"Carbon (Dioxide) trading is now the fastest growing commodities market on earth.....And here’s the great thing about it. Unlike traditional commodities markets, which will eventually involve delivery to someone in physical form, the carbon (dioxide) market is based on lack of delivery of an invisible substance to no-one. Since the market revolves around creating carbon (dioxide) credits, or finding carbon (dioxide) reduction projects whose benefits can then be sold to those with a surplus of emissions, it is entirely intangible." (Telegraph)
This blog has been tracking the 'Global Warming Scam' for over ten years now. There are a very large number of articles being published in blogs and more in the MSM who are waking up to the fact the public refuse to be conned any more and are objecting to the 'green madness' of governments and the artificially high price of energy. This blog will now be concentrating on the major stories as we move to the pragmatic view of 'not if, but when' and how the situation is managed back to reality. To quote Professor Lindzen, "a lot of people are going to look pretty silly"
PS: If you have arrived here on a page link, then click on the HOME link...
Friday, 30 November 2012
" More than 60 per cent of the British countryside could be exploited for shale gas, government documents show, as ministers prepare to give the go-ahead for developing the country's most significant new energy source since North Sea oil. The Independent understands that Ed Davey, the Energy Secretary, will soon end the current moratorium on shale gas production, which was put in place after fracking caused two small earthquakes near Blackpool in 2011. His decision will pave the way for a significant increase in shale gas exploration. The Chancellor, George Osborne, is also expected to announce the creation of a new Office for Shale Gas to co-ordinate and speed up production as part of his autumn statement next week. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the use of pressurised liquid to propagate fractures in rock and release natural gas. Maps, drawn up by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, and seen by The Independent, show the extent of potential development. They suggest more than 32,000 square miles – or 64 per cent of the countryside – could potentially be exploited for shale gas and is being considered for exploration licences."
Frosty Friday: Britain covered in white as temperatures dip to -7C and forecasters predict we're in for a snowy weekend
"Higher areas - including the Pennines, the North York Moors and north east Scotland - are likely to be blanketed in white come tomorrow morning with between 2cm and 3cm of snow. And with temperatures dropping as low as -7C last night - one degree colder than Moscow - it was frost which greeted many people as they opened their doors this morning, heralding a cold spell which is expected to last into next week."
Thursday, 29 November 2012
"A new paper published in The Cryosphere examines historical length changes of glaciers in W Greenland from 1800-2010 and finds "the average rate of retreat was largest in the first half of the 20th century." Data from the paper shows the average rate of retreat peaked at 25 meters per year during the 1930's and has decelerated to about half that rate over the past 70 years. Note glaciers have been generally retreating for 20,000 years since the peak of the last major ice age, and since the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850."
"(via CFACT) The latest round of climate talks began this week in Doha, Qatar in the usual fashion – namely, with alarmist claims that the world is being imperiled by manmade global warming and it’s time for “action.”
"Figures released by the UN's World Meteorological Organisation indicate that 2012 is set to be perhaps the ninth hottest globally since records began - but that planetary warming, which effectively stalled around 1998, has yet to resume at the levels seen in the 1980s and early 1990s.
The WMO figures are produced by averaging those from the three main climate databases: those of NASA, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the British one compiled jointly by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia.
The 2012 figure for the year so far stands at 14.45°C. If that were the figure for the full year, it would be cooler than 1998 (14.51°C) and most of the years since then (full listing from the Met Office here).
The official position of the climate establishment is that global warming is still definitely on and the flat temperatures seen for the last 14 years or so are just a statistical fluke of the sort to be expected when trying to measure such a vast and noisy signal as world temperatures with such precision. (The global warming since 1950 is assessed as just half a degree, a difficult thing to pick out when temperatures everywhere go up and down by many degrees every day and even more over a year.)"
Stefan Rahmstorf’s Sea Level Amnesia – Using His Own Numbers, Sea Level Rise Actually Slowed Down 3%!
"If we take Rahmstorf’s 1993 – 2006 period value of 3.3 mm/year, then we see that sea level rise has actually slowed down by 3%, and not risen 60%. The tricks being used by alarmist climate scientists are becoming ever more obvious and desperate. You don’t need to be an investigative journalist to uncover that."
"Thus we have another alternative energy failure – much like the many wind, solar and electric vehicle busts that have been archived by Obama administration watchdogs – that went belly-up once the government money ran out."
Wednesday, 28 November 2012
"Britain will shiver tonight as temperatures plummet in the first taste of what promises to be one of our coldest winters for a century. The cold snap is expected to last until the end of the week, creating dangerous conditions on the roads and adding to the misery of those already battling floods. Temperatures could fall to as low as minus 3°c (27°f) in some places, with snow already falling in the Pennines."
Tuesday, 27 November 2012
"Now that the old arguments have become obsolete, we’re told that green energy is the golden road to prosperity. Somehow the strategy of forcing higher-cost energy sources on consumers and propping them up with taxpayer subsidies (so everyone pays twice) is thought to be immune from the laws of economics.
