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

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

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



Archives

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 7.3/10 (22 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 7.3 out of 10 based on 22 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/h42wp2b

159 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
    doubtingdave

    Jo , you seem to have gone early with weekend unfettered , i hope its because your having some well deserved family time , so i’ve sent you a little left over easter egg chocolate , enjoy .

    190

  • #

    Wind Energy

    Politically green energy is still very much on the agenda of the major parties as it is viewed as way of reducing “greenhouse” gases, and in consequence global warming. Irrespective of one’s beliefs let’s look the main sources of green energy, wind turbines, as a means of replacing fossil fuel electricity generation.
    Eastern Aust. has a large interconnected grid and it possible to review the performance of wind, solar, hydro and fossil fuel generation. The major hydro schemes, the Snowy and Tasmania, have been providing electricity for decades, but there is limited scope for expansion. Solar schemes are operating but outputs are low and restricted to 6-7 hours daily. So that leaves wind.

    Wind Farms

    Looking at the marketing authority website, energy.anero.id.au/wind, one can see the performance of the 32 contributing wind farms. The total nameplate capacity of these farms is 3669 MW and they range from 4 MW to 240 MW in size.

    Lets look at the production figures from these windfarms for March.
    The data are graphed and the average value is given by a dark black line admist an array of coloured lines, one for each farm. The data are also illustrated pictorially with symbols representing the various outputs: white idle, green 0-30%, yellow 30-60%, brown 60-90% and red more than 90% production of their nameplate capacity.
    The graphs can be changed from % capacity to MW if required; the corresponding divisions are green less than 1,100 MW, yellow 1,100-2200 MW, brown 2200-3300 MW and red 3300-3669 MW.

    Using the actual MW values for the month, production was less than 1100 MW 70% of the time, between 1100 and 220 MW 25% of the time and more than 2200 MW only 5 % of the time.
    The overall average production from the 32 stations was 23% of nameplate capacity or 878 MW. The minimum figure noted was 100 MW and the maximum was 2,800 MW.
    There were 6 periods of between 3 and 12 hours duration with less than 10% productio; on March 1,2,4,11,12 and 13, and on March 14,15,16,17 and 18 production 30-60% was observed.

    General

    For the month overall production from the 32 farms was 627,840 MWh or 23% of their nameplate capacity which is equivalent to one 850 MW 24/7 coal station.

    The problem of wind energy is its intermittent nature which creates a number of problems.
    The main problem being the need for back-up supply 70-80 % of the time when the wind is not blowing, or occasionally when it is too strong. For March only 23% of nameplate capacity was produced by the farms so back-up supply would have been used most of the time. It also creates problems for the grid operators balancing an extremely variable input with the existing stations which have to be started and stopped, or put on “spinning reserve” in the case of the coal stations.

    Actual cost data of wind energy are difficult to obtain, but reports that wind is cheaper than coal are untrue, otherwise the substantial subsidies would not be required: Some estimates of cost range from 2-3 more expensive than coal.

    Other problems with the wind turbines include the large tracts of land required, the visual impact of the turbines, problems of low frequency noise close to habitation and the amount of bird kill.

    Although politically correct they are not the answer to our energy needs, that is 24/7 electricity for our cities and industry. The only role for wind turbines is in isolated communities with diesel back-up generation. Interestingly, Tasmania has two large windfarms and 305 MW of capacity and is importing 200 MW of diesel generators to overcome their present problems.

    429

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Excellent post, Robert
      The “leader” of the Greens in Tasmania, Cassowary Very Gullible, and her 2IC Just As Gullible, have the solution.
      Like a Shaman in a stone age culture, they are of the opinion that if the patient is not responding to the application of leaches, then the solution is more leaches and blood letting.
      With the situation in Tassie caused by over reliance on unreliable “renewables”, the witch doctor believes the solution must therefore be more “renewables”.
      With airheads like this in public life and being interviewed by an even more gullible MSM, there is no mystery as to why we have societal problems.

      2910

      • #
        ianl8888

        … an even more gullible MSM …

        Sigh … the MSM are not gullible, they asre deliberately disingenuous. To put it precisely, they lie to us constantly as their agenda is similar to the greens.

        The MSM are the enablers, by deliberate design. The only way to beat this is to ignore them – this won’t happen, the general public believes what they are told to believe.

        The immigration issue holds a possibility for breaking this unhealthy nexus, as people don’t like the empirical results very much, so the MSM constantly bleating at them for being “racist, !slamophobic, intolerant” etc etc has a tendency to provoke distrust.

        209

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          I think of the scene in Clockwork Orange when the main character is in the chair, eyes propped open and being bombarded with images etc…

          All I could think of was the MSM being the people who put the main character in the chair…eyes forcibly held open….

          1110

        • #
          Dennis

          The book The Electronic Whorehouse by Paul Sheehan is worth reading, it explains the media spin and how we are misled constantly by media spin and spin fed to media by politicians.

          72

      • #
        jorgekafkazar

        It is just like Socialism. The solution to failed Socialism is always . . . more Socialism.

        107

    • #
      Robk

      Additionally, as the portion of renewables increases, the surges in the grid due to significant”green producers” coming on and dropping off, more or less randomly, means the grid’s conductors and control equipment need to be greatly enhanced. This increases the cost per unit of energy distributed.

      1410

    • #

      Thanks Robert O,

      great Comment.

      I want to show you something from the site that Robert got his information from, and here I’m adding the link for the home site. For this link, right click your mouse and open the page in a new tab, and that way, you can still navigate back to these instructions with that site now open.

      Wind Energy Generation

      This site provides a wealth of information, and all you need to learn is how to navigate around it, and for that purpose I’m going to show you something here.

      Once the site is open, do the following little exercise. You’ll see the map there and the data is below this map, you can scroll down, and the data is what I want to direct you to, and, as you can see there, the data is in real time, so what’s happening now is indicated right there, so now scroll back to the top.

      I’ll set you a task here, and you can see just how little wind power provides, and at the same time, learn a few of the features at the site.

      1. Note at the top right in the black bar, there is a date facility. Click on that and a calendar opens up for the Month, so, you can click on any day you like and the full day will show(from midnight through the day and back to the next midnight)

      2. On that calendar, where it says APRIL 2016, note at the left is an arrow. Click on that and it will take you back one Month, and show the dates for all of March 2016.

      3. When the Month opens, I want you to click on 31, the last day of the Month, and the only reason I’m using this date is it’s a working day.

      4. When the new screen opens up, you’ll see just the data itself, and no map. When the page opens, at that data map, top right, click on MW, and what you see now is the black line, total wind power generation for the whole of the day, 31MAR2016. The minimum generation was around 200MW at around 8AM, and there was the maximum, a spike at around 2.30PM of around 800MW. (out of a total Nameplate of 3669MW) So, the average for the whole day was (around) 400MW, hence a Capacity Factor around 10% for the day.

      5. Now, look down the right side of the page and you’ll see headings with further links. Scroll down a little to the heading About the Australian Electricity Grid. Links are in blue so where you see the link for fossil fuels, again, right click your mouse to open in a new tab, and the page for fossil fuel generation will open.

      6. At that page, same thing, date change to 31MAR2016, same as for the wind page, and then when the data shows, click on MW, and you’ll now see the black line for total generation from fossil fuels.

