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

Farmed fish doing alright at CO2 levels twenty, fifty, seventy times higher than today

The World Wildlife Fund tells us that global CO2 is bad for global fish stocks, but ponder that professional fish farms can reach levels of CO2 twenty or even seventy five times higher, and the fish appear to be doing OK. Current guidelines for fish farms even suggest that “safe limits of CO2 range from >5000 to >30 000 µatm*” which are “12.5 to 75 times higher than current atmospheric levels”.

So in another few thousand years we might really get into trouble with fish farms and climate change then? (Or maybe we won’t. James Hansen estimates if we burn every last barrel of fossil fuel on Earth we’ll get to 1,400ppm. The experience of fish farms all over the world is that fish can apparently adapt to levels ten times higher even than this worst case scenario.)

We have a situation where there are scores of reports fish suffering from ocean acidification and high CO2 levels, but they don’t mesh with the reality that fish farms have been dealing with for decades.  A new paper tries to figure out why this is so. The study doesn’t prove that there are no bad effects from higher CO2, but it puts the panic into a whole new perspective.

Current global CO2 levels are 400ppm, they’re projected to rise to 1,000ppm by 2100. Aquaculture only tells us about a certain kind of fish, but as far as dinner fish go, and the fear of humankind running out of fish and chips, I think it’s safe to say we have at least a thousand years to go before it’s a hot item. Chalk it up on the program for the 3016 Paris conference. Whatever.

Aquaculture, graphic, CO2 atmospheric levels, effect on marine life.

Aquaculture puts the panic into a whole new perspective.

The studies and the real world contradiction

Lots of academics have published papers that suggest that a mere doubling of CO2 will seriously muck up fish (to be technical) making them smaller, less viable, slowing their metabolic rate, etc etc. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) are very intense. If you were inclined to worry about CO2 you might describe the loads of CO2 at RAS as “apocalyptic”. And this is not just RAS systems but aquaculture of all sorts:

“…elevated CO2 levels appear synonymous with intensive aquaculture more generally.”

“For example, over 40% of Norwegian salmon smolt hatcheries (flow-through and RAS) report CO2 levels >5400 latm (Noble et al., 2012), whereas Bangladeshi shrimp ponds are shown to experience CO2 levels averaging >17 000 latm (Saksena et al., 2006; Sahu et al., 2013).”

Here’s a big clue – Natural CO2 varies a lot — life adapts

In 2007, some oysters were hit with high CO2 levels and a pH as low as 7.6 and it did matter — but, but, but this was no man-made disaster — it was natural thanks to an upwelling of deep water with lots of CO2 in it.

In 2007, these impacts were realized with the upwelling of elevated CO2, aragonite undersaturated sea water off the US west coast,
significantly impacting oyster hatchery production as a direct result of changing climatic conditions  — Barton et al 2015, PDF paper.

The message is that the ocean has a lot of pH variation in it, and ocean life has probably been hit with high CO2 levels a lot of times since time began. I’ve been conversing with Patrick Moore, who’s done years of salmon farming himself and has been looking closely at the issue. There’s a lot more to come, but he and I agree that the most important message here is that life is adaptable. Within the gene pool are probably a lot of variations for coping with big changes, and a few generations of heavy selection transforms the population. We don’t need to wait for a big rare mutation. Life is probably tapping into a gene pool that has gone through major variations many times before.

Fish selected for aquaculture are obviously the kind of fish that do well in aquaculture. But there is a greater truth here and that is “multigenerational adaptation” which occurs in both fish farms and in the wild, but would be missed in short term studies.

“…strong and rapid evolutionary response. It is highly likely therefore that aquaculture practices operating at elevated CO2 concentrations would elicit sufficient selection pressure to directly select for CO2 tolerance during early life stages, leading to the rapid evolution of the population in just a few generations.”

 If CO2 levels are naturally all over the place it’s reasonable to assume that the genes for coping with it are naturally all over the place too. Fish managed to evolve from salt to fresh water in a mere fifty years, adapting to higher CO2 is probably easier. As Patrick Moore pointed out to me, the out — the implications of aquaculture species doing fine in much higher CO2 than could ever be prevalent as an average in the global ocean “are staggering”:

“The author surmises that species or varieties used in aquaculture may have become adapted to CO2 at 5,000 ppm or higher within a few generations. If so there is no plausible reason why this could not also take place in nature. It appears as though marine and freshwater species have about the same tolerance for atmospheric CO2 as air breathing animals do, i.e. >20,000 ppm (which translates to about 25ppm in the water)

  —   Patrick Moore is “The sensible environmentalist”

For more info on the details of the effect of high CO2 levels on humans read this link.  (h/t Tomomason for that link.)

Aquaculture is not the global ocean — obviously

There are other obvious reasons why studies on wild fish or lab fish are different to farmed fish:

“…animals reared in many aquaculture settings are living in a relatively benign environment, being provided with abundant food, relatively constant environmental conditions, protection against disease and absence of a predation threat.

And fish farm managers are not doing pscyh surveys looking for reckless fish either.

Can’t think why the media haven’t interviewed some fish farmers…

Obviously fish farms are not the same as the whole ocean ecosystem — we might be picking fish that like CO2 or having bred them to be happy in it, and these farmed fish don’t have predators. Still, if fish farms had found their yields suffered at 400ppm rather than 4,000 or 40,000, perhaps the media might have mentioned it?

What this means and does not mean

So finfish seem to adapt pretty well to crazy levels of CO2. Shell fish are a more complicated, and I’ll go in to more detail another time. This study does not mean that adding CO2 has no effect, and that there won’t be some winners and losers.  Just because a fish can make a happy meal does not mean  it was a happy fish. But the scale of the fear mongering on ocean acidification needs a big reality check, and if the public knew that CO2 levels were  a magnitude higher in working fish farms they might not need therapy and trigger spaces to cope with the nightly news.

With CO2, 400 is max,
In p.p.m. for most climate quacks,
But, when fish stay alive,
At 8,000 and thrive,
Then, what warmists hold true aren’t facts.

–Ruairi

OPINION

Lessons from two high CO2 worlds – future oceans and intensive aquaculture
Robert Ellis, Mauricio Urbina and Rod Wilson.

