. Most of the increases in ‘renewables” this year will be from those bits that they couldn’t get to work last year. Because e.g. they forgot to run a power cable to offshore “wind parks”. Manufacturing jobs in the “renewable energy” sector have largely evaporated.

      50

  • #
    Ruairi

    To cool just a hundredth degree,
    Costs the U.S. an outlandish fee,
    As to power production,
    With coal-mining reduction,
    From Obama’s regulation decree.

    230

  • #

    There’s nuffin’ worse than watching a failed prez casting around for some sorta legacy thang and doing the executive order boogie, but carefully post-dated after next year’s election when it can all be rolled back by the new prezzie’s executive order too. Jeez, talk about cheese as the say in Philly.

    Pointman

    252

  • #
    TdeF

    So Obama’s deal with Iran contains no safeguards at all to stop a nuclear WWIII, starting in the middle East and Obama is worried about our Barrier Reef? Every country in the Middle East is at war, from Libya to Turkey to Iran and Kerry is more worried about his hair? China has promised seriously to do absolutely nothing about anything and it is held up as a triumph of US negotiation? Now tiny Carbon Dioxide is the world’s greatest problem facing mankind? Really?

    This look at me foray into a fantasy save the planet agenda is pure distraction politics, irrelevant, useless, illogical and attention seeking. Obama’s legacy will be, like Rudd and Gillard’s, one of massive waste, economic disaster, wasted opportunity and a collapse of respect for government while promoting the absurd myth of strong leadership while handing out cash for votes. It is the age of entitlement gone mad where leadership has gone completely missing. Has there ever been a worse US President?

    291

    • #
      gai

      Has there ever been a worse US President?

      Yes FDR and Woodrow Wilson. Obama just follows in their [self-snip] footsteps.

      140

      • #
        gai

        I just had a nasty thought.

        Woodrow Wilson served from 1913 to 1921 and got the USA into World War I (1914-1918).

        Roosevelt served from 1934-1945, deepen the Great Depression and got the USA into World War II.

        151

        • #
          Dave in the states

          There are indeed parallels between Obama and both FDR and Wilson. In particularly Wilson. Both Obama and Wilson were/are academics that can be described as “book smart and job stupid.” Both are/were certain that their theories were/are correct even as observable data contradicted their opinions. Both were/are stubborn idealists not very grounded to reality. Both had/have a special interest in international relations, but were/are completely inept in the application thereof. Both hated/hate the US Constitution, and held/hold the Framers in contempt. Both were/are racialists.

          Wilson shares much of the blame for Germany becoming a revisionist power following WW-1, setting the stage for the rise of the Nazis.

          70

      • #

        I’d toss in Jimmy Carter. I would note, however, there has never been such a narcissistic, self-aggrandizing president who’s goal was to destroy America as we know it. Of course, that combined with a bunch of spineless Congressmen who are willing to sign away their children’s future for their own present, makes for a chiling scene. Just a few decades ago, the people from WWII were fighting the killing of Jews. Now, people are all for killing the unborn, only black lives matter, and people crawled into holes and pretended nothing is going on. What a difference 70 years makes.

        211

    • #
      Stupendus

      a nuclear War in the middle east will certainly solve a lot of problems…and reduce the amount of oil available unless we want glow in the dark combustion engines or ALL our plastic will be fluro. It is a win win situation for certain elements, not so good if you live in the middle east but meh….

      60

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Another fantasy out of DC? What a surprise.

    I hope the country survives the rest of his term. Bless his heart. :-(

    130

    • #
      Bill

      I feel sorry for my American friends… so many of them want to rebuild their country into something sane and reasonable. The reasonable people can’t be heard from at all as the complicit media won’t allow them to be heard.

      And here in Canada, (national election having been called) we have angry Tom Mulcair and Justin Trudeau who want to turn us into the failing state the US has become. Elizabeth May (the greenie leader) just keeps slurping the koolaid and preaching to her fellow nutbars about how evil Canada is for not following her religion and being “warmongers” for standing up to terrorists and other criminals.

      Bring back the monarchy and off with some heads.

      150

      • #
        Bill

        Oh, for clarrification: Mulcair leads the NDP (Socialists & unionists), Trudeau (junior) was annointed to lead the “liberals” (not so liberal and beholding to the backroom power brokers) back into power (not working out for them). Harper (serving Prime Minister) leads the Conservatives who have strengthened laws, stood up against terrorists and other international criminals, kept Canada economically sound despite the international recession, and lowered taxes for everyone.

        150

  • #
    handjive

    Carbon Dioxide (Co2)?

    Here is the official Whitehouse/Obama video via youtube.

    @1.20 minutes, Obama mentions mercury(hg), sulphur(S), arsenic(As) and carbon(C)

    No where does Obama say “carbon dioxide(Co2)”

    What sort of “science” is this?

    Wait! What?

    Rising carbon dioxide is greening deserts! (ABC)
    . . .
    Now that is inconvenient.

    60

  • #
    Peter C

    The Obama plan seems so incredibly irrational and stupid!
    What is wrong with people, that they don’t initially laugh out loud at the foolishness and then deliver a total rout at the next election?

    180

    • #
      el gordo

      Half the population has been brainwashed and are not laughing, while the other half are laffing at a lame duck.

      With global cooling expected to begin next year I predict a Republican win

      140

    • #
      Dennis

      Like Blair, like Gillard and Rudd, like Shorten, all comrades and part of the world wide web of socialism Obama is preparing for one world government, no sovereign borders and nations. Look how far the comrades have pushed the developed world since the end of world war two.

      130

      • #
        gai

        The Socialist Revolution in the US cannot take place because there are too many small independent farmers there. Those people are the stability factor. We here in Russia must hurry while our government is stupid enough to not encourage and support the independent farmership.’ — V. Lenin, the founder of the Russian revolution

        Quote provided by Anna Fisher

        Nicole Johnson traces the deliberate stamping out of independent farmers in the USA starting right after WWII HERE.