      What you see here is basically a typical daily load curve for the cooler Months of the year. The dip at around early AM as we all sleep. When we rise, power consumption rises, (here, on this graph equating closely to actual generation) to the first peak of the day, dips a little and then rises again at around 6PM as we all get home, and do dinner etcetera.

      Note here the value, while wind was in the hundreds, this is in the thousands and tens of thousands of MW. The daily minimum is at 3AM, 17,000MW so, add around another 1000 here for actual consumption and you can see that while we are all still tucked up sound asleep, Australia is consuming around 18,000MW virtually all of it provided by fossil fuels.

      The daily maximum is around 23,000MW.

      The daily average, and that’s all it is, an average, because again, as with temperatures the max and the min are the most important, not the mean, but for the sake of the exercise, the average is around 21,000MW.

      Okay then, with wind averaging around 400MW, that ,means that effectively, wind supplied around 1.9% of Australia’s power needs for the day.

      There will (undoubtedly) be wind supporters who say that I’ve cherry picked a day of low wind generation.

      Who bl00dy well cares, because tell me wind power supporters, what do you plan to do on days like this then. Just close Australia down. Even so, on good days, it is still only around 5.5%, and the yearly average is around 3.5%. Virtually nothing.

      So, tell me then. How much ….. NEW wind do you suggest we install to make up even close equality with what fossil fuel provides, keeping in mind that just to hope to cover every need, you’ll need (at the very least) 3.3 to 4 times that (average) 21,000MW, so around 70,000MW or today’s total Nameplate multiplied by, umm, around 18.

      Wind power, a very expensive lot of nothing.

      Tony.

      3310

      • #

        Using the Macarthur windfarm as an example one requires 5,500/ 420 = 13.1 ha. for each MW of nameplate capacity. Therefore, for the 70,000 MW of wind turbines you have estimated to supply our needs one is looking at 70,000 x 13.1 ha., or 917,000 ha. of wind turbines! The other problem is that they may all be idle at the same time, then what? Looking at the wind site production has dropped from 30% at 1 PM yesterday down to 10% at 11.30 AM which just demonstrates nature of wind energy and why it is not reliable.

        168

        • #
          ROM

          To simplify matters a little and to provide a rough base line to calculate wind power generation per given land area we can take a look at the following article , similar in its conclusions to those I came across some years back when searching for this piece of information for another pro-wind / renewable energy forum .

          Power per unit land area of windfarms

          the average power per unit land area of a typical well-located onshore windfarm in Britain is about 2 watts per square metre. (Or 2 MW per square km.)

          This number is my estimate of the best that can be done in Britain, and, as I explained in the appendix, the theoretical power per unit land area doesn’t depend very much on the size of the turbines used, because bigger turbines are spaced further apart.

          I’m always keen to check my numbers and update them if necessary.
          Today the the New Scientist interview with James Lovelock prompted me to write a blog article giving explicit data from a real windfarm.

          James Lovelock says “to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt – that’s an awful lot of countryside.”
          That’s a power per unit area of 0.4 W/m2, which is 5 times smaller than my ‘best possible’ 2 W/m2 estimate.

          Let’s look at some data. I picked a random windfarm in Britain with ten 27m-diameter turbines: Blood Hill windfarm.
          The helpful REF website gives exact energy-generation statistics for several years.
          The collage at the top of this page shows the data, and a map of the site, which is very close to the sea in Norfolk.
          What’s the area of this site?
          The blue grid lines are 1km squares.
          I’d say the ten turbines ‘occupy’ about 0.3 km2 (including an appropriate strip of land around the turbines, where similar size turbines could not be placed).
          The average output of the ten turbines is 420 kW.
          So that is a power per unit area of 1.4 W/m2.

          Or in the UK and no doubt most places as the Australian turbines are European designs about 1.4MW per square kilometre;`average power generated

          Going on Andrew Miskelly’s excellent Wind energy Generation site as reccommended by Tony above and which I have pored over at times for a decade past and using that same data as Tony outlines above, a 23,000 MW peak daytime use, we can calculate based on the UK wind power generating density per given area that to provide that daily peak useage of 23,000 MW’s, about 16.5 thousand square kilometres would have to be littered with closely spaced wind turbines without a break anywhere for terrain, roads, rivers , gullies, unsuitable locations and etc and etc.
          A minimum in area that would be about 130 kilometres length on a side without ANY breaks what so ever in the turbine array inside of that area.

          With the State of Tasmania covering an area of some 68400 square kilometres, such a close packed array of wind turbines to supply eastern Australia’s peak power needs at the wind turbine’s AVERAGE power output of 1.4 MW per square kilometre, would cover about a quarter of the state of Tasmania.

          When all those other factors such as terrain and etc are taken into account in actual practice it would need the equivalent of about half of Tasmania’s land area to accommodate those turbines.

          But there is more!

          As the size of a wind farm increases , the percentage generating capacity of the larger farms drops away very significantly due to down wind flow disturbance and energy extracted from the wind flow from the up wind turbines.
          The downwind turbine’s power generation loss has been measured and modelled a number of times and is very significant.

          So a very large array of wind turbines is markedly and considerably less efficient than a smaller array due to less downwind air flow disturbance and the energy extracted from the wind flow by the upwind turbines in the smaller turbine farm array.
          Consequently the figure of 1.4MW of Average wind generated power per square kilometre will be quite a lot lower in actual practice in large wind turbine arrays with a much greater area and far more turbines needed to [ strictly only ] theoretically supply eastern Australia’s power requirements.

          And if the wind don’t blow, well there is a few hundred billions of dollars worth of wind turbines that are hardly worth their scrap value.

          If the wind blows hard then there is nowhere to dump the excess power unless like the peak stupidity of the the UK government, you pay the turbine companies to stop their turbines and they then still get paid for the power they would have produced even though they are not producing any power.
          And it is the consumer who is forced to pay for this unbelievable governmental stupidity .

          If you just happen to be unfortunate enough to be one of Germany’s neighbours when there are good winds blowing then you can expect the Germans to dump their excess power into your grid and probably bring your grid down as result.
          So Germany’s bordering neighbours are all installing phase switch cutouts to stop the Germans from dumping unwanted, unusable, grid de-stabilising excess wind generated power into their grid systems and bringing their grid systems down.

          All this pain and disruption and destruction of our collective wealth for no more than a few percent at best in savings in emissions of that critically essential to all plant life, that atmospheric gas, Carbon Dioxide aka CO2.

          And the ultimate stupidity that wind and solar power do NOT REPLACE fossil fuel power generators.

          They merely at best TEMPORARILY DISPLACE fossil / nuclear fueled power generation and always only will.

          The big fossil fueled generators have to remain there running very inefficiently at low loads to immediately be able to come back on line if and when the wind stops blowing, as it does predictably , unpredictably every few hours and the sun, clouds, dust, rain and etc and etc reduces or shuts down solar power generation as invariably, come what may, happens every day as the Sun dips down in the west.

          A truly astonishing saga of an ultimate stupidity in what has been a cheap energy created, totally energy dependent civilisation which the historians and chroniclers of the future will only be able to shake their heads over in total disbelief.

          125

          • #

            The more one delves into green energy the more one realizes it is a can of worms. An area about half the size of Tasmania to provide 23,000 MW is a fantasy. Here we have so-called intelligent people, our political leaders espousing utter rubbish; Mr. Shorten the labour leader for example “50% renewable energy by 2030″. Even if there was enough available land area somewhere, what happens when turbines are idle? At the moment there are windfarms scattered along the coastline from Adelaide to near Sydney, and yet the SA, Vic., Tas., turbines have a similar production profile, and most of the time the NSW turbines tend to follow this trend even though the windfarms are a 1000km. apart.

