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

Panic time: a tiny 0.01% of Antarctica, resting on volcanoes, melts five times faster than nothing

Let this go down as a prime example of Big Meaningless Numbers used to scare you:

Antarctica’s ice melts five times faster than usual

Ben Webster – The Times  (copied at The Australian)

Antarctica has lost an area of ice the size of Greater London since 2010 as warmer ocean water erodes its floating edge, a study has found. Overall about 1,463 sq km of Antarctica’s underwater ice melted between 2010 and 2016.

What does 1,463 fewer square kilometers of ice mean?

The findings suggest that melting glaciers on the continent could add significantly to long-term sea level rises, with severe implications for thousands of coastal towns and cities.

Your house might wash away. Or not. How close to zero can a number be and still be “a number”?

The total area of Antarctic sea ice averages about 11 million square kilometers. So that’s one part in 7,500 that melted or 0.013%. But volume is what matters and the percentage of volume that melted is even smaller. Let’s assume ice volume was lost to a depth of one kilometer (the depth of the “grounding line” where the ice-sheet meets the earth). The giant Antarctic Ice Sheet itself covers 14 million square kilometers and is two kilometers thick, so there are 29 million cubic kilometers of ice there (not counting the sea ice). The volume that melted in this breathtaking news is 0.005% of that. If this six year long trend keeps up, Antarctica will melt in 118,933 years.

Quick, build a windfarm.

The Antarctic of course was permanently fixed in all aspects prior to 1979 when the satellite program began. Hence any change at all means blame your car, or coal, or conservative voters.

But how much of this melting is man-made and how much is due to hot-magma?

In 2015, a seismic survey found there is a blob of superheated rock 60 miles below West Antarctica. Then there are the 91 (count them) new volcanoes we only discovered last year, plus who-knows-how-many we don’t even know about. Perhaps that has something to do with making the water warmer?

Follow the reasoning, either a trace gas 10 kilometers up is causing some spots of Antarctica to warm and other parts to cool, or hot magma at 1,200C is. What’s more likely?

Antarctica, Volcanoes, Melting ice sheets, Grounding line. Map.

 

I doubt we can measure Antarctic volume to three decimal places. But see the error bar point below. Maybe I’m wrong.

Antarctica is pretty big:

Who thinks up these area analogies? Let’s compare “Greater London” (or the whole UK) to Antarctica.

 

These scientists at the University of Leeds are not trying to mislead or scare you, they just aren’t good with numbers.

(Does that make you feel better or worse? These are the same people being paid to calculate how fast the ocean might rise.)

Likewise, Ben Webster might not be a one-eyed political activist pretending to be a journalist. Perhaps he just doesn’t have the internet yet. Can someone can send him an email (assuming he has one).

How do we measure where the Antarctic Ice Sheet meets the earth underwater?

In case you are curious, the grounding lines are 1km underwater and were detected by satellites. Really.

Grounding lines typically lie a kilometre or more below sea level and are inaccessible even to submersibles, so remote sensing methods for detecting them are extremely valuable.

The team were able to track the movement of Antarctica’s grounding line using European Space Agency’s CryoSat-2 across 16,000 km of the coastline. Although CryoSat-2 is designed to measure changes in the ice sheet elevation, these can be translated into horizontal motion at the grounding line using knowledge of the glacier and sea floor geometry and the Archimedes principle of buoyancy – which relates the thickness of floating ice to the height of its surface.

How big are those error bars?

According to the paper: the continent has lost 1,463 km2 ± 791 km2 of grounded-ice area.

Cryo-sat has a surface resolution of plus or minus 1.3 centimeters, which is amazingly, fantastically good. Across the full surface of the Antarctic ice sheet, that error works out to plus or minus 175 km3 – plus about the same again for the sea ice extent. So there is 400km3 of error right there. Presumably, the rest of the error is in the guesstimate of how the grounding line relates to the surface. I think we need error bars for the error bars.

______________________________

PS: Fun Tip Of the Day: How big are those nations?

The True Size Map site compares Antarctica to the UK. Check it out. It’s a neat site, great for showing just how large countries really are in a comparative way. You can pick any nation and drag and drop. Nations shrink as you move them over the equator and expand as you shift towards the poles. Show the kids. :-)

h/t Darn. I am searching for two names that I cannot find, please email me… :-(

REFERENCES

RESOURCES

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (86 votes cast)
Panic time: a tiny 0.01% of Antarctica, resting on volcanoes, melts five times faster than nothing, 9.8 out of 10 based on 86 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/yct5bcxu

172 comments to Panic time: a tiny 0.01% of Antarctica, resting on volcanoes, melts five times faster than nothing

  • #
    TdeF

    “Antarctica has lost an area of ice the size of Greater London since 2010 as warmer ocean water erodes its floating edge”

    If floating ice melts, it adds nothing to sea level.

    Then Antarctica at 14million Sq.Km is the size of South American or two Australias.

    So what’s the problem?

    262

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Yeah I remember doing the ice cube in the glass water level experiment back in Primary School…….but we didn’t have grounding Lines….or satellites…or funding…or an agenda…..

      200

    • #
      PeterS

      Actually since ice is pretty much freshwater and hence less dense, when it melts in sea water the sea level will rise but only by a very small amount. Not sure of the amount if all the floating ice melted but it won’t be catastrophic, although the cause of it, say a supervolcano would be, and in fact would be pretty much the end of the world stuff, causing plummeting world temperatures and ice forming in lots of other places. As usual the global warming alarmists/leftists only look at the tip of the ice berg (pun intended) and neglect the rest of the facts that actually trashes their argument.

      100

      • #
        Chris in Hervey Bay

        Actually Peter, that is not quite right.

        Fresh water has a specific gravity 0.9998 g/ml
        And ice has SG of 0.9168 g/ml. The reason ice floats in water.
        So, if ice melts in a given volume of water, the level will actually drop.
        Plus, if you follow through with with the school experiment, ice in a glass of water, the level of water will continue to fall as the water cools. The reverse effect we are told about why there are rising sea levels as the oceans warm.

        I’m sure this will draw some flack !

        201

        • #
          Peter C

          So, if ice melts in a given volume of water, the level will actually drop.

          Yes I think your comment should draw some flack Chris. I think that you are forgetting about Archimedes. The ICE displaces its own weight of water.

          In the ice in the glass of water experiment the glass is full to the brim and the floating ice sticks above the top. The ice has less density but greater volume. When it melts into water the volume if ice decreases and it resumes the volume of water which was originally displaced. Hence the glass remains full to the brim but does not spill over.

          130

          • #
            Chris in Hervey Bay

            No, I haven’t forgotten Archimedes principal, but you forget, a cubic Cm of Ice doesn’t make a cubic cm of water even though the mass is the same. Time for thinking cap !

            73

            • #
              Chris in Hervey Bay

              Fortunately for Archimedes, the crown in his experiment didn’t change density while it sat in the water, otherwise the experiment would have failed.

              51

            • #
              Peter C

              That is what I just said.

              60

          • #
            Leonard Lane

            Yes, without a disturbance of any kind ice (near pure water) will float on seawater because of its salt content. Thus the melted ice is less dense for the same volume.

            10

          • #

            Peter C April 5, 2018 at 8:11 pm ·

            (“So, if ice melts in a given volume of water, the level will actually drop.”)
            Yes I think your comment should draw some flack Chris. I think that you are forgetting about Archimedes. The ICE displaces its own weight of water.

            Now the great distinction of gravitational ‘weight’ of mass versus mass itself.
            Archimedes. 271BC conclusively demonstrated that Earth’s atmosphere can never express ‘weight’ (accelerative force); only the compressive force (psi)
            Why oh why do ignorant academic Climate Clowns ignore this essential component of Earth’s atmosphere?
            All the best!-will-

            31

        • #
          PeterS

          Yes when fresh water ice melts in fresh water the water level doe snot change but I was referring to the oceans and they contain sea water of higher density than fresh water. I was also referring to land ice (mostly freshwater ice) and not sea ice (salt water ice). So the density difference changes things. One thing you can’t argue against is physics and observational evidence. In summary the melting of land ice floating on the ocean will introduce a volume of water greater than that of the originally displaced sea water, hence raising the water level a little. The experiment can be conducted in the lab and is clearly evident.

          The melting of floating ice raises the ocean level
          A freshwater ice cube floats in a beaker of concentrated saltwater

          Conclusions:
          If an ice made up of pure water melts in pure water, the water level does not change.
          If an ice made up of pure water melts in salty water, the water level rises.
          If an ice made up of salty water melts in pure water, the water level falls.
          If an ice made up of salty water melts in salty water, the water level does not change.

          50

          • #
            TedM

            Peter, Ice displaces it’s own weight, not it’s own volume.

            80

            • #
              PeterS

              The way I see it is when the seawater ice melts the density of the melted water is the same as that of the ocean so the sea level does not change. However, when freshwater ice is used the density of the freshwater water is less than that of the sea water when it melts so it reduces the density of the ocean. Since the density goes down but the total mass stays the same the volume of the ocean has to increase hence the sea level rises (ever so slightly). I will do an experiment using ice cubes made from tap water placed in a tall tube containing salted water to see if I can detect the effect.

              30

              • #
                PeterS

                I have completed my experiment and it confirmed the physics explanation I detailed below. Nothing beats observational evidence. I will now repeat the experiment using tap water for the liquid as well as the ice. This will be the control. As per the physics explanation below the water level should remain the same.

                10

          • #
            Jonesy

            Concentrated salt water? Dead sea concentrated or super saturated concentrated…cold oceanic or tropical?

            10

            • #
              PeterS

              Well if one wanted to take it to extremes one could place an ice cube in a jar of honey. By Archimedes principle not much honey will need to be displaced to keep the ice afloat but after the ice has melted the level in the jar will be much higher. This is as clear a proof as one can obtain experimentally to show density of the ice does matter.

              10

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            I am just curious. Is “doe snot”, the nasal secretions of a female deer?

            40

            • #

              I am just curious. Is “doe snot”, the nasal secretions of a female deer?

              Only if she snorts in your direction (vector), else more likely the concept of ‘aint’! :-)

              11

          • #
            SebMagee

            What PeterS says is true for ice floating in water. A shelf of ice hanging from a continental shelf is not floating. This is a much more complicated problem. If one were to asume the ice sheet is rigid and thus doesn’t deform then the sea level would in fact decrease when ice bellow the sea level melts independently of the water being saltwater or fresh water (since ice floats in both).
            This would be equivalent to having only the ice that is initially underwater melt in your experiment but leaving the ice above the level remain frozen somehow hanging from the rim.

            In reality the shelf will deform and it is difficult to predict. It is somewhere between the free floating hypothesis and the rigid shelf I just explained.