Book Review: REGULATING TO DISASTER: HOW GREEN JOBS POLICIES ARE DAMAGING AMERICA’S ECONOMY
" At the 15-second mark, Schneider says “How did we know in the 1970s pretty much what would happen, it was theory then...and since then, nature’s been cooperating with theory, but we kind of knew what was going to happen...” As Schneider is claiming that in the 1970s “we” knew that carbon dioxide would overheat the Earth, the following image is shown: look, it says “Climatic Change” there, and that portion of a graph appears to show rising temperatures! However, there is a big, big, big problem with using this image: It’s from a famous Newsweek article called “The Cooling World”, from April 28, 1975 (PDF here). Note that when you are allowed to see the entire graph (below), it shows plunging temperatures since the 1940s. Note that when you see the entire article, it contains a climate change “solution” that involves “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot”.
"Terry McCrann fact-checks Chief Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery’s latest prediction: The latest effort from its so-called ‘chief climate commissioner’ really takes the cake with his absurd claim that Australia could be powered “almost entirely by renewable energy.” Oh yeah. Renewable energy now provides about 10 per cent of our electricity. Sounds like we’ve got a running start? We’ve ‘only’ got to expand it tenfold? .....Yes, the greatest half-truth of the climate propagandists. Make real power sources ridiculously, unnecessarily expensive and suddenly wind and solar become “cheap.”
" A paper published today in Environmental Research Letters reconstructs climate extreme events between 1500 and 2009 from tree ring data throughout Europe and shows extreme events have been relatively less common over the past 30 years in comparison to the past 2 centuries. The data also shows the 20th century [1900-2009] had 24 years with the climate extreme index at 2 or greater vs. 27 years during the 19th century. The paper adds to several other peer-reviewed papers demonstrating that extreme weather is less common with global warming."
"The average temperature for the Earth, or any region or even any specific place is very difficult to determine with any accuracy. At any given time surface air temperatures around the world range over about 100°C. Even in the same place they can vary by nearly that much seasonally and as much as 30°C or more in a day. Weather stations are relatively few and located very irregularly. Well maintained stations with good records going back a century or more can be counted on one’s fingers. Even then only maximum and minimum temperatures or ones at a few particular times of day are usually available. Maintenance, siting, and surrounding land use also all have influences on the temperatures recorded.
The purported 0.7°C of average global warming over the past century is highly uncertain. It is in fact less than the margin of error in our ability to determine the average temperature anywhere, much less globally. What portion of any such warming might be due to due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions is even less certain. There are, however, numerous phenomena which are affected by temperature and which can provide good evidence of relative warming or cooling and, in some cases, even actual temperatures. ...."
Monday, 26 November 2012
"The most recent global temperature record, released this week, shows the average global temperature fell last year for the second year. There is now general agreement that the rising trend has stalled. This is the background against which governments will meet in Doha to negotiate a globally binding agreement to cut carbon emissions, as agreed at last year’s meeting in Cape Town, South Africa. --Graham Lloyd, The Australian, 24 November 2012"
Sunday, 25 November 2012
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports are the ‘scientific’ source of claims for more severe and extreme weather. In fact the incidence and severity of extreme weather— hurricanes, wind storms, tornados, heat waves, drought, floods, ice storms, etc—have not generally increased recently and are well within long term natural variability.
IPCC are also wrong because in their models the data on which they are built is insufficient, the basic physics incorrect, and major mechanisms are inadequate or missing. But don’t take my word for it as the IPCC don’t hide their limitations. Instead they know people, especially the media, don’t read or understand the Science Report. They, cynically produce a Summary for Policymakers (SPM) written with a certainty completely unjustified by the Science Report."
Saturday, 24 November 2012
'World is committing suicide on a grand scale': Prince Charles warns of doomed planet unless we solve green issues
"In very strong language, Prince Charles claimed the planet was doomed to an 'unimaginable future' if the problems of carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere, intensive farming using pesticides and the depletion of natural resources were not addressed."
"However Dr Benny Peiser, director of Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the Prince’s views were still out of step with mainstream thinking. “He is really a good representative of the environmental movement as such and it is not a personal issue,” he said. But he added that the “extreme alarm and extreme concern” was “over the top and not helpful to the debate”.(Independent)
"Yesterday’s print edition of Germany’s high-brow weekly Die Zeit has a full three-page feature story on the growing climate science skepticism in the USA and Germany titled “The Climate Warriors” authored by Kerstin Kohlenberg and Anita Blasberg."
"Williams starts the show by framing republicans (and skeptics) as liars: “New Scientist complained about the “gross distortions” and “barefaced lying” politicians come out with…” He’s goes on to make the most blatant, baseless, and outrageous insults by equating skeptics to people who promote pedophilia, asbestos and drugs."
"First the Government slipped the leftovers of the emissions trading scheme into the fridge, via a law change sporting the sleep-inducing title Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Act. It remains to be seen whether it will be whipped out later for a quick stir-fry or consigned to the recycling.
Under the changes in the new act, the date for agriculture to join the scheme has been postponed from 2015 to sometime, maybe never. Also on the never-never is the transitional measure that allowed businesses to surrender one unit for every two units of emissions. Half price till further notice.
The Government has also dropped plans to phase out a 90 per cent subsidy on high-emission trade-exposed industries and failed to limit the number of (cheap) international units that businesses can buy rather than being forced to buy Kiwi units. That has raised howls of outrage from foresters who say it is undermining their economic position.
