Weekly Climate and Energy Roundup #463 – Watts Up With That?

Weekly Climate and Energy Roundup #463 – Watts Up With That?

The Week That Was: 2021-07-17 (July 17, 2021)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “Nobody understands quantum mechanics.”  – Richard Feynman

Number of the Week: 301 in 1913, up 17.6% by 1988, up 39.2% by 2021


By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Fit for 55: In an article titled “Europe’s Climate Awe and Shock” the editors of the Wall Street Journal summarize the latest green scheme from the leaders of Europe. They begin:

“Brussels wants you to know that Europe’s finest bureaucrats are Thinking Big about climate change, and on Wednesday they released a comprehensive regulatory and spending plan to prove it. Call it an awe-and-shock strategy: They hope voters will be so awe-struck at its grand ambitions that they won’t have time to be shocked by what’s in it.

“Called ‘Fit for 55,’ the European Commission says the aim of its program is to reduce the European Union’s carbon emissions by at least 55% from 1990 levels by 2030. This is supposed to put Europe on track to become ‘the world’s first climate-neutral continent’ by 2050. The big Brussels reveal consists of hundreds upon hundreds of pages of proposed legal changes and spending commitments. [Isn’t part of Russia in Europe?]

“The trouble will be what’s in the fine print. The headline pledges will be difficult enough. Brussels wants to ban sales of new internal-combustion cars by 2035 and subject aviation to the EU’s emissions-trading system—good luck taking a vacation on a budget.

“Another proposal requires enormous expenditures to boost energy efficiency. There’s a renewable-energy directive, and an update to the regulation on land use, forestry, and agriculture (requiring, among many other things, planting three billion trees by 2030).

“Most of this won’t happen soon, or in this form. Industry groups started furiously picking Fit for 55 apart before it was even released. They’ll be sure to tell the national governments that have to approve this legislative Hydra about all the ways this package will be bad for job creation. They have a point, especially for industries such as aviation already nearly bankrupted by the pandemic. Governments will quail at the costs as they struggle to manage pandemic spending and debt.

“So why propose something so preposterous? Don’t underestimate the extent to which EU bureaucrats—and Europe’s national leaders—truly believe in the cause of eliminating carbon emissions. This is especially true in Germany, where voters and their politicians still pray to the climate gods despite the mounting costs.

“But don’t underestimate more cynical explanations. The backdrop for all of this is a new U.S. Administration that also wants to talk about its climate virtue. Brussels may hope that, by talking up its own climate ambitions, it can goad President Biden into inflicting on the U.S. economy costs similar to those that already hobble European industries. And if that doesn’t work, Fit for 55 includes a proposal for a carbon tariff as a diplomatic stick.”

The critical thinking exhibited by the European Union to “fight” climate change is reminiscent of the critical thinking exhibited by the European powers as they rushed off to fight in the glorious World War I, without a compelling threat. The threats were largely the product of propaganda coupled by vanity and arrogance. So is the threat of carbon dioxide-caused climate change. Germany came close to executing a brilliant plan but fell short and four years of destruction and human slaughter ensued. See links under Problems in the Orthodoxy and Article # 1.


Blue Planet In Green Shackles: An outstanding response to the EU climate package came from former Czech president Vaclav Klaus. Lubos Motl provided a translation. In part, Klaus wrote:

“This climate package is not bold. It is stupid and nonsensical. It is unrealistic, and if it were to be implemented, it would be a completely destructive package. Completely destructive to the lives, freedom and living standards of the people of Europe.

“That this package can do any good for the planet is something only green activists, only the advocates of the utterly unsustainable doctrine of climate alarmism, can think. Only people who believe in an immediate linear or even exponential relationship between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the average global temperature. I am not one of these deluded individuals who have managed to garner such absurd media coverage. Man’s role in the evolution of global temperatures over the long term is completely negligible. Moreover, CO2 has already played its potential role in influencing temperatures. The intention of carbon neutrality is an anti-human policy. It has almost no connection to temperature.”

As Klaus implies, the physical evidence shows that human additions of CO2 have a minor impact on earth’s temperature and climate. This has been shown in numerous experiments since John Tyndall in 1859. The experiments are confirmed by observations of the atmosphere. The speculated amplification from increased water vapor embodied in global climate models remains speculation. Global atmospheric temperature trends show no such amplification.