            00

        • #
          PeterS

          At the end of the day thought the seal level rise if all the land and sea ice melted would be very small – probably of the order of 10 or so mm if my memory serves me right. I read it somewhere a long time ago. It’s what would cause so much of the ice to melt that would be of concern, such as a supervolcano.

          30

          • #

            At the end of the day thought the seal level rise if all the land and sea ice melted would be very small

            Indeed but however an actual ‘seal’ goes up\down, lots; wondering ‘wads wid dis frigging ice’!

            32

      • #
        TdeF

        Interesting idea. I suspect this is not right.

        I believe the density of salt water is only higher because of the weight of salt dissolved, not because the water molecules are closer together somehow. Consider you can put a lot of salt in water and it does not change in volume but it does get heavier. So when the fresh water becomes salt water again, it is denser too, measured in weight per unit volume. The one effect is that an iceberg would float higher in salt water.

        Still there is a really minute reduction in volume when you dissolve salt in water. This is a 2% reduction in volume for a saturated solution, brine at 26% salt. However normal sea water is about 3.5% salt, so expect 10% of that effect, a 0.2% change in volume.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          Having looked at the logic, there is no difference whatever from the salinity of the water, the water level cannot change when the ice melts. It does not matter about the density of the ice or the water at the start. The end result is that the ice becomes indistinguishable salt water, so working backwards it floats at exactly the level to make that come true.

          The densities do not matter. The original salt levels do not matter as long as the final density of the melted water is identical to the ocean. The density of the ice relative to the water did not matter in the first place. It is a result of Archimedes principle. As said, the only difference is that ice floats 0.2% higher in salty water.

          21

          • #
            PeterS

            Here’s the physics to show density does make a difference.

            Let the total volume of floating pure ice with density density(pureice) be V(tot) and the volume of the ice submerged under the sea water be V(sub). According to Archimedes principle, the buoyant force provided by sea water with density density(seawater) is given by:

            F(buoy) = V(sub) x density(seawater) x g

            The weight of the ice is given by W(pureice) = V(tot) x density(pureice) x g

            As the ice floats on water, the buoyant force must balance the weight of the ice. So,

            V(sub) x density(seawater) x g = V(tot) x density(pureice) x g
            V(sub) = V(tot) x density(pureice) / density(seawater) (Eq. 1)

            Let V(new) be the new volume occupied by the melted ice. After the ice melts, the density has changed but the mass hasn’t. So

            mass(pureice) = V(tot) x density(pureice)
            mass(purewater) = V(new) x density(purewater)

            So given mass(pureice) = mass(purewater),

            V(new) = V(tot) x density(pureice) / density(purewater) (Eq. 2)

            Compare Eq. 1 and 2. Since the density of pure water is less than the density of sea water, V(new) must be greater than V(sub). Hence the sea water level rises, all other things being equal.

            40

            • #
              TdeF

              But they are not equal. The water which was solid ice turns into sea water of exactly the same temperature and salinity.
              So it changes density too. This cancels out.

              11

              • #
                PeterS

                Please re-read what I explained. The ice I’m using is NOT the same as the sea water. It is pure water. You are only correct if the ice is made form the exact same water as the sea. When ice made from pure water melts in a container of salted water (and thus is more dense) the density of the whole liquid is reduced (obviously). In any case I just proved it experimentally using ice made from ta water floating in a tall narrow jar of water with a couple of teaspoons of grounded sea salt. The water level ws higher with all the ice melted.

                20

            • #
              TdeF

              Hold on, you just proved that the sea water rises when the ice block melts.

              20

              • #
                PeterS

                Only if the ice is made of water less dense than the sea water. If it’s made of more dense then the water level will fall after the ice melts. However, I don’t believe is much if any sea ice that’s more dense than the sea. Also see the post earlier regarding ice in a jar of honey. It’s a no brainer.

                20

              • #
                PeterS

                BTW, I just completed my second (control) experiment with ice made from tap water floating is the same container as before but this time with tap water instead of salted water. Once the ice melted I did not notice any change in the water level, as expected from the physics explanation.

                20

            • #
              TdeF

              PS, please try this even simpler explanation using your Equation #1 alone.

              Even forget that the sea water becomes pure ice. Just consider something floating which is magically transformed into seawater and sinks. Can you say what volume it will occupy without even knowing what it is? Yes.

              V(sub) is the original volume of the object submerged
              Vtot = the final volume of pure sea water and your equation #1 for an arbitrary object which is turned into seawater becomes

              V(sub) = V(tot) x density(something) / density(seawater)

              Now turn the something magically into seawater and it will sink such that

              V(sub) = v(tot) x 1

              The total volume now under the water exactly equals the original amount submerged. Independent of densities as long as they match at the end.

              As I wrote, the sea water density only affects the height at which ice floats, about 10% out of the water. This is slightly affected though by the removal of salt which produces an additional 0.2% expansion.

              I also have a problem with ” After the ice melts, the density has changed but the mass hasn’t”. Depends on how you look at it. You now have salt water. Of course this weighs more with heavy 3.5% dissolved salt. Does it occupy more room? No. You could keep the ice in a bag, add the salt and it would get smaller. The spacing between water molecules which actually reduces in volume slightly from fresh water, about 2% for a saturated solution, so about 0.2% for sea water. You would not notice it but the bag would be heavier.

              As I said, interesting problem.

              20

              • #
                TdeF

                Not sure about the no brainer idea.

                10

              • #
                TdeF

                Good experimental physics. Great fun.

                30

              • #
                PeterS

                Yes the problem is interesting but the physics proves what the results will be, which I have confirmed myself using a jar of salted water then repeated the experiment with a jar of tap water. The water level rose in the first case but did not in the second.

                20

              • #
                PeterS

                I have just thought of an even more challenging experiment. What would happen to the water level if the floating ice cube had a large enough bolt inside it? I would have to think about it. My guess is the water level will fall but will have to try and solve the problem to make sure, if I can.

                20

              • #
                TdeF

                PS, consider that the reason your level went up in salt water was that you diluted the salt water with fresh water and fresh water has a lower density, bigger volume than salt water. In the infinite ocean, this does not happen.

                11

              • #
                joseph

                Ok, I’m not a scientist but I’m trying to get a better understanding of things and this discussion has given me quite a challenge!

                I’m wondering if either of you have come across the work of Gerald Pollack. He’s written a book titled “The Fourth Phase of Water” in which he describes the experiments he, and his group, have carried out and what they’ve discovered.

                I’m now reading that book but my introduction to him was a presentation he made to an audience, complete with visuals. The links to the talk are below. If you have the l time I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.

                Pt. 1
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnGCMQ8TJ_g

                Pt. 2
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqHWueBp23c

                Cheers

                20

              • #
                PeterS

                TdeF, yes if all the floating ice in the world melted the rise in sea level (due to difference in density as proven by physics and my experiment) would be insignificant, assuming all other things, such as temperature, orbit of the moon, our orbit around the sun, etc. remained the same. Someone calculated the rise in sea level would be of the order of 20 mm, I think. I don’t know if the calculation is right, and I don’t really care since it would be too small to worry about whatever it is. What we should be worried about is what would cause such a meltdown. One possible cause is a massive weakening of our magnetosphere leading to much higher temperatures across the world during the day, not to mention deadly cosmic rays streaming to the surface of the earth. Not something I would like to experience because if we did we would all be dead.

                10

            • #
              Jack Miller

              I was interested in this subject before this post, here is a link that may interest you – The melting of floating ice raises the ocean level
              Peter D. Noerdlinger Kay R. Brower : https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/170/1/145/2019346

              00

      • #
        WXcycles

        Well, of course the (imaginary cagw) non-’problem’ is about the ice that’s above sea level (i.e. almost but not quite all of it) melting, such as it hasn’t for at least 4 million years, and re-defining global ‘sea’ level, and landl area.

        And who knows, maybe in another 5 my that might actually happen, and Earth can back to being its long-term geologically normal self.

        Given the current Ice Age is 5 my old, and direct human ancestors have been around about 5my, it’s more likely that humans caused the big icey, and not the big melty wet spot.

        51

    • #

      I just can’t believe the number of people who look at me strangely whenever I mention Archimedes Principle.

      It’s that look, you know, with the look off to the left and up slightly, trying to remember where they know that from.

      Even after being reminded, they still ask me to explain it, and some have actually asked me if it was really true.

      Learn it at High School, and immediately after the exam, forget you even heard of it.

      Equate that to melting SEA ice and people still can’t believe it.

      I have even had some tell me that it’s just not true.

      Tony.

      150

      • #
        Graham Richards

        I would imagine that most are puzzled as they’ve not heard of that particular school & have never heard of the principal or their water problems!

        30

      • #
        TedM

        That’s because they just knew it Tony. They didn’t actually understand it. The two are not the same.

        30

      • #
        TedM

        And I should add I share your frustration.

        30

      • #
        toorightmate

        But Tony,
        The sea is rising and the planet is rapidly heating and the polar bears are dying and the glaciers are melting and there will never be any snow BECAUSE
        the ABC and Fairfax said so
        AND
        it’s all because of CO2
        BECAUSE
        the ABC and Fairfax said so.

        20

      • #
        PeterS

        Tony, I get the same and sometimes more weird looks whenever I talk about physics in general, and in particular astrophysics. I do have the advantage of being a trained physicist (PhD and all) but these days it’s understandable it doesn’t count for much.

        50

        • #
          toorightmate

          PeterS,
          With those measly qualifications, how do you expect to compete with a political scientist in the climate debate?

          30

          • #
            PeterS

            Simple – I don’t bother anymore because about 15 years ago I debated a scientist in the US who believed in the CAGW crap. It was a total waste of time. Never again. It was like talking to a brick wall, perhaps worse. I get more sense talking to a rodent.

            40

      • #
        sophocles

        Students seem to run a mental whiteboard (the older ones a blackboard) and the very new or most recent ones an LED/LCD screen of variable resolution.
        Everything they learn this year, is entered onto/into that board/screen.
        When they run out of room (some do) some stuff is erased to make way for newer stuff. Or it’s erased in anticipation of the space being re-used by newer stuff without it actually happening. Whatever, it’s still gone.

        The start of the next, or the end of the present, academic year is a magical time: that’s when that mental board—white or black—is erased. If it’s an LED/LCD screen, it’s reset.

        Any reference to something they learnt last year is Not Fair, because it’s no longer there.
        The worst offenders are Engineering Students. They use Memory Solvent (ethyl alcohol) in quantity to wash those boards clean and prepare them for the new academic year and their screen reset is a power one.

        30

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Archimedes? Who pays attention to dead old white men anymore? Science, like daydreams and nightmares, is all a matter of the mind these days. The idea that there are absolutes has worn itself out and been replaced with…I can’t even think of a good word for it; garbage maybe.

