Archives de catégorie : better to know…?

better to know...?, energy and fields

COP25 : LA PLACE DU NUCLÉAIRE DANS LA TRANSITION ÉNERGÉTIQUE MONDIALE

by l’EnerGeek, 3 décembre 2019

Lundi 2 décembre, la COP25 s’ouvre dans un climat tendu à Madrid. Le 28 novembre dernier, le Parlement Européen a décrété l’urgence climatique. Le Parlement appelle la COP25 à “prendre des mesures audacieuses et ambitieuses”. Et la plus ambitieuse de toutes pourrait être une résolution votée en faveur de l’énergie nucléaire. Car avec la mise en place d’un nouveau mix électrique mondial, cette énergie bas carbone est plus que jamais en bonne position pour devenir le moteur de la transition énergétique.

Le Parlement Européen soutient le nucléaire

Le texte du Parlement Européen revient sur l’importance de l’énergie nucléaire dans le cadre de la transition énergétique et estime que “l’énergie nucléaire peut jouer un rôle dans la réalisation des objectifs climatiques, car elle n’émet pas de gaz à effet de serre et peut également assurer une part significative de la production d’électricité en Europe ; considère néanmoins que, en raison des déchets qu’elle génère, cette énergie nécessite une stratégie à moyen et long terme prenant en compte les avancées technologiques (laser, fusion, etc.) visant à améliorer la durabilité de l’ensemble du secteur”

Valérie Faudon, de la Société Française d’énergie nucléaire (SFEN), François Momboisse, Tristan Kamin et autres experts, consultants ou ingénieurs se sont félicités sur les réseaux sociaux de cette prise de position estimant que le nucléaire est “une solution efficace pour lutter contre le réchauffement climatique, aux côtés des autres énergies bas carbone.” A l’inverse, Michèle Rivasi, députée européenne, a par exemple expliqué par le biais d’un tweet pourquoi elle a voté contre cette résolution :

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Climatologist On The State Of Climate Change Ahead Of COP25

by J. Curry, December 2, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch

The UN Climate Change Conference this week in Madrid provides an important opportunity to reflect on the state of the public debate surrounding climate change.

The UN Climate Conference (COP25) is beginning today in Madrid. I’ve been invited to write an op-ed for a newspaper in Madrid, which I assume will be published sometime this week (in Spanish). Below is the text of my op-ed.

JC op-ed

The UN Climate Change Conference this week in Madrid provides an important opportunity to reflect on the state of the public debate surrounding climate change.

Most of the world’s governments are prioritizing energy security, affordability and industrial competitiveness over commitments made for the Paris climate agreement.

Continuer la lecture de Climatologist On The State Of Climate Change Ahead Of COP25 →

better to know...?

Doomsday awaits? NASA predicts the odds of two asteroids that are now headed toward earth

by Nirmal Narayanan, November 30, 2019 in InternationalBusinessTimes

Several space experts believe that earth will face an extinction event following a dreaded asteroid hits

It was on last July that NASA discovered a giant asteroid named 2019 ND7. This doomsday rock is more than 200 meters wide, and a potential hit on the planet could wipe out a city within a fraction of a second. Experts believe that a potential collision with 2019 ND7 will unleash energy equivalent to more than 1,000 atomic bombs exploded in Hiroshima during World War II, and millions of people will lose life instantly.

However, the chances of asteroid 2019 ND7 hitting the earth are very small. The United States space agency has calculated the risk at 1 in 310,000, which means there is a 99.99968 chance that this dangerous space rock will miss the earth. 2019 WG2 is a small asteroid when compared to 2019 ND7.

The asteroid is 35 meters wide, and NASA has calculated the risk at 1 in 4,000. As per NASA, 2019 ND7 may crash into the earth between 2097-2117 on 20 different occasions. On the other hand, 2019 WG2 may hit between 2098 and 2119 on 56 different occasions.