Abstract

Exponentially rising CO2 (currently ~400 latm) is driving climate change and causing acidification of both marine and freshwater environments. Physiologists have long known that CO2 directly affects acid–base and ion regulation, respiratory function and aerobic performance in aquatic animals. More recently, many studies have demonstrated that elevated CO2 projected for end of this century (e.g. 800–1000 latm) can also impact physiology, and have substantial effects on behaviours linked to sensory stimuli (smell, hearing and vision) both having negative implications for fitness and survival. In contrast, the aquaculture industry was farming  aquatic animals at CO2 levels that far exceed end-of-century climate change projections (sometimes >10 000 latm) long before the term ‘ocean acidification’ was coined, with limited detrimental effects reported. It is therefore vital to understand the reasons behind this apparent discrepancy. Potential explanations include 1) the use of ‘control’ CO2 levels in aquaculture studies that go beyond 2100 projections in an ocean acidification context; 2) the relatively benign environment in aquaculture (abundant food, disease protection, absence of predators) compared to the wild; 3) aquaculture species having been chosen due to their natural tolerance to the intensive conditions, including CO2 levels; or 4) the breeding of species within
intensive aquaculture having further selected traits that confer tolerance to elevated CO2. We highlight this issue and outline the insights that climate change and aquaculture science can offer for both marine and freshwater settings. Integrating these two fields will stimulate discussion on the direction of future cross-disciplinary research. In doing so, this article aimed to optimize future research efforts and elucidate effective mitigation strategies for managing the negative impacts of elevated CO2 on future aquatic ecosystems and the sustainability of fish and shellfish aquaculture.

* µatm is very similar to ppm. pCO2 = xCO2 * ( p(air) – p(H2O). So  360ppm is “typically” eq to 350 µatm or something like that, in case you were wondering.

REFERENCES

Robert Ellis, Mauricio Urbina and Rod Wilson (2016) Lessons from two high CO2 worlds, Global Change Biology. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13515

Barton A, Hales B, Waldbusser GG, Langdon C, Feely RA (2012) The Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas, shows negative correlation to naturally elevated carbon dioxide levels: implications for near-term ocean acidification effects. Limnology and Oceanography, 57, 698–710.

h/t Willie S

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (58 votes cast)
Farmed fish doing alright at CO2 levels twenty, fifty, seventy times higher than today, 9.4 out of 10 based on 58 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/jtkxhc6

117 comments to Farmed fish doing alright at CO2 levels twenty, fifty, seventy times higher than today

  • #
    Steve Richards

    Should ‘we’ be using the term – acidification – ie “mongering on ocean acidification needs” instead of ‘ph levels’.

    Does this not legitimise the term acidification?

    201

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I agree. Sea water is alkaline. It can get more or less alkaline, but it does not become acidic.

      Specific words trigger specific thought patterns. Good orators know this, and you only need to read any of Churchill’s speeches to spot the techniques.

      It is one of the central principles of brain-washing, where phrases are used incorrectly, and slightly out of context, but repeated consistently.

      That is what the environmental lobby has done, in using, and repeating, the term “ocean acidification”. We should not be using the term on a science blog.

      261

      • #
        ian hilliar

        Was it Ian Plimer who said “the oceans will become acidic when the ocean floors run out of rock. “?

        90

    • #
      bobl

      Technically the right word is neutralisation as the Oceans are alkaline heading for Neutral.

      31

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Do you expect your an average Greenie to appreciate the difference? If there is one thing they cannot get, it is subtlety.

        Apart, of course, for the overuse of the word “like”, as an avoidance mechanism for actually having to definitively state a fact.

        31

  • #
    Graham Richards

    I don’t think the human race can survive these levels of BS BEING PUMPED OUT BY THE WARMISTS!

    302

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Submariners are able to function at CO2 levels of 8,000 ppm without any great dramas: this is twenty times normal.

    261

    • #
      Leigh

      Keith I remembered reading the same thing years ago but for the life of me I couldn’t remember where.
      It wasn’t difficult to find but I again found it an enlightening study to read . The navy observations do seem to contradict universitys experiment and its detrimental conclusions about CO/2.
      Fish too make detrimental decisions to their health and well being. But I usually think it depends on what bait you use.
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/17/claim-co2-makes-you-stupid-as-a-submariner-that-question/

      100

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Some earlier discussions here came up with a few interesting points.

        Rereke knows about the CO2 levels used in submarine escape chambers when you are about to be subjected to high pressure and Roy suggests that when flying at altitude and low pressure you could survive on pure oxygen.

        Environment is important.

        50

    • #
      Dennis

      Yes, but they are not exposed to the world outside their vessel [wink]

      40

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Submariners are able to function at CO2 levels of 8,000 ppm without any great dramas: this is twenty times normal.

    61

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    That stutter again.

    71

    • #
      gary turner

      Have you tried singing your comments. Or, perhaps typing while your mouth is filled with marbles?

      80

      • #
        ian hilliar

        Why , is he auditioning for another Seattle garage grunge band?

        30

      • #
        MariC

        Walnuts. Marbles are easily swallowed and lead to pinging noises while a-toilet. Walnuts fill the mouth with little worry of swallowing by accident (especially if still in the shell)

        10

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      In some languages, words are repeated for emphasis. It is very, very, tiresome.

      90

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        One very “scientific” word I never want to hear again is the term “forcing”.
        It has no place in science.

        61

        • #
          el gordo

          The word ‘forcing’ gives me legitimacy in discussions with warmists.

          Yesterday I spoke to a zealot for half an hour and I used the word in relation to a circus tent out on the flat being forced full of carbon dioxide on a still, chilly night. He gave me a wry smile and said I was ‘being smug.’

          What ever does he mean?

          50

  • #
    TdeF

    So an upwelling of CO2 rich water? The IPCC say that doesn’t happen, the layers do not mix, which is their only way of leaving out the massive CO2 reservoir which is the deep ocean where 98% of all CO2 is dissolved. That is assuming that CO2 gas does not just bubble up like CO2 or CH4. So just leave it off the famous Bern diagram.

    It is fascinating how when presented with a contradiction, the CO2 scientists just make something up. No evidence. Just off the top of their heads. When will anyone admit we do not and cannot change CO2 levels? There is no man made CO2 level, so there is no man made Global Warming and there is no man made Climate Change, whatever that is.

    Two dreams come true for Christmas. BREXIT and Donald Trump. The third is to return our real Prime Minister to his job. The only reason Malcolm Turnbull is Prime Minister is that Bill Shorten is worse, if there is level below terrible.

    341

    • #
      Manfred

      I have seen no mention of (sea surface) tenperature that for example typically range globally from a maximum sea temperature of 34.4°C / 94°F (Tía Juana, Venezuela) to a minimum sea temperature: -1.7°C / 29°F.