All of that adds up to such a weakening of the ''price signal'' sent to emitters that critics say the emissions trading scheme will have a minimal effect, if any, on curbing future carbon emissions. ......While it has largely gone under the radar, the Government has radically changed its original commitment to climate change measures. And there may be more to come. Cabinet's next decision will be whether to adopt a ''formal'' target on emissions reductions to 2020, which so far exists only as a conditional offer to cut them to between 10 per cent and 20 per cent below 1990 levels. That decision is itself conditional on establishing the final rules, including access to international carbon markets.
It may not get many voters hot under the collar, but New Zealand's climate change response has just been quietly filleted."
Friday, 23 November 2012
The real cost of green energy: Plans for new wind farms and nuclear reactor could add £75 to average electricity bill
"Electricity bills could rise by £75 a year by 2020 to fund a new generation of wind farms and nuclear reactors, it emerged last night. And by 2030 annual bills will go up by an estimated £178 under all the Government’s green and fuel poverty policies. A green energy strategy to be unveiled next week will treble the costs levied on bills from £2.35billion a year to £7.6billion."
" The news this morning is that the government seem to have plunked once and for all for a gas dominated future. The Energy Secretary Ed Davey has said this morning that we are going to need a lot of unabated gas fired generation. They're not saying that they're abandoning renewables of course, but it seems clear that the shale gas revolution is indeed going be central to the UK's energy future. A wildly expensive policy of promoting windfarms is going to be increasingly hard to justify."
"Osborne should be worried this morning that Tim Yeo is heaping praise on his defeat by the LibDems. The government have given two fingers to the public by sticking them with around £180 per year on top of their bills to fund green vanity projects like wind farms. While Osborne has gained a long term win in scrapping pie in the sky decarbonisation plans, Guido is fairly sure voters, already fuming at the cost of energy, are not going to see it like that.
The winners? With a planned £5 billion hike in renewable subsidies up to £7.6 billion from the £2.6 billion currently, the Big 6 energy giants and Nick Clegg’s standing in his own party. The losers? Everyone else. Vote Blue, go Green, end up in the Red…"
Thursday, 22 November 2012
“You’ll Be Amazed By What Was Observed” – Inconvenient Arctic Observations Before Satellite Measurements
"Die kalte Sonne website has another report about the Arctic. It presents a chronology showing that really nothing unusual is happening today. You’ll find it below translated in English."
"Almost everybody agrees that wind turbines are ugly and inefficient. But you’d think that the government, if it must persist in subsidising renewable energy, would do everything it could to incentivise wind power producers to create as much energy as possible while keeping the aesthetic damage to a minimum. Astonishingly, it is doing the opposite.
Inquiries by The Spectator have revealed a scam known as ‘de-rating’. Green businesses are modifying large turbines to make them less productive, because perverse government subsidies reward machines that produce less energy at nearly double the rate of more efficient ones. It’s extraordinarily profitable for a few beneficiaries, even if it clutters the countryside and does little to save the planet."
"A great piece of digging coming up in this week’s Speccie. Green businesses have been taking part in a scam known as ‘de-rating’, deliberately producing less energy than they are capable of in order to cash in on disincentivising government subsidies. With low-energy wind turbines given almost double the subsidy of their high-power alternatives in order to encourage new businesses to enter the market, owners of giant wind farms have been running their turbines at half capacity so they can trouser the top rate. DECC are aware of the scam but have yet to do anything about it…"
Wednesday, 21 November 2012
Another Dissident In Germany Speaks Up In An Open Letter – Even Warmist Science Shows There’s Been No Warming
"Dissent is growing and skepticism is taking root in Germany, as one prominent figure after another begin to speak out. This all goes back to Prof. Fred Singer’s visit to Germany 2010, which produced an uproar, especially among the Greens and Socialists."
"An important paper published today in the European Geosciences Union journal Earth System Dynamics uses polynomial cointegration to find "data for 1880–2007 do not support the anthropogenic interpretation of global warming during this period." The paper demonstrates "there is no relationship between temperature and the anthropogenic [man-made greenhouse gases] anomaly, once the warming effect of solar irradiance is taken into consideration."
"Until about ten years ago, NASA showed the US on an 80 year long cooling trend, with the three hottest years being in the 1920s and 1930s. They have deleted the raw data from their website and blocked archiving, but John Daly captured it. .....The current version of the US temperature record from NOAA and NASA is a complete fraud, and fundamentally misrepresents changes to the US climate."
My Open Call To The New York City Police Department – To Report Obvious Fraud Now In Progress At NASA GISS
"I am officially reporting, to the NYC police, NASA-GISS scientist James Hansen, pictured above, for manipulating and falsifying U.S. Government temperature data, with the likely intent to defraud U.S. citizens. He has been caught red-handed by Steven Goddard and other experts, not just once but on multiple occasions. All witnesses are urged to notify the authorities and to provide evidence of Hansen’s activity so that the authorities can properly investigate what plainly appears as criminal activity in broad daylight and, as duty calls, to render protection to the public they have sworn to serve."