…

better to know...?, climate and geology

WH’S “POLAR BEAR VIEWING SEASON” ENDS EARLY FOR THE THIRD YEAR IN A ROW BECAUSE OF TOO MUCH ICE!

by Cap Allon, November 19, 2019 in Electroverse

2019 is now the third year in a row in which the refreezing of Western Hudson Bay (WH) ice has come earlier than the 1980s average date of November 16, as reported by polarbearscience.com.

Livecams over at explore.org have confirmed a key indicator that the ice is back — the polar bears of WH have begun their winter trek back onto the bay.

The redeveloping sea ice may be good news for the bears, but it’s bad for tourists — after a short five months with the Sailors of the Floe on land, their departure now means the ‘polar bear viewing season’ in Churchill, Manitoba, is ending early, just as it did last year, and the year before. In fact, on the back of what have been five good sea ice seasons in succession for WH polar bears, this year’s repeat of an early freeze-up means a sixth good ice season is now likely for 2019-2020 — less kerching for the region.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

UK ON COURSE FOR AN HISTORICALLY COLD NOVEMBER

by Cap Allon, November 19, 2019 in Electroverse

After decades of being lectured by the Met Office -among others– that global warming will bring an end to extreme-cold temperatures, the UK still somehow keeps-on clocking them — yet another example of how simple real-world observations can unravel the AGW-ruse.

Brits have been suffering-through an historically cold month, too — November’s average temperature has held well-below the norm for the first 17 days, continuing October’s dramatic cooling trend:

…

The Central England Temperature (CET) record measures the monthly mean surface air temperatures for the Midlands region of England, and is the longest series of monthly temperature observations in existence anywhere in the world.

Its mean reading for November 2019 (to the 17th) is sitting at 6.6C — that’s 0.7C below the already cool 1961-1990 average, the current standard period of reference for climatological data used by the WMO.

In the 360 years of CET data, there have only been 10 other years with an November average temperature of 6.6C — these are 1804, 1833, 1835, 1849, 1886, 1932, 1941, 1949, 1977, 1980.

Note also how the majority of these years fall in or around solar minimums of the past (1804, 1849, and 1980 being the only exceptions).

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

THE DANISH METEOROLOGICAL INSTITUTE ADMITS IT WRONGLY REPORTED GREENLAND’S “RECORD WARM TEMPERATURE” THIS SUMMER

by Cap Allon, November 17, 2019 in Electroverse

The Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) admitted it wrongly reported Greenland’s record summer warmth, in what it called “good news from a climate perspective”…?

The DMI, a key player in monitoring Greenland’s climate, reported a “shocking” early-August temperature of between 2.7C (37F) and 4.7C (40.5F) at the Summit weather station, located some 3,202m above sea level at the center of the Greenland ice sheet.

This news quickly spread to every corner of the left-leaning web, like some nasty EOTW rash. But just a few days later the DMI posted a tweet retracting that record temp, saying that after a “closer look” (whatever that means exactly) it was revealed that the monitoring equipment had been giving “erroneous results”.

“Was there record-level warmth on the inland ice on Friday?” said the institute’s tweet dated Aug 08. “No! A quality check has confirmed out suspicion that the measurement was too high.”

…

Blue Melt River, Petermann Glacier, in remote northwestern Greenland, on Nares Strait. (Photo by: Dave Walsh/VW Pics/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
better to know...?, climate-debate

Forget Climate Excuses: Environment Agency Ignored Flood Warnings For Years–The Times

by P. Homewood, Nov. 21, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

As flooding spread across the country yesterday, the Association of Drainage Authorities said that warnings had been issued each year since 2007 at its annual conference, attended by Environment Agency staff.

The warnings were made by the association’s members in South Yorkshire, including John Duckitt, a farmer and elected commissioner of the drainage board that covers Fishlake near Doncaster, where parts of the village are still submerged more than a week after flooding began.

Speaking from his home yards from the Don, Mr Duckitt, 83, said that his concerns fell on “deaf ears”. He claimed that the agency “chooses to do as little as possible” and had allowed trees and plants to grow on the side of the river narrowing the channel after “ignoring local knowledge”.

