Archives mensuelles : février 2025

climate-debate

Reasons Why Regulating CO2 Emissions Needs to be Reconsidered

by Dr R. Spencer, Feb 26, 2025 in ClimateWarming

Today, the Washington Post is reporting the EPA Administrator is considering recommending to the White House that the EPA’s 2009 CO2 Endangerment Finding be rescinded. Let’s look at a few of the reasons why this might be a good thing to consider.

Today, the Washington Post is reporting the EPA Administrator is considering recommending to the White House that the EPA’s 2009 CO2 Endangerment Finding be rescinded. Let’s look at a few of the reasons why this might be a good thing to consider.

The Science

The science of human-caused climate change is much more uncertain that you have been led to believe. The globally-averaged surface temperature of Earth seems to have warmed by 1 deg. C or so in the last century. The magnitude of the warming remains uncertain with a 30% range in different thermometer-based datasets, and considerably weaker warming in global “reanalysis” datasets using all available data types. But whatever the level of warming, it might well be mostly human-caused.

But we don’t really know.

As I keep pointing out, the global energy imbalance caused by increasing human-caused CO2 emissions (yes, I believe we are the cause) is smaller than the accuracy with which we know natural energy flows in the climate system. This means recent warming could be mostly natural and we would never know it.

I’m not claiming that is the case, only that there are uncertainties in climate science that are seldom if ever discussed. The climate models that are the basis for future projections of climate change are adjusted (fudged?) so that increasing CO2 is the only cause of warming. The models themselves do not have all of the necessary physics (mostly due to cloud process uncertainties) to determine whether our climate system was in a state of equilibrium before CO2 was increasing. (And, no, I don’t believe the warming caused the oceans to outgas more CO2 — that effect is very small compared to the size of the human source).

As most readers here are aware, for many years I’ve been saying the science of “climate change” has been corrupted by big government science budgets, ideological worldview biases, and group-think. Even my career has depended upon Congress being convinced the issue is worthy of big budgets.

It is almost impossible for new science to be published in the peer-reviewed literature that in any way runs counter to the current narrative which states that humans are causing a “climate crisis” from our CO2 emissions, a natural consequence of fossil fuel burning. That “peer review” is now in the hands of climate scientists whose research careers depend upon continuing government funding. If the “problem” of global warming were to be much less than previously believed, funding for that research could dry up.

The most alarmist science papers are the ones that get all of the press, which then get exaggerated and misrepresented by the news media. As a result, the public has a very skewed perception of what scientists really know.

As Roger Pielke, Jr. has been pointing out for many years, even the IPCC’s official reports do not claim that our greenhouse gas emissions have caused changes in severe weather. Every severe weather event in the news is now dutifully tied in some inferential way to human causation, but with public opinion of mainstream news outlets at an all-time low, fewer and fewer people take those news reports seriously. Severe weather has always existed, and always will. Storm damages have increased only because of increasing infrastructure and everyone wanting to live on the coast.

And about the only, clear, long-term change I’m aware of is a 50% decline in strong to violent tornadoes since the 1950s.

But you would never know of any good climate news if your main source of information is Al Gore’s books, your favorite environmental think tank (that you contribute to so you can get their yearly calendar), or the mainstream media.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

How the “scientific consensus” on climate change was invented

by C. Rotter, Feb 27, 2025 in WUWT

How a “scientific consensus” that “climate change is mostly human-caused” was forced by:
1) Shutting down funding for scientific research into natural causes.
2) Punishing scientists who continued this research anyway.

This is an excerpt from “Climate The Movie” (2024). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOAUsvVhgsU

climate-debate

NOAA’s Homogenized Temperature Records: A Statistical House of Cards?

by C. Rotter, Feb 25, 2025 in WUWT

For years, climate scientists have assured us that NOAA’s homogenized temperature datasets—particularly the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN)—are the gold standard for tracking global warming. But what if the “corrections” applied to these datasets are introducing more noise than signal? A recent study published in Atmosphere has uncovered shocking inconsistencies in NOAA’s adjustments, raising serious concerns about the reliability of homogenized temperature records.