        But the real laugh to me is this. Antarctica is a frozen wasteland of no use to anyone. A few birds and other animals make parts of it near the ocean their home. Only researchers ever go there. They never stay and establish homes and bring their families along. The place is of no good use to anyone except to try to scare the world into believing we have a terrible problem.

        So some of it is melting. Who will miss it? No one will ever notice what melts except for being told it’s a great big problem and we need to do what they say or else.

        Maybe it’s only use is to keep the world right side up because the great mass of Antarctica is at the bottom. I can think of no other use for the place. Yet it generates more verbal and political heat than the volcanoes that are melting some of it. Honestly, the place is a big political football and a mole hill made into a mountain for the sake of a dishonest agenda.

        30

    • #
      soldier

      There is no problem (as usual).
      To illustrate how puny mankind’s activities are in the overall scheme of things lets ask one simple question:
      If all thee known reserves of fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas, etc) were burnt all at once and the resulting heat energy directed onto the Antarctic ice cap, how much of would melt?
      The answer is 0.3% or 1/336th portion of the total ice. (calculations provided if required)
      Of course if we were silly enough to do this we would have no energy left to keep warm, cook, run industry etc.

      60

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Excuse me guys, but Antarctica happens to be volcanic, Erebus being the most well known.

      Now, I seem to remember that, in a contest between volcanic ejecta and packed sea ice, or any other ice for that matter, the volcano should be odds on favorite to win.

      This appears to be another example of not letting the facts get in the way of a very scary story.

      120

      • #
        PeterS

        Facts? The left and the elite at high levels don’t care about facts. They only deal with propaganda, hoaxes and scams. Facts to them are an annoyance. If they had their way they would flush down all facts (and history) down memory holes as in the Novel 1984.

        30

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Facts are apparently obsolete. No one cares for the facts anymore. Try to put a provable fact in front of someone and you’ll end up being ridiculed for making the effort.

        10

  • #

    And all that Antarctic sea ice gained in the post ’79 satellite obs period, while the Arctic was shedding some? Or do sats start fibbing once over the south pole, to resume telling the truth once above the north?

    As for that cordillera-looking thing that looks like it wants to connect with the South American cordillera: if it looks like a cordillera, and walks like a cordillera, and quacks like a cordillera, and has massive subglacial ash sheets like a cordillera, and has active volcanism like a cordillera…

    It’s a cordillera!

    141

    • #
      TdeF

      There was massive gain reported in the centre, which is a desert. The bits around the edges do not matter.
      The average height of Antarctica is 2500 metres (8000) feet.
      The average temperature in summer is -25C
      In winter -50C.
      So what’s 1 degree C?

      So of course the alarmists worry about the edges which keep breaking away all the time as the ice is piled in the centre.

      It’s not just area, its volume. So what’s a tiny bit of floating ice against the amount of ice the size of South America at an average thickness of 8,000′? It’s an entire ocean on land, frozen and likely to stay that way even if Prof Turkey and his Ship of Fools think it is all melting.

      150

      • #
        TdeF

        What that means is that when the iceberg melts, it actually takes up less room by about 0.2% but there is more fresh water out of the ocean in the first place because of the higher density of salt water, so that would produce a reverse effect, increasing volume slightly.
        As I said, interesting. Ice cubes in 3.5% salt water.

        60

      • #
        sophocles

        The whole of Antarctica is a desert with a population of around 1000 (that’s humans, not penguins! And note the absence of Polar Bears.)
        Population Density of 1 person per 14,000 sq kms.

        That’s why the annual “ozone hole” is so scary and has to be tracked so assiduously. (asininely?). It’s because of all the skin cancers it could cause if it got away. (So far ~0 skin cancers have been caused, probably because it’s been so well tracked … )

        30

    • #

      Musings on cordilleras and po-mo-cli-sci.

      ‘More things in heaven and journey to
      the center of the earth, Horatio,
      than mann (et al)ever dreameth of.
      ‘Nay, neigh,’ sayeth cli-sci-philosopher
      -kings,’keep it simple for serfs.
      Cee-oh-too-kills!… Send more money
      to Guvuhmint ‘n Goldman Sachs Elites
      (euros to Brussels-men) and we will
      fix it for you, tee-hee.

      80

      • #

        There once was a prof name of Turney
        Embarked on an Antarctic journey.
        Got south in a trice
        But forgot about ice
        And was carted back home on a gurney.

        130

  • #
    el gordo

    The melting must be from volcanic upwelling and not AGW.

    ‘The Southern Ocean featured some remarkable changes during the recent decades. For example, large parts of the Southern Ocean, despite rapidly rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, depicted a surface cooling since the 1970s ….’

    Mojib Latif et al
    2017

    70

    • #
      Peter C

      I agree el gordo,

      Jo says:

      Follow the reasoning, either a trace gas 10 kilometers up is causing some spots of Antarctica to warm and other parts to cool, or hot magma at 1,200C is. What’s more likely?

      It is not even a matter of likely. Long term temperature records at the Australian Antarctic bases show No Warming.

      Kenskingdom says there is no correlation between CO2 levels measured at Cape Grim (Tasmania) and Antarctic temperatures.

      If that is not enough to kill off the CO2 greenhouse effect theory forever, it should be. Jo calls it a Zombie theory (dead but still walking).

      92

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        But Peter C: belief in zombies is rife as the gullible and the general public revert to medieval superstition.

        40

        • #
          PeterS

          Not just any people but many scientists in particular have reverted to pseudo-science or science fiction as their foundation for searching the “truth” now that the have discarded the age old scientific method. So what chance is there for ordinary people with little or no scientific training to tell the difference between true science and fake science? No chance at all I’m afraid.

          60

          • #
            el gordo

            There is a chance that the ABC could move towards ‘balance’ in their reporting, most likely forced by a debate over coal usage.

            20

  • #
    Binny

    First thought on seeing that headline ‘What’s normal, and how was it measured?’
    Political rule of thumb, reduce an amount by expressing it as a percentage… increase it by using total amounts.

    70

  • #
    John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia

    Thank goodness I read on, I was about to call the removalists to move to the mountains.

    40

  • #
    Ian Hill

    It was the size of Hobart yesterday, now Greater London. What will it be tomorrow?

    50

    • #
      sophocles

      London uses a lot of land area. It’s a big city, with Greater London covering a land area of 1573 sq kms. It’s the biggest city on this little island called Great Britain. (Great Britain = England, Scotland and Wales). Britain has a land area of 209,331sq km including its islands[Wikipedia].

      New Zealand has a land area of 268,021 sq.kms also including all the itty bitty squitty little islands. Auckland is New Zealand’s largest city holding a population of around 1.5 million and covering a land area of 1013sq kms.

      Leeds covers about 1038 sq km.

      All three are Tiny, certainly relative to Antarctica.

      It seems the English natives are used to thinking of their cities as Large. Really? I looked up Auckland City. It may be the largest city in a small country but as you can see above … same size as Leeds and neither is a lot smaller than Greater London. So I looked up Greater Auckland: oops: From the Brynderwyn Hills in the North to the Bombay Hills in the South: 4894 sq kms. (There’s a lot of unimproved land in there …) so I kept looking in Wikipedia: (I was there anyway, so it was easy)

      Metropolitan areas for Australian major cities. (Newcastle and Townsville didn’t rate down in just three figures …)
      Sydney: 12,368 sq km.
      Perth: 6,417.9 sq km.
      Melbourne: 9,992 sq km.
      Brisbane: 15,842 sq km.
      Adelaide: 3,257 sq km
      Darwin: 112 sq km.
      and even New York City: 1,213 sq km.

      Now I know why the Mini was so popular in England. For all those one-way lanes, one could paint a white line down the middle and it became a two-way road for two Minis while staying one way only for your average Jaguar/Vauxhall/Wolsley.

      Antarctica is a continent. A continent is the next step up from an island and things don’t get bigger than that. (Planet?) One thing for sure: it’s bigger than an island. Antarctica has an area of 14,000,000 sq km. Hello, that’s somewhere around 52 New Zealands or 66 Britains.

      I’ll see your 52 New Zealands and raise you 66 Great Britains! :-)

      I think I can understand the kiddies-with-calculators at Leeds University having their problems with proportion. The Urbanised extent of Auckland City occupies 1,013sq km. and you can walk across it (long axis is North/South) in a day (that’s 24 hrs, not sunrise to sunset!). :-) . Maybe those kiddies at Leeds University need to get outside more and look around themselves. If they’re the ones computing Sea Level Rise, then I can understand why I haven’t seen any sea level rise in Auckland’s Harbour in the 6 decades (+ a bit) I’ve lived here.

      Take away their calculators and give them a slide rule, pencil and eraser plus paper. They’ve got to take more care with those to get a meaningful answer.

      I said “meaningful” didn’t I? What’s the bet they would try to interpolate a slide rule to three decimal places …? sigh.

      70

      • #
        Greg In NZ

        sophocles – as a 6th decade survivor of d’Auckland as well (thankfully I spent my 20s and 30s overseas) I can vouch the sea level in the Hauraki Gulf is exactly the same as when I was a kid splashing around in it back in the 1960s and 70s. The volcanic lava reef I still occasionally surf over (only happens once in a blue moon or when an ex-cyclone pushes swell down from the north-east, like today thanks to ex-Cyclone Josie) breaks/peels/works in the exact same fashion as it has for, well, ages. Sand comes and sand goes, yet high tide and low tide are – I’m shocked! – still the same (apart from king tides and other lunar/atmospheric effects).

        As for ice cubes the size of a) Hobart b) Greater London c) Wales d) Luxembourg – joy! – I’ll bring the whisky (and a bottle of gin for laughs). Oh, and snow to low levels next week in the South Island and on Ruapehu too. Meh, it’s “only” weather, as they say.

        80

        • #
          sophocles

          The Leeds Laddies have problems with Orders of Magnitude: One, Two, BIG/HUGE/ENORMOUS/GIGANTIC, boggle boggle. That’s a definite symptom of people who don’t know how to use calculators. With slide rules, the Orders of Magnitude are tracked on paper. I guess Innumerates would still have trouble. :-) ( 1 + 1 = um 3!)
          Big Cities: only a thousand (OoM = 3) sq kms. Not so big as whole continents like Antarctica, at 14,000.000 (OoM = 6). Big difference.

          The Aussies are having the same problem with their sea levels: tide marks cut into rocks back in the days of the convict camps (c. 1850s or earlier) by the convicts are still showing the same sea levels … unless the rocks go up and down with the tides. I’ll have another whisky while I think about that …

          Yeah, Greg. let’s not put a decent supply of ice cubes to waste. I’ll trot along with a couple of bottles, too. Just don’t cut the yellow ice :-) y’hear?. (Save that for the Greenies …)

          20

      • #
        toorightmate

        The standard US unit of length AND area is the “football field”.

        40

    • #
      Sceptical Sam

      t was the size of Hobart yesterday, now Greater London. What will it be tomorrow?