            84

          • #

            Playing around with numbers for the amount of land needed and the amount of electricity required for 100% renewable energy it seems to be a figure between about 10,000 sq. km. and 16,000 sq. km. of wind turbines in our windy areas (coastlines) and not too far from the cities and industry to reduce transmission loss.

            Apart from the logistics and finding sites can anyone imagine the population accepting this with its downside of bird kill, visual pollution, low frequency noise problems and regular blackouts?

            As has been pointed out, in the future people will wonder about the inanity of it all. Perhaps someone should write a book “Green Energy for Dummies” for that is what our elected representatives are.

            34

          • #
            Ian Hill

            A truly astonishing saga of an ultimate stupidity in what has been a cheap energy created, totally energy dependent civilisation which the historians and chroniclers of the future will only be able to shake their heads over in total disbelief.

            Even sillier, this is all being done to ensure there are such future historians and chroniclers!

            32

    • #
      Analitik

      An interesting comment from Energy Matters on how this poses a risk to SA (posted in relation to the recent closure of Longannet in Scotland and their high commitment to wind turbines)

      The same is happening down here in Australia where one state (South Australia) will soon close its last 768 MW of coal power plants, leaving only 2939 MW of gas and diesel generators to “backup” 1477 MW of wind turbines. Of the dispatchable generators, only 838 MW are CCGT meaning peaking plants maybe required to run for long periods since there are only 2 interconnectors with a total capacity of 680 MW (being upgraded soon to 870 MW) and the mean demand is around 1700 MW.

      With a peak demand around 3300 MW in the coming summer (the northern hemisphere winter), it will be a race to see whether Scotland or South Australia experiences the first total grid collapse.

      http://euanmearns.com/blowout-week-117/#comment-17558

      62

  • #
    James Murphy

    $25 million for 26 megawatts of battery power in “…more than 5,000 Canberra homes and businesses over the next four years…”

    Meanwhile, scientists at the Mopra radio telescope had to resort to crowdfunding to raise a measly $65k (in comparison to 25 million) to keep operating. Given that it is used as part of a Very Long Baseline Interferometry array, the no-doubt imminent loss of Mopra will have wider impacts than just those who use Mopra alone.

    Can there just be 1 day when I do not see this type of shameful, hypocritical, anti-scientific, and regressive activity reported as “a good thing”?

    228

    • #
      manalive

      For the link:

      Minister for the Environment and Climate Change Simon Corbell [ACT Government] said it would complete the Territory’s investment to meet its commitment of using renewable sources to supply 90 per cent of Canberra’s electricity needs by 2020 …

      90% by 2020, this development is very exciting but why not 100%?
      Then the ACT, which relies totally on the national grid, could cut itself off completely and demonstrate to the world that renewable energy really works (I suspect that won’t happen).

      216

  • #
    Peter C

    Marine scientists and Fairfax journalist, Tom Arup were at it again during the week, shrieking and wailing about Coral Bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef
    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching-more-widespread-than-first-thought-surveys-reveal-20160331-gnux7x.html

    The thing I find unlikely about this is not that coral bleaching events occur, but that they are attributed to warmer water than usual. Since coral reefs thrive in warm tropical waters and are not found much in colder waters, there must be some other cause for coral bleaching.

    168

    • #
      James Murphy

      I seem to recall the “hole in the ozone layer” being held solely responsible for coral bleaching. I think the crown of thorns starfish has also been named as the sole culprit as well?

      Dumping dredged material (onto seabed which was devoid of any coral, despite the claims made by some) from various port expansions was also going to completely kill the reef too.

      What next, I wonder?

      118

    • #
      el gordo

      When the waters around the north east are warmer because of El Nino then the zooxantheliae abandon the host, but they return when conditions cool down. This has been going on for millions of years.

      http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/managing-the-reef/threats-to-the-reef/climate-change/what-does-this-mean-for-species/corals/what-is-coral-bleaching

      118

      • #
        GrahamP

        There seems to be an inconsistency here.

        “When the waters around the north east are warmer because of El Nino”

        From the BoM website here: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/history/ln-2010-12/Nino-to-Nina.shtml

        it appears that during an El Nino the warmer waters head east not west.

        Something does not seem to add up?

        108

        • #
          el gordo

          GrahamP it may have something to do with the Madden Julian Oscillation (MJO) which sees less cloud and higher temperatures in northern Australian waters.

          67

      • #
        Peter C

        Thanks el Gordo

        This is what the Great a barrier Reef Marine Park Authority say;

        What causes coral bleaching
        The main cause of coral bleaching is heat stress resulting from high sea temperatures.Temperature increases of only one degree celsius for only four weeks can trigger bleaching events.
        If these temperatures persist for longer periods (eight weeks or more) corals begin to die. High wathttp://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/managing-the-reef/threats-to-the-reef/climate-change/what-does-this-mean-for-species/corals/what-is-coral-bleachinger temperatures can affect reefs at regional and global scale.

        The problem is that I don’t believe them. If warm water is bad for coral, how come all the reefs in Micronesia, New Guinea, Indonesia, Maldives etc do so well. The water is even warmer there. If our authority actuallynbelieves what they say, they will never discover the real cause and nothing effective will be done.

        1610

        • #
          Dennis

          The Plate tectonic theory indicates Australia has moved northwards at a rate of 7 cm (2.8 in) per year, starting during the Cenozoic. Eastern Australia experienced a period of tectonic uplift, which moved the drainage divide in Queensland 400 km (250 mi) inland. Also during this time, Queensland experienced volcanic eruptions leading to central and shield volcanoes and basalt flows. Some of these became high islands.] After the Coral Sea Basin formed, coral reefs began to grow in the Basin, but until about 25 million years ago, northern Queensland was still in temperate waters south of the tropics—too cool to support coral growth. The Great Barrier Reef’s development history is complex; after Queensland drifted into tropical waters, it was largely influenced by reef growth and decline as sea level changed.

          710

        • #
          climateskeptic

          The problem is that I don’t believe them. If warm water is bad for coral, how come all the reefs in Micronesia, New Guinea, Indonesia, Maldives etc do so well. The water is even warmer there.

          You cant be serious can you?

          911

        • #
          gnome

          And interestingly enough, when the Bjelke government in 1971 wanted to approve the mining for limestone of the thoroughly bleached and reportedly dead Ellison Reef conservationists opposed the proposal on the grounds that occasional bleaching was perfectly normal for coral reefs, and Ellison Reef would soon recover.

          It is one of the few times in history that the conservationist position has been vindicated. Now we are told that coral bleaching didn’t occur until 1998.

          45

      • #
        David Maddison

        Where do the zooxanthellae go when they leave the host?

        109

    • #
      toorightmate

      The last low pressure system off Mornington Is did not develop into a cyclone. One of the reasons stated by BOM was that the water temperature was too low!!!!!!!!

      1011

      • #
        el gordo

        Its been a quiet cyclone season and the northern wet didn’t really happen, BoM doesn’t expect a late downpour.

        Coral bleaching is not caused by dirty coal and is probably more closely aligned with the MJO, but its hard to find any academic paper to support my theory.