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
"Over the last 10 years or so as new data have accumulated the general trend and likely future course of climate change has become reasonably clear. The earth is entering a cooling phase which is likely to last about 30 years and possibly longer. The major natural factors controlling climate change have also become obvious.Unfortunately the general public has been bombarded by the scientific and media and political establishments with anthropogenic global warming – anti CO2 propaganda based on the misuse and misrepresentation of already shoddy IPCC “science” for political ,commercial and personal ends."
"It's bizarre to watch the UK Met Office squirm as it desperately tries to maintain an ideological position in the face of conflicting evidence. I never would have believed that such a formerly respected institution, scientific impartiality at its core, could be so compromised by a political agenda."
"The initial response from the Met Office to the Mail on Sunday contained a number of errors. In their reply to me, they have made three more claims that are not true, in an attempt to cover up for their earlier mistakes. Were these incorrect statements deliberate or simply a result of incompetence? My personal view is that much of the propaganda fed to the public comes down from the management guys via the PR people. I suspect many of the actual scientists involved would tell you a different story, if they were asked. Lies or incompetence? Take your pick. Either way, we deserve much better from a publically funded body that has a duty to be open, honest and transparent."
Monday, 19 November 2012
"A quick recap: the seminar that brought it all to the surface Besides the furore over bungled BBC journalism, 28 Gate - the Beeb's refusal to name the "scientific experts" who convinced the broadcaster to take a firmly warmist position when reporting climate change - is far more profoundly serious than the BBC and its critics yet realise. What a humble freedom-of-information request has exposed, and called into the question, is the conduct and judgement of the BBC Trust itself. The trust is the BBC's governing body; it's essentially the old Board of Governors given a Strategy Boutique-style New Labour makeover when Auntie's royal charter was rewritten.
.....It started with a list 28 Gate, as it's predictably called, concerns the identity of attendees of a joint CMEP-IBT-BBC seminar in January 2006 who were credited the following year with shaping BBC policy on reporting climate change. But does it matter? Now we know who attended, thanks to some digging around in the internet's attic, are we surprised? Critics excited about 28 Gate affair are in danger of failing to see the wood for the trees. Blogger Tony Newbery's pursuit of the seminar's previously secret attendee list highlights two things of much greater significance. One is that it casts light on a strategy by the BBC's legal department to shield the public-funded corporation from scrutiny by the citizen, by redefining itself as a private organisation. .....
And the trust? It appears not to know or not to care about the battle over the climate seminar's attendees. But the affair also highlights the role the BBC thinks it must perform - and it's rather different to the one licence-fee payers expect it to perform - that of staying aloof from the fray. A report written by independent filmmaker John Bridcut for the BBC Trust asserted that the seminar was "high-level" and prompted a significant change in editorial policy. The trust did not refute this. Indeed, the trust would later pitch into the brawl, fists flying, itself. Both are ultimately issues that reflect on the conduct and judgement of the trust itself: it has made decisions where either it doesn't know or doesn't care about the consequences. This is why the Newbery saga is so incendiary: as Newbery himself says, this is "merely the beginning". (h/t Climate Realists)
Saturday, 17 November 2012
" The BBC’s decision to defy its charter obligation to report on this subject impartially followed from a secret day-long seminar held at Television Centre on January 26, 2006. It was attended by all the BBC’s top brass, including George Entwistle, the short-lived director-general, then head of TV current affairs, and several executives who have had to “step aside” because of the Savile affair, such as Helen Boaden, then director of news, and Steve Mitchell, then head of radio news.
In 2008, the BBC Trust published a report claiming that this unprecedented decision to flout its charter was taken after a “high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts” on climate change. Among those who tried to get the BBC to identify these “experts” was Tony Newbery, the blogger who recently faced the might of a highly paid legal team which persuaded an information tribunal to uphold the BBC’s right to keep secret the names of those attending this seminar.
When, last week, those names were finally revealed – thanks to another blogger, Maurizio Morabito (see omnilogos.com) and the Wayback Machine, which stores information deleted from the internet – the result was even more startling than had been suspected. Only three of the “28 specialists” invited to advise the BBC were active scientists, none of them climate experts and all committed global-warming alarmists. Virtually all the rest were professional climate-change lobbyists, ranging from emissaries of Greenpeace and the Stop Climate Chaos campaign to the “CO2 project manager” for BP, one of the world’s largest oil companies."
"The science does not exist to make detailed forecasts for temperature and snowfall for the end of this month, let alone for December or even the winter as a whole with these types of forecasts only able to provide an indication of how our weather might change, or be different from normal, (i.e. warmer, colder, wetter, drier) across the whole UK or even Europe Ultimately, we’re heading into winter and it is perfectly possible that we will see the whole range of weather that we get in winter at some point over the coming months, including snow and freezing temperatures, but also heavy rain, windy weather and mild conditions too." (h/t Tom Nelson)
Friday, 16 November 2012
Munich Blackout…Consumers Learn Today That Their Electricity Rates Will Skyrocket To Record Levels In 2013!
"If unstable grids, blackouts and crappy supply aren’t bad enough, today we learn that we will are going to have to pay a hell of a more for this crap power in 2013. What a deal! It’s the story of the green economy: much crappier products - astronomically higher prices."