      “First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.”

      That’s been their message for the last 30 years.

      They’re guided by a signal in their heaven.

      Twenty years of boredom!

      20

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    “Antarctica has lost an area of ice the size of Greater London”. It sounds like the author has been following the BBC. “Greater London” is one of the many “scientific” units loved by the BBC. For area they also use “Wales” and “football pitch”, but there are many more. For volume they use “Olympic swimming pool” and “Wembley Stadium”. The BBC does not do real science.

    110

    • #
      Saighdear

      Yes Phillip, I quite agree! Just how scientific is that ? – in a Period when we are trying to encourage more Scientists and Engineers… we measure rainfall in mm – by the 10′s when eg 17 or 37mm means nothing whereas 1/2″ or 2″ means a more realistic guestimated value. I mean, who in their right mind estimates rainfall to be some precise number of millimeters? Likewise the Areas, How far can ANYONE see from their regular standpoint? – not very far on flat ground at sea-level, and high up in Wales, only as far as the Mountain peaks around you? ( like my native Scotland ). Huh – and as for Swimming pools or Stadia, I don’t go there – so I don’t know – AND do they include the seating areas too? OH! and the we have the DOUGHBALLS – or duffballs who go on about kill-ometers – phizzat? or f’azat ? think it is something to do with non Euro-orientated Brits learning metrication ( P’EU-trification :-) ) were taught what a Metre was as SI unit, and prefix ‘K’ made 1000.= kilo therefore kilo metre – simplz. .Oooohhhh!

      61

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Of course they don’t do science. Science requires numeracy. They are journalists, which only needs a modicum of literacy; emphasis being on the word “modicum”.

      That should get the scribblers reaching for the Shorter Oxford.

      40

  • #
    Clint

    The NZ Leftist coalition of Losers will be delighted. This is the kind of stuff that they peddle to justify their carbon neutral diktat and adherence to the Paris Discord, and TPP(-US), Leftist shorthand for the eco-marxist globalist success of orchestrated economic collapse and national suicide, and tragically, like all Leftist conflagrations, it augers the relentless inevitability of mounds of corpses, already hinted at by the exploding heads of school children, or easy reference to coal trains, or recurrent reference to executing those who commit climatism denial. I pray not. But the writing is on the wall.

    70

  • #
    Wayne Job

    There does seem in history to be a correlation between a sombullent sun and an increase in volcanic activity. This has happened before and a good course of study would be why as the sun seems to have some tricks up its sleeve that we know nothing about.

    This period of subdued activity in the past has caused some serious eruptions and to me it is not surprising that a line of volcanoes are active, as those in South America are also awake. Mayhaps the sun has more outpourings of energy of a different kind than we mere mortals have a handle on.

    80

  • #
    Roger Gower

    Slightly off topic – but relevant I think. This report hasn’t received any MSM coverage in NZ https://www.nzcpr.com/is-new-zealand-exempt-from-climate-change/

    30

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      This report hasn’t received any MSM coverage in NZ

      And I doubt that it will, either. The primary maxim of the press is, “Never let the facts interfere with a good story”.

      But Barry Brill is a tenacious guy, and NZCPR has a track record for being right. They do their research.

      Research is something the media hacks cannot do. So they trot off to talk to the PR wonks for the Politicians, who don’t have a clue either.

      So they come up with statements like, “We have done our own internal opinion poll, and the majority of people believe that climate change is happening, so there is our proof – besides, it is current Government Policy, that aligns with a similar position that we inherited from the previous Government.” Or words to that effect.

      30

  • #
    Saighdear

    Slightly off- Topic, BUT “Antarctica has lost an area of ice the size of Greater London since 2010″ – Should we be worried? I mean that LAND AREA as big as that is lost to Conurbations regularly ( I don’t bother with figures – they don’t put food on my plate ) SO what’s the big deal when Agric Land is wasted for housing and Industrial development, yet we cry out for greater food production ( Feed the starving), but without GM or application of Chemicals ( ie be Organic). Definitely agree that all this global warming / climate change & the Organic movement area ll emanating from the SAME Pigsty, nay Cesspit ( sorry piggies ).

    61

  • #
    WXcycles

    Your snark is quite unrivalled Jo.

    I stand in awe.

    70

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Notice the Alarmists aren’t selling off their waterfront properties so no need to panic .

    50

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I have some waterfront properties for sale, at very reasonable prices. Coincidentally, they happen to be placed in a prime locations on the Antartic water front.

      20

      • #
        sophocles

        Trouble with that location, Rereke, is the difficulty in determining what is waterfrontage and what is a glacier snout.
        I guess if it’s retreating it must be glacier :-)

        20

  • #
    Mark M

    March 14, 2018, This tweet from the British Antarctic Survey sums up the trip:

    “Science station
    Work is over
    too much ice”

    https://twitter.com/dr_will_reid/status/973909751821225984

    70

  • #
    A C Osborn

    To see how bad it “really is”, take a trip over to Robert Scribbler’s site.
    It is all doom gloom and metres of sea level rise.
    There is not a single dissenting post, they are all “believers” spiralling down to borderline madness.

    https://robertscribbler.com/2018/04/04/rapid-sea-level-rise-possible-as-ocean-floods-into-antarctica-at-up-to-400-meters-per-year/

    30

    • #
      rapscallion

      I posted this there

      “What a load of utter drivel. Try looking at the 90 or so volcanoes that sit where all your red arrows are. I can’t believe that you really think sea level will rise 400 metres a year! Really ?

      rapscallion / April 5, 2018
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.

      What’s the betting it will be “moderated”?

      Anybody want to place any bets?

      80

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        Yep. I’m a betting man.

        I’ll take it.

        I bet you that it doesn’t get published. 10/1 on.

        50

        • #
          rapscallion

          LOL – How right you are – it wasn’t published! Quelle surprise. I mean, who knew?

          30

          • #
            sophocles

            You’re right: who could possibly have known?

            Maybe it wasn’t sycophantic enough? I mean that opening sentence was straight into it :-) .

            00

    • #
      Lionell Griffith

      The magic of “up to”. Up to 400 meters per year is anything from totally evaporated to 400 meters increase per year. I suggest follow the prime directive in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy: “Don’t Panic.” At least not on the bases of that statement.

      50

      • #
        sophocles

        Right you are, sah!
        Not panicking, sah!

        10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Don’t panic? Sure we should panic. All the experts say we should. The world will soon end if we don’t.

        And they never notice that after every prediction of terminal disaster the predicted end of the world not only didn’t happen but nothing happened.

        If I was making dire predictions and they didn’t come true I would get the obvious message and go back to my day job before I got fired for terminal stupidity.

        If it wasn’t for a chance to vent my frustration and dislike for these climate change disaster people on this blog I would have to find something more useful to do. And then I’d soon need a psychologist to help me keep my grip on reality.

        20

  • #
    Mark M

    Turns out emitting a trace gas (CO2) is a truly lousy way of turning oceans acidic and killing antarctic spiders and worms …

    A writhing mass of spiders and worms found on the open sea floor of the Prince Gustav Channel #Antarctica; did these species live there before the ice shelf collapsed 23 years ago?

    https://twitter.com/AntarcticReport/status/970966067106398208

    40

  • #
    Bruce

    Jo has made a mistake assuming volcanoes creates melting sea ice. Maybe it’s other way around and that melting sea ice creates volcanoes?

    Just saying.

    53

  • #
    Paul

    So many people are worried about the ice loss at sea level, yet forget (or do not know) that snow continues to fall on the Antarctic replacing the loss or adds even more. The more that fall the more that will come of the base of the glaciers.

    91

  • #
    pat

    more worthless CAGW “research”, which provides cover for other worthless CAGW stuff, such as:

    4 Apr: UK Times: The unwinnable £10m energy prize Sturgeon refuses to ditch
    by Daniel Sanderson
    Nicola Sturgeon ignored calls from advisers to abandon a £10 million initiative to boost renewable energy and instead told officials to “make it work” despite warnings of continued failure.
    Alex Salmond, her predecessor as first minister, launched the Saltire prize in 2008, offering the cash to any company that could generate a commercial scale of electrical output from wave or tidal power for at least two years in Scottish waters.

    Imposing a seven-year deadline — later extended by two years — Mr Salmond said the award was the largest of its kind in the world and described Scotland as potentially “the Saudi Arabia of tidal power” because of its strong tides and coastal currents.
    However, documents seen by The Times show that the expert committee overseeing the challenge concluded in March 2014 – more than three years ahead of the final deadline – that it could not be met. The members of the committee recommended to ministers that the prize should be suspended, in light of difficulties facing the industry. A review by Scottish Renewables, the industry body, said that the award had “failed to attract an adequate number of contenders”…
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/the-unwinnable-10m-energy-prize-sturgeon-refuses-to-ditch-lnlpxgjjf

    4 Apr: UK Times Leader: Prize Flop
    The £10 million award for marine renewable energy is a PR stunt gone wrong
    Launching the Saltire prize in 2008, Alex Salmond bragged that this £10 million award for marine renewable energy demonstrated that “Scotland is a place to watch, a nation with ambition, a country determined to maximise our economic performance”. The prize was nothing less than “a call to action to scientists around the world to help bring the power of the seas around Scotland . . . that much sooner”. Not that the benefits of this spur to innovation would be limited to Scotland. No, the Saltire prize would be “a challenge that will push the frontiers of renewable energy technology . . . across the world”.
    A decade later, it remains unclaimed. Government documents seen by this newspaper reveal that officials within the department of…
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/prize-flop-0p3kp59dl

    20

    • #
      pat

      more worthless CAGW stuff:

      4 Apr: BBC: Cornwall Wave Hub uses more electricity than it produces
      A £42m wave energy facility has used more electricity than it has produced since it was launched eight years ago.
      Wave Hub, an undersea “socket” located off Hayle in Cornwall, is meant to transfer electricity from wave energy producers to the National Grid.
      So far no firms have used the facility for that purpose and it has been dubbed an “energy sinkhole”.

      ***But owner Cornwall Council said Wave Hub was part of a local marine sector that continues to “grow and thrive”.

      A 10-mile (16km) undersea cable linking Wave Hub to the shore is always live, but no power has been transferred through it.
      Wave Hub’s managing director Claire Gibson said keeping the cable live was “good practice” and helped maintenance, but she declined to comment on how much it cost to keep the power on…

      Seatricity’s former managing director Andy Bristow said “expensive mistakes” at Wave Hub had created a “white elephant”.
      He said: “We believe there is a future for wave energy but Wave Hub means the public’s perception is that wave energy is a costly mistake.”
      He described the project as an “energy sinkhole” and said money spent on Wave Hub would have been better used to help small companies develop their ideas.
      “For a fraction of the cost we could have had a credible wave energy business but unfortunately the whole industry has been tainted by expensive public funding,” he said.