        59

        • #
          climateskeptic

          Coral bleaching is not caused by dirty coal and is probably more closely aligned with the MJO, but its hard to find any academic paper to support my theory.

          That might be because there is no evidence to support your idea, it not really a theory unless you have some explanation of the mechanism by which it might happen.

          105

          • #
            el gordo

            Mt climateskeptic, we know that a few extra CO2 molecules didn’t increase the SST off northern Australia.

            Found this for starters.

            https://eprints.usq.edu.au/1405/1/Donald_Ribbe_2002_review.pdf

            810

            • #
              climateskeptic

              That is 14 years old, anything more recent?

              85

              • #
                James Murphy

                why does age invalidate the content?

                75

              • #
                climateskeptic

                So what is your theory?

                67

              • #
                James Bradley

                Climateskeptic,

                My theory is: Climate is within natural variations.

                Evidence: About 4 billion years of greater, lesser and similar climates all of which managed to: support, encourage and provide environments for the evolution of life.

                So, what’s your theory?

                126

              • #
                climateskeptic

                That’s not a theory its only an opinion. It may be right it may be wrong. I don’t have a theory, I’m not that clever.

                610

              • #
                James Bradley

                Climateskeptic,

                It’s actually the null hypothesis.

                Climate alarmists believe 100 years of ‘homogenised’ anomaly data proves an alternative hypothesis.

                What’s your opinion?

                Or are you a consensus type of adherent…

                95

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘That is 14 years old, anything more recent?’

                You maybe aware that DYNAMO have taken over proceedings and has the full support of the Klimatariat, whereas the old Review doesn’t appear tainted by global warming or AGW.

                Just sayin’.

                66

              • #
                climateskeptic

                My opinion is that its would have been a very uncomfortable life 600myo when we had snowball Earth and would have had to exist under kms of ice. Just because something is within natural variation doesn’t mean it suits us. Why you think it would is beyond my comprehension

                65

              • #
                el gordo

                Most importantly the coral bleaching is natural and not because of an increase in CO2 supposedly making SST a degree warmer for a month in summer. Its attachment to ENSO appears sound when you think back to the bleaching of 1998 and the present situation.

                http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2016/01/29/madden-julian-oscillation-massive-thunderstorm-cluster-in-tropical-indian-and-pacific-ocean-explained/

                47

              • #
                James Bradley

                Climateskeptic,

                “My opinion is that its would have been a very uncomfortable life 600myo when we had snowball Earth and would have had to exist under kms of ice. Just because something is within natural variation doesn’t mean it suits us. Why you think it would is beyond my comprehension”

                So if natural climate variation has wide boundaries explain why alarmists choose the end of the Little Ice Age as the target for climate optimum?

                38

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Do they? I’m not an alarmist so I wouldn’t know. Im not making that claim, you are making the claims.

                74

              • #
                James Bradley

                climateskeptic,

                It’s not a ‘claim’ – it is the period that is claimed by alarmists as the optimum climate for the planet.

                The end of the Little Ice Age is the beginning of the Industrial Revolution when CO2 was at about 280ppm etc etc.

                Why do you not know this?

                38

              • #
                climateskeptic

                the period that is claimed by alarmists

                Its your claim that this claim exists, I’ve never seen it, I cant find it with google, so I assume you are just making it up. Maybe you can provide us with a link. The only claims I have ever seen is that we should limit temperature rise to 2deg because that’s where the benefits are exceeded by the drawbacks. It might be on the wrong track here of course.

                33

              • #
                James Bradley

                climateskeptic,

                Curious response.

                “… limit temperature rise to 2°… ”

                Limit it to 2° of what?

                Surely there is a set standard against which this rise is to be measured?

                Maybe limit it to 2° degrees above Rutherglen on the 21st December 1913 – got a way to go so we are safe, or 2° above McMurdo Sound on September 30 1961 – we are screwed?

                Over to you climateskeptic…

                35

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Limit it to 2° of what?

                Surely there is a set standard against which this rise is to be measured?

                Google it, its not hard to find.

                21

              • #
                AndyG55

                2ºC..

                ….a number plucked out of mid air by that goose Petalhummer…

                or whatever his name is.

                The Pope’s bedmate, iirc…

                25

              • #
                James Bradley

                climateseptic,

                http://joannenova.com.au/2016/04/weekend-unthreaded-113/#comment-1795542

                “Its your claim that this claim exists, I’ve never seen it, I cant find it with google,… “

                04

              • #
                AndyG55

                climateskeptic seems to originated from SkS.

                maybe one of those that took John Cook’s climate 101 course?

                12

              • #
                James Bradley

                AndyG55,

                climateseptic also seems to have access to a few different port addresses from where the inordinate number of red thumbs originate – probably hits the library during recess.

                12

        • #
          GrahamP

          The lack of rain in the wet season probably means less cloudiness and probably calmer seas allowing more UV penetration. Maybe this is what causes the bleaching?

          However that would not suit the warming narrative would it!

          42

          • #
            • #
              GrahamP

              From the paper above:

              “Coral bleaching was reported to have occurred during periods of low wind velocity, clear skies, calm seas and low turbidity, when conditions favour localized heating and high penetration of short wave length (UV) radiation. Also less oxygen is held by water at higher temperatures.”

              The paper then gets back on message with this:

              Potentially stressful high sea temperatures and UV radiation flux could conceivably cause coral reef bleaching on a global scale with suspected greenhouse warming and the thinning of the ozone layer.”

              82

            • #
              Peter C

              Corals live in very nutrient poor waters and have certain zones of tolerance to water temperature, salinity, UV radiation, opacity, and nutrient quantities.

              ….

              The tissues of corals themselves are actually not the beautiful colors of the coral reef, but are instead clear. The corals receive their coloration from the zooxanthellae living within their tissues.

              Coral reef ecosystems world-wide have been subject to unprecedented degradation over the past few decades. Disturbances affecting coral reefs include anthropogenic and natural events. Recent accelerated coral reef decline seems to be related mostly to anthropogenic impacts (overexploitation, overfishing, increased sedimentation and nutrient overloading. Natural disturbances which cause damage to coral reefs include violent storms, flooding, high and low temperature extremes, El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events, subaerial exposures, predatory outbreaks and epizootics.

              The way I see it, that means the author, and all the other marine scientists for that matter, have NO IDEA what causes coral bleaching!