“They knew about the problem and chose to ignore it,” he said. “This made the floods worse. Fair enough this flood was unprecedented but the Environment Agency, through lack of maintenance on the river, protracted the flood. It didn’t get away fast enough and did more damage.”

better to know...?, climate-debate

Raw Data Bombshell: no change in Very Hot Days in Australia since World War I

by JoNova, November 20, 2019

After we were shocked at the latest ACORN changes to our Very Hot Days data, I asked Chris Gillham if we could see the effect of Bureau of Meteorology changes to the original raw data – and he replied it would be too time-consuming writing the code to calculate 40C+ days among the millions of daily temperatures from 112 weather stations across Australia since 1910. Then he did it anyway.

Wow. In 2011, the BoM’s ACORN 1 adjustments wiped out some of the “very hot days” recorded at weather stations in the early 1900s. These were records that had stood for a whole century. Then, quietly six years later, the ACORN 2 readjustments turned the statistical air conditioner on again and cooled people from 100 years in the future.

It’s all especially miraculous given that even the old World War I  data was recorded in official BoM-approved Stevenson screens. The BoM won’t consider pre 1910 data because it wasn’t standardized, but even when it is, they still have to “fix” it. And in the intervening years after 1910, the Urban Heat Islands have grown and electronic equipment that can record one-second-records have been introduced across the nation. With the old equipment, 40C+ extremes were harder to get than with today’s micro-minute spikes caused by gusts of hot air rolling off carparks and tarmacs.

What we see in the 60 longest running ACORN sites, all open in 1910, is that the raw temperature data had just as many “very hot days” in the World War I era as it does now. Oh boy.

No wonder the BOM was keen to move the “Very Hot Days” graphics and data and tuck them away in a remote page on their website.

…

 

better to know...?, climate-debate

Thugs bully Munich Conference Center – Force Cancellation of Climate Skeptic Conference

by Anthony Watts, November 19, 2019 in WUWT

Reprinted with permission from No Tricks Zone

Just like the 1030s, and again Munich. There’s no question that freedom of science and speech are under heavy attack in Germany after dozens of distinguished but dissenting scientists have seen their long planned science conference cancelled due to intimidation by leftwing extremists.

 

This latest climate conference cancellation comes just after leftists coerced the University of Hamburg to disinvite political leaders from making speeches.

The same has also just occurred at the famed University of Göttingen.

The problem of suppressing open discussion has deteriorated to such an extent across Germany over the recent years that even according to leftist Spiegel 75% of journalists and writers are “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about the state of free speech in Germany!

Free speech in Germany is in state of crisis.

Munich NH Congress Center bullied, cancels at last minute

The latest free speech suppression and intimidation has unfolded in Munich: The 13th International Climate and Energy Conference, sponsored by the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) and CFACT, has seen its contractual agreement torn up, and was booted out of the conference facility at the last minute.

…

Also : Climate Extremism in the Age of Disinformation

better to know...?, climate-debate

Judith Curry: Legacy of Climategate – 10 years later

by Charles the moderator, November 15, 2019 in WUWT

As we approach the tenth anniversary of Climategate and are deluged with whitewashing and revisionist history, we will post a few articles, but cannot counter everything.

As far as we are concerned the tenth anniversary is on November 17th, the day I personally received the files.

The following post by Dr. Curry is one of the best historical retrospectives I’ve seen on the topic.~ctm

Reposted from Dr. Judith Curry’s Climate Etc.

Legacy of Climategate – 10 years later

Posted on November 12, 2019 by curryja | 121 Comments

by Judith Curry

My reflections on Climategate 10 years later, and also reflections on my reflections of 5 years ago.

Last week, an email from Rob Bradley reminded me of my previous blog post The legacy of Climategate: 5 years later. That post was the last in a sequence of posts at Climate Etc. since 2010 on Climategate; for the entire group of posts, see  [link]  Rereading these was quite a blast from the past.