Thursday, 15 November 2012
"Here, roughly, is how the spoils will be divided among the troughers at Ovenden Moor. The landowner will be paid £401,000 pa, index-linked, for the next 25 years. The developer will get an income of around £2,679,300 pa, index-linked, over the same period. The vast bulk of this will come straight from the taxpayer in the form of compulsory subsidies, payable even if the turbines produce no power. And the energy that will emerge from this orgy of greed and destruction? It will be neither green, clean, abundant or useful. Wind power requires full back-up from fossil-fuel-powered stations. It doesn’t save CO2, nor provide energy security, nor contribute anything to the base load power Britain so badly needs to keep the lights on."
Wednesday, 14 November 2012
" It's because I honestly believe that the Great Wind Energy Scam is by far the greatest scandal of our age. As I've argued time and again, in articles like this, this, this, and this, the wind industry is a very expensive solution to a non-existent problem. It makes no sense economically, ecologically, politically or environmentally. It kills wildlife, needlessly drives up energy prices, causes fuel poverty, blights property values, creates Low Frequency Noise which makes people ill, ruins the landscape and enriches the already rich at the expense of the poor. It even increases carbon emissions.
The only reason the industry exists at all is because of the vast sums of money made available to it through hidden tariffs consumers are forced to pay on their energy bills. Greedy rich landowners and even more rapacious corporations (most of them foreign-owned) are making a fortune at the expense of ordinary people by making a useless, environmentally-unfriendly product – unreliable, intermittent energy – which would be worthless in a free market and which causes enormous misery and damage to humans, to wildlife, to the landscape and the economy."
"But this is the problem, Tom, don't you see? Sceptics are not allowed to talk about climate sensitivity on the BBC because the science is all "settled". The seminar attendees told the corporation so. The amount of science that is settled is piffling - temperatures went up a bit at the end of the last century, CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that's pretty much it. Everything else is up in the air. Which is why the BBC policy is so iniquitous."
Exclusive: What Was Discussed at Secret BBC Climate Seminar Coverage “Exaggerated the Risk of Climate Change”
"Yesterday Guido brought you the list of names the BBC has spent six years trying to keep secret, revealing the “scientists” who set the Beeb’s editorial climate policy were nothing more than a crackpot assortment of pseudo-experts and hippy campaigners. Guido can now exclusively reveal what was discussed at the infamous meeting. Held under Chatham House rules, the quotes that have surfaced make for very interesting reading. ...."
Tuesday, 13 November 2012
"Here’s a summary of why such a list if very important, thanks to Bruce Hoult in a Bishop Hill comment I wish I knew how to link to:
This is incredible. In Jan 2006 the BBC held a meeting of “the best scientific experts” to decide BBC policy on climate change reporting (t)
The BBC has been in court blocking FOI attempts to get the list of the 28 attendees, but it’s just been discovered on the wayback machine (t)
It turns out that only 3 were current scientists (all alarmists). The rest were activists or journalists (t)
The BBC sent four low level representatives: Peter Rippon, Steve Mitchell, Helen Boaden, George Enwistle. All have since risen to power. (t)
Amazingly, those are also the exact four who have thus far resigned this week over the false paedophilia accusations against Lord McAlpine. (t)
BBC secret exposed: Greenpeace, activists, BP decide what “science” brits see — Hello TwentyEightGate
"In mid 2007 Tony Newbery of Harmless Sky started asking who was at the seminar, but the BBC wouldn’t give up the names. In fact the BBC thought the names were so significant that when Newbery sent them an FOI, they not only refused to hand over the list, but they used six lawyers against him (see The Secret 28 Who Made BBC ‘Green’ Will Not Be Named). The BBC, improbably, argued they weren’t “public” and even more improbably, they won the case. Who knew? The BBC could be considered a “private organisation”. Where are the shareholders? Having spent many thousands defending their secret meeting with such elaborate wordsmithing and lawyering, presumably, the irony is sweet that when Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) hunted online, he found the sacred list published in full. (Thanks to the wayback machine.)" ED:A MUST READ
SECRET 28 'scientific experts' who Greened the BBC - Revealed! alert print comment tweet Beeb spent a mint to suppress list on Wayback Machine (includes Greenpeacers)
"The case also highlights once again the BBC's corporate strategy of using an FOI derogation, or legal "opt-out" clause, to withhold a wide range of material from citizens who wish to know whether the BBC is fulfilling its statutory obligations under its royal charter. And it raises further questions about the effectiveness of the BBC Trust. The trust, which replaced the Board of Governors, was created with a mission: an "unprecedented obligation to openness and transparency". It has yet to enquire into the corporation's use of FOI derogation to withhold data such as the BBC's US tax contributions, website statistics, and strategic policy-making decisions."
"This of course follows the unsuccessful attempt by blogger Tony Newbery (Harmless Sky) to get to the truth of the now-infamous January 2006 seminar where the BBC decided to give up even pretending to be balanced on the climate change issue and start reporting it like a full-on Greenpeace activist. The BBC's excuse: clever experts made us do it. But this won't wash now that – thanks to some inspired digging by Maurizio Morabito – the list of the guilty has finally been revealed. (A big thanks to Tony for setting the ball rolling….) Here are allegedly "the best scientific experts" who attended:"
"Now, thanks to the Wayback machine and Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) we can now read the list that the BBC fought to keep secret. [Damn those mischevious bloggers ;-) ] This list has been obtained legally. (link to Wayback document.) My heartiest congratulations to Maurizo for his excellent sleuthing!"