      Wave Hub, forecast to be a “world class facility”, was financed by the South West of England Regional Development Agency (£12.5m), the European Regional Development Fund Convergence Programme (£20m) and the UK Government (£9.5m).
      It was claimed it could generate £76m over 25 years for the regional economy.

      Australian firm Carnegie was given £9.6m from the European Regional Development Fund to support the development of commercial wave energy, but it is the latest company to decide against using Wave Hub.
      Ocean Prospect, Ocean Power Technologies, Fred Olsen, Ocean Energy and Fortum all went elsewhere after Wave Hub said they were coming onboard.
      Hayle councillor John Pollard said the facility was designed as a test bed for devices and “not to be an electricity producer”.
      Last week, Wave Hub said the wave energy business was “unfortunately taking longer to develop” than anticipated.
      http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-43588728

      PICS: 4 Apr: CornwallLive: £40m Wave Hub scheme accused of being flawed and of being in the wrong place
      The pioneering renewable energy scheme near Hayle has been branded a white elephant by Seatricity
      By Olivier Vergnault
      Andrew Bristow, the boss of Seatricity believes Wave Hub, which has cost £42m in UK and EU tax payers’ money but has not produced a single kW of electricity in eight years , is conceptually flawed and located in the wrong place and has proved a costly white elephant which has deterred others from venturing into the marine renewable energy sector…

      Despite costing £42 million, Wave Hub scheme, which was transferred to Cornwall Council last year, has not produced a single kiloWatt of electricity…
      Wave Hub, an undersea electrical socket installed to test wave energy machines with capacity to produce 48MW has been operating for six years.
      Seatricity had hoped to plug in an array of devices which could have generated some 10MW of electricity…

      On its website, the company lauded its Wave Energy Convertor – the Oceanus – as the first economically viable, practical and reliable wave energy plant deployed in the UK, adding that ‘competitors have come and gone but Seatricity’s Oceanus devices have survived the test of time’.
      However Seatricity’s device has since been mothballed and sits rusting away on Falmouth docks after the company’s private investors ran out of patience and refused to pump any more cash into the project.
      He added: “Some £9.6m was granted to a competitor Carnegie who have since gone back to Australia…

      “But I fear some unwise investment has been made which has tarnished the industry as a whole. I don’t think the government policy has helped with the premature termination of subsidies to renewable energy has not helped.
      “It has been influenced by the prevalence of wind energy at the expense of other renewable energies.”…

      Wave Hub is an EU and UK funded project, which was lauded as the future of clean renewable energy production, but it has yet to pump any power to the National Grid.
      It means that anyone with solar panels on their roofs has produced more electricity than Wave Hub…

      American company, Gwave, which is also linked to the Cornish site with a monster device the size of a Boeing 747 jumbo jet that pitches from side to side in the waves creating power through the rolling movement, was due to plug into Wave Hub this summer.
      The firm has now said it could be a further two years before it comes to Cornwall…
      https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/boss-40m-wave-hub-device-1415685

      30

      • #
        Mary E

        Pat – I don’t know how often you are told this, but I really appreciate all the work and time you devote to sharing these articles. I’ve learned much here and what you post is part of that.

        Thank you

        00

  • #
    Don Gaddes

    Water locked up as ice was estimated at circa 25 million kilometres cubed in 1982. It is currently estimated at circa 33 million kilometres cubed.
    Sea-ice forms from the ‘bottom up’. Glacial-ice is a result of precipitation,(Snow).
    If I was an Ice Shelf extending out from a shoreline, into a hostile ocean – at some point,(as my volume increased,) I would feel a strong urge to break off (under my own weight), and float away.
    I noticed the current scaremongering on a ‘melting Antarctic’ in Attenborough’s Blue Planet II.
    A greater concern should be the ABC’s push to promote Brian Cox as the ‘new David Attenborough’.

    111

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      Thanks Don,
      I’m watching the ABC less these days, a lot less, but an appearance by Cox is suuficient to end that session.
      Cheers,
      Dave B

      60

    • #
      WXcycles

      The Commies ‘with-Western-attributes’, are always looking for a new smarmy Hysteria-Clown, with which to attack Western Civilisation, via their BS of mass-destruction format.

      But you’ll never see the Western commie going after China’s “Socialism with Chinese Attributes”, for what they’ve done to the former coral reefs of the South China Sea.

      Going after China on the facts would be like attacking their ideal society, a repressed, corrupt, draconian, fake, hollow, even deeper in debt, and addicted to creating an endless parade of major white elephant projects, and environmental destruction on an epic scale, where they send an invoice to a familly for the cost of the bullet they use to execute your protesting relatives.

      What’s not to like?

      No, they only go after Australia with the coral catastophism, because only the Federal or Queensland Government is vapid and fake enough to give them a slice of $300 million for reef ‘research’, to save it, from nothing. And even more, to “manage the reef”.

      China isn’t that stupid, they just spend several hundred billion destroying every reef, in international waters, that they can reach.

      And where were ABC’s, BBC’s, CBC’s Hysteria-Clowns while that was happening, or since?

      Swanning about in Antarctica counting penguin droppings, and diving on the Great Barrier Reef, and sucking up hydrocarbons, while pushing-out their soup of rank hypocracy, and dropping sea shells into fish tanks filled with sulphuric acid … to save the world!

      The Hysteria-Clown is dead!

      Long live the new Hysteria-Clown!

      Now in 4K-HD Supra-Stupid format!

      And you just won’t believe how stupid this format can get.

      70

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘What’s not to like?’

        They have stopped the traditional practice of charging parents for the bullet and presumably mass executions are no longer fashionable.

        Of course Beijing may simply be hiding it from international attention, but more likely they are adopting western ways and building more prisons.

        10

      • #
        sophocles

        China isn’t that stupid, they just spend several hundred billion destroying every reef, in international waters, that they can reach.

        Why bother?
        Over the last 3 million years, the GBR has been killed off some 60 times—by cold temperatures. Every time an interstadial has appeared, with its warm temperatures and higher sea levels, the GBR has regrown. Just leave Nature to it.
        Fans and Sunscreens are not worth it.

        20

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      With all that cubed ice you refer to, we are going to need a tanker of gin, and truck loads of tonic.

      40

      • #
        Annie

        What about the limes or lemons or bitters for pink gin? Hey?

        21

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          That ice already has two kinds of gin in great abundance, hydro-gin and oxy-gin and the doom and gloom crowd has been drinking far too much of it. Should we do the same? ;-)

          30

  • #
    Stacey

    Thanks for the link to the map comparison site.

    The uk fits into Hudson Bay?

    21

  • #
    dinn, rob

    Since heating and cooling happen every day
    since geology is yet under way
    since fahion is just down the street
    what can I say? do your thing
    you will anyway

    30

  • #
    dinn, rob

    fashion of course

    30

  • #
    Ruairi

    Alarmists would think it no harm,
    To raise Antarctic ice-melt alarm,
    More man-made-heat panic,
    Likely suboceanic,
    Just to build yet another wind farm.

    130

  • #
    RAH

    Well they can harp about melting ice and where the “grounding lines” are all they want as they have been for decades and it won’t make a damned bit of difference to the common Joe unless it shows up as significant sea level rise. And I’m not talking about satellite sea level measurements. It only counts for anything if it effects the shore lines and thus significant numbers of people. For half of my 62 year adult life now they have been telling me that we’re in for real trouble from rising sea levels and there are no signs that it is happening or about to happen. So arguing about where the “grounding lines” are is about as important to me as well, uh, gee I can’t think of anything less important! Thus when faced with these kinds of articles I just ask: Where is the water? Where is the significant increase in the rate of SLR as measured by tide gauges?

    50

    • #
      Peter C

      Port Phillip Bay, Victoria is a good site to look at sea level rise. The bay is large and shallow with a narrow entrance so the water level at the top of the bay hardly changes with the tides. The northern and southeastern shores are very flat and only a few feet above the water (eg Point Cook, Mordialloc).

      Hence any sea level rise should inundate those areas.

      A map of the bay dated 1835, looks just the same as the size and shape of the bay today. So what happened to the sea level rise?
      http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks13/1301991h.html

      As for tide gauges, the Port Authority has moved the gauges over the years and forgot to do any overlap measurements. I suppose it was not important then.

      40

    • #
      sophocles

      RAH:
      Just watch Battery Point in New York. If it looks like going under, it’s time to panic and move. It’s water level hasn’t moved since people started on this meme over 30 years ago, and it probably won’t in our remaining life times. I don’t see any need to worry.

      Warming in Antarctica is a silly idea which pops up every three or four years with great histrionics and credibility straining. The Southern Hemisphere hasn’t warmed like the Northern Hemisphere (about 0.2 ° and spotty at that) but all the Northern Hemisphere scientists all go twitty about every 0.1° in their “measurements.”

      The coast line with the red arrows is the volcanic hot “spot” along the outside edge of the Antarctic tectonic plate where the Pacific Plate subducts under it. It’s the “volcano line.” About four or so years ago, researchers from the University of Texas discovered an active volcano under the Thwaites Glacier. It’s since been doing some melting, as you would expect.

      This meme pops up every three or four years. The fresh “discovery” of volcanic action puts it back to sleep again. Until then, many, varied and twisty are the theories about how “warm water” is getting in to do the melting. Twits. The Southern Ocean has been cooling. We know this because every winter (Southern Hemisphere winter is Northern Hemisphere summer!) the pack ice around Antarctica has, on average, been a larger extent decade on decade, indicating the Southern Ocean is cooling, not warming.

      But as Volcanic Action is never suspected by the oh so sloppy Northern Hemisphere sky-ent-ists, we get a lot of oh-oh-oh and hand-waving until someone does trip over it and it all goes quiet again.

      The Warmists are talking about warming out to 2100. It’s quite possibly going to be a repeat of the Little Ice Age out to about 2300 but we’ll see.

      30

      • #
        RAH

        That part of NY is rising due to Glacial rebound. Other parts of the East Coast are subsiding. But overall there are no indications of any sustained increase in the rate of SLR. How can there be with the Greenland Ice Sheet and most of the Antarctic Ice Sheet each showing increases in their mass? Thermal expansion is a transient as the warmest are about to find out in the next decade I suspect. Their excuses for the lack of sustained increase in the rate of SLR are as hilarious as their excuses were for the pause.

        10

  • #
    Robber

    Stop press. Great editorial by Andrew Bolt.
    “Never in my life have I seen our politicians collectively do to this country something as suicidally stupid as what they’re now doing to our electricity system. And they mask it with sheer bull.”

    130

    • #
      PeterS

      I would modify the script somewhat and say yes they are all stupid (and fools) and are ignorant of the facts but if scientists presented them truthfully most would change their minds. However, the rest, in particular the extreme left don’t care about the facts and want to destroy our Western way of life simply because they hate it with a vengeance. Then there are a few who do know the facts but keep quiet and say nothing to avoid rocking the boat. Many scientists fit into that category, which makes them much worse than stupid. They belong behind bars for allowing the biggest scam of all time to continue for so long.