              32

  • #
    ROM

    When you look at the stupidity of renewable energy and its very well proven inability to ever meet more than a fraction of any industrialised nations power equirements let alone the global power needs now and not even considering the future global power requirements,
    When you look at the hundreds of thousands of people now possibly numbering in the single digit millions, who can no longer afford the electricity and the gas to keep them warm in winter and who are consequently dying in winter in their thousands from the effects of low temperatures they are forced to live in and who cannot to prepare decent hot meals with their limited food,
    When you look at industries closing down and losses of thousands of jobs because energy is now too expensive and the industries can no longer compete with low energy cost nations such as in Asia,
    When you look at the increasing mental and physical health problems of those who are now forced to live close to wind turbine farms, a physical and mental health situation that would create an uproar and lead to a lot of political resignations if it ever occurred in a city or near a coal mine,
    When you look at the incredible diversion of limited public resources and capital into effectively useless to society, renewable energy systems at the gross expense of other far more deserving sectors of science, industry, health and societal needs,
    When you look at the extraordinary level of corruption of politics at the federal, state and local levels by the renewable energy companies,
    When you look at the incredible bias and notorious bigotry of so much of the MSM against anybody who dares to question the climate change ideology,
    When you consider the abject contempt that much of the profession of science is descending into in the eyes of an increasing percentage of the public,
    When you look at the enormous harm and the constant barrage of false and deliberately corrupted information about so much of the natural world that is suposedly being destroyed by the so called Climate Change as is being promoted by the grossly untruthful and completely hypocritical greens,
    When you consider the increasing prevalence of murderous public death threats against skeptics being promulgated by the fanatics of the climate change ideology,
    When you consider the extremely corrosive effects all of this is increasingly having on public morale and societal cohesion,

    Just remember that ALL OF THIS CIVIL and increasingly vicious DISRUPTION of society is due totally and solely to a scientifically and ethically corrupted cabal of so called CLIMATE SCIENTISTS most of whom hold no qualifications at any level in the physics of Climate or Weather.

    223

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Yay! Daylight savings time ended in Victoria this morning so no more forced 4am starts that achieves nothing except dupes the public into thinking the economy runs better for 6 months?

    All I ever find when researching the purpose of this are a few people that had some derangement about others not engaging in recreational activities when they believed they should, so we have a very few “experts” dictating when or how the majority live via governmental intervention hmmmm sounds a little familiar.

    134

    • #
      toorightmate

      As the old Red Indian said,
      “So if I cut a yard off the bottom of my blanket and sew it onto the top of my blanket, you are telling me I have a longer blanket”.

      121

      • #
        Yonniestone

        LOL I remember that one it’s very good, my issue has always been with how that apparent extra daylight is enforced and why, if it’s natural for the sun to rise earlier in warmer months they why wouldn’t it be natural for people to adjust their internal clocks accordingly?

        Over the years when I’ve voiced my opposition to the idea of daylight savings most people are bewildered and affronted at the idea of anyone questioning the status quo then after I state my case against the bewilderment continues when they question their long held acceptance of this practice.

        This sheeple mentality towards daylight savings and CAGW is quite striking on reflection.

        63

        • #
          AndyG55

          When I was a school teacher, that extra hour of usable sunshine in the afternoon/evening was a real plus.

          Plenty of time for a surf! :-)

          103

          • #
            Yonniestone

            Do a ‘dawn patrol’ surf ya lazy bugger. :)

            82

            • #
              climateskeptic

              Do a ‘dawn patrol’ surf ya lazy bugger. :)

              …but without daylight saving you would actually have to get up a hour earlier, what you say makes no sense.

              Over the years when I’ve voiced my opposition to the idea of daylight savings most people are bewildered and affronted

              I thought your research indicated that most people were against daylight saving. You sound confused.

              38

              • #
                Annie

                With so-called ‘daylight saving’ you ARE getting up an hour earlier, for goodness sake!

                70

              • #
                Yonniestone

                The sun rises early anyway giving possible extra recreational morning time without encroaching on the normal time zone, your choice.

                I thought your research indicated that most people were against daylight saving. You sound confused.

                Where did I say that?, “a few people” that are so called “experts” read it again.

                You want research, try any search on the history of daylight savings and look for yourself, hint this is what sheeple wont do.

                72

              • #
                climateskeptic

                You want research, try any search

                So, conclusion from your evidence, there is none you can use to support your position.

                56

              • #
                Yonniestone

                Did you do a search or just want to troll?…….poorly.

                83

              • #
                climateskeptic

                Did you do a search or just want to troll?

                Why do I need to search. You were the one claiming to have found sources, not me.
                Did you actually find any as you claim or are you just in the business of posting thought bubbles.

                45

          • #
            Analitik

            In general, I hate daylight savings but one thing it allows is use of power tools for longer periods after getting home from work. Working with them in the early morning would have the neighbours calling the police and it’s not the same working under lights as in sunlight.

            31

          • #
            Greebo

            I love it. I just don’t see why they insist on changing it back.

            00

      • #
        Annie

        Nicely put toorightmate! This term ‘daylight saving’ really annoys me; it’s no such thing. There are just so many hours of daylight, dependant on exact season, and shifting the clock alters things not one jot.

        Why on earth is it not called ‘summer time’ and be done with it? The cooler time is ‘standard time’.

        62

        • #
          AndyG55

          I disagree,

          You save an hour of sunlight in the morning before work…

          …. then get it back in the afternoon.

          21

          • #

            You save an hour of sunlight in the morning before work…

            …. then get it back in the afternoon.

            To, as they say, umm, go to the beach, and perhaps while you’re out at a time you normally wouldn’t be, perhaps you might even like to browse the shops, and even do some shopping.

            No!

            Surely that can’t be right.

            They wouldn’t introduce daylight saving just for the money now ….. would they?

            Tony.

            31

            • #
              Retired Now

              I love it that WA told the politicians where to go about daylight saving. It never worked here. All it meant was that I lost an hour as the extra hour at night wasn’t useable to me. Daylight saving here meant that we had to travel home at peak heat which was between 4pm and 5pm. Then we had to cool down the house from peak heat, not an hour later when it was mostly a tad cooler. I rejoiced when the referendum threw out the policy after a trial period.

              While I hated daylight saving when living in southern New Zealand, with very young children who liked to stay awake till it was dark – after 10pm in the south – we could darken the room with black out curtains and that made a difference. Here in WA it was a matter of the increased air conditioning cost for that extra hour of heat at home.

              31

          • #
            Annie

            Well then AndyG55, we’ll just have to disagree!

            00

        • #
          James Murphy

          All I know is that the extra hour of sunshine a day means that my curtains bleach faster, and cows don’t know it’s milking time. I think there was also an argument with regards to daylight, the working habits of farmers, and the timing of the nightly ABC news broadcast.

          I’m sure there are some other highly entertaining reasons why it’s bad, I just can’t think of any.

          22

          • #
            AndyG55

            “means that my curtains bleach faster”

            Actually because I get up an hour earlier, and open my curtains an hour earlier, they actually get 1 hour LESS sunlight during daylight saving.

            10

          • #
            Annie

            The change of clock doesn’t produce extra sunlight. Summer does because the days are longer.

            Actually, I find there is more ingress of sunlight into the house now it’s autumn as the sun is lower in the sky and shines in under the verandah more, so need to cover sunlight-damageable items more carefully.The hours it shines are fewer though.

            01

    • #
      climateskeptic

      All I ever find when researching the purpose of this are

      Can you link me to some of this research, I’d be interested to read it.

      54

      • #
        James Murphy

        For an entertaining read (?), you can see this US congressional hearing transcript from 2001, with the catchy title of “Energy Conservation Potential of extended and double daylight savings time”, where various industries lobbied to maintain, or increase the duration of daylight savings time.

        31

    • #

      When I was younger, daylight savings was really cool. Now that I’m a lot older, it no longer holds the fascination that it once did.

      10

  • #
    Ruairi

    The folly of renewables take hold,
    When lights go out and people feel the cold.

    The wind-farm ‘experts’ aught to tell us why,
    So many birds and bats fall from the sky.

    Obama tells his troops what they must do,
    Is battle climate change and CO2.

    Though satire it me be to shoot ‘deniers’,
    On stage it might well fail if it backfires.

    The hottest March month ever on a graph,
    Could make a warmist cry and skeptic laugh.