"Maurizio Morabito has obtained the details of the BBC climate 28. It had been published by the International Broadcasting Trust. Greenpeace, Tearfund, Television for the Environment (one of the companies involved in the BBC free programming scandal), Stop Climate Chaos, Npower Renewables, E3G, and dear old Mike Hulme from UEA. Just the group you'd want guiding climate change coverage. Read the whole thing."
"Last month Guido reported that the BBC were refusing to respond to a Freedom of Information request asking for the names of scientists who attended the now infamous climate change seminar in 2006, that was convened to decide BBC climate change policy. The BBC Trust admitted that the evidence given at the seminar led to an unprecedented editorial decision to no longer give equal airtime to opponents of the climate change . At the time Guido wondered why the BBC was spending a six-figure sum to keep the names of the specialists who dictated their editorial policy secret? So who was there? Well if the BBC had their way we would never know, they are still trying to fight the publication of this list, however what is believed to be the complete who’s who has now been acquired by legitimate sleuthing by Maurizio Morabito:"
Monday, 12 November 2012
"Met Office figures already show that 2012 has been one of the coldest years since 1996. Yesterday forecasters said that Scotland could expect to see temperatures plunge to between -10C and -15C by the end of the month. It is also believed Scotland could see a repeat of the winter of 2010, when temperatures fell to as low as -18C in some parts of the country."
Sunday, 11 November 2012
"Does Mr Cameron really have any idea of what a far-reaching game he is caught up in? Another story last week – with the headline “We need wind farms to power electric cars, says Cameron” – may make us wonder. On the face of it, nothing could seem dottier than putting these two huge blunders together: the fanciful belief that we can somehow provide a third of our electricity from unreliable windmills; and the quixotic enthusiasm for electric cars which, despite hefty subsidies, remain so unpopular that their UK sales have fallen this year to just 749."
Friday, 9 November 2012
Thursday, 8 November 2012
"Re-posted from the latest NIPCC Report, two new papers add to hundreds of others showing that the Medieval Warming Period [MWP] was warmer than the Current Warm Period, "which makes it extremely difficult to believe that Earth's current level of warmth largely owes its existence to anthropogenic CO2 emissions, as the world's climate alarmists continue to claim it does."
"Europe’s ability to compete against the US as a manufacturing centre is being damaged by rising energy costs as North America benefits from cheap natural shale gas, Germany’s biggest companies have warned. The energy cost advantage for US companies is rising and is expected to persist until at least 2020, according to the BDI, the German industry lobby group. .......While Obama will continue with a series of environmental regulations that would curb the production and use of coal, his policies promise to boost demand for natural gas in vehicles and power plants and facilitate domestic oil and gas output to levels not seen in more than two decades. ....Britain will need to invest 330 billion pounds in its energy sector, excluding networks, by 2030 and return its economy to growth to meet carbon emissions reduction targets, the London School of Economics said in a report on Thursday."
"Hurricane Sandy was not due to global warming, and the Climate Commission is wrong to claim otherwise.
As has already been stressed by senior scientist Martin Hoerling from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and many other scientists, no evidence exists for any influence of global warming, let alone human-caused warming, on the intensity of hurricane Sandy. Sandy was a decaying hurricane whose wind intensity was decreasing as it moved north across subtropical waters. Importantly, the presence of a second large weather system in the north-east Atlantic Ocean and Canada blocked the passage of the hurricane and caused its impact and storm surge to be focused in the New Jersey-New York area. (h/t Climate Depot)
Winter Hits Early On Three Continents…Cold, Snow And Blizzard Conditions Hit China, New York And The UK
"As snow falls over New Jersey and other parts of the mid-Atlantic states, the Northeast USA is not the only region being visited early by old man winter."
Wednesday, 7 November 2012
"The IPCC seems to be pre-empting the growing skeptical science by preparing to issue an ‘its even worse than we thought’ report in 2013, according to a report in the Australian newspaper."
ED: More scare stories to keep the faithful in line and the money coming in....
"Regrettably for the global warming religion, its predictions have started to appear shaky, and the converts, many of whom have lost their jobs and much of their wealth, are losing faith. Worse, heretic scientists have been giving the lie to many of the prophecies described in the IPCC bible. They could not be silenced. Of course, the IPCC texts can be interpreted in different ways and sceptics have obviously chosen the wrong interpretation. When atmospheric temperatures on which we had relied failed to comply with the prophecies, the waverers were instructed to look at ocean temperatures and rising sea levels.
So far, so good. However, the British arm of the climate establishment silently released an encyclical that revealed no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures from the beginning of 1997 until August this year. This communique was unearthed by the heretic newspaper, the Daily Mail, which pointed out that this period was of about the same duration as when temperatures rose between 1980 to 1996.
Of course, the religious high priests were quick to play down the significance of this pause. Phil Jones of the Climategate denomination claimed it was to be expected and, he insisted, 15 or 16 years is not a significant period. Yet in 2009 he said that a “no upward trend has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried”. But that was then and this is now and he is not about to lose his religion simply because the evidence doesn’t support the text. And, of course, there are always extenuating circumstances. El Nino and La Nina are there when you need them, to be forgotten when temperatures are warming or remembered if they are cooling. And, we’ve had a record Arctic melt. But better not mention the storm that NASA concedes broke the ice up and drove it south, or the record Antarctic ice gain."