        “Food is a weapon,” said Maxim Litvinov, Soviet Commissar of Foreign Affairs

        1932 to 1937 “The Collective Farm Policy was a terrible struggle, Ten million died. It was fearful. Four years it lasted. It was absolutely necessary. Joseph Stalin (wwwDOT)faminegenocide.com/resources/quotes.html

        1934, [Our] future is becoming visible in Russia. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rexford Tugwell (wwwDOT)archive.org/stream/rednetworkwhoswh00dillrich/rednetworkwhoswh00dillrich_djvu.txt

        September 1995,Catherine Bertini, Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, stated “Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize. UN’s 4th World Conference on Women: Beijing, China. ngin(DOT)tripod.com/280702c.htm

        The idiots in the cities do not realize where their food comes from and WHO is keeping the prices down for them not to mention WHAT keeps them from 12 hours of hard labor in the fields — PETROLEM!

        A Quicky History of Farming since the Luddites seem determined we regress a couple hundred years or more.

        In the 1850s you saw factory-made agricultural machinery and In 1850 about 75-90 labor-hours were required to produce 100 bushels of corn (2-1/2 acres) with walking plow, harrow, and hand planting.

        The 1860s saw the change from hand to horse drawn equipment. By 1890 most agricultural machinery that was dependent on horsepower had been discovered. In 1890 about 35-40 labor-hours were required to produce 100 bushels (2-1/2 acres) of corn with 2-bottom gang plow, disk and peg-tooth harrow, and 2-row planter.

        THIS is the MAXIMUM level of civilization that can be sustained with ‘Renewables’ IF we are very very lucky. I am not sure we could manage mining or manufacturing at this level though.

        1910-15 saw Big open-geared gas tractors came into use in areas of extensive farming. By 1930 – One farmer supplied 9.8 persons. AND you do not have to use half your farm to supply feed to the horses/mules/oxen.

        1945-70 saw the change from horses to tractors and the adoption of a group of technological practices characterized as the second American agricultural revolution.

        In 1945 it took 10-14 labor-hours to produce 100 bushels (2 acres) of corn with tractor, 3-bottom plow, 10-foot tandem disk, 4-section harrow, 4-row planters and cultivators, and 2-row picker.

        By 1975 that was reduced to 3-1/3 labor-hours to produce 100 bushels (1-1/8 acres) of corn with tractor, 5-bottom plow, 20-foot tandem disk, planter, 20-foot herbicide applicator, 12-foot self-propelled combine, and trucks.

        1987 saw little additional gain with 2-3/4 labor-hours required to produce 100 bushels (1-1/8 acres) of corn.

        Shamelessly stolen from A History of American Agriculture 1776-1990

        20

    • #
      Reed Coray

      Peter, I wish I had an answer to your question. Alas, I don’t. His position on global warming is one of his milder wrong-headed thought processes and actions. In a “slightly nutty world” it might be possible to rationalize his first election. However, it takes a really screwed up country to elect him twice. The fact that we did does not bode well for the USA.

      60

      • #
        bobl

        Mind you, the demographics of that election speaks volumes, over 90% of african americans and over 60% of non caucasions voted for him. The last election was effectively decided by anti white racism. There is at least a chance the next election won’t have such a bias, though the democrats are working on a gender bias next time.

        50

  • #
    handjive

    Meanwhile …

    At the headquarters of 97% scientific climate ignorance, the conversation:

    Can’t we just remove carbon dioxide from the air to fix climate change? Not yet

    If we have put too much CO2 into the air, wouldn’t it make sense to find ways to remove it again?
    . . .
    Atmospheric carbon dioxide has been higher than now (usually several times higher) for most of the existence of earth.

    It is required for life as we know it.

    If it had any effect on climate, we wouldn’t be here to discuss it

    140

  • #
    Ross

    I have a cousin who has lived in the USA for 30 years. He is now planning to leave because he thinks “it is stuffed”. I mentioned this to my wife who is currently working overseas and she said an American colleague she works with said a similar thing the other day –she wants retire to Australia or NZ.
    Meaningless sample size but it makes you wonder how prevalent this thinking could be in the USA.

    110

    • #
      bobl

      Yes, there is a minor exodus on, though I would warn against Oz since we are hanging by a thread, maybe one Labour election win away from a green driven banana republic.

      NZ looks good to me, and take it from me, that says a lot coming from a stalwart Aussie.

      151

    • #
      Planning Engineer

      Speaking roughly it’s more typically leftists who say they will leave the U.S. Those on the right look down on that kind of talk, their preferred threat is to have their region of the country succeed from the union. (Makes some sense the left has Europe and Canada to go to, the right ??).

      Now those on the left are generally happy with recent events, those on the right who aren’t want to reclaim America. I don’t think the problem is the size of your sample, but that it is skewed towards responses from those with international connections-not a large part of the American right.

      Surely not everyone fits into those boxes. Right-left shouldn’t matter-it’s a bad plan. But in the heartlands of the U.S. you don’t hear typical folks talking about leaving over this.

      70

      • #
        Bill

        We don’t want the leftist fools up here in Canada any more than you want them down south of the border. Clean up your own mess, please.

        30

  • #
    Dan Pangburn

    I wonder how much longer this assault on prosperity will be tolerated. The proof that CO2 has no effect on climate and identification of what does cause climate change are at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com

    110

    • #
      handjive

      Hi Dan,

      The 3 lines I used above …

      “Atmospheric carbon dioxide has been higher than now (usually several times higher) for most of the existence of earth.

      It is required for life as we know it.

      If it had any effect on climate, we wouldn’t be here to discuss it.”

      … I must attribute to you @climateEtc.
      . . .
      Some people are economical and succinct with words in a way I can only dream of!

      Great link.

      80

      • #
        TdeF

        It is required for life as we know it

        CO2 has a real image problem. Water is made from two gases, but who really believes that? Chemistry is for scientists, not lawyers.

        If CO2 did not exist, there would be no life in our world! We are made from plants and plants are made entirely from CO2 capture with sunlight. However it is a gas, a tiny, invisible gas which we cannot feel. Who really believes a mighty oak tree is made from CO2 and water? A forest? Us? Everything burns and there is no hole around an oak tree but still no one really believes this. Gravity exists but carbon is that dirty black stuff, like coal or oil. Uck.