The study, conducted by a team of independent climate researchers led by Peter O’Neill, Ronan Connolly, Michael Connolly, and Willie Soon, offers a meticulous examination of NOAA’s homogenization techniques. These researchers, known for their expertise in climate data analysis and critical evaluation of mainstream climate methodologies, gathered an extensive archive of NOAA’s GHCN dataset over more than a decade. Their research involved tracking over 1800 daily updates to analyze how NOAA’s adjustments to historical temperature records changed over time.

Their findings reveal a deeply concerning pattern of inconsistencies and unexplained changes in temperature adjustments, prompting renewed scrutiny of how NOAA processes climate data.

The study analyzed NOAA’s GHCN dataset over a decade and found that:

  • The same temperature records were being adjusted differently on different days—sometimes dramatically.
  • 64% of the breakpoints identified by NOAA’s Pairwise Homogenization Algorithm (PHA) were highly inconsistent, appearing in less than 25% of NOAA’s dataset runs.
  • Only 16% of the adjustments were consistently applied in more than 75% of cases, meaning the majority of “corrections” are shifting unpredictably.
  • Less than 20% of NOAA’s breakpoints corresponded to actual documented station changes, suggesting that many adjustments were made without supporting metadata.

In layman’s terms: NOAA is repeatedly changing historical temperature records in ways that are inconsistent, poorly documented, and prone to error.

What Is Homogenization Supposed to Do?

Continuer la lecture de NOAA’s Homogenized Temperature Records: A Statistical House of Cards? →

better to know...?, energy and fields, minerals and ores

The rising tide of sand mining: A growing threat to marine life

by Michigan State University, Feb 21, 2025 in ScienceDaily

In the delicate balancing act between human development and protecting the fragile natural world, sand is weighing down the scales on the human side.

A group of international scientists in this week’s journal One Earth are calling for balancing those scales to better identify the significant damage sand extraction across the world heaps upon marine biodiversity. The first step: acknowledging sand and gravel (discussed as sand in this publication) — the world’s most extracted solid materials by mass — are a threat hiding in plain sight.

“Sand is a critical resource that shapes the built and natural worlds,” said senior author Jianguo “Jack” Liu, Michigan State University Rachel Carson Chair in Sustainability. “Extracting sand is a complex global challenge. Systems approaches such as the metacoupling framework are essential to untangle the complexity. They can help reveal the hidden cascading impacts not only on the sand extraction sites but also other places such as sand transport routes and sites using sand for construction.”

Sand is the literal foundation of human development across the globe, a key ingredient of concrete, asphalt, glass, and electronics. It is relatively cheap and easily extracted.

…

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Pay Up, Mr. Mann

by The Editors, Jan 10, 2005 in NationalReview

For more than eight years, the climate scientist Michael Mann harassed National Review through litigation over a blog post — until, eventually, the First Amendment brought an end to his attack. This week, a court in our nation’s capital ordered Mann to pay us $530,820.21 worth of attorney’s fees and costs, and to do so within 30 days. It is time for him to get out his checkbook, and sign on the dotted line.

This restitution is welcome, if incomplete. As was made clear during the discovery process, Mann’s explicitly stated intention was to use a “major lawsuit” as a vehicle with which to “ruin National Review.” Happily, Mann failed in this endeavor. But, while all’s well that ends well, his failure exacted costs nevertheless. Between 2012 and 2019 — with the courts inexplicably refusing to apply legal provisions ostensibly designed to prevent frivolous lawsuits such as Mann’s — we were forced to spend a considerable amount of time and money defending ourselves against his malicious, meritless suit. Between 2019 and now, we have been obliged to expend yet more effort trying to recoup at least some of our costs. This week’s award will not undo all of the damage that Mann has inflicted upon us, and upon journalism more broadly — we had asked for $1 million in fees and costs, and even that was a fraction of what we have spent — but it will, at least, go some way toward making us whole.

…

unclassified

Wrong, Politico, Climate Change Does Not Threaten the EU’s Survival, But Climate Policy Does

by  L. Lueken, Feb 21, 2025 in WUWT

A recent Politico article, “Climate change threatens EU’s survival, German security report warns,” claims that “global warming will exacerbate conflicts, hunger, and migration worldwide, with growing risks for Europe.” Evidence undermines these claims. In reality, the world is not suffering destabilization due to climate change, but European populations are far more likely to suffer from climate policy, as Politico briefly mentions.