"With a wink and a nod to the electorate, President Obama campaigned that he would drill more, dig more, burn more, and explore more. In the debates, the two candidates practically got into fisticuffs over who would be the true energy president. Hours after he won the bitterly fought election, he tweeted: "We want our kids to grow up in a world...that isn't threatened by the destructive power of the warming planet." Forget the campaign promises. Enviros have nothing to worry about. Obama can now use the EPA to regulate energy companies into near-profitless entities who will now have to deal with even less access to federal lands and off-shore drilling. Fracking for natural gas is already an anathema to this administration as tougher restrictions are expected to be imposed on companies that utilize federal lands. According to analysts at ClearView Energy Partners, they expect the president to "continue prosecuting energy policy through regulation and administrative action, with only the courts as a check on that agenda." By tightening these rules and arduous regulations, billions will be added "in costs for oil and gas companies." These costs are expected to be passed on to consumers. Obama is also expected to cut subsidies to oil and gas companies and continue to promote renewable energy under Energy Secretary Steven Chu's tutelage."
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
"The recent convictions of seven earth scientists for involuntary manslaughter raised a storm of protest. A closer look at the case provides a sobering lesson for experts who present opinions as established fact. Climate alarmists, please take note....On Sunday April 5, 2009, five days before Good Friday, the inhabitants of L’Aquila (“The Eagle”, population about 70,000) in central Italy’s Apennine Mountains, felt two tremors. The first struck just before 11pm local time. It measured 3.9 on the magnitude scale, the second 3.5. Strong enough to loosen some objects, but unlikely to wake you up.Nevertheless, there was a lot of anxiety. A low-level quake swarm had occurred the previous week - eight tremors of at least magnitude 3. A major quake, magnitude 6.3, hit central Italy about four hours later, at 3.32am local time. More than 300 residents were killed, 1,500 injured, 65,000 homeless, with damage estimated at about 15 billion dollars. .....Three years later, on Monday, October 22, seven members of Italy’s National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks (NCFPMR) were given six-year jail sentences after a two-year trial, banned from holding public office and forced to pay court costs and damages. ....The L’Aquila Seven, however, were not charged with failing to predict the earthquake, but with conducting a superficial risk assessment and presenting incomplete and falsely reassuring findings to the public,
Lesson 4: An invitation to panic (and to de-carbonise your life, civilisation and planet during a climate change scare) is an alarmist statement.
Monday, 5 November 2012
"As millions in the Northeast suffer from the lack of water, heat, and electricity, climate change alarmists are quick to suggest that humanity's "carbon footprint" is somehow to blame for the devastation. Physicians for Civil Defense states: "The lesson from this hurricane is that we need better disaster preparedness, not less use of coal and oil." Historical records show that worse hurricanes have occurred before, but did less damage because there were fewer human homes and businesses in the path of the storm surge. In its 2011 New England Hurricane Awareness Project, PCD reminded people about the 1938 Great New England Hurricane, also known as the Long Island Express.
"Today Spiegel here writes that there is “little hope of a global worldwide climate treaty” being reached in Doha, Qatar, three weeks from now and that “the chief economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Ottmar Edenhofer, sees negotiations at a dead-end“.
"So rather than anthropogenic global warming making Sandy worse, it could have actually lessened its intensity and impacts. The truth is, is that it is impossible to know how, or even if, global warming played any role at all in the lifecycle of Sandy. The science is all over the map, and the signal-to-noise ratio is so low that no matter what is occurring its impact in any direction is undetectable. But it is sexier and has much more press appeal to proclaim that the destruction wrought by “superstorm” Sandy is the product of our unrestrained fossil fuel consumption, rather than the equally plausible opposite—that anthropogenic climate changes may have combined to lessen Sandy’s intensity."
"SUMMARY (1) Irene and Sandy were overdue landfalling storms in the northeast during the warm multidecadal Atlantic mode that started in 1995. This is similar to the active priod from 1938-1960 when 11 landfalling impactful hurricanes occurred in the east (8 so far since 1995).
(2) The arctic ice responds to the same multidecadal Atlantic cycle and the Pacifical Decadal Oscillation. Ice in the 1950s was probably even lower than present as US submarines surface at the pole in winter and summer
(3) The warm AMO favore ths negative state of the NAO and AO which translates into colder and often snowier winters in the US and Eurasia.
(4) Its the AMO stupid. (h/t Climate Depot)
Sunday, 4 November 2012
" American and British researchers compared two groups of residents in the US state of Maine. One group lived within a mile of a wind farm and the second group did not. Both sets of people were demographically and socially similar, but the researchers found major differences in the quality of sleep the two groups enjoyed. The findings provide the clearest evidence yet to support long-standing complaints from people living near turbines that the sound from their rotating blades disrupts sleep patterns and causes stress-related conditions."
North Sea Mk II: Britain is sitting on a £1.5 trillion gas goldmine which could bring enormous economic benefits...