      70

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Peter,

        … the extreme left don’t care about the facts and want to destroy our Western way of life simply because they hate it with a vengeance.

        That is not what the evidence implies. The extreme left want to raise the Western way of life to a new level of intellectualism for their own benefit.

        They simply want to direct proceedings, so as to align society with there cerebral views. Using a phrase coined by Hilary Clinton, they don’t want “the deplorables” to be seen or heard, as long as they continue to maintain the American economy, in a manner that will support a new American aristocracy.

        31

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          RW,

          I could have gone all day quite happily without any reminder of Queen Bee Hillary. But now that you mention her, let’s remember that she is the Queen Bee, the anointed one and respectfully bow down before her, indeed, we should grovel at her feet. And if you don’t believe me, just ask her.

          I have never seen her like in all the years I’ve been a watcher of politics. And for some reason a large part of my beloved country sucks up every word she says like it was a revelation straight from god.

          It would be comical if it wasn’t so pathetic. She went from First Lady of the United States to being the worlds worst sore loser in just the few years between husband Bill’s election and now. And she apparently doesn’t realize what she’s done to herself.

          10

    • #
      Peter C

      Thank God for BoltA.

      He speaks the truth and calls out this stupidity. And a lot of people read his blog and listen to his show.

      40

      • #
        PeterS

        The fact that the rest of the MSM are anything from mildly disinterested to aggressively against Bolt’s opinions is a sad indictment of Australia as a whole. There is definitely a sort of sickness or mental disease that’s rampant in our established media. Some would say it’s deliberate; and I would agree in a few cases, such as the extreme left who have a definite and deliberate goal to destroy our Western way of life simply because they hate it so much. Sad that so many people are too blind to see it that way.

        30

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Heard a prominent Lib pollie saying we cannot expect cheap power from new coal burners because the cost of new ones will be much higher, and the returns much less. He ommitted the vital piece that the returns will be less because of the government’s RET and incentives to favour renewables. If the pollie had been a company, a false advertising claim would likely succeed in court. Geoff

        30

  • #
    robert rosicka

    OT but I’m sure I just heard that AGL refuse to sell Liddell because someone has to do something to tackle deadly climate change .

    50

    • #
      PeterS

      The real reason is they don’t want composition. It’s a business decision to keep their shareholders happy and maximum their profits. This is why capitalism has its downside too but it’s still far better than the alternative. The solution is simple; scrap the RETS and subsidies to renewables and create a level playing field. Of course it will never happen with leaders like Turnbull and Shorten.

      70

  • #
    robert rosicka

    More propaganda from the Climatariat Politburo, the claims are simply outrageous.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-04-06/solar-power-most-backed-fuel-technology/9612976

    30

    • #
      Dennis

      There is interesting information here …

      https://www.iea.org/renewables/

      21

      • #
        robert rosicka

        One thing all these reports fail to address is what happens when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow , you could cover Australia in solar panels and wind turbines but wouldn’t be guaranteed to be able to switch the lights on .

        70

        • #
          Another Ian

          ” A Fifth Is Fine For Scotch, Power Generation Not So Much”

          Another look at UK electrical “renewables”

          “But because Weather Dependent Renewable Energy output is crucially dependent on the vagaries of the weather, (for wind), and the weather in combination with the season and the time of day, (for solar), the useful electrical output achieved by Weather Dependent Renewables is inevitably substantially less that the maximal Name Plate capacity of the installation. Accordingly in 2017 Weather Dependent Renewable Energy in the UK was operating at about one fifth of nominal name plate capacity overall.

          https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/a-fifth-is-fine-for-scotch-power-generation-not-so-much/

          (The usual “so many houses” bandied about is based on nameplate capacity so divide by 5 for closer to actual)

          40

  • #
    dougie

    may have been posted upthread, but old relevant post from CA –

    https://climateaudit.org/2010/12/02/odonnell-et-al-2010-refutes-steig-et-al-2009/

    10

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    “Quick somepne build a windmill”….

    Funny…very good….

    30

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Ow wow….yawn…..

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-04-06/solar-power-most-backed-fuel-technology/9612976

    “In a record-breaking year for renewable energy creation worldwide, the 98 gigawatts of new solar capacity was higher than all other technologies, including other renewables, nuclear and fossil fuels.”

    From the UN agency IEA :

    https://www.iea.org/etp/tracking2017/coal-firedpower/

    “Outside the OECD, coal generation in China, the centre of global coal demand, decreased in 2015 due to a reduction in electricity demand, coupled with an increased generation from hydro and nuclear.1 Despite the decrease in generation in 2015, 52 GW of coal-fired generation capacity was added in China in 2015, and roughly 150 GW is currently under construction. In India, the third-largest coal consumer in the world, coal-fired power generation increased by 3.3% in 2015, which is considerably lower than the 11% growth of 2014, mostly due to lower demand growth.”

    They celebrate 3 poompteenths of very little, but for coal based generation, its a normal day….

    But the final word from the same IEA link above :

    “Recommended actions

    Policy measures need to address both the long-term and short-term challenges associated with generation from coal.

    Ultimately, a long-term carbon price signal will be needed to set adequate investment incentives and hence enable a low-carbon energy transition. For the short term, carbon pricing and more stringent pollution control regulations may be used to reduce emissions, minimise local air pollution, and limit and ultimately phase out generation from subcritical coal-fired power stations.

    Examples are emissions performance standards in Canada and the United Kingdom for power generation capacity additions as well as the carbon price support in the United Kingdom. In OECD countries, and especially in many emerging economies, where coal-fired power generation is set to expand in the near future, new-build coal‑fired power units should aim for best available efficiencies (currently, through application of supercritical or ultra-supercritical technologies), where feasible, and be designed in view of potential future CCS retrofits, if they are not equipped initially with CCS.

    Further, coal plant designs should ensure sufficient operation flexibility to balance electricity supply and demand and to support the introduction of increasing shares of intermittent renewables onto the power grid.”

    10

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Its also worth noting the UNs IEA has a dashboard to track “progress” in various aspects of the global economy areas in thier ( bascially forced ) transtition to low carbon ( i.e. stone age ) economy…

      https://www.iea.org/etp/tracking2017/

      Tracking Clean Energy Progress: 2017

      Tracking Clean Energy Progress examines the progress of a variety of clean energy technologies towards interim 2°C scenario targets in 2025. Click on any of the technologies to find out more:

      Status against 2°C scenario targets to 2025

      On track, but sustained deployment & policies required
      Improvement, but more efforts needed
      Not on track

      Recent trends

      ➚ Positive developments
      ~ Limited developments
      ➘ Negative developments

      10

    • #

      The ABC just loves to use Nameplate, and the percentage increase per single year so let’s drill into that, shall we.

      The actual amount of power generated from Solar power increased ….. THIS YEAR ALONE by 72%. And there the ABC stops. See that huge number there ….. PLUS 72%.

      At the foul disgusting end of the power generation data, rotten filthy stinking coal only increased by a puny amount, barely 5.2%, a tiny amount compared to the SEVENTY TWO PERCENT increase from solar.

      The actual power generated by solar power (every single plant totalled together) in China is 1.1% of the total generated power in China.

      Just that puny little tiny single 2017 YEARLY INCREASE of 5.2% in coal fired power is 1.95 times the power generated by EVERY solar plant in China, not just the yearly percentage increase but from the Overall yearly total power generated from solar power.

      Wind power generation (not Nameplate, but total generated power) from wind power increased by a WHOPPING 26.3%, and there the ABC would just stop, that’s if they ever realised that it’s not Nameplate that is important but actual generated power.

      That 26% increase amounted to an extra 63TWH of generated power.

      That 5.2% increase in coal fired power amounted to an increase of 225TWH, four times the power.

      Sometimes figures can be used to give a totally different impression, depending upon your agenda, eh!

      Tony.

      Source – China Electrical Power Generation Data, end of year, December 2017.

      40

  • #
    PeterS

    Howard announced the incentives in energy policy are skewed towards renewables and is in essence the problem. Yet he also announced the Liberal Party should stop quibbling about coal fire power stations and rally behind Turnbull. Howard must think Turnbull is also against the skew towards renewables. Of course we all know that’s false. If both Howward and Trunbull really believe the problem is that skew towards renewables then the solution is very simple and easy; scrap the incentives. Of course we all know that’s not going to happen under Turnbull, which means Howard has lost his marbles, is a hypocrite and a fool. He should have done a Trump and said scrap the RETS and rip up the Paris agreement. Instead he like the left is blind to the fact this country is heading for a financial crisis the likes we’ve never seen thanks partly to the biggest scam of all time; the massive subsidies of renewables that won’t even provide base load power and directly causing the coal power industry to implode.

    60

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      It bears repeating that Howard supports economy killing renewables, and brought in the Socialist dream of gun control. Based on these two big facts alone, Howard shows all the signs of being a Socialist.

      I look at what peopke do, not what they say…words are cheap.

      30

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Howard giving advice to the liberals ? Now you know your in trouble .
        If only they could pay him to keep his mouth shut after all didn’t he do enough damage when he was in charge .

        20

        • #
          PeterS

          Actually he was very lucky there was an commodity boom at the time. He and and in fact most of us did very well out of it. Otherwise, he would have been a disaster. Overall though I would prefer him to Turnbull any day if those two were the only choices.

          OriginalSteve, as for Howard being a socialist – that’s stretching it too far. He’s on average more of a true liberal than a socialist. I do agree though he deviated to being a socialist wrt to gun control and renewables.

          30

  • #
    John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia

    Like drawing an analogy with Trump losing a dollar from his net worth.

    10

  • #
    pat

    woke up to ABC News Radio endless anti-coal interview with some guy whose voice I didn’t recognise. turned out to be Fairfax’s Peter Hannam. can’t find it on ABC website, but u will get the idea from the following:

    Vesey knows where to go for support – to Hannam/Fairfax – where he can say he’s moving on from fossil fuels to gas, without Hannam blinking:

    5 Apr: SMH: Peter Hannam: Not for sale: AGL’s Andy Vesey defies Malcolm Turnbull
    AGL will defy pressure by the Turnbull government to sell its ageing Liddell power plant, warning that interference in the market would raise issues of “sovereign risk” that could deter investment in new energy assets.