While I still mention Climategate in interviews, the general reaction I get is ‘yawn . . . old hat . . . so 2010 . . . nothingburger . . . the scientists were all exonerated . . . the science has proven to be robust.’ I hadn’t even thought of a ’10 years later’ post until Rob Bradley’s email.

Now I see that, at least in the UK, the 10 year anniversary looks to be rather a big deal. Already we are seeing some analyses published in the mainstream media:

Two starkly different perspectives. While I personally think Delingpole’s article is a superb analysis, it would not surprise me if the ‘establishment’ media in the UK is looking to rewrite history and cement the ‘exoneration,’ especially with this forthcoming one hour BBC special Climategate: Science of a Scandal, set to air November 14.

According to Cliscep  (not sure what the source of this information is), McKitrick and McIntyre were both interviewed for the BBC special, but apparently McKitrick was cut completely. Lets see how they edit McIntyre.

…

…

 

Also:  It’s Officially the Tenth Anniversary of Climategate – and they’ve learned nothing

Also : Climategate: 10 Year Anniversary Reading List

better to know...?, biology+acidification

The Corals That Don’t Exist

by Donna Laframboise, November 18, 2019 in BigPictureNews

In December 2015 Peter Ridd, then a physics professor at Australia’s James Cook University, contacted a journalist. Researchers affiliated with his own institution, he said, were misleading the public about the Great Barrier Reef.

As an example, Ridd cited photos taken approximately 100 years apart near Bowen, a community of 10,000 on the Australian coast in the vicinity of the Reef. These photos tell a stark story: previously vibrant coral expanses are now desolate wastelands.

Ridd complained that this pair of photos was spreading across the Internet. They were appearing in official reports and news stories. Even though the 1995 paper in which they’d first been published had cautioned against viewing them as evidence the Reef was in “broad scale decline,” that’s exactly how they were being used.

Ridd supplied the journalist with recent photos from the same area. These showed healthy, abundant coral.

…

better to know...?, climate and geology

Climategate And Post-Normal Science

by Michael Kile, November 16, 2019 in WUWT

It was an important moment in the Climategate saga. Yet few remember Jerome Ravetz’s damning critique of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) posted on WUWT in early 2010.

Ravetz is an eminent American philosopher of science and an Associate Fellow at Oxford University’s James Martin Institute for Science and Civilisation. (Personal web page here; Oxford pages here and here.) For much of his career he has been challenging claims of scientific objectivity and developing a concept of “post-normal science” (PNS).

We can understand the root cause of Climategate as a case of scientists constrained to attempt to do normal science in a post-normal situation. But climate change had never been a really ‘normal’ science, because the policy implications were always present and strong, even overwhelming.  Indeed, if we look at the definition of ‘post-normal science’, we see how well it fits:  facts uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high, and decisions urgent.  In needing to treat Planet Earth like a textbook exercise, the climate scientists were forced to break the rules of scientific etiquette and ethics, and to play scientific power-politics in a way that inevitably became corrupt.  The combination of non-critical ‘normal science’ with anti-critical ‘evangelical science’ was lethal. (J Ravetz, WUWT, 9 February, 2010)

Some environmentalists had been using Ravetz’s PNS concept to drive a looser – more subjective – approach to decision-making under uncertainty, urging greater use of the so-called “precautionary principle”, a “principle” of pseudoscience, not genuine science.

The late Stephen Schneider (1945-2010), then Stanford University professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies and editor of the journal Climatic Change, was one of them. He was also an IPCC lead author. Schneider advised other lead authors how to deal with uncertainty in a climate context in the IPCC’s Third and Fourth Assessment Reports.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

MULTIPLE KEY ROADS BLOCKED IN ALGERIA FOLLOWING HEAVY SNOWFALL

by Cap Allon, November 12, 2019 in Electroverse

Northern Africa caught the edges of Europe’s polar blast over the weekend and into Monday. Heavy snowfall affected several wilayas (provinces) in Algeria yesterday, as reported by alg24.net. 

The key national road 33, linking Bouira to Tizi-Ouzou, was closed during Monday morning rush-hour near the town of El Asnam. As was the RN30, the alternative route connecting Bouira to Tizi-Ouzou.