      Most may appreciate that the effect of water temperature on gaseous solubility is significant. A 20C increase in SST reduces solubility by approx 50% at STP.

      Assuming the absurd, unfettered rise in temperature leads to declining solubility of CO2 in the Oceans and increasing atmospheric CO2.

      Acidification? I think not.

      121

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      TdeF
      You are beyond any doubt a master wordsmith. And I say that with the utmost respect. You are a gentleman as well as a scholar, and there are damned few of us left!

      100

    • #
      el gordo

      From my reading water molecules weigh less than other gasses and have the ability to force the other gas molecules out of an area, producing low pressure.

      H2O is poorly modelled, but clearly its the most powerful greenhouse gas.

      70

      • #
        bobl

        Yes, H2O Atomic Mass 22, O2 Atomic Mass 32, N2 Atomic Mass 28.

        But H20 is a assymetric polar molecule that has a positively and negatively charged end. Since positives and negatives attract the negative end of a water molecule attract positive ends of other water molecules which means water has a high melting (0deg C) and vaporisation temperature (100C). So the water vapour “condenses out” as the water molecules huddle together due to their charge attraction, as they condense out they reduce the density of the air (because spaces that had water vapour no longer have them) so when water is condensing out air pressure falls because of the gaps the condensed water leaves in the air).

        Think about the egg in the bottle science experiment, Firstly you boil the water, the bottle fills with WV that displaces the air, the egg is placed on and seals the bottle, upon cooling the water condenses out creating a partial vaccuum in the bottle (low air presure) and the egg is pushed into the bottle by the higher air pressure outside the bottle CF inside the bottle.

        When you jar preservatives the same principle is used to vacuum seal the jars, you put the hot jam into the jar, put the lid on without sealing it and turn the jar upside down forcing the air out of the jar at the bottom and leaving only water vapour in the gap between the jam and the bottom of the jar, you tighten the lid to seal the jar and let it cool. A vaccuum forms in the jar when the WV condenses out. Bacteria can’t grow because there is little to no oxygen.

        50

    • #
      Dennis

      I will not stand for socialism masquerading as environmentalism – PM Tony Abbott 2015

      70

      • #
        el gordo

        No, but a rural uprising has begun and this new agrarian socialist movement holds much promise.

        ‘Australian farmers are hiring their own trains to freight grain and other harvested crops direct to port or to contract buyers to avoid what they say are excessive transport, logistics and marketing costs charged by the big grain companies.’

        Sue Neales / Oz

        50

        • #
          Dennis

          The number of abandoned railway tracks and infrastructure around Australia are depressing to see, and road trains using narrow country roads alongside abandoned tracks.

          30

          • #
            Dennis

            Which reminds me of the deals done in the 1970/80s by Labor state governments to close railway lines and assist road transport operators to grow their businesses with taxpayer funded roadworks on major routes.

            A recent times deceased former NSW Labor Premier was one and after retiring from politics won a contract to commercially clean airport terminals and other buildings owned by a well known trucking firm, a public company with other investments too including an airline that has since been declared bankrupt.

            40

          • #
            el gordo

            We could discuss the problems of the past, why infrastructure schemes fail, mainly because the demand wasn’t there. Everything is now changing and the demand from China alone should provide the impetus.

            The Brisbane to Melbourne (goods line) Inland Rail is progressing satisfactorily.

            The Ord River dam was considered a white elephant, but its finally come good.

            Desalination plants are a very poor investment, whereas bullet trains under the Great Dividing Range would take a lot of pressure off the cities.

            20

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Well said TdeF. I think it was Cambrian CO2 levels that were around 7% – 20x present levels. Temperatures about similar to now. And CO2 dissolves more readily in cold water hence the post increase lag after an Ice Age.

      30

  • #
    PeterS

    I drink a lot of soda water and I feel better. I wonder if I can get some grant money to show that increased levels of CO2 all round is good for the planet. I know; it would be rejected.

    120

  • #
    ROM

    Lets go back to somewhere near the beginning and figure out from what is known and what has to be guessed at and assumed about the earliest single cell life forms on the Planet, the Anaerobic bacteria , i.e. non oxygen requiring and O2 intolerant bacteria.
    For that is where ALL life on this planet has evolved from over the 3 billion years since that first primitive single celled life forms appeared.

    And that original very primitive single celled anaerobic bacteria [ there wasn't any free Oxygen ] were highly tolerant to CO2 and a whole range of what we oxygen breathing creatures regard as highly noxious gases today.

    But as with all life, tolerance to a greater or lesser degree of these now regarded as noxious gases depends greatly on how and when the ancestors of a Taxa, a group of living organisms with some common characteristics, evolved and how they evolved over that last couple of billions of years since the first single celled non O2 tolerating Anaerobic bacteria life and then multi celled life in the form of Cyanobacteria evolved over that couple of billion years since the great Oxygenation event which it is suggested was a direct result of Cyanobacteria’s production of O2.

    So it is highly likely that all life today has a tolerance to various concentrations of CO2 as a part of its genetic inheritance from those likely very first, very early primitive single celled anaerobic bacteria.

    So lets look at a paper from 1980 before the stupidity of the current CO2 madness was even thought about.
    And in fact well before the “discovery” [ ??? ] of the so called and grandiosely misnamed Ozone Hole in May of 1985.

    The Ozone Hole epic according to James Lovelock, in referring to the 2009 Climate Gate and the subsequent exposure of all encompassing and still ongoing corruption through out climate science to quote;

    I have seen this happen before, of course. We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.

    The Ozone Hole corruption of science was the template for the now almost absolute corruption of climate science that we are seeing today.
    —————–
    So from the 1980′s paper, the tolerances and requirements of anaerobic bacteria for CO2

    The carbon dioxide requirements of anaerobic bacteria. [ PDF ]

    Abstract;

    Some clinically significant anaerobic bacteria were incubated in pure culture in anaerobic jars containing a range of atmospheric concentrations of CO2. Growth of Clostridium perfringens, C. sporogenes and C. septicum was independent of the amount of CO2.

    Small supplements of CO2 (0.25%) allowed good growth of the majority of anaerobes studied–an observation contrary to established teaching.

    The exceptions were Fusobacterium necrophorum which showed an absolute requirement for CO2 of at least 1% and B. melaninogenicus which needed an atmospheric content of 10–40% CO2 for optimal growth.