    202

  • #
    David Maddison

    Around 70,000 years ago there was a global ecological disaster, the Toba super volcanic eruption in Indonesia which caused a reduction of the numbers of H. sapiens from around a million to between 3,000 to 10,000 individuals creating a genetic bottleneck and reducing human diversity. A global cooling of about ten years also ensued.

    http://youtu.be/y8Lw-KWD31k

    51

  • #
    • #
      Robk

      Unbelievable, Al Gore seems to have a fixation with the word “fraud”.

      [A nearly perfect quote of Al Gore, so fraud is in. Everyone else, still be careful to avoid the word unless it's substantiated.] AZ

      32

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      el Gordo,

      I just watched the video. I came back especially for this one thing after clearing up a lot of other stuff today. Shades of James Hansen — or Al Gore rides again (or still). What ugly stuff. It’s sickening.

      Were I a betting man I’d offer real good odds that they can’t prove their allegation of false advertising in a courtroom. Hansen tried to get what would have been a very sympathetic senate committee to go a long with his demand that these same executives be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity and they wouldn’t give his demand the time of day, though they wouldn’t condemn it either. The word hubris doesn’t begin to describe what’s going on.

      When they try to use the law to silence free speech it’s time to be afraid for the future.

      114

      • #
        Peter C

        Apparently a lot of the AGs backed out from making any commitments to pursue the corporates. It must have been embarrassing for them to appear on that stage, with so much guff coming from the main speakers.

        10

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          So far, so good. But the time will come when they finally pull that legal trigger unless we can elect some more sensible representatives and senators, not to mention a president who has his head screwed on facing forward instead of sideways.

          00

    • #
      Glen Michel

      What a shady lot.The body language gives it away.

      22

  • #
    • #
      handjive

      “The total supply of any mineral is unknown and unknowable because the future knowledge that would create mineral resources cannot be known before its time.”

      Open-Ended Resourceship: Bring on 2012!

      “If resources are not fixed but created, then the nature of the scarcity problem changes dramatically.

      For the technological means involved in the use of resources determines their creation and therefore the extent of their scarcity.

      The nature of the scarcity is not outside the process (that is natural), but a condition of it.”

      54

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Government takes credit for benefits of cessation of government intervention.
    More than 400 medicines will drop in price from this weekend

    “Part of our agreement for price reductions now has been the cost of expensive combination medicines that have been priced too highly in the past.

    They’re not very adept with this whole Market concept. The price wasn’t too high for people that would rather be alive than dead.

    “If you combine two generic molecules, it’s not appropriate to call them a brand new medicine — in fact they should reflect the price of their components.”

    But the only reason they can make that argument with suppliers now is because some patented drugs became generic.
    The government protection they used to enjoy ended. Funny how patents are a boon to inventors when they begin and a boon to the public when they end. Doesn’t seem to stop the government from claiming credit at *both* ends. :-)

    71

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      I get your point — probably more acutely than you might think.

      But tell me, when has government ever given credit for anything. I’ve never seen that. All they do is take credit, except of course, when it comes to paying your taxes, traffic fines and anything else for which you owe them money. Then it’s cash on the barrelhead.

      51

  • #
    Ross

    I wonder how far the UK will get with this proposal of mini nuclear power stations

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/02/mini-nuclear-power-stations-in-uk-towns-move-one-step-closer/

    At least people in the UK Govt. are facing up to the mess the UK energy situation has become.

    51

    • #
      James Murphy

      I wonder how much power each reactor would generate? I guess it would only be in the order of a few hundred megawatts?

      30

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        50, 75 maybe 150MW. And they don’t like fluctuating demand from the likes of wind.

        32

        • #
          ROM

          SMR’s [ Small Modular reactors ] of which a couple of hundred have been built for use in submarines, aircraft carriers, as power generators in a number of remote sites in a number of advanced nations around the world and in a number of nuclear experimental laboratories.

          A number of companies and corporations are working on SMR’s which are almost completely automated and through design use an automated passive shutdown procedure that does not require any external power or any other inputs to automatically shut down if any critical operational criteria are breached.

          This allows these transportable reactors to be installed in pre-prepared underground silos and quickly linked into the local grid.

          An array of such reactors can be expanded into a number of units as the power demands increase.

          When the fuel burn cycle is completed, the SMR can be lifted out of its silo, a new one installed and the used SMR transported back to a dedicated SMR refurbishing depot for a refurbishing and a refueling before it will be despatched out for another power generation fuel burn cycle somewhere.

          Small Nuclear Power Reactor
          [ updated Mar 2016 ]

          The whole idea behind the SMR is to have a mass produced and therefore very much cheaper, highly flexible in location, fully transportable and expandable array of long life nuclear powered steam generators with built in passive safety shut down features and therefore a very reduced need for having highly trained nuclear engineers always on hand.
          Plus a production line of such transportable returned reactors at the end of their [ ten year ] fuel burn cycle to be refurbished and refueled on highly specialised and dedicated factory type production lines.

          The whole idea makes a great deal of sense particularly in that a couple of hundred such reactors are out there around the world installed submarines and ships and in nuclear research establishments and in remote research camps for power.
          And have been since the launch of the first American nuclear submarine, the Nautilis[ SSN 571 ] in 1954.

          120

          • #
            James Murphy

            This is what I was thinking relatively portable… Tasmania could do with a couple of SMRs at the moment.

            I imagine the collective apoplexy amongst the anti-science Greens would lead to their meltdown long before an SMR was likely to do so.

            60

            • #
              Analitik

              If we could buy 6 Virginia class submarines, a couple could be docked in Hobart and Adelaide to prop up their grids while undergoing maintenance.

              20

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      They are not facing up to the mess, just continuing to make it worse. These reactors won’t start before 2025 (at the earliest) when the real need is for reliable power in the next 2 winters.

      And since the Liberal Dimwits and the Greenpeace don’t want nuclear expect only a small number to be installed before 2030 (somewhere between 0 and 1).

      42

      • #
        James Murphy

        Short term, I believe that any deaths due to lack of heating will be blamed fully on the conservative UK government – no doubt with great glee by those who claim to call themselves environmentalists, “caring humanists”, and by members of the Greens.

        20

      • #
        Ross

        Fair point, Graeme, but at least someone is looking past the “renewables is the solution” and is prepared to look a solution which is a big no-no to most Greenies.
        So even if you look at it from a “symbolic” political move it is a big move in the right direction.

        40

  • #
    handjive

    Who is thinking of the children’s children’s children?

    Why WA matters to the prime minister and Labor

    “WHEN Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull lands in WA on April 11 for a four-day visit, he will need more than national issues in his back pocket if he is to appease parochial West Australians and a cash-strapped State Government.”
    ~ ~ ~
    - Pep Candell, Executive director, Global Carbon Project at CSIRO:

    “A return flight from Sydney to Perth per-person emits about one tonne of CO2, of which 400 kg will still remain in the atmosphere after 100 years, and about 200 kg will still be airborne in 1,000 years.”
    . . .
    Who?

    52

    • #
      toorightmate

      We live in exciting times.

      There has never been a more exciting time to be Malcolm Turnbull.

      He’s actually on an inspection to see where the GST that goes to Tassie and SA comes from.