Heavy early-season drifts also shut national road 15 near Iferhounene, in the wilaya of Tizi-Ouzou.

Same case for the RN109 linking Sidi Bel Abbès and El-Bayadh.

And the road 172, located between Djbel Chélia and Lyabous (Khenchela) was also shut.

…

…

better to know...?

N. Hemisphere In Hypothermia! Widespread Early Winter…”Historic Snowstorms”…”Record Books Rewritten”

by P. Gosselin, November 13, 2019 in NoTricksZone

Winter has not even officially arrived, but already large areas of the northern hemisphere are seeing “historic snowfalls”, frigid temperatures and even avalanche alarms.

The Northern Hemisphere has certainly caught a major cold, one certainly not caused by the human CO2 virus. Instead of fever, parts of the northern hemisphere are in hypothermia!

Alarmists, media desperate

Though global warming scientists will never admit it, they are really surprised and stunned. All that is left for them is to make up some cockamamie warming-causes-cold explanations and hope there are enough severely stupid among the media and masses to believe it.

“United States — Rewrite the Record Books”

Beginning in North America, “sub-zero temperatures are now blasting” millions of Americans following “the three historic snowstorms which buried parts of the U.S. last month,” reports weather site electroverse.net here.

Electroverse writes that “lows throughout the week will be more like January temperatures” with readings below zero for many U.S. states and “temps down into the teens are even forecast as far south as Texas.” Yesterday, 97 records toppled.

“It’s a big deal,” Electroverse writes in its headline.

Solar activity suspected

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Réflexion sur la pétition des 11 000 ‘scientifiques’

by Paul Berth, 15 novembre 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie

La “pétition des 11 000” a été publiée dans le journal BioScience le 5 novembre 2019. Dans un style ultra-alarmiste, Ripple et ses collaborateurs nous apprennent que le CO2 et les gaz à effet de serre (GES) sont à la base de tous nos problèmes. Rien de nouveau ici : rappelons que le même auteur a publié un article très semblable il y a deux ans, en novembre 2017, et ce dans la même revue (BioScience). Il avait cependant fait mieux il y a deux ans puisqu’il avait récolté 15 000 signatures. Au total, 4 000 scientifiques se sont donc désistés cette année… Avant de lire le présent article, commencez par l’analyse de 2017 (cliquez ici). Comme vous le verrez, les conclusions tirées peuvent être appliquées au nouvel article de 2019.

La solution proposée par Ripple et ses “suiveurs” est simple : il faut arrêter immédiatement d’extraire du pétrole, du gaz et du charbon et laisser tout cela dans le sous-sol.Comme charité bien ordonnée commence par soi-même vous pourrez déjà vérifier, en consultant la liste des pétitionnaires, que les 234 scientifiques belges signataires de la pétition vont travailler le matin à vélo et se chauffent aux éoliennes. Dans le présent article nous allons analyser le nouveau texte publié dans BioScience.

1. Le journal BioScience

…

…

Also : An Analysis Of The 11,000 ‘Micky Mouse’ Climate Scientists

better to know...?, climate-debate

Paris Won’t Cut Emissions–Bob Watson

by P. Homewood, November 10, 2019 in NotaLotofPeople KnowThat

It’s apparently taken ex IPCC Chair Bob Watson four years to work out that the Paris Agreement did nothing to reduce emissions.

It’s a pity he did not read this blog, because I was saying the same thing when it was signed!

Steve Milloy reports:

 

The truth behind the Paris Agreement climate pledges

Almost 75% of 184 Paris Agreement pledges were judged insufficient to slow climate change; Only 28 European Union nations and 7 others will reduce emissions by at least 40% by 2030

UNIVERSAL ECOLOGICAL FUND

  • Only 28 European Union nations & 7 others will reduce emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030
  • China & India, top emitters, will reduce emissions intensity, but their emissions will increase
  • U.S., second top emitter, has reversed key national policies to combat climate change
  • Almost 70 percent of the pledges rely on funding from wealthy nations for their implementation

Almost three-quarters of the 184 climate pledges made under the Paris Agreement aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate to slow climate change, and some of the world’s largest emitters will continue to increase emissions, according to a panel of world-class climate scientists. It is these increasing greenhouse emissions that are driving climate change.