    In a rare interview, chief executive Andy Vesey told Fairfax Media the much-publicised interest in AGL’s Hunter Valley coal-fired power station from smaller rival Alinta had been limited to a phone call on Tuesday evening from Alinta chief Jeff Dimery and a follow-up email on Wednesday.
    Mr Vesey said his rival had indicated in the email a ‘‘desire to engage in a potential acquisition” of Liddell and asked about the purchase process.
    Mr Vesey said he had replied “we are not in the process of selling so there is no process”…

    ‘Bleeding edge’
    Mr Vesey conceded AGL’s shift ***away from fossil fuels had drawn political fire but argued the strategy was the right thing to do for shareholders and for environmental reasons…
    “Somebody has to be on the bleeding edge,” he said. “We [AGL] are going to be the biggest emitter of [carbon dioxide in Australia] – that means we are going to need to be responsible, and take action.”…

    AGL plans to replace Liddell with ***gas, batteries and pumped hydro and renewable energy after 2022. Any sale of Liddell would be complicated by the shared cooling, coal supply and other services with the nearby, larger Bayswater plant.
    “We need to renew the infrastructure in this country,” Mr Vesey said. “We need to replace older, less reliable stations.”…

    ‘World has changed’
    While AGL had initially valued Liddell at zero dollars, this was no longer the case because market prices had since risen, particularly after the relatively abrupt closure of the similar-sized Hazelwood power station in Victoria.
    “The value of the plant has changed from the time we bought it because the world has changed,” Mr Vesey said.
    Apart from Hazelwood, the shift of gas from generation to export markets, a repricing of black coal and rising network costs – all beyond AGL’s control – had acted to push those prices higher.
    If Alinta or “someone was so inclined’’ and could “meet our expectations about its value today and the value we have forward, then they need to put forward a bona fide bid but that hasn’t happened yet”, he said…

    Rod Sims, head of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, said the competition watchdog had argued against the two plants being sold together because of the market concentration and possible impact on prices.
    Market movements since ‘‘have shown we were right’’, Mr Sims said yesterday.
    “It would certainly be pro-consumer if AGL got rid of Liddell” to another buyer “other than the big three”, he said.
    AGL, Energy Australia and Origin Energy dominate electricity generation and retailing in the eastern states.
    Still, Mr Sims stressed the ACCC was “not going after AGL”, and the company would not be breaching the Competition Act if it refused to sell Liddell.
    https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/not-for-sale-agl-s-andy-vesey-defies-malcolm-turnbull-20180405-p4z80k.html

    10

  • #
    pat

    4 Apr: SMH: Peter Hannam: Why AGL is likely to rebuff any and all suitors to ‘old lady Liddell’
    As Kate Coates, the plant’s general manager, told a media mob last September that Liddell was “an old lady: we can’t ask [her] to run a marathon a few days in a row without her falling over”…
    As if to underscore its unreliability, Liddell even put in a wobble on Wednesday…
    (At a bill of $4 billion-plus – before the cost of extra transmission and the $6 billion federal takeover tab for buying NSW and Victoria’s Snowy shares – Snowy 2.0 is itself far from a done deal.)…

    Federal Coalition politicians have hinted darkly that this “indivisibility” hides AGL’s true intent to boost the wholesale electricity price for Bayswater (and all other generators) by reducing supply when Liddell’s generators grind to a halt for the last time.
    But, in any case, such changes are usually left to the market to sort out (which the Coalition would more typically support)…
    https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/why-agl-is-likely-to-rebuff-any-and-all-suitors-to-old-lady-liddell-20180404-p4z7nx.html

    20

    • #
      pat

      Coal dream to fail, says Snowy Hydro chief
      Snowy Hydro chief executive Paul Broad has warned federal ministers would do their dough if they bowed to the self-styled Monash Forum of coalition backbenchers who demand the government build a new coal-fired power station
      The Australian – 14h ago

      20

    • #
      robert rosicka

      I reckon let AGL shut it down but on the proviso that they guarantee equal baseload generation and put in place the following fines for non conformance .

      $1000 per hour to each private consumer to cover blackouts

      $10000 per minute for each business to cover blackouts .

      They will sell it in an instant .

      41

  • #
    pat

    Top Miner BHP Quits World Coal Association Over Climate Clash
    Bloomberg· 21h ago

    BHP quits World Coal Association over climate views
    The Australian· 13h ago

    6 Apr: Australian Mining: BHP parts ways with World Coal Association
    BHP has confirmed it will leave the World Coal Association (WCA) because of differing views on how climate change concerns can be managed…
    BHP made a preliminary decision to leave the WCA last December..

    The WCA responded that it was disappointed by BHP’s decision to leave, based on one claimed material policy difference, given it was involved in developing this position on energy and climate change.
    “The WCA’s position has always been clear; we support a balanced approach that integrates climate and energy policy that works towards a low emission future,” WCA chief executive Benjamin Sporton said.
    “We believe a balanced approach should not exclude high efficiency, low emissions power generation and carbon capture and storage.”
    Sporton said the WCA had compared its position on energy and climate policies with those set out in BHP’s review. The Association believes there are no material differences between the two…

    BHP will, however, continue to work with the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) to advocate policies that are aligned between the two parties. It will also remain a member of the United States Chamber of Commerce despite the two parties have conflicting stances on energy and climate change.
    https://www.australianmining.com.au/news/bhp-parts-ways-world-coal-association/

    20

    • #
      toorightmate

      It is many decades since BHP had leadership = the slide is the proof.
      Rio tinto is also devoid of leadership at present.

      20

  • #
    pat

    5 Apr: SMH: Melbourne’s summer-like temperatures nudge late season heat records
    By Peter Hannam & Amber Schultz
    A burst of heat from inland Australia is set to sweep across the country’s south-east in coming days, challenging records for this late in the year, meteorologists said.
    “Summer-like conditions will linger for several days,” Kim Westcott, a meteorologist with Weatherzone, said.

    The low-pressure trough will transport to the south-eastern states some of the warmth that has been baking north-western WA. That region set late-season Australian heat records of just shy of 46 degrees on both March 28 and 29.
    According to Weatherzone, Adelaide, Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney may all be in line to set record warmth in coming days, including for the number of days in a row above various temperatures, for this late in the season.

    Jordan Notara, a forecaster with the Bureau of Meteorology, said inland areas of Victoria and South Australia could exceed April averages by 10 degrees, with other areas unusually warm.
    “There’s the possibility that we’ll see Canberra and western Sydney approach record temperatures” for April, Mr Notara said. Monday may see “the peak of the heat” for those areas”.
    The lack of any cooling maritime influence is one factor in the coming warmth, he said.
    On current forecasts, Melbourne can expect daily tops of 22-27 degrees each day out until at least next Wednesday, with 29 degrees forecast for Sunday, the bureau said. The average maximum for April at the bureau’s Melbourne Regional Office is 20.3 degrees.
    Temperatures in Echuca in Melbourne’s north will exceed 30 degrees next week, with 35 forecast for Tuesday and Wednesday…

    Also pointing to a worsening dry spell for the region’s food bowl is the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s environmental watering outlook for 2018-19, also released on Thursday.
    “In the coming water year, conditions are expected to range from very dry to wet in different
    catchments but with a common drying trend,” the report said.
    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/melbourne-s-summer-like-temperatures-nudge-late-season-heat-records-20180405-p4z7z6.html

    5 Apr: SMH: ‘Summer-like’ heat to nudge late-season heat records across south-east
    by Peter Hannam
    A burst of heat from inland Australia is set to sweep across the country’s south-east in coming days, challenging records for this late in the year, meteorologists said.
    “Summer-like conditions will linger for several days,” Kim Westcott, a meteorologist with Weatherzone, said…

    On current forecasts, Sydney can expect daily tops of 27-28 degrees each day out until at least next Wednesday, with 30 degrees forecast for Monday, the bureau said. The average for April at Observatory Hill near the CBD edge is 22.5 degrees.
    Places like Penrith in Sydney’s west will be 31 degrees or more for the week to come, with 35 forecast for Monday…
    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/summer-like-heat-to-nudge-late-season-heat-records-across-south-east-20180405-p4z7x4.html

    Hot, dry start to 2018 set to continue for Sydney, much of NSW by Peter Hannam
    The state – and Australia as a whole – is off to one of its warmest starts to any year.
    Sydney Morning Herald – 3 Apr 2-18

    20

  • #
    el gordo

    Take note of the cool anomalies, West Antartica and the UK.

    https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/march-2018-map.png

    10

  • #
    pat

    no mention of coal in the headline. clean green GE involved:

    4 Apr: Reuters: GE Power and Alstom picked to build Polish Ostroleka power plant
    by Agnieszka Barteczko
    A consortium of GE Power and Alstom Power was selected to build a 1,000 megawatt coal-fuelled power plant in Ostroleka for Polish state-run utilities Energa and Enea, Energa said on Wednesday.

    GE and Alstom offered to build the plant for 6 billion zlotys ($1.76 billion). In December Energa said three offers had been submitted to build the Ostroleka plant, all of which overshot the original budget of 4.8 billion zlotys.

    ***Polish energy minister had said Ostroleka will be the last coal-fuelled power plant built in Poland.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/energa-ostroleka/ge-power-and-alstom-picked-to-build-polish-ostroleka-power-plant-idUSFWN1RH0JN

    in the substantial rewrite:
    ***Energy Minister Krzysztof Tchorzewski said LAST YEAR that Ostroleka would be the last coal-burning plant to be built in Poland.

    5 Apr: Reuters: UPDATE 1-GE Power, Alstom to build Poland’s last coal-fired power plant
    by Agnieszka Barteczko
    (Adds details from GE statement, background)
    GE Power and Alstom Power have won a tender to build Poland’s last coal-fired power plant with a bid of 6 billion zlotys ($1.75 billion), utilities Energa and Enea said.
    The 1,000 megawatt power plant in Ostroleka in northeast Poland is expected to open in 2023 and power around 300,000 homes.

    “GE Power will design, manufacture and deliver its market-leading ultra-supercritical technology components (boiler and steam turbine generator) for this new power plant,” GE Power said in a statement.
    GE and Alstom won over competing bids from Polish construction firms Polimex-Mostostal and Rafako and China Power Engineering Consulting Group.

    By 2050, Poland plans to reduce the share of coal in its energy mix to 50 percent from around 80 percent currently, while reducing pollution by switching to new technology such as that which will be used at Ostroleka.
    “This plant will …help Poland meet its energy needs while also meeting the latest EU standards in terms of air quality,” GE said.