Born under Fascism (Nazism) and coming of age under Communism, Klaus has articulated how destructive authoritarian governments can be, regardless of what one labels such belief systems. The Amazon description of his book is.

“The largest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy, and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st century is no longer socialism or Communism. It is, instead, the ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous ideology of environmentalism. So writes Vaclav Klaus, [former] president of the Czech Republic, in Blue Planet in Green Shackles: What Is Endangered – Climate Or Freedom? In this brilliantly argued book, Klaus argues that the environmental movement has transformed itself into an ideology that seeks to restrict human activities at any cost, and that policies being proposed to address global warming are both economically harmful — especially to poor nations — and utterly unjustified by current science.”

See link. under Challenging the Orthodoxy and https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Planet-Green-Shackles-Endangered/dp/1889865095


23 Out Of 25: Researchers from Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China, estimated the energy related greenhouse gas emissions from 167 cities and found 52 percent of the world’s urban greenhouse gas emissions come from only 25 megacities. Under the ranking by most emissions, Moscow is ranked 7 and Tokyo is 17. Twenty-three are in China (including Hong Kong) and Guangzhou is ranked 13. The highest-ranking US city is New York at 26, just ahead of Manilla and Bangkok. The highest-ranking EU city is Frankfort, Germany, at 33, just below Istanbul, Turkey, and ahead of Jakarta, Indonesia. The authors recognize the study has limitations:

“Some limitations and uncertainties should be noted. First, the definitions of ‘urban unit’ are diverse and sometimes inconsistent from cities to cities, which makes it difficult to assess cities within the same geographical scale (inclusion of urban areas) and organization status (forms of local administration), given the current data. This may introduce uncertainties to the carbon accounts and budgets.” An example is given.

“Second, the population data are collected to match with the carbon data and could be subject to some extents of inconsistency.”

During Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966 to 1976) urban areas were purged “of capitalist and traditional elements,” millions were massacred, and famine to the point of cannibalism occurred. It is doubtful that the leaders of China will purge their cities to satisfy the arrogance and vanity of EU Greens. They will probably smile politely and wonder what type of fools lead the EU to economic destruction. See links under Problems in the Orthodoxy.


Failure to Correct: Roger Pielke Jr. and Justin Ritchie describe how out of date the scenarios used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are and how out of touch with reality are those who use them. This lack of reality applies to most studies using global climate models. Published by Issues in Science and Technology the authors write:

“A failure of self-correction in science has compromised climate science’s ability to provide plausible views of our collective future.

“The integrity of science depends on its capacity to provide an ever more reliable picture of how the world works. Over the past decade or so, serious threats to this integrity have come to light. The expectation that science is inherently self-correcting, and that it moves cumulatively and progressively away from false beliefs and toward truth, has been challenged in numerous fields—including cancer research, neuroscience, hydrology, cosmology, and economics—as observers discover that many published findings are of poor quality, subject to systemic biases, or irreproducible.

After giving an example of erroneous research on breast cancer, the authors continue:

“In 2021, climate research finds itself in a situation similar to breast cancer research in 2007. Our research (and that of several colleagues) indicates that the scenarios of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through the end of the twenty-first century are grounded in outdated portrayals of the recent past. Because climate models depend on these scenarios to project the future behavior of the climate, the outdated scenarios provide a misleading basis both for developing a scientific evidence base and for informing climate policy discussions. The continuing misuse of scenarios in climate research has become pervasive and consequential—so much so that we view it as one of the most significant failures of scientific integrity in the twenty-first century thus far. We need a course correction.”

After a lengthy discussion on errors embodied in the science produced by the IPCC and its followers, the authors state that restoring integrity in climate science will be difficult:

“The consequences of pervasive, implausible climate scenarios extend far beyond the IPCC process and the academic literature these scenarios have enabled. A continued focus on implausible emissions scenarios in climate research is a failure of science’s supposed internal quality assurance mechanisms and thus a failure of scientific integrity. The persistent use of implausible scenarios introduces error and bias widely across climate research. They are now woven through the climate science literature in ways that will be very difficult to untangle.”