        So the President of the United States can openly and proudly, grandiloquently demonize carbon dioxide as terrible industrial pollution and the biggest threat to mankind today without the faintest idea that he is made from it and generating it himself in large quantities. This shows the gulf between science and politics, the Periodic table and the election timetable. CO2 needs some PR. Why doesn’t Sir David Attenborough admit he is ultimately made from CO2 too?

        160

        • #
          tom0mason

          CO2 has an image problem,
          no problem rename it, redefine it –

          Diamond Gas, crystal cool in a sun warmed world.

          Trees of life powered by the gas of life — CO2.

          CO2, the gift of life.

          20

      • #
        gai

        For Bumper stickers or Tee shirts:

        LADIES ❤ CARBON

        http://moneycrux.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/diamfcts-001.jpg

        ………………..

        PLANTS ❤ CARBON DIOXIDE

        http://oi61.tinypic.com/2hcgvgi.jpg

        I would use this image in the middle — http://www.luisgyg.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/mariguana.jpg

        20

  • #
    Neville

    There has been a big drop in July for UAH, from 0.33c to 0.18c. Mostly in the extratropics, SH etc, but some el nino warming in the tropics.
    Will RSS show similar results?

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/08/uah-v6-0-global-temperature-update-for-july-2015-0-18-c/#comments

    90

    • #
      bobl

      Let’s hope the catastrophists are right because the world has seen what cooling can do, famine, death and pestilence and wolly mammoths frozen in their tracks. Unfortunately I fear they are wrong big time and an uncertain and cold future is out there.

      America knows what to do if New York is 2 degrees warmer (go to the beach) Exactly what should it do if New York is under a 1 km deep ice sheet as in the last ice age?

      112

    • #
      Peter C

      Well maybe not that big a drop. 0.15C. That is about the normal variation from month to month, which may be measurement errors.

      If it gets below the line over the next few months “the pause” will be extended back even further.

      50

      • #
        el gordo

        Let’s say a drop of 0.3 C over one year and the end of the pause, nothing serious apart from cool/wet summers in Europe and freezing winters.

        40

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      RSS is likely to show similar results.

      The UAH and RSS datasets are showing similar results after the last set of adjustment. The June 2015 measurement was close.

      I expect the upper air temps to spike later this year due to the El Nino. And if they don’t – interesting!

      My issue with the upper air measurements is they are very noisy.

      313

      • #
        el gordo

        There has been talk of a strong Humbolt Current, coming up the west coast of South America, could weaken this El Nino.

        http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2015/anomp.8.3.2015.gif

        50

        • #
          gai

          F. H. Haynie, a retired EPA scientist said last year:

          If I were asked to pick a single point on earth that most likely has the greatest effect on global weather and climate, it would be 0 and 90W (Galapagos). This is where El-nino winds, the deep sea Cromwell current, the Panama current, and the Humboldt current meet. These flows are not constant and each has different cycles and those cycles are not constant. Cycles on cycles create extremes in weather and climate. These extremes have an effect globally. I suspect these cycles are also controlling our observed atmospheric concentration of CO2. CO2 is very likely a lagging indicator and not a cause of climate change.

          This shows the Humboldt current nicely:

          http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/contour/equatpac.REM.fc.gif

          This shows the tongues of cold water going up both sides of South America and up the western side of Africa.

          http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/contour/global.fc.gif

          This is why I think the Antarctic Sea Ice and the Antarctic winds resulting from changes in ozone are ‘of interest’

          20

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      I was actually looking right at the figures and did not notice.

      RSS June 2015 0.3906
      RSS July 2015 0.2886

      So 0.102C difference – quite a swing!

      Keep in mind the RSS dataset does not cover the entire globe. The specs are: Latitude Range = 70.0S to 82.5N

      315

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘I expect the upper air temps to spike later this year due to the El Nino. And if they don’t – interesting!’

        http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_June_2015_v6.png

        Temps should automatically fall after this moderate El Nino, due probably to a strong La Nina, but where it goes from there is anybody’s guess.

        61

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          el gordo

          “Temps should automatically fall after this moderate El Nino, due probably to a strong La Nina, but where it goes from there is anybody’s guess.”

          The RSS and UAT will probably fall after an El Nino like they have before. But no guarantee of a following La Nina.

          The current El Nino is showing signs of being a strong one, time will tell.

          05

      • #
      • #
        Harry Passfield

        And how much of the globe does HADCRUT cover; a tree in YAMAL; Bristlecone pines; ice cores?????

        20

      • #
        James Bradley

        Harry Twatter,

        The latitudes you mentioned are Alaska in summer, not surprising there is a 0.1 swing.

        [SNIP]

        61

        • #
          Glenn999

          you shouldn’t be so harsh to young children;]

          51

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          James Bradley.

          Even more name calling.

          You probably should look up how they calculate anomalies before you make a fool of yourself.

          07

        • #
          James Bradley

          Hmmmm, Harry Twatter,

          Temperature anomalies – due to incomplete or lack of data sets – blended this, averaged that, assumed something…

          4 green thumbs to 0 green thumbs.

          You wanna try for match point?

          Dick head!

          51

        • #
          James Bradley

          Harry Twatter,

          But I digress, so, I have a question for my learned friend: why is it that we never see the lower than average anomalies reported?

          Because it’s not about the science, it’s all about the terms of reference and the propaganda labels that promote your ideology.

          Meanwhile between the 50th and 52nd latitudes both Britain and Germany are suffering their coldest winters in 20 years.

          Here’s a label that adequately describes your arguments of persuasion -’Dick head’.

          51

        • #
          James Bradley

          Wow, Harry Twatter,

          Five – love.

          See what happens when you take your eye off the data set and rely on modeled projections and best guesses.

          As ever, etc etc

          You know how it ends.
          [You have had a bit of fun James, but let's just leave it there, OK?] Fly

          31

  • #
    gai

    Reposted per Jo’s request:

    Mike Haseler, the USA signed its death warrant under President Clinton.