    Energy Minister Krzysztof Tchorzewski said last year that Ostroleka would be the last coal-burning plant to be built in Poland.
    GE built a 858 megawatt lignite-fuelled power station in Belchatow for power company PGE and is building two 900 MW units at PGE’s Opole power plant.
    State-run Energa and Enea aim to take advantage of a back-up power capacity scheme approved by the EU in February.
    The scheme will allow them to be paid for electricity and for keeping power plants online to produce when needed.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/energa-ostroleka/update-1-ge-power-alstom-to-build-polands-last-coal-fired-power-plant-idUSL5N1RI1VB

    10

  • #
    pat

    5 Apr: FinancialPost: Reuters: Energy minnow Bahrain just found 80 billion barrels of oil, as much as Russia’s entire reserve
    The find catapults the kingdom to the top of the shale oil league
    by Davide Barbuscia
    “The newly discovered resource, which officials expect to be ‘on production’ within five years, is expected to provide significant and long-term positive benefits to the kingdom’s economy – both directly and indirectly through downstream activities in related industries,” Bahrain’s National Communication Centre said in a statement…
    http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/update-2-bahrain-says-new-discovery-contains-an-estimated-80-bln-barrels-of-tight-oil

    5 Apr: Bloomberg: AP: U.K. Opens Persian Gulf Military Base in Bahrain

    20

  • #
    pat

    read all:

    4 Apr: World Nuclear News: Pickering supports Ontario’s economy, report says
    The Ontario Chamber of Commerce (OCC) says the continued operation of the Pickering nuclear power plant until 2024 would be a benefit to Ontario’s economy, its local communities, its climate change goals and the stability of its energy system. The OCC made its comment in a report released yesterday in partnership with the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis (CANCEA)…

    Minister of Energy, Glenn Thibeault, provided comment on the OCC and CANCEA analysis: “The OCC and the CANCEA have confirmed the overwhelming benefits to Ontarians from the continued operation of Ontario Power Generation’s Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. Operating the Pickering station to 2024 would ensure that Ontario families and businesses have an affordable and reliable source of emissions-free power during the Darlington and initial Bruce refurbishments, generate billions of dollars in economic activity and support thousands of jobs per year. This is part of our government’s plan to support care and opportunity, while producing affordable, reliable and clean energy for the people of Ontario.”…

    The share of power generated from nuclear steam turbines increased from 42% in 2003 to 62% in 2014. Despite accounting for only one-third of Ontario’s installed capacity, nuclear power produces about two-thirds of Ontario’s electricity.
    “Low-cost, clean and reliable nuclear power has become the backbone of Ontario’s electricity system,” the report says…
    http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/EE-Pickering-supports-Ontarios-economy-report-says-04041801.html

    2 Apr: Financial Post: Canada’s competitiveness in big trouble as even green companies are heading for the exit
    The NextEra sale is seen in the energy sector as being specifically related to taxation. It’s likely the first of many such deals
    by Claudia Cattaneo
    You know Canadian competitiveness is in big trouble when even investors in renewable energy – favoured by Canadian governments through subsidies, plus carbon taxes and regulatory overload on competing fossil-fuel energy — are leaving because they like lower U.S. taxes even more.
    Juno Beach, Fla.-based NextEra Energy Partners LP said Monday the sale of its wind and solar generation assets in Ontario to the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board for US$582.3 million was specifically motivated by U.S. tax reform…

    The transaction includes the sale of six fully contracted wind and solar assets in Ontario with an average contract life of approximately 16 years and a combined total generating capacity of approximately 396 megawatts…

    For its part, CPPIB (Canada Pension Plan Investment Board) said the purchase gives it immediate scale in a sector where it wants to grow.
    “Since December 2017, CPPIB has committed to wind and solar investments in Brazil, India and now Canada,” said Bruce Hogg, managing director and head of power and renewables…

    Dan Tsubouchi, chief market strategist at Stream Asset Financial Management LP in Calgary, said the NextEra deal is the first he’s seen in the energy sector related specifically to taxation, but it should surprise no one and is likely the first of many.
    Murphy Oil Corp. has also said it would repatriate Canadian retained earnings and that it sees the substantially lower tax rate in the U.S. as a big advantage for capital reinvestment…
    In addition to reducing corporate taxes, the U.S. is allowing companies to immediately write off the full cost of new machinery and equipment, making the U.S. advantages hard to resist, Tsubouchi said.
    “There will be more similar transactions in 2018,” he predicted…

    RBC president and CEO Dave McKay told the Canadian Press that a “significant” investment exodus to the U.S. is already underway, especially in the energy and clean-technology sectors.
    Latest data from Statistics Canada shows foreign direct investment in the country dropped to $31.4 billion last year, compared to $49.4 billion the year before.

    The oil and gas sector is vulnerable to such capital transfer because the Canadian/U.S. business is highly integrated. The tax angle worsens Canada’s already depressed conditions versus the U.S. industry due to energy infrastructure bottlenecks and more stringent environmental regulations in Canada.

    Convinced that an energy transition from fossil fuels to green energy is under way, the federal government hasn’t seemed too concerned about the decline of Canadian oil and gas. It should be concerned, however, that lack of tax competitiveness is bad for businesses across the board, even in those sectors it wants to grow.
    http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/lack-of-canadian-tax-competitiveness-discourages-even-renewable-energy

    10

  • #
    pat

    5 Apr: BusinessGreen: What future for the Feed-in Tariff?
    by Oankar Birdi, RenewableUK
    Government must urgently spell out its plans for future renewables support, argues RenewableUK’s Oankar Birdi
    The announcement last month that one of the small and medium wind industry’s best-known companies, Gaia-Wind, was going into liquidation is the starkest warning yet that the renewable energy sector urgently needs action by government on the Feed-in Tariff (FiT)…

    Gaia-Wind was a reference point for the sector, constantly cited as a great example of a company punching above its weight in the global arena, run by entrepreneurs employing a dozen highly-skilled workers. But Gaia-Wind is now just one of a number of UK companies working in the renewable energy sector facing an uncertain future due to government inaction over the Feed-in Tariff scheme. The FiTs is due to close to new applicants just one year from now, but there is no sign from government about what, if anything, will replace it…
    Gaia-Wind may prove to be the tip of the iceberg as innovative UK companies, tired of waiting, pack up or move abroad.

    The FiTs scheme has successfully brought forward new energy capacity and helped households, business and communities benefit from the new technologies that are transforming the energy market.
    We know what is needed next: a supportive framework that allows small-scale renewables to make the transition to becoming subsidy-free…
    To continue investing in the UK, what Gaia-Wind and others need to know is, what’s next?
    https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/opinion/3029577/what-future-for-the-feed-in-tariff

    4 Apr: CityAM: UK solar panel installations plunge to a seven-year low, “undermined” by government
    by Courtney Goldsmith
    The number of solar panel installations in the UK over the past year has tumbled to a seven-year low, despite falling costs, as the government cut solar incentives, according to data from blockchain energy firm Energi Mine.
    After analysing eight years of government data, Energi Mine found that solar photovoltaics (PV) installations dropped following a shift in government policy away from a rebate incentive scheme called the feed-in tariff (FiT) in 2016.

    The firm’s research found that in the two years since the government cut the FiT by more than 60 per cent, the number of new solar PV installations plummeted from over 26,000 a month in December 2015 to just 2,422 in January 2018.
    That’s despite the cost of installing a four kilowatt (kW) domestic solar PV system falling from about £14,000 in 2011 to as little as £4,000 in 2018.
    Feed-in tariffs, which are payments made to homes that generate their own electricity, have stalled at 3.93p per kW hour (kWh), versus an average consumer price of 13p per kWh.

    “Habitual change can only take hold if people are financially incentivised and rewarded. Much like the introduction of charges for plastic bags, financial rewards need to be introduced for energy saving behaviour to deliver the necessary results,” said Omar Rahim, chief executive at Energi Mine…
    http://www.cityam.com/283373/uk-solar-panel-installations-plunge-seven-year-low

    10

  • #
    pat

    4 Apr: UK Telegraph: Jillian Ambrose: Gas storage bet moves ahead in wake of Siberian cold snaps
    A rare investment in new gas storage is edging forward in the wake of the Siberian cold snaps which hit Britain’s gas markets with price spikes in recent months.
    The calls to build a new gas storage facility to replace the UK’s aging energy infrastructure reached fever pitch after the “Beast from the East” brought freezing temperatures and unprecedented gas demand across the UK this year.
    But it would still be a bold investment after years of declining profit margins for gas storage operators following a string of milder than average winters.

    Infrastrata, an AIM-listed company, said it is willing to roll the dice on its bet against the UK’s energy security by diluting its own market value to help fund the next phase of its project.
    Adrian Pocock, chief executive of Infrastrata, said: “What has been demonstrated by the Beast from the East is that the energy system is vulnerable.”
    Mr Pocock said the winter gas price spikes are “symptomatic” of the UK’s “increasingly vulnerable” energy system which is “groaning and creaking at the seams”.
    The Twickenham-based company plans to build one of the first new gas storage sites in decades on the coast of Northern Ireland in a bid to increase the UK’s gas reserves by a quarter…

    While the group aims to eventually attract institutional investment to the project, it has been forced to offer new shares to the market to raise almost £1m to carry out the full engineering and design studies.
    Mr Pocock said the raise was a “bitter pill to swallow” after the group’s share price plummeted almost 14pc, ***but that it needed to kick start the final studies or risk losing the capital it has already secured from the European Union…

    He told The Telegraph that the group has made “very positive progress” in its talks with long-term infrastructure investors to help build the underground salt caverns which could operate for 40 years.
    The project has attracted “strong interest” from energy suppliers that hope to use a new facility to store their gas after the shutdown of the UK’s main facility at Rough, he said.
    By keeping gas in reserve suppliers can avoid buying gas from the global market at times of rocketing demand when prices are highest to help to keep their costs low.
    The surge in gas heating over the last winter caused market prices to leap to twelve year highs as National Grid issued its first emergency alert.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/04/gas-storage-bet-moves-ahead-wake-siberian-cold-snaps/

    30

  • #
    Elgorza Phoney

    If anyone thinks it is worth offering this “journalist” a little guidance on the facts, you can email him at: ben.webster@thetimes.co.uk
    Don’t hold your breath for any reply though.

    20

  • #
    robert rosicka

    OT but is it any wonder people believe in this garbage about the big battery being better than coal or gas after reading rubbish like this .
    One question they don’t ask or cover is where does the power come from to charge the battery ?

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-06/tesla-battery-outperforms-coal-and-gas/9625726

    40

    • #
      PeterS

      The odd thing is there is a far better battery. It’s called fossil fuel. The advantages include: it’s cheaper, more efficient, more plentiful, and doesn’t need charging because it’s come already charged out of the ground.

      61

  • #
    el gordo

    “Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away”

    — NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses

    30

  • #

    HA HA HA! as Beththeserf explains Mad hatter says ‘you must be mad else you would not be here’!
    Planet Earth, lonely remote strict quarantine for those that ‘believe’ possessing some of GOD’s KNOWLEDGE! Kitten Shadow reminds us; Want to see bestus Cats ass ever? :-)

    13

  • #
    Pete of Perth

    It is not possible to have three significant figures in the estimate of uncertainty. Two maybe.

    00

  • #
    Blue555

    “Two More New Papers Document
    No Warming Trend In Antarctica” So it’s not temperature.

    00