"Britain is sitting on a £1.5 trillion shale gas bonanza that could be worth more than the remaining North Sea gas. The amount is bigger than previously thought and would potentially bring energy price stability and independence from imports for decades. Although only about ten per cent of the gas is in unpopulated areas suitable for extraction, it would still be worth £150 billion. ,,,,,Although the shale gas reserves are unlikely to mean a fall in gas prices, there could be enough to prevent expected big increases for years. Oil and gas experts are also hopeful about the high concentration of gas in UK rocks, which is richer than even US shale deposits and would require fewer wells. The Coalition hopes that shale gas can transform the economy in the way North Sea oil did in the Eighties and Nineties. David Cameron has chaired a seminar to which he invited shale gas experts to come to Downing Street."
Saturday, 3 November 2012
"Inevitably, as the area was hit by a 12ft storm surge, climate activists had rushed to blame global warming for this “unprecedented” event – only to be met with a wall of historical facts showing it was nothing of the kind. According to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, hurricanes were much more frequent and intense in the 1940s, and have lately been at a historic low. A storm surge flooding Manhattan in 1821 was 30ft high. The Galveston hurricane of 1900 killed 8,000 people. And so forth."
" For years our politics has been frozen in a claustrophobic unanimity, whereby all parties agreed that we must not question our loyalty to the EU – or the need to “fight climate change” by suicidally distorting our energy policy in favour of those absurd windmills. But on each issue, those who spoke out last week were aware that their actions were viewed with sympathy even in the highest reaches of government. What “targets” was he referring to? He couldn’t possibly have meant the EU target which commits us to producing 32 per cent of our electricity from renewables within eight years. Technically, this is out of the question: it would require us to spend £100 billion on another 24,000 giant turbines, at a rate of nearly 10 a day, in addition to the 4,500 we’ve already got (which produce between them less electricity than the 2.2 megawatt gas-fired power station that opened in Wales in September, at only a fraction of the cost). We may, he implied, be unable to stop the 3,500 turbines already under construction or with planning permission, but as to what comes after that, we must have a serious national debate."
Forecasters warn of coldest bonfire night for 14 years as early winter worsens and temperatures drop to as low as -6C
"The Met Office issued a severe weather alert from tomorrow across the South, South-East and south Midlands for up to 40mm of rain - two weeks’ worth - fanning flood worries. Forecasters said wet snow threatens the North Downs, South Downs, Chilterns, Cotswolds, Salisbury Plain, Exmoor and Dartmoor, with slushy deposits possible. Monday will be the coldest November 5 since daily temperature records began in 1999, Met Office data passed to Reading University meteorology expert Dr Roger Brugge showed."
Friday, 2 November 2012
"The emails go on and on, revealing that Vice President Biden, Secretary Chu, and other high-ranking White House officials consistently pressured career DOE officials to approve loans to politically favored Green energy companies. Many of these now bankrupt companies had close personal ties to the Obama Administration. Research by Marita Noon and Christine Lakotos shows “that at least 90% of the projects had close ties to the White House and other high ranking Democrats.”
Next time somebody tries to tell you hurricane Sandy was an “unprecedented” East Coast hurricane, show them this
"All one need to do to explode the memes that paid political activists Bill McKibben and Brad Johnson are pushing is to look at a history book. In this case, WeatherBELL’s Joe Bastardi points us to NOAA’s National Hurricane Center history book: .."
"The public-funded broadcaster appeared in court this week to defend its decision to conceal the names of "scientific experts" that attended a BBC climate change seminar in 2006".
"This seminar is historically significant. The BBC's global reputation for news reporting stems from its unshakable impartiality; even in wartime its commitment to maintaining evenhandedness has occasionally enraged British politicians (and sometimes servicemen). Following that 2006 seminar, however, the corporation made a decision to abandon impartiality when covering climate change - and that's according to the BBC Trust. This was an unprecedented decision for the BBC in peacetime."
"Yet, Mayor Bloomberg is also an elected leader. What is he going to do about the fact that his city was less prepared than it should have been for a disaster that was expected and one of a sort will certainly recur, climate change or not?"
"In 1886, the US was hit by an incredible seven hurricanes, including two major hurricanes. Suppose that some snake oil salesman named Hames Jansen had been running around the country in 1886 claiming that he could prevent hurricanes by having everyone give up coal and oil. The consequences would have been catastrophic, had people been stupid enough to listen to Dr. Hames Jansen. So why are people in 2012 stupid enough to listen to snake oil salesman James Hansen?"
It’s The Global Warming, Stupid New York’s crack mayor says that hurricanes are caused by humans, and that voting for Obama will make hurricanes stop. Bloomberg has people starving on Staten Island, so he responds by checking out mentally and joining the pagan cult of Obama worship. That is much easier than doing anything useful."
Thursday, 1 November 2012
"The graph above shows normalized US hurricane damage, based on data from ICAT, which applies an extension to the methodology of Pielke et al. 2008. The 2012 estimate for Sandy comes from Moody's, and is an estimate. The red line represents a linear best fit to the data -- it is flat."
"This cover today is making the rounds in the alarmosphere, where a single storm, a single data point in the hundreds of hurricanes that have struck the USA during its history, is now apparently “proof” of global warming causing bad weather. It is just another silly example of Tabloid Climatology™. .....Hurricane expert Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. says: The only accurate part of this Bloomberg BusinessWeek cover is “stupid”