      40

  • #
    ianl8888

    Peak stupid continues:

    http://euanmearns.com/eu-to-introduce-two-new-time-zones/

    So adding additinal time zones across the European continent (geographically tiny as it is) will spread wind and solar power demand more evenly, thus avoiding peaks and troughs in supply.

    Cassandra is not surprised. There really is no hope.

    91

  • #
  • #
    ROM

    Politics being what it is and just wondering!

    Will we see an Independent’s party formed before the election ???

    30

  • #
    pat

    1 Apr: Dominica News Online: Snow falls in Guadeloupe in extraordinary weather phenomenon
    No, it is not an April Fools Day joke, snowflakes actually fell in the neighbouring French island of Guadeloupe.
    The event, which was described as ‘exceptional’ by a French meteorologist took place on Thursday, March 31 in the municipality of St. Claude.
    Reports from French media indicate that a very fine snowfall blanketed the hills above the town…
    http://dominicanewsonline.com/news/homepage/news/weather/snow-falls-in-guadeloupe-in-extraordinary-weather-phenomenon/

    2 Apr: UK Telegraph: Christopher Booker: We’re following Germany to an energy disaster
    A far darker shadow is hanging over Britain than that of the collapse of our steel industry. As she is the sister of a leading figure in the campaign to keep Britain in the EU, we may not be surprised by the warning from Amber Rudd, our Energy and Climate Change Secretary, that “Brexit” would raise our energy bills by £500 million a year. Her brother Roland, as a key behind-the-scenes strategist for Stronger in Europe, might be described as “the Rudd who doesn’t want us to leave the sinking ship”.
    But in making that “half a billion a year” claim, Ms Rudd must hope that we don’t recall those recent figures from the Office for Budget Responsibility projecting that within four years – due entirely to her own Government’s policies – we will be paying £13.6 billion a year in climate change levies alone, up a further £7.6 billion from the year just ending.
    Even this is only a small part of the disaster Ms Rudd is heading us towards, as she sets about “decarbonising” our economy by closing down all the fossil-fuel power stations which, until recently, were supplying two thirds of all our electricity, in order to rely instead on ever more “renewables” and those new nuclear power stations which simply aren’t getting built…READ ALL
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/04/02/were-following-germany-to-an-energy-disaster/

    40

  • #
    pat

    2 Apr: Bloomberg: SunEdison Plunges on Report of Plans to File for Bankruptcy
    by Brian Eckhouse & Michael Heath
    SunEdison’s shares last changed hands at 23.5 cents in heavy after-hours activity on Friday evening, down 45 percent from 43 cents at the end of regular trading on the New York Stock Exchange, which was the lowest since the company went public in July 1995…READ ALL
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-02/sunedison-said-to-be-preparing-to-file-for-bankruptcy-wsj-says

    10

  • #
    pat

    3 Apr: SeekingAlpha: Will Ebiefung: SunEdison Is The Canary In The Coal Mine For Solar Energy
    Summary
    •Solar energy is not the future of energy, SUNE will not be the last company to collapse in this sector.
    •The solar industry cannot survive without government subsidies.
    •Falling oil/natural gas prices and the advent of shale indicate that the fate of solar energy is sealed.
    Solar is not the future of energy…READ ALL
    http://seekingalpha.com/article/3962720-sunedison-canary-coal-mine-solar-energy

    21

  • #
    pat

    the least CAGW-polluted report:

    3 Apr: Economic Times India: PTI: Mining leases approved for Adani’s project in Australia
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/indl-goods/svs/metals-mining/mining-leases-approved-for-adanis-project-in-australia/articleshow/51668506.cms

    Fairfax & rest of the MSM still giving voice to every CAGW NGO they can find, encouraging further activist behaviour, all for a renewables’ future that is blowing up in their faces..but which the MSM is not even reporting! of course, like The Guardian, they’ll eventually be screaming about job losses and pretending they care:

    3 Apr: Australian Financial Review: Mark Ludlow: Adani gains final approval for Carmichael mine
    Indian energy giant Adani is under pressure to show how it will fund its $16.5 billion Carmichael mine after the Palaszczuk government on Sunday granted the final major approval for the controversial coal project in Central Queensland.
    Despite environmental activists likely to challenge the decision to grant a mining lease, Adani said it was still committed to the mine, rail and port project which it hopes will begin construction in 2017.
    But Adani warned that “politically-motivated” activists who had held the project up for the past five years could still jeopardise the Galilee Basin mine which the government claims will create 9500 jobs.
    “It is important to note that successive legal challenges to science-based approvals, which are the strictest of their kind for a major resources project in this country, are designed to deny the job creating benefits of the company’s mine, rail and port projects to our state,” an Adani Australia spokesman said in a statement on Sunday.
    “It is for this reason that conclusion of second tier approvals and resolution of politically-motivated challenges is the company’s principal focus, prior to final investment decision being made.”…
    Queensland Resources Council’s acting chief executive Greg Lane said the Adani approval could not have come at a better time given 22,000 jobs had been lost to the mining sector in the past two years…ETC
    http://www.afr.com/news/politics/adani-gains-final-approval-for-carmichael-mine-20160403-gnx074

    10

  • #
    James Murphy

    Yesterday it was 15 degrees (celsius), and today it’s supposed to be 21 degrees here in Paris – a 6 degree increase in 1 day seems like conclusive proof of global warming to me.

    Still, a nice day for the marathon, for those who partake.

    20

    • #
      ianl8888

      … a 6 degree increase in 1 day seems like conclusive proof of global warming to me

      Yep, just as a 6 degree decrease in 1 day is conclusive proof of global cooling.

      Happens most weeks where I live.

      40

      • #
        James Murphy

        well, if you had a 6 degree decrease, and I have a 6 degree increase, that would just average to to no change at all, but that can’t be right, given that every month is the ‘hottest month ever’…

        Perhaps I should discuss it wth my nearest climatologist, and they can explain their version of statistical analysis to me – after they’ve done my Tarot reading.

        20

  • #
    pat

    3 Apr: ABC: Rebecca Carmody: Dennis Jensen, West Australian MP, blames ‘dirty tricks’ after being dumped by Liberal preselectors
    However, Dr Jensen later told the ABC he was the victim of an “absolute smear campaign” by the Morton camp, whom he accuses of leaking his unpublished book to the media.
    Dr Jensen said the result meant “dirty tricks had been rewarded” and flagged the possibility he may quit the party in disgust…
    Dr Jensen likened remote Aboriginal community residents to “noble savages” in a speech to Parliament.
    ***But Dr Jensen, who has often courted controversy particularly as a climate change denier, stood by his comments and labelled criticism as political correctness gone mad.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-03/dennis-jensen-furious-at-losing-endorsement/7295310?google_editors_picks=true