The Truth Behind the Climate Pledges, a new report published by the Universal Ecological Fund, examines in great detail the 184 voluntary pledges under the Paris Agreement, the first collective global effort to address climate change.

…

better to know...?, energy and fields

The Fossil Fuel Dilemma

by David L. Debertin, November 9, 2019 in WUWT

California again easily could become one of the top three fossil fuel producing states in the nation, but the largely liberal state has made drilling for fossil fuels within the state very difficult if not impossible. So the drillers have wisely looked elsewhere for locations that pose less of a political burden. North Dakota and its leaders welcomed the drillers. The result is tax dollars flowing into the state treasury from a variety of oil-related taxes levied not only on the drillers, but on individuals receiving mineral royalty income. In the past dozen years or so this has meant that taxpayers outside the oil producing counties have seen state-level taxes drop and the state can pursue projects that benefit the residents in a host of different ways simply by using funds that would not have been available had the drilling not occurred.

The new revenue coming into New Mexico as a result of recent oil drilling on the New Mexico side of the Permian basin via fracked oil wells is a more recent phenomena, only about 3-years old. The dilemma is that New Mexico has long been left-leaning politically whereas North Dakota has been a right-leaning state. Left-leaning politicians when they hear about new state revenue from an unexpected source generally think about new government program benefiting certain favored groups (maybe the younger voters who tend to favor left-leaning politicians) rather than lowering other taxes (sales, income) that would benefit a broader base of residents both young and old. Hence, we have the New Mexico idea of offering free college tuition to the state’s residents using oil-related tax revenue.

…

better to know...?

Predictions are Hard, Especially About the Future

by Les Johnson, November 10, 2019 in WUWT

Gasoline vs Electric Vehicle Future Fuel Costs

Assumptions:

1. There will be no Idiot Swan events. There will be no outright bans on drilling or frac’ing. Tax policy will not provide heavy subsidies for renewable power or batteries, nor will tax policy unduly burden oil and gas production.
2. The difference in purchase price for an EV and ICE vehicle will be almost immaterial to the economics of vehicle choice. This is based on the assumption that TAAS will push vehicle lifetime mileage closer to 1,000,000 miles, at which point the dominant economic driver will be fuel cost.

Vehicle Fuel Cost:

Based on today’s cost of gasoline and electricity (my latest bill) the cost of each at the wheel is:

• Gasoline: $0.3415/kWh ($2.50/gallon, 20% efficiency)
• Electricity: $0.2667/kWh ($0.16/kWh, 60% efficiency)

(efficiencies from your link https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/09/14/the-future-of-electric-vehicles-in-the-u-s-part-1-65-75-new-light-duty-vehicle-sales-by-2050/#76551c18e289)

This places gasoline at a 30% price disadvantage relative to electricity (not the more than 2:1 price disadvantage in your link https://www.globalxetfs.com/future-of-transportation-is-autonomous-electric)

So if fuel cost for an electric vehicle is lower and the initial purchase price differential is assumed to not be a factor and TAAS effectively eliminates the charging management and range issues that affect EV acceptance, then why do I believe the EV’s will not take over the world anytime soon?

Simple. I have reason to believe that the cost of electricity will rise both because of rising demand and the move to renewable power generation. I also have reason to believe that the availability of electricity will be a constraining factor; we just can’t build it fast enough.