    The inclusion of CO2 in the anaerobic jar at a final concentration of 10% is to be recommended for all routine isolation procedures.
    ————

    Note those numbers from the above abstract ;

    1 / Today’s atmospheric CO2 = 400 parts per million = 0.04% of the atmospheric gases by volume;
    [ The "million" being the totality of gases, not including water vapour, THE major greenhouse gas, that make up our planet's atmosphere. ]

    2 / As in the above extract; 0.25% of CO2 = 2500 parts per million

    3 / 1% of CO2 = 10,000 ppm by volume

    4 / 10% to 40% of CO2 = 100,000 ppm > 400,000 ppm about 250 times to about 1000 times the current levels of atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm.

    As derived from the above 1980 experiment which in all probability would not be carried out today in the highly toxic to any questioning and doubting CO2 alarmist science of today.

    These numbers are the likely levels of CO2 that the first and even much later life forms on this planet right down to today’s anaerobic bacteria both required and tolerated.
    Such increased tolerance to high CO2 levels will be found as in the fish of Jo’s headline post and no doubt in many other and various life forms today if such tolerances to CO2 were actually researched.
    ————-
    Also and highly relevant to ourselves and virtually ALL of sentient life on the planet today;

    Great Oxidation Event: More oxygen through multicellularity

    101

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Possible that as the inner planets minus Earth (with an atmosphere) have 98% CO2, Mars lost 90% of it due to solar wind stripping, was Earths also CO2 + N2 and the O2 was produced from life, which was early plants consuming the CO2.

      20

  • #
    Ruairi

    With CO2, 400 is max,
    In p.p.m. for most climate quacks,
    But, when fish stay alive,
    At 8,000 and thrive,
    Then, what warmists hold true aren’t facts.

    280

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    CO2 is
    A waste product (exhaust gas) of animal life
    A gaseous food (necessary intake) of plant life
    A great propaganda tool for globalists to transfer wealth to China

    210

  • #
    Scientist

    Climate change denial is bollocks to protect fossil fuel industries. Always was, always will be.

    The word deniers are most scared of, because they cannot produce it and it undermines all they say:

    corroboration
    kəˌrɒbəˈreɪʃ(ə)n/Submit
    noun
    evidence which confirms or supports a statement, theory, or finding; confirmation.
    “there is no independent corroboration for this”
    synonyms: confirmation, verification, attestation, affirmation, ratification, endorsement, accreditation, authentication, validation, certification, documentation, evidence, proof, substantiation; More

    239

    • #

      You mean like the way 28 million weather balloons corroborates the satellites in showing that not only do models fail dismally, but that they fail in a coherent pattern? The same models-that overestimated the warming also overestimated water vapor feedback and predicted a hot spot that wasn’t there. And the 120 proxies and 6000 boreholes both corroborate the historical records that show the Medieval warm period was warmer than the Little ice age, and that none of the current models can hindcast that. Or the Beryllium records and C14 that both corroborate that the solar cycles correlate better over the long run with global temperature than CO2 does.

      See The Evidence — where almost every observation corroborates the skeptics and requires adjustments to be “corrected” to fit the models.

      What bad luck eh? All modern equipment is cool biased, and old equipment is warm biased. The ARGO buoys needed to have cool biases removed, the weather balloons did too, the satellites showed hardly any sea level rise but needed to be adjusted up.

      In contrast, most historic thermometers need to be adjusted down… the MWP boreholes got adjusted down… the holocene optimum got adjusted down… the warm 1940s peak got adjusted down…

      491

    • #

      Scientist! Thank you for cutting and pasting from some dictionary or thesaurus. I’m sure I could never have worked out what corroboration means without your help. Does your source also do definitions and synonyms for “unicorn” and “jellybean”. It does? Extraordinary!

      It also seems you know people who deny that climate changes? What? These wallies missed the entire Holocene? Missed the Storegga Slides, the isolation of Britain and flooding of Bass Strait within the period of human settlement building, the Optimum, the Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warmings, the cold+drought disaster around 2200BC, the cooling Bond Events, the LIA? They believe in a static climate? And you have tracked these scallywags down and discovered that they are in some sort of conspiracy to protect fossil fuel industries?

      You are some scientist. Never stop patronizing! (I know I don’t need to cut and paste definitions and synonyms of “patronizing” for you. You’re way ahead of that game.)

      321

      • #
        jorgekafkazar

        Does your source also do definitions and synonyms for “unicorn” and “jellybean”.

        Wot I wants ter know is, does it have deffernitions fer batty, barmy, and bonkers?

        251

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          I think that alliteration is part of the advanced course, when it comes to climate scientists.

          They are still following the Humpty Dumpty model: “When I use a word, it means precisely what I want it to mean, nothing more, and nothing less”

          181

    • #
      Manfred

      You omitted the inverted commas from your nom de plume. It’s a distinguishing honorific often used here.

      201

    • #
      tom0mason

      Explain that to the snow bound Saudis, Lebanese, Moroccans.

      Its been snowing in all these countries in the last 3 weeks,
      I know it’s only weather but they think its climate. That will defeat the likes of you advocates of this daft theory of AGW.

      In over 100 years and .4°C warming piffling!

      AGW seance is a loser’s game of inaccurate models and outrageously adjusted data. All theory no observation!

      221

    • #
      Jim Poulos

      Hey Scientist,

      I know you.

      You used to work for the CSIRO… found another job yet?

      221

    • #
      Raven

      Well, I’m impressed that one poster knows the investment portfolio of thousands of others without providing a shred of corroboration.

      If anything, it should be obvious that today’s post about fish is corroborated with the feast of St. Andrew the Apostle. St Andrew is the patron of fishermen, singers and unmarried women.

      171

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Seriously, Raven, how many unmarried, fisher women, do you know, who can sing? Chugging beer, does not count as singing.

        40

        • #
          Raven

          OK, I don’t know many fisher women but I once knew a girl named Coral.
          I’m not sure about her singing but she could certainly talk under water.
          We weren’t together long . . . :)

          20

    • #
      PeterS

      If you are a real scientist then you should be ashamed of yourself for believing in the global warming alarmist crap that has failed all scientific tests and guidelines as demonstrated here and on other sites. Did you know there are a few scientists who believe the earth is flat? Are you one of them?

      161

    • #
      Albert

      Every time I hear ‘climate change’ while watching TV, I quickly change channels

      130

    • #
      Radical Rodent

      Climate change denial is bollocks to protect fossil fuel industries.

      Can you corroborate that statement?

      131

    • #
      AndyG55

      Poor Mr NON-scientist.