    In return for campaign funds from China, Clinton saw to it that China was given US technology and also saw to it that China was part of the World Trade Organization. Clinton caused the USA to lose more than 2.7 million jobs between 2001 and 2011 to China. Over 2.1 million of which (76.9 percent) were in manufacturing. These lost manufacturing jobs account for more than half of all U.S. manufacturing jobs lost or displaced between 2001 and 2011.

    Competition with low-wage workers from less-developed countries such as China has driven down wages for workers in U.S. manufacturing and reduced the wages and bargaining power….

    Put another way, for a typical full-time median-wage earner, earnings losses due to globalization totaled approximately $1,400 per year as of 2006 (Bivens 2008a). For a typical household with two earners, the annual cost is more than $2,500. China is the most important source of downward wage pressure from trade with less-developed countries because it pays very low wages and because its products make up such a large portion of U.S. imports (China was responsible for 55.3 percent of U.S. non-oil imports from less-developed countries in 2011)….

    The USA has become shop keepers for China instead of manufacturers. However that is not the worst of it. Clinton and his buddies sold US military secrets to China such as the launching and guidance systems now used for China’s missiles. On top of that, due to his lack policies, Clinton allowed China to steal the crown jewels of our nuclear arsenal, including the neutron bomb and the W-88 miniaturized warhead.
    (And the Unions STILL support the Democrats???)

    The USA no longer has top notch education:

    For 10 years, William Schmidt, a statistics professor at Michigan State University, has looked at how U.S. students stack up against students in other countries in math and science. “In fourth-grade, we start out pretty well, near the top of the distribution among countries; by eighth-grade, we’re around average, and by 12th-grade, we’re at the bottom of the heap, outperforming only two countries, Cyprus and South Africa.”
    Source

    The USA no longer has a strong manufacturing base:
    In 1979 over 25% of the US labor force was employed in manufacturing (19.5 million) now it is 8.8% as of 2013 (12 million) and is still nose diving. The Econuts are having an impact on mining and U.S. Steel is curtailing the operations of its biggest mills.

    Soldiers on US military bases have been disarmed.
    President Bush (Donald J. Atwood,) in 1992 signed Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5210.56 that disarmed US military personnel and has left them open to the recent slaughters such as the killing of 13 people by Nidal Hasan. Army Regulation 190-14, was a policy implemented in 1993 under Clinton and The DoD Directive was reissued in April 2011 under Obama.

    Obama is just delivering the final blows by using peripheral concerns (Gay Rights, Blacks Lives Matter, Social Justice, CAGW…) to deflect attention from the fact that his policies are designed to further weaken and finally collapse the USA.

    E.M. Smith goes into the economics and Demographics for both the USA and EU HERE that are a part of this political mess.

    CAGW has always been political which is why I include the politics as well as the science.

    90

  • #
    thingadonta

    Just a note that there is actually 2 main processes that is driving renewable energy legislation, and the whole climate change debate.

    1. One is the claimed effect on the climate from fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, which is not settled, but largely taken over by scientist activists, which various people quite rightly question and so on.

    Despite some claims, this is part of ongoing research, and the science is not settled.

    2. The other is about reliable long term energy supply, and the need to have ‘reliable’ (i.e. ‘renewable’ or ‘sustainable’) long term energy sources, particularly where there isn’t any fossil fuel energy available(which usually then has to then be transported/imported).

    Coupled with the second, is all sorts of pandora’s boxes and various can’s of worms, not the least being that fossil fuels are very unequally distributed over the earth, but also including the ideological and political beliefs that things are generally better if they are ‘sustainable’, meaning they don’t change or ‘run out’ over time, creating job losses, structural change and so on. (So for example, it’s no good if a port fills up with sediment and cant be used, or farming degrades the soil so one can’t farm etc etc. There is a good deal of truth in this, however for some things in nature they are, by their very nature, non-renewable and non-sustainable to begin with (e.g metals rust, energy gets transferred, technology creates structural change etc etc, so parts of science and nature just don’t work this way, but that is another matter some can’t understand).

    But the important point is, that it isn’t only ‘climate science’ (whether it’s right or wrong) driving renewable energy legislation, but it’s also the availability of long term alternatives, and a perceived political need to address long term unequal distribution of resources and employment (including academic employment/research) within energy-related fields.

    Not to say enacting various types of legislation is the way to go about all these, as others argue that one doesn’t need to pre-empt fossil fuel decline in any case, and that markets can, and will, adjust organically and when necessary, but some just can’t, or won’t, see things that way, and want to pre-empt ‘normal’ market forces by interfering with it.

    40

  • #
    Peter Browning

    Get used to more **** like this from Barry. He’s a dead man walking, nothing to loose.
    Remember all the land mines Juliar left behind?
    Seems decent normal people haven’t got the stomach for politics that’s why it’s full of narcissistic psychopaths.

    81

  • #
    john robertson

    Well what do we expect from a community organizer?
    Obama currently leads the coordinated parasites guild.
    He and most of his ardent supporters have never produced a good of benefit to anyone.
    Career feeders upon the public trough.
    The kleptocracy is huge and conditioned to always take more.
    These thefts and attacks upon productive persons will continue until there is nothing left to steal.
    Bureaucracy can not help itself, it grows to absorb all available energy.
    Kleptocrats are uncontrolled bureaucracy without voter oversight.
    Stop feeding them.

    Persons sustained by taxpayers money, should not be allowed to vote.
    To do so is a blatant conflict of interest.
    Three wolves and a lamb voting on; “Whats for lunch?”

    110

  • #
    Neville

    Obama’s stupid so called cut of 32% to emissions is really only a 32% cut to co2 from power stations. As explained by the Bolter and Vox the total cut is just 6% from all USA emissions of co2.