Politico reports on a “landmark” political report from the German federal intelligence service (BND) that attempts to assess “the dangers climate change poses to German and European security over the next 15 years.” The report concludes that “climate change’s destabilizing effects will drive up migration and food prices, threatening economic and political upheaval,” and “the unequal impact of rising temperatures in the EU — with southern countries hit worse than others — risks tearing the bloc apart.”

Politico goes on to claim that as global average temperature rises, “so do the frequency, severity and intensity of flood-triggering extreme rainfall, deadly heat waves, harvest-destroying droughts and the conditions that allow wildfires to spread easily.”

These claims are false, as available data proves.

While rainfall has modestly increased over northern latitudes that contain the European Union member states, extreme rainfall that causes flooding has not. Claims that recent flooding events were “supercharged” or worsened by climate change are pure speculation based on attribution modelling. Data and historical records of flood frequency and severity debunk claims of unprecedented flooding. Recent flooding in Spain, for instance, was blamed on climate change by attribution groups, but the storm that hit Spain was consistent with a long history of similar storms that are not becoming more severe or frequent. In the Climate Realism post, “Flooding Facts Drowned by Climate Hysteria: The BBC Ignores Spain’s Weather History,” meteorologist Anthony Watts and H. Sterling Burnett describe the history of the region struck by the floods:

Valencia, which sits along and at the mouth of the Turia River on the Mediterranean Sea, suffered similar flooding, for example, in 1897, 1957, and 1996, 127, 67, and 28 years of warming ago, respectively, when temperatures were cooler than at present.

…

As Caroline Angus’ account of the 1957 Valencia flood reveals, these conditions are neither new nor unprecedented. The BBC’s focus on “climate change” and a warmer atmosphere as the primary cause of the recent flooding ignores the atmospheric mechanics behind these storms and downplays the recurrent pattern of similar natural events.

Likewise, Climate Realism debunked other regional European flooding events, here.

Heatwaves and drought are likewise not getting worse, and contra Politico and the German report’s claims, crop production is not declining in Europe due to those conditions, as pointed out in numerous Climate Realism posts, here, here, and here, for example. Wildfires are also on the decline globally.

Interestingly, Politico and the German report do admit that government response to climate alarmism may also cause tension. Politico reports that policies meant to address climate change “will cause tensions, noting that carbon pricing — the backbone of EU climate efforts — disproportionately affects poorer households.” This fact should be obvious to anyone. Carbon pricing does not bother the elites, who can afford higher energy prices.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Conflicts of Interest in Climate Science: A Systemic Blind Spot

by C. Rotter, Feb 18, 2025 in WUWT

Introduction

The field of climate science has long been presented as an objective, data-driven discipline, immune to the biases and financial conflicts that plague other scientific domains. However, a recent preprint study by Jessica Weinkle et al, Conflicts of Interest, Funding Support, and Author Affiliation in Peer-Reviewed Research on the Relationship between Climate Change and Geophysical Characteristics of Hurricanes, challenges this assumption, shedding light on an alarming lack of conflict of interest (COI) disclosures in climate research, particularly in studies linking hurricanes to climate change​. She also has an excellent write up of the study on her Substack, Conflicted.

The study’s findings reveal a disturbing trend: not a single one of the 331 authors analyzed disclosed any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest​. Moreover, the research found that funding from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) was a significant predictor of studies reporting a positive association between climate change and hurricane behavior​.

…

…

Time to Clean House

The Weinkle et al. study is a wake-up call for anyone who still believes climate science is an objective, bias-free discipline. The overwhelming correlation between NGO funding and climate change-hurricane research outcomes, coupled with the complete absence of COI disclosures, exposes a deeply entrenched problem​.

The fact that not a single author among 331 disclosed a conflict of interest should be viewed as a scientific scandal. If such a pattern were observed in pharmaceutical or medical research, there would be widespread public outcry and immediate reforms. Yet, in climate science, this level of opacity is tolerated—perhaps because it serves the interests of powerful political and financial actors.