      You are free to provide proof that

      1. Anyone here is linked to the fossil fuel industry.. I certainly am not

      2. That CO2 causes any warming in a convectively controlled atmosphere.

      Until you can do that, you post is EMPTY and BASELESS and based on ZERO-SCIENCE.

      72

      • #
        bobl

        Well I am, shares in Fossil Fuel companies everywhere, one must back ones principles after all and given the performance on solyndra and geoflannery and the sovereign risk in subsidy dependent businesses noone in their right mind would buy green shares. All those divestment drives, just a great buying opportunity IMO. Mind you I do like lithium and rare earth’s due to the fact that they make fossil power more cost effective, and I would be interested in a really long bet on Thorium so I’m not completely a fossil fuel puppet.

        Oh and if you think for a minute I would be involved in those things if I thought they were in any way existentially threatening, you have another thing coming. CO2 and warmer weather is good for the planet even the IPCC says so.

        51

        • #
          AndyG55

          I know several skeptics that invest in wind and solar. Shares are a different matter.

          They know there is money there. But because they are awake to the scam , they usual see collapses before they happen and cash the shares before they collapse.

          Me, I like my spare time and don’t work anywhere near full time, so haven’t built up the funds to take chances either way. :-)

          63

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            I am a founding shareholder in a company that makes relatively small wind turbines for use in rural areas.

            My shareholding is modest, but it does keep me reasonably up to date with developments in the technology. It also deflects any angst that I might get from the urban eco-warriors, since I have better green-cred’ than they do.

            I have never received a dividend, nor do I expect one.

            60

    • #
      bobl

      … and climate change activists are wonderously pious people that promote :

      * Deprivation of poor africans and asians from ever having what they have

      * Ensuring that grannies in cold countries die in their thousands from unaffordable fuel bils.

      * Diverting money from the treatment of cancer, aids and other morbidities to building windmills that don’t save any CO2 anyway.

      * Saving Haitian people from cyclones by building windmills in the blackout state of SA rather than cyclone shelters in Haiti.

      * Burning food aid (corn) in cars as corn ethanol.

      * Driving climate and CO2 back to levels that would create a famine as the climate did in the cooler, lower CO2, little ICE AGE.

      Oh yes, I can see how your planet wrecking cult is sooo morally defensible. You know what I call that lot – EVIL…

      112

  • #
    Fromdownunder

    Doesn’t really matter if the cute little fishes are being slowed down by co2 lethargic effect. Any predator swimming though the same water would also be affected by the same water, and also slowed.

    If it’s not broken don’t spend billions on fixing it.

    150

  • #

    ‘Some fish are minnows,
    Some are whales,
    People like dimples,
    Fish like scales.
    Some fish are slim
    And some are round,
    They don’t get cold,
    They don’t get drowned.’
    They’re doing quite well
    Out in ocean and sea,
    and in high CO2 fish farms,
    for like you and me
    they adapt to changed levels
    of C-O-2-too.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsD0FDLOKGA

    160

  • #
    Reasonable Skeptic

    It seems to me that humanity has convinced itself that the world changes at such a slow rate that any rapid change will have drastic and negative consequences. Sure at a macro level changes are slow, but the changes themselves happen at a micro level and life has to adapt or die.

    We are taught to worry about changes of 0.6 deg C over a couple of decades, but ignore that life adjusts daily to changes far exceeding that. Life is not a photograph where everything stands still it is a movie where change is constant normal and expected.

    161

  • #
    J.H.

    I need a grant to study the CO2 levels in my Gin and Tonic….. However, I’m pretty certain fish can’t live in it. ;)

    171

    • #
      bobl

      Well not for long,

      reminds me of my grandfather who unfortunately died in a tragic accident in a vat of beer at XXXX. The coroner said he would have died sooner but had to get out several times to go to the toilet… ba Boom

      60

      • #
        Raven

        I can corroborate that effect.

        My grandfather died in a similar unfortunate accident when he fell into a vat of rum.
        He was cremated . . and it took three weeks to put the fire out.

        30

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    The Devonian Period is often known as The Age of Fishes. The CO2 content is thought to have started around 3,000 ppm, climbed to 4,000ppm and then dropped to about 1200ppm. The climate was thought to be warm but it seems that this was based on fossils in Europe which at that time straddled the Equator. But with CO2 levels like that no wonder fish aren’t bothered by levels above today’s low one.

    It is noted that the drop in CO2 levels “probably caused” a drop in temperature of about 5℃ in the middle of the Period, although the temperature recovered towards the end of the Period despite the CO2 level being even lower.

    111

  • #
    Andy Pattullo

    In my undergraduate period I learned that CO2 can have at least an indirect negative impact on fish. I learned this when the early fixation on CO2 and acid rain caused my lab TA to suggest that I anaesthetize sucker fish, sew rubber membranes around their mouth, trap them in a respiratory chamber to measure the impact of adding CO2 to their intake water and measure the affect on metabolism. I can testify this was not very good for the fish but skeptics might wonder if some of the adverse effects might have been from drugs, amateur surgery, confinement and rough handling. True believers know it is all about CO2 the same way they know that Armageddon is next week.

    100

  • #
    Rud Istvan

    The US west coast oyster pH papers are a complete hash. They negligently misrepresent the breeding biology of the Miyagi oyster, an estuarine species. Essay Shell Games at Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. A longer version including corals in ebook Blowing Smoke. Whiskey Creek oyster hatchery on Oregon’s Netarts Bay has to be managed like the oyster estuary it is not.

    101

    • #
      bobl

      Shell making chemistry

      CO2 + H2O H+ + HCO3-
      Then
      Ca+ + HCO3- –> CaCO3 + H+

      CaCo3 = Calcium carbonate – Argonite of shells.

      Look at the first equation, now if we took the CO2 out of the water what would happen – Shelfish USE (sink) dissolved CO2 in making their shells: less Co2 less shells, more CO2 more shells.

      41

  • #
    David S

    What’s true for fish is doubly true for coral .i am fascinated when I read how the addition of CO2 will wipe out coral reefs when they have survived through Eons of much higher levels of CO2 than exists today.

    If there was one thing that Donald Trump must do through the EPA is to decriminalise CO2. Even skeptics reference talking about clean energy when talking about non fossil fuel power generation as if the release of CO2 makes fossil fuel generated Electricity dirty. CO 2 is a colourless odourless gas that makes very good plant ( and fish) food.

    141

  • #
    AZ1971

    and if the public knew that CO2 levels were a magnitude higher in working fish farms they might not need therapy and trigger spaces to cope with the nightly news

    I feel this to be true not only of CO2 levels and climate change hype, but a myriad of other things as well that qualify more as sensationalism than news or—shudder the thought—science.