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/warmist_media_gives_obama_five_times_more_credit_than_he_deserves/

    81

  • #
    pat

    heard CAGW-zealot Lenore’s spin on radio last nite. of course, Lenore doesn’t link to the poll, so people can see the deception:

    4 Aug: Guardian: Lenore Taylor: Voters still prefer Malcolm Turnbull over Tony Abbott as leader, poll shows
    Malcolm Turnbull remains the most popular leader of the Liberal party, preferred by 24% of voters, but Tony Abbott has gained ground since his leadership woes in February and is now preferred by 17%, according to the latest Essential poll…
    Labor’s 50% renewable energy goal was popular with voters – 65% approved of the policy and only 16% disapproved, even though 51% accepted it would lead to higher electricity costs.
    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/04/voters-still-prefer-malcolm-turnbull-over-tony-abbott-as-leader-poll-shows

    ***a minor detail to Lenore, no doubt – “Among Liberal/National voters, 41% (up 18%) prefer Tony Abbott, 21% (down 3%) Malcolm Turnbull”.

    5 Aug: Essential: Best leader of the Liberal Party
    Q. Which of the following do you think would make the best leader of the Liberal Party?
    24% (no change since February) think Malcolm Turnbull would make the best leader of the Liberal Party, 18% prefer Tony Abbott (up 7%) and 17% prefer Julie Bishop (down 4%).
    ***Among Liberal/National voters, 41% (up 18%) prefer Tony Abbott, 21% (down 3%) Malcolm Turnbull
    http://www.essentialvision.com.au/best-leader-of-the-liberal-party-6

    70

    • #
      Angry

      I fixed it for you…….
      Malcolm Turnbull remains the most popular leader of the ALP (Australian LIARS Party)

      71

  • #
    pat

    3 Aug: The Hill: Tim Devaney: Environmental activists cheer new climate rules
    Billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer called the power plant regulation a “major turning point” in the fight against climate change.
    “It creates a tremendous opportunity for American business to do what it does best: turn a generational challenge into a story of American ingenuity and foresight,” Steyer said in a statement…
    “Breathing healthy air is essential to life,” said American Lung Association president Harold Wimmer. “The evidence is clear that climate change now harms lung health and public safety…
    “Our ambition can’t end here,” said World Wildlife Fund vice president Lou Leonard…
    Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica characterized the rules as a first step…
    http://thehill.com/regulation/energy-environment/250133-environmental-activists-cheer-new-climate-rules

    no climate NGOs! LOL.

    4 Aug: RTCC: Louisa Casson: Stop sulking Ed Miliband, learn from the climate movement
    (Louisa Casson is a policy advisor at the London-based think tank E3G.)
    Ex Labour leader says green groups are non-existent, but gives little credit to major wins in run-up to Paris says campaigner
    But when Labour’s former leader Ed Miliband spoke at the relaunch of NGO Sandbag a few weeks ago, his disappointment wasn’t directed at the party’s election defeat; it was aimed at environmental NGOs.
    “Where is the climate movement?” he asked. “There’s no pressure on governments,” he bemoaned to an ***audience made up of this allegedly non-existent climate movement.
    Claiming public pressure was “nothing” compared with during the run-up to 2009’s Copenhagen conference (the last time the world’s governments tried to sign a global climate deal), Miliband declared December’s summit in Paris would “fail” to reach a deal capable of avoiding further catastrophic climate change.
    So much for a politics of hope…
    I’m not prepared to accept the ‘we’re doomed and there’s nothing we can do about it’ line, so here’s how I challenged him on it afterwards.
    (ON AND ON AND ON)
    http://www.rtcc.org/2015/08/04/stop-sulking-ed-miliband-learn-from-the-climate-movement/

    40

  • #
    pat

    Sara & ABC dream of a carbon dioxide emissions trading bubble:

    5 Aug: ABC: Sara Phillips: Obama’s Clean Power Plan: give them a cap and the trade will follow
    Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan works around a hostile political opposition and avoids the carbon tax headache. Will it provide inspiration for further Australian climate action?
    ???Australia will become caught up in climate fever again this year. The Australian government will feel international pressure to take our climate commitments to the next level. Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten recently announced that he wants to make the next election about climate change.
    However Prime Minister Tony Abbott has railed long and hard about a carbon tax and its “toxic” effect on Australia. He has labelled the alternative — a cap-and-trade scheme — to be a tax in disguise…
    Short of the Governor-General intervening, Australia has no equivalent of executive action; it’s up to parliament to nut this one out.
    But could Obama’s non-tax work-around provide an inspiration for further Australian climate action?…
    The first is that while the plan looks good on paper, there are suggestions it is actually not very ambitious. The US coal industry is in decline. The recession and the boom in gas has hit coal pretty hard. One analysis suggests that as much as 69 per cent of the goal has already been achieved for these reasons.
    The other is that it may well be only a ‘cap’ on emissions, but there is nothing stopping the ‘trade’ part from tagging along, turning the rules into a de-facto cap-and-trade system, or as we call it in Australia, an emissions trading scheme…
    So if Mr Abbott was hoping that Obama had created a third way — a climate solution that is neither tax nor ETS — he’ll be disappointed.
    It may be only a cap at this stage, but in a market environment as lively as the USA, it’s a matter of time before carbon is traded as a commodity.
    http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2015/08/05/4286903.htm

    “Australia WILL BECOME caught up in climate fever”???
    the MSM has had it the fever for years & still can’t infect a wary public.

    5 Aug: Bloomberg: Don’t Like Obama’s Carbon Plan? Fine, Here’s Cap and Trade
    by Mark Drajem and Lynn Doan
    Now, while the Chamber (of Commerce) said it opposes the new Environmental Protection Agency’s carbon regulations, many company representatives say they’re pleased that trading can be used to help them keep down the cost of cutting their use of coal under the EPA regulations.
    “Trading is one of the most efficient ways to get the market to act,” said Arvin Ganesan, vice president at Advanced Energy Economy in Washington, which represents companies such as Johnson Controls Inc. and First Solar Inc. “It yields results and minimizes the cost on customers.”…
    “It’s a really big leap forward,” said Bob Wyman, a lawyer representing companies such as Alstom SA, Calpine Corp. and Boeing Co. which support the EPA’s efforts and say they want them to work…
    “It makes it easier for the rank-and-file officials to say that this is doable,” said Vicki Arroyo, the head of the Georgetown Climate Center. “It will be relatively painless.”…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-04/don-t-like-obama-s-clean-power-plan-fine-here-s-cap-and-trade