After additional remarks, the authors conclude with:

“Good science works to bring society the best possible images of the real world. The emissions scenarios of today’s climate science are delivering distorted pictures that compromise both understanding and well-informed policymaking. Until the climate science community addresses this fundamental problem of scientific integrity, its potential to contribute to pragmatic solutions for the vexing, extraordinarily difficult challenge of climate change will be unnecessarily compromised. Climate change has been solved countless times in fanciful models, but it is the real world that matters.” See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy


Fractional Attribution of Risk (FAR): Last week’s TWTW presented the latest effort to divert attention away from facts that expose the false predictions of climate alarmists, Fractional Attribution of Risk (FAR). Writing in Quadrant Online, Michael Kile describes how World Weather Attribution (WWA) uses this technique to claim the extreme heat in the northwest US and southwest Canada was human-caused (by CO2 emissions). Kile also gives a brief history:

“It all began with ACE, the Attribution of Climate-related Events initiative. ACE’s inaugural meeting was held in Boulder, Colorado, January 26, 2009, at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). ACE released a four-paragraph statement. Its mission would be “to provide authoritative assessments of the causes of anomalous climate conditions and EWEs”, presumably for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“ACE’s ‘conceptual framework for attribution activities’ would be: ‘elevated in priority and visibility, leading to substantial increases in resources (funds, people and computers).’ Everyone had to sing from the same song-sheet:”

Kile uses the false “Antarctica’s hottest day” as an example. As discussed in last week’s TWTW, the weather station involved is outside the Antarctic Circle. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Flawed Heatwave Report: US Pacific northwest meteorologist Cliff Mass goes through a technical examination of the World Weather Attribution report. Mass states that its main findings are not supported by scientific evidence or the materials in the report. He emphasizes certain claims within the report are contradicted by other claims within the report. Mass also brings up the IPCC global warming scenarios, which as Pielke explains above, are worse than useless, they are misleading.

“It is clear that this attribution study was not intended to serve as an objective examination of a scientific issue (e.g., the contribution of global warming to the Northwest heatwave) but rather is an advocacy document. 

“It is easy to demonstrate this.  For example, the first section of the paper calls for immediate policy changes, including adaptation and mitigation.  The final section “Recommendations” promotes policy changes and specific adaptation recommendations.  The inconsistency between the dramatic claims of the first sentence and the more nuanced material within the document suggests a clear intention to highlight a message that promotes notice and action.”

It is important to note that NCAR, where the Attribution of Climate-related Events initiative began, is principally financed by the National Science Foundation. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Pogo Stick Power: For the past several weeks, TWTW reported on the changes in wind power generation as reported by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which includes the Columbia River Gorge “where the wind always blows.” The total nameplate generation is 27,879 MW of which 79.5% is hydro and 10.5% (2930 MW) is wind.

On July 12, wind power went to zero at mid-day, bounced to over 1500 MW at midnight, back down close to zero mid-day on July 13, then bounced around for a few days. On July 15, at midnight, it was above 2000 MW and bounced between 1800 and 2500 MW until July 17. Then it fell dramatically to near zero at midday and bounced up to about 1500 MW at midnight.

In attempting to find BPA’s answer to a question by engineer Paul Kenyon on how the BPA balances the load without destroying the turbines, TWTW was unsuccessful. However, it did find a transcript of a discussion between Doug Johnson, Public Affairs Specialist and Brian Silverstein, Senior Vice President for Transmission Services, BPA, titled “Value of the River – Transmission” dated October 12, 2012. One paragraph is particularly germane:

“Anyone who’s traveled through the Columbia River Gorge in recent years knows that the Northwest is rich with wind power. But because the amount of energy that the wind produces can fluctuate up or down, moment to moment, it can be a challenge. BPA’s system operators are constantly balancing wind power with energy from the dams to avoid disruptions or power outages. But the hydro system is at its limit as the sole source of balancing, so BPA and others in the energy community are seeking innovative solutions to meet this challenge.” [Boldface added]

The BPA has problems balancing Pogo Stick Power. See links under Energy Issues – US and https://www.bpa.gov/pages/results.aspx?k=how%20does%20bpa%20balance%20wind%20power%3F


Dam Removal: The greens have motivated Indian tribal leaders to call for removal of dams on the Snake River, which includes some of the dams BPA uses for balancing wind power. The false claim is to save salmon and orcas from extinction.

“Neither Snake River sockeye, nor any of the other 12 runs of salmon and steelhead since listed for protection under the ESA in the Columbia and Snake, have recovered despite more than $17 billion spent to save them.

The relevant Corps of Engineers web site states:

“The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Walla Walla District owns and operates the four lower Snake River dams, all of which are multiple-use facilities that provide navigation, hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife conservation benefits.