    10

  • #
  • #
    pat

    3 Apr: Lockport Union Sun & Journal: Turbines: Not for the birds?
    DEVELOPMENT: American Bird Conservancy puts Lighthouse Wind on its list of ‘worst’ sited wind power projects.
    By Rachel Fuerschbach
    The American Bird Conservancy recently identified what it considers to be the top 10 worst-sited existing and proposed wind power projects within the United States. Among them is Apex Clean Energy’s proposed commercial-scale Lighthouse Wind project in Somerset and Yates…
    For raptors and songbirds, “It could potentially be a bloodbath,” Ewald (Brett Ewald, a regional bird expert, biologist and naturalist with Lakeshore Nature Tours) said. “The number one most dramatic effect turbines could have is the killing of the raptors.”…
    The American Bird Conservatory says that wind energy facilities and their associated infrastructure result in the deaths of, at minimum, thousands of federally protected birds every year. The number will climb into the millions as wind power is fully built out, it warns.
    “Our wildlife should not be collateral damage in our effort to combat climate change, nor does it have to be,” says Michael Hutchins, director of ABC’s Bird-Smart Wind Energy Campaign…
    http://www.lockportjournal.com/news/local_news/turbines-not-for-the-birds/article_344e0829-fd44-5933-924c-e3bd487a2b48.html

    not anti-wind, BUT…

    24 Mar: American Bird Conservancy: Report: 10 of the Worst-sited Wind Energy Projects for Birds
    The listed projects—five already built or approved and five proposed—are located throughout the United States, in California, Hawaii, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Some of these projects have a long history of causing bird deaths…READ ALL
    https://abcbirds.org/10-worst-wind-energy-sites-for-birds/

    30

  • #
  • #

    From:https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/atmospheric-convection-what-does-it-mean/comment-page-8/#comment-115272
    I doubt that TB will ever allow such a post! There will be other blogs
    wayne says: April 3, 2016 at 7:45 am

    RC: (“The height of troposphere and hence the column mass is two times more at the equator than the poles.”)

    “… hence the column mass is two times more at the equator than the poles?? No Roger, but at least you got it halfway right.”

    “The columnar mass is not double at the equator or the surface pressure would be double there also. You are forgetting to consider what the density is at the two extremes, which by itself proves why you are off by about 100% for the comparative columnar masses that you speak of, they are nearly identical. Do the math.”

    Why don’t you do the math Wayne? Gravity does not act on columnar mass. It acts only to compress the “entire mass” of the atmosphere to a uniform pressure of 101325 ±34 Pa at sea level independent of surface temperature or density! This pressure is what prevents further outgassing from the surface and ocean. That is how gravity affects a compressible fluid surrounding atmosphere even on the gas giants and the Sun. Mass that becomes part of the compressive force at every altitude below the Karman line at 100 Km.

    “Have you ever considered opening a good atmospheric physics book, or better, maybe reading of why density is so important for pilots and how they do calculate the necessary densities at various altitudes in these two extreme examples which shows why the surface pressure is directly dependent on the columnar mass above the surface? Think of the integrated densities from the surface upward to correct your thinking on this topic.”

    Have you ever considered following your own advice? Have you bothered to check your own silly integration routine for obvious error? Your routine runs out of atmosphere below an altitude of 800 meters! Once corrected for proper mass to be subtracted at every iteration it is still way way off! You treat the atmosphere as a isotherm with a gas gamma of 1.0 rather that the required 1.4 for the N2 O2 mix.
    On the the silly Meteorological claim of hydrostatic formula of ∂P = -ρ(z,T) · g · ∂z stolen from the incompressible fluid formula! This is so very wrong as such a partial derivative does not exist in a compressible fluid atmosphere. Even the more correct:
    ∂P/ ∂z ∝ -ρ(z,T) · g is misleading!
    The ratio of Earth’s surface pressure to columnar mass is 101325Pa/(pi · g); (g) in Newtons per Kg!
    All the best! -will-

    41

  • #
    Pete of Perth

    Bob Ellis has died.

    10

  • #
    Another Ian

    Is something like the inverse of this how BOM gets those spectacular “Hotter Than’s”?

    “Indignant Elder Thu 31 Mar 2016 06:32:31 pm

    OBAMA RATED 5th BEST PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY, WOW !

    From a total of 44 U.S. Presidents, Obama has been rated as the 5th best, according to a study completed at Texas A&M University.
    The Public Relations Office at A&M released this statement:

    “After almost 7 years in office, American academics have rated President Obama the 5th Best President in American History”.
    These are the results, according to Texas A&M:

    1. Lincoln and Reagan tied for first place
    2. Seventeen Presidents tied for second place
    3. Twenty-three other Presidents tied for third place
    4. Jimmy Carter came in fourth, and
    5. Obama was fifth.”

    From

    http://pickeringpost.com/story/i-always-thought-turnbull-was-a-dickhead/5872

    40

  • #
    gnome

    Bob Ellis was a figure of fun to most of us, but please, can everyone please refrain from hitting a like or dislike button on this subject, please, please.

    We had a lot of fun with Bob over the years, and sometimes he overstepped, but he always meant well, and he has a family.

    00

    • #
      James Murphy

      Unlike the people who savaged Bob Carter on his passing, and those who had parties to celebrate the death of Margaret Thatcher, I think it is extremely easy to show a modicum of respect towards Bob Ellis and his family, despite not being aligned with all his political views.

      20

  • #
    Will Janoschka

    THE EXTREME DIFICULTYLY OF THE CRIPPLED TRYING TO LEAD THE BLIND!!
    More from: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/atmospheric-convection-what-does-it-mean/comment-page-8/#comment-115313
    ROGER Tatersall now running for public orfice; would never allow such critique.
    Ben Wouters (BW) says: April 4, 2016 at 1:01 pm

    Roger Clague says: March 31, 2016 at 5:15 pm
    (“The difference in column mass at the equator and poles is x2 not 0.03%.”)

    “Clueless nonsense.”
    ———————————————–
    (BW) Wouters says: April 4, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    suricat (RD) says: April 3, 2016 at 2:51 am
    (“Your description reads as an expansion of gas within a region of a ‘fixed enclosure’. Data and datum’s [not to mention atractors]) are missing ”)

    (BW) http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/clim/glbcir.anim.shtml
    “Try to understand why eg the 200 mb level or the 500 mb one is so much higher in the tropics than near the poles. If you heat a gas it EXPANDS unless its volume is fixed.”

    (RD) (“What is it that troubles you the most with atmospheric convection?”)

    (BW) “The incredible amount of nonsense that is repeated over and over again on this blog about a simple subject as HE and convection.”

    (RD) (“You’ve been a bit mean with your “0,3% lower at the equator than at the poles” figure. 32 ft/sec^2 (gravity constant) – ~3 in/sec^2 (gravity ‘counterpoise’) is a lot closer to 1% than your estimation.”)

    (BW) ” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth#Latitude
    This one and other sources give the EFFECTIVE gravity at the equator as ~9,780 m/s^2 and near the poles ~9,832 m/s^2. Difference 9,832-9,780= 0,052 m/s^2 which is ~0,51 % of 9,832 m/s^2. Of this 0,51% ~0,3% is caused by the centrifugal (inertial) effect and the remaining 0,21% by the equatorial bulge. For atmospheric consideration these two effects are totally irrelevant against the much larger effect of gravity itself.”

    (RD) (“Both Earth’s centrifuge and H2O’s diffusion influence lead to the establishment of a/the ‘Hadley cell/s’.”)

    (BW) “Complete and utter nonsense.”

    Here we have Ben Woulters a commercial airline pilot, that has been completely brainwashed by the nonsense of current meteorology, and demands to promote such!
    Obviously Ben Woulters has no clue as to how his aircraft may possibly fly, or how the aircraft engines make such flight possible! OO woha are we!!! To be continued perhaps.
    All the best! -will-

    01

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Theres NO SUCH THING as a ‘greenhouse gas!’ Except HOT AIR which dominates all parliaments!
    Get used to it! Stop calling CO2 , methane etc. greenhouse gasses.

    00