    “relatively painless”? if you believe that…

    50

  • #
    pat

    31 July: Los Angeles Daily News: Laurel Rosenhall: Why hasn’t California’s cap and trade pollution program been a model for US?
    It was mid-morning one day in May and somewhere deep inside a 25-story tower in Sacramento, an auction, cloaked in secrecy, was about to begin.
    There was no gavel pounding. No shouting. No frenzy of traders running around.
    Instead, an unknown number of state workers surrendered their cell phones, and took positions monitoring computer screens inside the building that houses California’s environmental agencies. Across the world, traders logged in, poised to buy permits that allow businesses in California to emit the kind of pollution responsible for global warming.
    Four hours later, the auction was over and California state government was $626 million richer.
    That’s the state’s cap and trade program at work…
    How many staff monitor the online auctions? Which companies bought the permits? State officials won’t say. Making too much information public, they say, could compromise the integrity of the quarterly auctions.
    “What we don’t do and won’t do is get into the individual business strategies that companies use to decide when to buy, what auctions to participate in, who to trade with, and so forth,” said Mary Nichols, chair of the California Air Resources Board, which runs the cap and trade program…
    One Canadian province has joined and another is working on it, but California remains the only state that charges almost every industry a price for emitting carbon.
    It wasn’t supposed to be this way, said former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, who carried Assembly Bill 32, the 2006 measure that led to cap and trade.
    “The environmental community said, ‘Look, the reason why this has to be the most progressive bill is because once California passes a law, all of these other states are going to follow suit. All of them,’” Nunez said in a recent interview.
    “The irony of this is that once the law passed in California, no one followed suit. No one.”…
    “It’s a regressive tax,” said Morning Star spokesman Nick Kastle, as he led a tour through a Los Banos processing plant…
    “The only link in that chain who can’t pass it on is the consumer,” Kastle said. “That is the person who bears all the additional costs.” …
    http://www.dailynews.com/environment-and-nature/20150731/why-hasnt-californias-cap-and-trade-pollution-program-been-a-model-for-us

    70

  • #
    tom0mason

    Here’a a neat view of global temperatures from William M. Briggs

    51

  • #
    pat

    only fit for publishing in a single publication in WA! and it’s “the only locally edited daily newspaper published in Perth”, according to Wikipedia:

    5 Aug: The West Australian: Greens Senator Scott Ludlam defends $11,000 flight
    Andrew Tillett and Andrew Probyn
    WA Greens senator Scott Ludlam spent $11,136 chartering a flight at taxpayers’ expense to get to Wiluna where he attended an anti-nuclear protest.
    But the party’s co-deputy leader defended the cost, saying the main purpose of his three-day visit in August 2011 was to meet staff of uranium miner Toro Energy and inspect the company’s proposed mine nearby…
    His return flight between Kalgoorlie and Wiluna coincided with the start of the Walkatjurra Walkabout when about 100 protesters marched from Wiluna to Kalgoorlie and then to Perth to demand an end to uranium mining.
    The Greens’ anti-nuclear spokesman also met residents and traditional owners opposed to the project…
    “We will not rest until this industry finally has been closed down,” he told Parliament after the visit.
    Senator Ludlam toldThe West Australian the cost was quoted on a competitive basis and no commercial flights fitted the schedule.
    “I wouldn’t really characterise the purpose of the trip as a protest, more as a site visit with Toro staff and a series of meetings … with local people,” he said…
    https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/29180381/greens-senator-scott-ludlam-defends-11-000-flight/

    50

    • #

      No commercial flights ever fit my schedule. So I change the schedule to fit the commercial flights and use the extra time on the ground, at whichever end, to my advantage!

      Senator Ludlam is nothing if not inflexible.

      20

  • #
    PeterS

    I sometimes wonder if Obama is part of some plot to destroy US and let a foreign power take over. Probably not but he might as well be. What better way to weaken a nation from within than to make their economy worse than it already is using his dumb CO2 policy?

    60

  • #
    pat

    all over the MSM. ABC always seems happy to see economic activity stopped, but surely it means the $1bn a year ABC gets from taxpayers is no longer affordable!

    5 Aug: ABC: Approval of Adani’s $16 billion Carmichael coal mine in Queensland’s Galilee Basin ruled invalid by Federal Court
    The approval of Adani’s Carmichael coal mine in central Queensland has been declared invalid by the Federal Court because of a bureaucratic bungle over two vulnerable species…
    The approval was set aside by the court after it was found Environment Minister Greg Hunt had not properly considered advice about the yakka skink and the ornamental snake.
    The Mackay Conservation Group launched a challenge to the mine project earlier this year over the vulnerable species.
    Today’s court ruling has been consented to by Indian company Adani and the Federal Government…
    Adani said it was committed to ensuring its mine, rail and port projects in Queensland are developed, and complied with environmental conditions.
    “It should be noted the approval did include appropriate conditions to manage the species protection of the yakka skink and ornamental snake,” it said.
    “However, we have been advised that, because certain documents were not presented by the Department in finalising the approval, it created a technical legal vulnerability that is better to address now…
    Queensland Resources Council chief executive Michael Roche said “legal loopholes” had paved the way for anti-coal activists to delay billions of dollars in investment and thousands of jobs…
    Mr Roche said Mr Hunt should be able to quickly sort it out.
    “The great irony of this is that minister has put conditions in his approval for the mine that cover the two species – a skink and a snake – but on some technical basis he can’t demonstrate that all the right documents were in front of him at the time,” he said…
    However, Greens senator Larissa Waters said Adani should now walk away from Carmichael mine in the wake of the Federal Court decision…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-05/federal-court-overturns-approval-of-adanis-carmichael-coal-mine/6673734

    Maddie – who is the “we” “our” you write about?