Because of their locations, size and ability to help meet peak power loads, these four dams do much more than generate energy–they are key to keeping the system reliable and helping to meet its multiple uses — including supporting wind energy. The Snake River dams lie east of the other federal generators, so they provide a significant technical contribution to transmission grid reliability.

“The Lower Snake River system of locks and dams deliver a significant economic benefit to the nation. Barging on the inland Columbia Snake River System moves, on average, approximately 10 million tons of cargo valued at over $3 billion each year. Forty percent of the Nation’s wheat transits through this system.” [Boldface added.]

Salmon runs change from year to year and as demonstrated by the fisheries students who uncovered the Pacific Decadal Oscillation change every 20 to 30 years or so. The website has graphs showing yearly counts of adult fish returns for Chinook, Steelhead, Sockeye, Coho by dam as well as the count for lamprey. What is surprising is how well these fish have recovered after fish passage improvements were made. Also, according to NOAA Fisheries, Chinook salmon are the preferred fish for southern resident orcas. West Coast Chinook salmon have increased in the past 50 years. Further, those calling for removal of the dams make no mention of the increase of protected seals at the mouths of the river systems. See links under Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science and Energy Issues – US.


14th ICCC: The 14th International Conference on Climate Change presented by The Heartland Institute will be October 15 to 17, 2021, at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. See https://climateconference.heartland.org/


39th Annual Meeting of DDP: The Doctors for Disaster Preparedness will hold their 39th annual meeting “Renew, or ‘Reset’?” in Tucson on July 30 to August 1, 2021 at the Doubletree at Reid Park. Three SEPP directors will be giving presentations: Willie Soon, Sunspots: Hindcasting and Forecasting the Solar Cycle; David Legates, Bloom energy: the Theranos of Thermodynamics; and Howard Hayden, The Magic Trick of Climate Science. Register at http://www.ddponline.org/




SEPP is conducting its annual vote for the recipient of the coveted trophy, The Jackson, a lump of coal. Readers are asked to nominate and vote for who they think is most deserving, following these criteria:

The voting will close on July 30. Please send your nominee and a brief reason why the person is qualified for the honor to [email protected] The awardee will be announced at the DDP meeting on July 31 or August 1. For a list of past recipients and their accomplishments in earning this honor see http://www.sepp.org/april-fools-award.cfm


Number of the Week: 301 in 1913, up 17.6% by 1988, up 39.2% by 2021. The hottest temperature recorded on Earth was 134 F (56.5 C) Death Valley, California on July 10, 1913, at Greenland Ranch. According to NASA-GISS estimates the CO2 concentration in 1913 was 301 ppmv (parts per million volume). The tracking of CO2 concentrations at Mona Loa, verified by data taken elsewhere, peaks each year in May.

June 23, 1988 – James Hansen testified to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, triggering the political fear of global warming. the May peak CO2 concentration was 354 ppmv, up 53 ppmv, 17.6%, since 1913.

In 2021 the May peak CO2 concentration was 419 ppmv, up 188 ppmv, 39.2%, since 1913

It appears that nature does not obey global climate models and climate pessimists.

https://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/US/hottest.php, https://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/ghgases/Fig1A.ext.txt, https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt, and https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2764/Coronavirus-response-barely-slows-rising-carbon-dioxide

Science: Is the Sun Rising?

Tree rings show record of newly identified extreme solar activity event

Press release by Morgan Rehnberg, American Geophysical Union, July 13, 2021 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]


Link to paper: A Single-Year Cosmic Ray Event at 5410 BCE Registered in 14C of Tree Rings

By F. Miyake, et al. Geophysical Research Letter, June 1, 2021


Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013

Summary: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014


Summary: https://www.heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019


Download with no charge:


Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015


Download with no charge:


Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008


Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data

By Craig D. Idso, David Legates, and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Policy Brief, May 20, 2019

Challenging the Orthodoxy

Will the people rise up against the EU?

By Lubos Motl, The Reference Frame, July 16, 2021


New Paper on Out-of-Date Climate Scenarios

How Climate Scenarios Lost Touch With Reality

A failure of self-correction in science has compromised climate science’s ability to provide plausible views of our collective future.

By Roger Pielke Jr. and Justin Ritchie, Issues in Science and Technology, Summer 2021

Source link

Similar Articles



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here



Most Popular