The Future Cost of Electricity:

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

How Bad Science & Horrific Journalism Misrepresent Wildfires and Climate

by Jim Steele, November 9, 2019 in WUWT

As one wildfire expert wrote, “Predicting future fire regimes is not rocket science; it is far more complicated than that.” But regardless of accuracy, most people are attracted to very simple narratives such as: more CO2 causes global warming causes more fires. Accordingly in the summer of 2019, CNN trumpeted the headline California wildfires burn 500% more land because of climate change. They claimed, “the cause of the increase is simple. Hotter temperatures cause drier land, which causes a parched atmosphere.” CNN based their claims on a scientific paper by lead authors Park Williams and John Abatzoglou titled Observed Impacts of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildfire in California. The authors are very knowledgeable but appear to have hitched their fame and fortune to pushing a very simple claim that climate change drives bigger wildfires. As will be seen, their advocacy appears to have caused them to stray from objective scientific analyses.

If Williams and Abatzoglou were not so focused on forcing a global warming connection, they would have at least raised the question, ‘why did much bigger fires happen during cooler decades?’ The 1825 New Brunswick fire burned 3,000,000 acres. In Idaho and Montana the Great Fire of 1910 burnt another 3,000,000 acres. In 1871, the Great Michigan Fire burned 2,500,000 acres. Those fires were not only 6 times larger than California’s biggest fire, they occurred in moister regions, regions that don’t experience California’s Mediterranean climate with its guaranteed months of drought each and every summer. If those huge devastating fires occurred in much cooler times, what are the other driving factors of big wildfires?

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Russia Scraps Plans to Set Climate-Change Goals for Businesses

by Natasha Doff, November 7, 2019 in Bloomberg

Bloomberg) — Russia has ditched plans to set greenhouse-gas emissions targets for companies as a sign of its commitment to fighting climate change, following lobbying from big businesses that risked fines if they didn’t comply.

The measure was part of a bill intended to accompany Russia’s ratification of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change in September. Instead, the world’s fourth-largest carbon polluter scrapped the proposal after the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) warned it would raise costs for companies and delay investment.

“After consultations with the government, it was decided to abandon the specific regulatory requirements,” the press department of the Economy Ministry, which is drafting the bill, said by email. “The government will have the right to decide after Jan. 1, 2024 what measures to introduce if Russia is forecast to miss its emissions targets.”

…

better to know...?, climate-debate, to keep an eye on...

Doomsday poll shrinks 25%: Now just 11,000 MeToo scientists say “panic now”

by JoNova, November 2019

Who remembers that 15,000 scientists signed some climate declaration in 2017? The same Prof Ripple, and Bioscience probably hope you don’t, because two years later there is the same rehashed, but with only 11,000 signatories. So 4,000 disappeared without a trace. There are however, the same comic indefendable graphs. Call it “extreme graphing” — every line needs to be diagonal. All “pauses” are disappearing. No fallacy remains unbroken.

To stop storms we apparently need to reduce the global population, stop mining “excessive” minerals, eat more veges,  and we need to preserve biodiversity, reefs, forests and greenery at whatever it was in 1685 or whenever the sacred preindustrial year of Life On Earth is declared. You know the drill — coal and oil are demon spirits. Exorcise them now! Then rinse, repeat and …hand-wash your undies.

…

After crowing about how unqualified skeptics were, only 156 (1%) of the 11,000 have the word “climate” in their job title or specialty. And even these climate experts mostly seem to be experts in adapting or mitigating climate change. They know things about food, forests, ecology, land use, disease, law, agriculture, policy, economics, communication and tree survival. This is not to say that they are wrong because of their qualifications (they’re wrong because of the arguments they make), but isn’t it rather odd, that the real experts in the field of climate modeling are all missing? Could it be that these 11,000 scientists are the me-too propaganda arm endorsing graphs and arguments that real modelers can’t afford to?

…

Also here and  here

better to know...?, climate-debate

A STAGGERING 1,204 U.S. SITES RECORDED THEIR COLDEST-EVER OCTOBER TEMPERATURES LAST MONTH

by Cap Allon, November 4, 2019 in Electroverse

According to official NOAA data, more than twelve-hundred monthly low temperature records fell ACROSS the U.S. in October 2019 — multiple Arctic air masses rode anomalously-far south on the back of a wavy jet stream flow, itself associated with historically low solar activity.