    5 Aug: Gizmodo: Maddie Stone: This Is Why Carbon Is Now Called Pollution
    Carbon dioxide is a funny molecule. Life as we know it wouldn’t exist without CO2. But when we pump too much of it into the atmosphere, it destroys our environment. That’s why the Clean Power Plan, announced yesterday by the Obama administration, has finally decided to call carbon what it is: Pollution…
    Carbon is Changing the Climate, Period.
    You’re probably sick of hearing about it, so I’ll keep it short and sweet…blah blah blah
    Pollution is something dangerous; something ***we don’t like. And — sorry carbon — but it’s in ***our best interests not to like you very much right now.
    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/08/this-is-why-carbon-is-now-called-pollution/

    50

  • #
    Gethrog

    Off topic
    Once upon a time there was a king who wanted to go fishing.
    He called the royal weather forecaster and inquired as to the weather forecast for the next few hours.
    The weatherman assured him that there was no chance of rain in the coming days.
    So the king went fishing with his wife, the queen.
    On the way he met a farmer on his donkey.
    Upon seeing the king the farmer said, “Your Majesty, you should return to the palace at once because in just a short time I expect a huge amount of rain to fall in this area”.
    The king was polite and considerate, he replied: “I hold the palace meteorologist in high regard. He is an extensively educated and experienced professional. Besides, I pay him very high wages. He gave me a very different forecast. I trust him and I will continue on my way.”
    So he continued on his way.
    However, a short time later a torrential rain fell from the sky. The King and Queen were totally soaked and their entourage chuckled upon seeing them in such a shameful condition.
    Furious, the king returned to the palace and gave the order to fire the weatherman at once!
    Then he summoned the farmer and offered him the prestigious and high paying role of royal forecaster.
    The farmer said, “Your Majesty, I do not know anything about forecasting. I obtain my information from my donkey. If I see my donkey’s ears drooping, it means with certainty that it will rain.”
    So the king hired the donkey.
    And so began the practice of hiring asses to work in the BOM

    80

  • #
    David Maddison

    Obama is not destroying the US due to incompetence, he is doing it by design.

    80

  • #
    pat

    PIC: 5 Aug: Northern Star: New Byron Bay resort offers visitors carbon-neutral holidays
    THE $100 million Elements of Byron resort has been hailed a “game changer” by tourism boss Sandra Chipchase, chief executive of Destination New South Wales.
    Ms Chipchase praised the architectural design and added “the picture perfect setting at Belongil Beach is unsurpassed”…
    A state of the art energy management system will also enable guests to monitor their carbon footprint in real-time via iPads.
    Upon checkout guests have the option to offset their carbon footprint with funds contributing toward habitat restoration…
    http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/new-resort-is-game-changer-for-tourism-in-byron-ba/2728473/

    40

  • #
    pat

    5 Aug: The Hindu: Yuthika Bhargava: Australian court revokes environmental nod for Adani’s $ 16-bn coal mine project
    This is a technical, administrative matter and to remove this doubt, the department has advised that the decision should be reconsidered,” it said. “Reconsidering the decision does not require revisiting the entire approval process,” it added.
    It said it expected it would take six to eight weeks to prepare its new advice and supporting documentation and for the Minister to reconsider his decision on the mine.
    The company said it is regrettable that a technical legal error from the Federal Environment Department has exposed the approval to an adverse decision…
    The spokesperson said the need to finalise these approvals and timelines is critical so “Adani and the community can realise the benefits associated with its investments to date including 10,000 jobs and $22 billion in taxes and royalties to be reinvested back into the community.”…
    http://www.thehindu.com/business/australia-federal-court-revokes-environmental-nod-for-adanis-16bn-coal-mine-project/article7502221.ece

    40

  • #
    David Maddison

    For those that rightly hate wind turbines this will make you hate them more. Search YouYube on the term “wind turbine failure” and you will get a heap of videos of failures. This is one of many (no one hurt) https://youtu.be/u14tBwO5QVQ

    Now if random people happened to be in the right place at the right time to film these failures, how many failures really occur with no one watching?

    70

  • #
    ROM

    Ok! Late to the party again which is still going strong by the look of it.

    There is a heck of a lot of straight out frustration and condemnation with an overture of fear as to what Obama in his utter imbecility wants to forcibly impose in his drive to destroy America’s source of its great wealth, its highly efficient energy production system at every level, a frustration and a ribbon of fear running right through the posts above.

    For the record I was;
    Deeply skeptical of Obama when he was elected particularly as he was a Chicago democrat , the archtypal political off spring of the Tammany Hall political machine  that made Chicago politics and politicians the byword for corruption and malpractice in a democracy.

    Dubious at best when he got going in the Presidency ;

    Increasingly Contemptuous as he advanced in his presidency.

    Unprintably contemptuous now as his rabidly leftists and his utterly impractical , ideologically motivated, imbecilic energy policies have unfolded;

    Saddened and uncomfortable for the great nation of America that it should have come down to this level in it’s political leadership.

    And the worst American President since Warren Harding who never wanted to be President in any case.

    Obama now has his legacy and it will be one that will now stick to him, as we older Aussies used to say, like s**t to a blanket down through history and it will continue to stink in a similar manner.
    ————-
    BUT I very seriously doubt that ANY of this futuristic scenario as being set by Obama will play out as the principals from all sides in this incredibly imbecilic fiasco expect and hope that it will be played out.

    The whole political and energy technology scenario both American and internationally, plus the American State politics, plus the rapidly changing and very volatile and unpredictable economic situation both nationally and internationally, plus the mixed approaches of current and putative runners for the next American presidency, plus the ever shifting and unforecastable and unpredictable American and foreign public’s psychology approach to every facet of this situation, plus and etc!

    The mix of the lot is extremely volatile and rests on the knife edge now with the rapidly increasing chances of major Black Swan event overwhelming all the hopes and aspirations of all the mice and men [ and women ] involved.

    What that possible and increasingly likely Black Swan event will be is completely unknown and could not possibly occur hence the descriptive term “Black Swan event ” as it was an undeniable and unchallengeable fact that ALL Swans were white and always had been since time immemorial, that is until the unpredicted and impossible Black Swans of WA appeared on the scene.