    The older I get, the more I realize that today’s youth is generally lost and has been taught by lost hippies from the 1960′s. Natural inquisitiveness and critical thinking skills are not being taught and sadly not even being emphasized as being relevant any longer, especially when everything is just a Google search away from their fingertips.

    I wonder what my grandparents would say about the cultural failures being witnessed today? Likely it would include some profanity and general dismissal of large portions of the world being little more than a collection of women’s external reproductive parts.

    100

    • #
      Alen Ford

      I am afraid that this blog has gone off at a tangent over CO2 levels in fish farms, when the real problem lies elsewhere. I am referring to the metres of fish poo lying on the sea floor beneath the cages, ready to leap into action and enter the water column with unknown, catastrophic consequences.

      Their ABC, as usual, has the full story:

      CARO MELDRUM-HANNA: It’s feared tonnes of fish waste and sediment set to be generated by Tassal’s Okehampton Bay farm could drift here.

      WOMAN: That’s fine when it’s sitting on the bottom of the sea floor and its stationary, but you started disturbing that, that’s a whole different thing because it will expand into the water column.

      We have been looking at the wrong potential disaster!

      50

  • #
    David Maddison

    O/T Good read.

    http://www.xyz.net.au/left-will-lose-will-win/

    QUOTE: “The left increasingly tries to win debates around public policy by openly lying and then furiously attacking anyone who exposes their lies, relying on the fact that they dominate the establishment to smother any dissent in an avalanche of hate, slander and sometimes outright violence.”

    101

  • #
    Boambee Johm

    So fish (and other life forms) evolve, who would have thought it!

    Why are CAGW fanatics such deniers of evolution?

    21

  • #

    The hottest spring ever.
    Whatever the temperatures were.
    When I switch to the weather channel to analyze my golfing prospects for the next few days I always push the mute button first.

    81

  • #

    Fish-farming in places like Norway are intensely oil-dependent. As soon as the flow of oil starts slowing down, these farms will be abandoned. BTW, the same applies to long-distance fishing fleets. I doubt if fish-farming in Vietnam is quite the same.

    Fish Farming Explores Deeper, Cleaner Waters

    40

  • #
    Dennis

    The typical leftist brain cannot separate fact from fiction, and worse, does not want to know the facts.

    71

  • #
    redress

    O/T completely but overnight……….ABOUT 200,000 people experienced power outages overnight after South Australia disconnected from the national electricity network.

    The Australian Energy Market Regulator said South Australia disconnected from the national network at 12.16am on Thursday but remained operating as a separate entity.

    The separation of South Australia was due to an issue on the Victorian transmission network, impacting the flow electricity via the Heywood Interconnector to South Australia but the root cause is still under investigation.

    Approximately 220 megawatts was lost in SA.

    There had been reports the SA Power Networks messaging system designed to alert customers to power outages was either slow or never received.

    But Mr Roberts said the issue would have related to the speed of restoration.

    “Some outages lasted 15 minutes so it would be a case of a message going out and power being restored as the message was being sent,” he said.

    About 200,000 South Australian customers were affected – some lost power for 15 minutes, others for up to an hour. Most properties had electricity restored by 2am.

    http://media.fyre.co/Vky6FTiRwmvLGc1thdA8_AEMO.jpg

    60

    • #
      David Maddison

      I no longer care. I can’t wait until Hazelwood is shut down and power outages become a regular occurrence in SA and VIC. It might finally knock some sense into the morons that voted for both governments.

      41

    • #

      This power blackout happened at around 1AM on the Thursday Morning.

      Wind power in South Australia was delivering 100MW of its (almost) 1600MW Nameplate, around 6.25% of total Capacity. So, one turbine in every sixteen with it’s blades actually moving.

      Total Demand for South Australia at that time, even with almost everyone tucked up in bed asleep was 1150MW.

      Lucky this outage from Victoria (South Australia’s main electricity supplier) happened when it did, and not during the day with Total Demand up around 1500MW.

      This again proves that a State, or large area, cannot survive on just wind power alone as the main source of power generation. What do you do when there is a sudden collapse of real power, and the wind is just not blowing?

      Sources Aneroid Wind and AEMO

      Also, note that even when Demand is at its absolute minimum for the day, power consumption is still around two thirds of the maximum total demand.

      Load Curve Maths, and until that time when people start to take those Load curves seriously, for what they actually do tell us, then the renewables fallacy will keep making traction.

      Tony.

      111

      • #
        bobl

        Yes Tony,
        There were several reports that warned SA that it no longer has sufficient local energy resources to guarantee it can operate islanded from the NEM, the NEM interconnect goes down and SA will (most of the time) be completely unable to fend for itself. Even Tasmania that bastion of socialist basketcasery can fend for itself without basslink.

        51

  • #
    David Maddison

    VIC electricity and gas prices (retail) to go up 11% and 9% respectively next year. Hazelwood closure responsible for electricity price increases.

    But I thought wind power was so cheap market forces would naturally shut down fossil generators….

    71

  • #
    ROM

    redress @ #25

    Thanks for that update.

    Another blatant failure of SA’s renewable energy wind turbine generators and its hyped solar [Wonder if the fact that was just past midnight and there was no Sun had anything to do with solar not supplying any power to the SA system? ] to provide even a modicum of predictable reliability to that essential electricity supply that is central to our modern civilisations entire operation and existence.

    Very Sadly I just barely laugh at the utter imbecility of an electrically powered, power outage warning system that supposedly warns the public of power outages apparently after they occur when the power that drives the warning system is down and out.
    But of course they use batteries which the green anti CO2 cult will power all our needs for days on end when the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine.
    Batteries that apparently have already just demonstrated that they haven’t even enough power capacity to even run a power outage warning system for more than an hour or so.

    The miserable excuse for a so called Media no doubt will be full of excuses from all sorts of “renewable energy experts” for the power outage, if they even get around to mentioning this power outage, as to why it happened.

    And Whirling Windmill Weatherill, premier of SA will again furiously flail around with further endless excuses for another failure of his renewable energy debacle.

    All this just the tip of the power failure iceberg as to what will happen to both SA and Victoria when the brown coal burning Hazelwood power station gets closed down due to the policies of the utterly despicable Vic Premier, the Dopey Despot, Dan Andrews here in Victoria next year.

    71

  • #
    • #

      One single take out from Dennis link is the following: (my bolding here)

      Another NSW plant, AGL Energy’s ageing Liddell power station, is due to close by 2022 and the company reiterated in an investor briefing this week it will stick with that timetable.