The sun is currently in its deepest solar minimum of the past 100+ years, and the jet stream has weakened as a result; its usual tight ‘zonal’ flow has more-often-than-not reverted to a loose ‘meridional’ one. This wavy flow has diverted brutal Arctic air into the lower-latitudes, and is responsible for the U.S. either busting or tying a staggering 1204 all-time MONTHLY low temperature records in October 2019 (double the number of new heat records).

…

…

 

See also here and  here

 

better to know...?, climate-debate

U.S. Starts withdrawal from Paris Climate Accord.

by A. Watts, November 4, 2019 in WUWT

President Trump is fulfilling his most important de-regulatory promise.  This is a great day for America, and 4th November 2020 when U. S. withdrawal becomes final will be an even greater day. 

On the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

Press Statement by Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State

November 4, 2019

Today the United States began the process to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.  Per the terms of the Agreement, the United States submitted formal notification of its withdrawal to the United Nations.  The withdrawal will take effect one year from delivery of the notification.

As noted in his June 1, 2017 remarks, President Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement because of the unfair economic burden imposed on American workers, businesses, and taxpayers by U.S. pledges made under the Agreement.  The United States has reduced all types of emissions, even as we grow our economy and ensure our citizens’ access to affordable energy.  Our results speak for themselves:  U.S. emissions of criteria air pollutants that impact human health and the environment declined by 74% between 1970 and 2018.  U.S. net greenhouse gas emissions dropped 13% from 2005-2017, even as our economy grew over 19 percent.

The U.S. approach incorporates the reality of the global energy mix and uses all energy sources and technologies cleanly and efficiently, including fossils fuels, nuclear energy, and renewable energy.  In international climate discussions, we will continue to offer a realistic and pragmatic model – backed by a record of real world results – showing innovation and open markets lead to greater prosperity, fewer emissions, and more secure sources of energy.  We will continue to work with our global partners to enhance resilience to the impacts of climate change and prepare for and respond to natural disasters.  Just as we have in the past, the United States will continue to research, innovate, and grow our economy while reducing emissions and extending a helping hand to our friends and partners around the globe.

better to know...?, climate-debate

COLORADO: HEAVY SNOW BREAKS A 102-YEAR-OLD RECORD IN PUEBLO — CANCELS/DELAYS 800+ FLIGHTS AT DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

by Cap Allon, Oct 30, 2019 in Electroverse

The Centennial State has seen a myriad of all-time cold records tumble this fall, and this week is continuing that trend towards cooler climes.

The 3.8 inches (9.7 cm) of snow that accumulated in Pueblo on Monday, October 28 comfortably eclipsed the city’s previous record for the date — the 2.9 inches (7.4 cm) from back in 1917. It also adds to the early-season inches already received during the first week of October.

For reference, Pueblo’s mean date for first measurable snowfall isn’t until Nov 6, according to weather.gov.

And yet more powder is forecast for the city on Wednesday, meaning this year will likely win third spot for snowiest October on record, surpassing the 8.2 inches (20.8 cm) that accumulated in October 1997(solar minimum of cycle 22).

…

 

better to know...?, sciences-general

Simulations explain giant exoplanets with eccentric, close-in orbits

by University of California – Santa Cruz, Oct 30, 2019 in ScienceDaily

As planetary systems evolve, gravitational interactions between planets can fling some of them into eccentric elliptical orbits around the host star, or even out of the system altogether. Smaller planets should be more susceptible to this gravitational scattering, yet many gas giant exoplanets have been observed with eccentric orbits very different from the roughly circular orbits of the planets in our own solar system.

Surprisingly, the planets with the highest masses tend to be those with the highest eccentricities, even though the inertia of a larger mass should make it harder to budge from its initial orbit. This counter-intuitive observation prompted astronomers at UC Santa Cruz to explore the evolution of planetary systems using computer simulations. Their results, reported in a paper published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, suggest a crucial role for a giant-impacts phase in the evolution of high-mass planetary systems, leading to collisional growth of multiple giant planets with close-in orbits.

…