    And those possible and potential Black Swan events range through from an assassination not necessarily of a leader or even any particular national leader to a sudden economic collapse internationally, to a economic or political collapse of the EU, to a miscalculation by China or India or the some other rising political party or power or just about any other potential and impossible Black Swan event you might like to imagine.
    Maybe with a great deal of luck, the announcement of the achieving the operation of a successful sustained, fully controlled fusion reaction in a transportable sized reactor.

    Strangely, the last option as a Black Swan event would justify Obama’s programming of future emmissions reduction but in a completely different manner to that which he has outlined and promoted and all done without any help or input at any level from Obama and his zombie level climate change lackeys.

    He would have his renewable energy production source in spades, a never ending renewable energy source of unlimited energy production potential .
    He would dramatically reduce emmissions of CO2 as fossil fuels would be phased out over the century following.

    Not a very good idea to see the end of that increased CO2 from the Earth’s flora and fauna and the sentient species perspective if fusion becomes a reality and It will eventually as the rewards for succeeding are so profound for our future continuing existence into the centuries ahead.

    Flora and fauna that are entirely reliant for their existence and good health and flourishing existence on sufficient levels of CO2 being in the atmosphere for the Flora part of the combination to take up, process using photosynthesis and then expel the Oxygen that all of the earth’s Fauna including its sentient species are so reliant on just to live, including one species in particular, that of Homo sapiens.
    And Thats Us!

    My guess and that is all it is, is that none of Obamas promoted solutions to the predicted but non visible, non evident, non proven futuristic climate change event which he personally is going to prevent as a major plank of his presidential legacy will ever appear in any major nation changing or global changing fashion let alone having ANY possible and potential downstream effects on the global climate.

    Nor will all the other predictions and prophecies evolve and appear as published as events and / or someone, somewhere, somehow, sometime will derail the whole thing.
    And the world will wipe its collective brow and swear “never again!

    Until the next time!

    110

    • #
      Peter C

      Obamas plans for American energy may not last in the long term.

      However his imperative is to stitch something up at the Paris UNFCC talks. That is what I am afraid of. Hopefully our own government will be non committal at worst.

      But what if Tony Abbott calls an election in the mean time and looses?

      70

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Offtopic news just to hand (okay, just to web browser)

    CSIRO modelling and simulation skills performing as per usual.

    Their initial modelling indicated a low probability that any debris from MH370 would have made landfall in the east Indian Ocean at the time.
    The CSIRO has now made further refinements to the drift model, including an approximation of the effect of waves, in addition to the wind and surface currents.
    The chief oceanographer working on the search, Dr David Griffin, concluded the flaperon found on La Reunion could have originated from the present MH370 search area, taking the errors of the ocean, wind and wave models into account.

    … The drift analysis undertaken by the CSIRO further supports that the debris from MH370 may be found as far west of the search area as La Reunion Island.

    How these people can predict the state of the whole planet’s heat distribution 50 years from now when they couldn’t predict the ocean currents one year ahead and now have taken 7 days to catch up to last week is anybody’s guess.
    At least they are on the right track. Once they’ve figured out how to predict the past they might try predicting the future.

    Nobody even knows if this flaperon is guaranteed to be from MH370, so it’s just more C.Y.A. activity. What a stuff-up. Who would have thought waves were important in the ocean? heh! If they punch in the right fudge factor they can make the model support any scenario.
    But stay proud, as “Australia is leading the hunt for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370″ with hastily cobbled-together half-baked models of ocean currents. Leading on the back foot!

    80

  • #

    [...] It’s Fairy-tales time: Obama’s $2.5 trillion plan to kill jobs, coal, make a 0.1% reduction in CO2, and cool world by zer… [...]

    00

  • #

    A few real numbers for Renewable Energy in Europe.

    These figures use Renewable Energy Industry data sources.

    The cost of a conventional gas-fired generation is about €1billion / Gigawatt.

    Accounting for capacity factors the capital cost of European Renewable Energy installations is about €29billion / Gigawatt. Greens and the BBC obviously think this is a great way to spend other peoples money.

    By 2014 European Union countries had invested approximately €1 trillion in large scale Renewable Energy installations. This may well be an underestimate.

    This has provided a nameplate electrical generating capacity of about 216 Gigawatts, nominally about ~22% of the total European generation needs of some 1000 Gigawatts.

    The actual measured output by 2014 from Renewable Industry sources has been 38 Gigawatts or 3.8% of Europe’s electricity requirement, at a capacity factor of ~18% overall.

    The whole 1000 Gigawatt fleet of European electricity generation installations could have been replaced with lower capital cost Gas-fired installations for the €1trillion of capital costs already expended on Renewable Energy in Europe.

    However Renewable Energy production is dependent on the seasons, local weather conditions and the rotation of the earth, day and night.

    So the Renewable Energy contribution to the electricity supply grid is inevitably erratic, intermittent and non-dispatchable. It is therefore much less useful than dispatchable sources of electricity, which can be engaged whenever necessary to match demand and maintain grid stability.

    That 3.8% Renewable Energy contribution to the grid is often not available when needed and obversely its mandatory use can cause major grid disruption if the Renewable Energy contribution is suddenly over abundant.

    The Renewable Energy industry could not exist without the Government mandated subsidies and preferential tariffs on which it depends. It is not a viable business proposition

    Viewed from the point of view of the viability of the nation’s electrical grid, Renewable Energy would never be part of the generating mix without its Government mandate and Government market interference.

    see
    https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/charting-renewable-energy-costs-and-performance-in-europe-2014/

    10

  • #

    Please note the link is broken in the contribution above It should be:

    apologies for thew confusion

    https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/european-renewable-energy-costs-and-performance-2014/

    10

  • #
    Fred

    We are at a great disadvantage. The EPA lies, breaks the law, manipulates temperature data. We think the states have to be truthful. Why can’t the states lie like the EPA and say we reduced the CO2 by 32% or whatever % we want. If they need proof, contract with a group that is the opposite of the ecoterrorists to do a study saying it’s true. You can’t win when you play by the rules and the other side doesn’t. We should have learned this in Vietnam.

    20