      Wind power supporters must be green with envy over this, oh sorry, they actually haven’t a clue really.

      Liddell is scheduled to close in 2022.

      That’ll be after ….. 51 years of continuous operation.

      Wind power is lucky to manage 15 to 20 years at best.

      Oh, the irony. How it must burn.

      Tony.

      61

      • #
        David Maddison

        Tony, when wind plant is costed for depreciation, do you know what the expected lifetime is? Are they falsely assuming it will last as long as coal plant or the more accurate 15-20 lifetime you quote. If it is assumed to last as long as the reliable power generators its true cost will be even greater.

        41

        • #

          David,
          at the proposal level, costing are worked out based on the total capacity (nameplate) a lifetime Capacity Factor (CF) of 38%, and a lifetime of 25 years.

          The two problems here are that the wind plant will never have that lifetime CF of 38%. It may start out that way, but for the first few years it will be pressed to average 30%. Long time wind operations in Germany see lifetime wind CF down as low as 15% to 20% at best. The lifetime of 25 years assumes that all towers with their turbines will operate at optimum, again, not the case at all, as some units have been known to totally ‘clap out’ after five years.

          The construction cost and all ongoing costs from there are calculated to an overall total cost, and that is recovered from the sale of the electricity. That construction cost is lowered by the up front subsidy paid to the proposers, and in some cases that is more than half, so this artificially lowers the total recoverable cost. Profit then has to be added into the mix as well. Also, in nearly every case, the proposal will only ever proceed if Governments also pay a subsidy to the proposing company for every MegaWattHour of power generated, hence also lowering that total recoverable cost.

          So let’s do some Maths for the total power to be generated by the plant.

          Original proposal:

          Nameplate – 500MW, CF – 38%, Lifetime – 25 years. Total power delivered (approx) 41,600GWH.

          Actual, based on most likely CF (20%) and 20 years best case operation, and here I have gone to the high end probable best case scenario in both of those parameters.

          Same Nameplate – 500MW, CF – 20%, Lifetime – 20 years. Total power delivered (approx) 17,500GWH.

          That’s just over 40% of the power quoted at the proposal stage.

          The truth is never explained, as those proposal figures are all you will ever see.

          Tony.

          81

      • #
        Dennis

        Exactly right.

        31

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        As I understand the average life of a wind turbine is about 12 years? Compared to a steam turbine or hydro generator..

        10

  • #
    pat

    Farage has a go at wind turbines:

    30 Nov: Youtube: 4mins59secs: Nigel Farage savages the biased media to their faces at media conference
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfajEW_BNSo

    30 Nov: Breitbart: Nigel Farage spoke at a Media Conference and Journalists lost their minds
    Appearing in Copenhagen at the News Xchange annual conference for the international broadcast news industry Farage addressed the audience of around 630 journalists from around the world and promptly sent them into a Twitter frenzy by informing them they were out of touch…
    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/30/farage-spoke-media-conference-journalists-lost-minds/

    82

  • #
    pat

    Fake News hits a new low:

    30 Nov: UK Express: Will Kirby: Viewers blast ‘bias’ Newsnight guests for ‘calling Brexit & Trump victory undemocratic’
    SEETHING Newsnight viewers have condemned the BBC’s coverage after guests claimed Britain’s decision to quit the EU and Donald Trump’s victory are “undemocratic”.
    Pulitzer Prize-winning author Anne Applebaum and Brian Klaas both went against the historic decisions this year, leaving viewers furious with the lack of balance.
    Mr Klaas, from the London School of Economics, said: “I feel like the idea that democracy is losing some faith is very true”, while claiming the presidential election was “an advertisement against democracy”…READ ALL
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/738073/Newsnight-democratic-Doanld-Trump-Brexit-Tim-Snyder-Brian-Klaas-Anne-Applebaum-twitter

    read all:

    28 Nov: GatewayPundit: Jim Hoft: AP Issues Reporting Guidelines for “Alt-Right” …
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/ap-issues-reporting-guidelines-alt-right-kkk-neo-nazi-tump-supporters/

    51

  • #
    Bob in Castlemaine

    There’s the world of politicised “climate science” and then there’s real world science. Just as the graphic in the article helps put the lie to the endless alarmist BS about ocean “acidification” so to does a simple picture of what goes on in the real world of commercial horticulture do when it comes to the endless tsunami of atmospheric CO2 alarmism.
    Who do you think is telling lies?

    31

  • #
    pat

    found at ClimateDepot:

    VIDEO: 26mins17secs: MRC: Collateral Damage: Forgotten casualties of the Left’s War on Coal
    Several months ago, MRCTV sent a camera crew to the southern counties of West Virginia to document the impact of EPA regulations on communities that have historically relied on the coal industry for their livelihood. What the team found was devastating…
    Through up-close footage and a compelling series of brutally honest interviews, “Collateral Damage” exposes in stark detail the real, human impact of President Obama’s promised and delivered assault on the coal industry, and on the hardworking American families of Appalachia.
    This is a real story about real people. Please help us tell their story by sharing this video.
    https://info.mrc.org/collateral-damage

    found, in prominent position, on Google News page today. NOT FUNNY AT ALL. end taxpayer funding for SBS:

    30 Nov: SBS: Kara Eva Schlegl: Top Tourist Destinations in Queensland now that the Great Barrier Reef is Basically Dead
    Despite One Nation’s opinion on the matter, actual scientists claim the Barrier Reef might be ‘all gone in two decades time’. With this in mind, Comedian Kara Eva Schlegl steps up to the plate to save the tourism industry.
    http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/article/2016/11/30/top-tourist-destinations-queensland-now-great-barrier-reef-basically-dead

    41

    • #
      pat

      just to clarify something:

      the trash SBS piece is on the Google News homepage under “SCIENCE”, & gives no hint it’s a piece of trash “comedy”. here is how it shows up:

      Science -
      Top Tourist Destinations in Queensland now that the Great Barrier Reef is Basically Dead
      SBS – ‎Nov 29, 2016‎
      Despite One Nation’s opinion on the matter, actual scientists claim the Barrier Reef might be ‘all gone in two decades time’

      the so-called Sydney comedian who wrote this rubbish is a regular contributor to SBS, & naturally has plenty of anti-Trump trash talk in previous pieces, two examples:

      16 Nov: SBS: Kara Eva Schlegl: Dating Advice: How to break up with the United States of America
      It might be difficult to make them understand what the problem is, because their leader has the comprehension skills of a first grader, so feel free to draw them a simple diagram in which America has fallen into the pits of hell and you’re standing away from them at a safe distance, hanging out with Belgium and Lithuania.
      Explain that it’s no one’s fault, except for the 60 million plus members of their population who voted for Trump…

      14 Nov: SBS: Kara Eva Schlegl: Who will Trump choose to make America great (a garbage fire) again?
      The last thing I want to write about right now is Donald Trump. He’s terrible, the world is going hell, white people are the worst, yada yada yada. There are nicer things to think about, like, will I ever pay off my HECs debt?…
      So who will round out this Nuremberg line-up of an administration? Well, I have some ideas…
      I guess time travel always sounds like a good idea, until you get eaten by a dinosaur. Let’s just hope Trump is gobbled up before the rest of us.

      Kara contributes so regularly, one must presume she gets paid. no way should she receive a cent of Australian taxpayers’ money.

      21

  • #
    pat

    30 Nov: SanAntonioExpressNews: EPA plans to withdraw pollution rule for 7 Texas power plants
    By Ryan Maye Handy, Houston Chronicle
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it plans to withdraw a rule that would require seven Texas coal-fired power plants to reduce pollution coming from their stacks, providing at least a short-term reprieve for power companies fearful that the costs of ever stricter regulations would doom their plants.
    The rule would have mandated that the Texas plants, as well as eight others in Oklahoma, update scrubbers and other air pollution control devices to preserve air quality near national parks and wilderness areas, including Big Bend National Park on the Texas border with Mexico, and Guadalupe Mountains National Park on the New Mexico border.
    Several plant operators went to court to block the rule, arguing that the costly upgrades could force some plants to shut down and could create shortages of electricity in Texas.
    The rule was under review by the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which over the past few months issued rulings favorable to the power producers, including one that prevented the EPA from enforcing the regulations. In a court filing Monday, the EPA said it plans to soon file a motion to withdraw the rule.
    Environmental advocates said they expect the EPA to rework and resubmit the rule, but its future is uncertain as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office…
    http://www.expressnews.com/business/eagle-ford-energy/article/EPA-plans-to-withdraw-pollution-rule-for-7-Texas-10645121.php

    21

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: Winter power crunch fears as UK-France cables severed during storm
    Britain’s main power link to France was partially severed during Storm Angus and will not be fixed until February, National Grid has revealed, exacerbating fears of a power crunch this winter…
    National Grid, which is the joint owner of the link, said it had now discovered that four of its eight cables “have been severed”, putting 1GW of capacity out of action until the end of February.
    The unprecedented damage – which it is thought could have been caused by a ship dropping anchor during the storm – comes as Britain heads into winter with power supplies already tight and National Grid expecting to have to draw on emergency back-up power plant reserves to keep the lights on…
    Analysts at Barclays said the outage was “likely to lead to increased volatility and higher UK power prices over January and February 2017 – especially during peak demand periods”…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/11/29/winter-power-crunch-fears-uk-france-cables-severed-storm/

    29 Nov: Daily Caller: Michael Bastasch: Kellyanne Conway’s Visit To Canada Suggests Trump Will Quickly Approve Keystone XL
    Reports that President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign manager will tour Canadian oil sands production sites suggests the incoming administration may make approving the Keystone XL pipeline a major priority.
    Kellyanne Conway will visit Fort McMurray, Alberta for an oil sands tour before speaking at a fundraiser hosted by conservative super-PAC Alberta Prosperity Fund. Conway’s visit to Alberta is set to take place just days before Trump’s inauguration…
    Trump’s plan revolves around rescinding a 1968 executive order giving the State Department the power to authorize cross-border oil pipelines, sources told Bloomberg’s Jennifer Dlouhy.
    The State Department took seven years to determine Keystone XL is not in the “national interest” — a process that was criticized by lawmakers and the oil industry as being politically motivated and influenced by environmental activists.
    Trump could rescind the order once he gets into office, meaning that Keystone XL would only need to go through an environmental review.
    Interestingly enough, the State Department’s environmental review of the 1,200-mile pipeline found the project would have little or no impact on water quality and carbon dioxide emissions.
    But President Obama rejected the pipeline as not in the “national interest” in 2015 because it would tarnish America’s reputation as a leader in the fight against global warming…
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/29/kellyanne-conways-visit-to-canada-suggests-trump-will-quickly-approve-keystone-xl/

    11

  • #
    el gordo

    No histrionics from the Guardian on the approaching summer, in search of balance, natural variables rule.

    ‘The higher-than-usual pressures in the short term were the result of a climate driver known as the Southern Annular Mode, typically associated with reduced rainfall and higher temperatures.

    ‘It was forcing wind systems further north than normal, holding monsoon weather at bay while moving air far across the continent.

    “It acts a bit like a wall that blocks the influence of the tropical wet season,” said Andrew Watkins, the acting head of climate monitoring and prediction at BoM.’

    Elle Hunt / Guardian

    20

  • #

    Who would have guessed fish don’t drown in 99.8 % water ?

    Next , Jo Nova interiews a thirsty salmon raised in a champagne bottle .

    00

  • #
    Denis

    Jo,

    I’m late to this.

    I grew up in the Riverina area of Australia.

    I was told that the bottoms of the rivers there had some of the highest salt content of any waters in the world. More salty than the sea but I’m not sure they had a measurement for the ocean depths at that time.

    We used to catch a species of fish that normally lives in the sea. I presume they came up river to spawn.

    They did an underwater survey of the Swan Hill bridge one time. Many years ago they sent down divers. Huge Murray Cod dug into the mud at the bottom just waiting for passing food.

    And the passing food are molluscs. We used to call them mussels. Inland oysters. The one’s that survived grew huge as dinner plates but they taste terrible until you put them in clean water so they void their waste.

    I’m all for fish farming. Easier than sheep or cattle.

    00

  • #
    ron

    Nice study meaningless but very nice. Fish can live whit 8000ppm CO2 human cane do that to. We cane live whit 50000ppm CO2 or even a 100000. The one problem we have is that CO2 dos little to us we exhale 40000ppm CO2 every time we breed . Fish use oxygen like humans for living. So as long there is about 20% oxygen its just fine.

    The big worry comes whit CO2 getting lower then 200ppm at that point plant wont grow any more and at 150ppm they go dead. So if say CO2 levels would reach 1200ppm fish nor human would bother this. But plants will benefit whit an overall growth of more than 42% better then now.

    00