At the very least, this study proves that climate science is not above bias. The question is: Will the scientific community acknowledge and correct these issues, or will it continue to operate under a veil of selective transparency?

better to know...?, climate-debate

Earth.com’s Climate Alarmism Crumbles As Cocoa Production Rises

by H.S.  Burnett, Feb 17, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch

…

FAO data for those countries show that since 1990:

  • In Cameroon, cocoa bean production has grown by more than 157 percent;
  • In the Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire), cocoa bean production increased by more than 194 percent (nearly doubling, setting a new record in 2023);
  • In Ghana, cocoa bean production expanded by just over 122 percent;
  • And in Nigeria, cocoa bean production grew by almost 17 percent.

Each of these countries experienced multiple years of record-setting production over the past three and a half decades of climate change. (See the figure below).

With these facts in mind, there is no evidence whatsoever that climate change is putting cocoa production under extreme pressure, except perhaps in the imagination of Earth.com’s Ionescu.

Globally carbon dioxide has resulted in a general greening of the Earth with significantly improved crop production. There is good reason to believe that rising carbon dioxide concentrations have significantly contributed to West and Central Africa’s improved cocoa production, as well.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

A fire deficit persists across diverse North American forests despite recent increases in area burned

by S.A. Parks et al., OPEN ACESS, Feb 10, 2025 in Nature

Abstract

Rapid increases in wildfire area burned across North American forests pose novel challenges for managers and society. Increasing area burned raises questions about whether, and to what degree, contemporary fire regimes (1984–2022) are still departed from historical fire regimes (pre-1880). We use the North American tree-ring fire-scar network (NAFSN), a multi-century record comprising >1800 fire-scar sites spanning diverse forest types, and contemporary fire perimeters to ask whether there is a contemporary fire surplus or fire deficit, and whether recent fire years are unprecedented relative to historical fire regimes. Our results indicate, despite increasing area burned in recent decades, that a widespread fire deficit persists across a range of forest types and recent years with exceptionally high area burned are not unprecedented when considering the multi-century perspective offered by fire-scarred trees. For example, ‘record’ contemporary fire years such as 2020 burned 6% of NAFSN sites—the historical average—well below the historical maximum of 29% sites that burned in 1748. Although contemporary fire extent is not unprecedented across many North American forests, there is abundant evidence that unprecedented contemporary fire severity is driving forest loss in many ecosystems and adversely impacting human lives, infrastructure, and water supplies.

…

energy and fields

China Still Building Coal Power Plants

by P. Homewood, Feb 14, 2025 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

China last year began construction on projects with the greatest combined coal power capacity since 2015, jeopardising the country’s goal to peak carbon emissions by 2030, according to a report published Thursday.

The world’s second-largest economy is the biggest emitter of the greenhouse gases that drive climate change, but also a renewable energy powerhouse. It plans to reach net zero by 2060.

While coal has been a pivotal energy source in China for decades, explosive growth in wind and solar installations in recent years has raised hopes that the country can wean itself off the dirty fossil fuel.

But according to a report from the Finland-based Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) and Global Energy Monitor (GEM) in the United States, China began construction on 94.5 gigawatts of coal power projects in 2024 — 93 percent of the global total.

Although the country also added a record 356 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity — 4.5 times the European Union’s additions — the uptick in coal power risks solidifying its role in China’s energy mix, the report said.

“China’s rapid expansion of renewable energy has the potential to reshape its power system, but this opportunity is being undermined by the simultaneous large-scale expansion of coal power,” said Qi Qin, lead author of the report and China analyst at CREA.

The rise comes despite a pledge by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2021 to “strictly control” coal power projects and increases in coal consumption before “phasing it down” between 2026 and 2030.

Coal production has risen steadily in recent years, from 3.9 billion tons in 2020 to 4.8 billion tons in 2024.

“Without urgent policy shifts, China risks reinforcing a pattern of energy addition rather than transition, limiting the full potential of its clean energy boom,” the report said.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/chinas-2024-coal-projects-threaten-000005109.html

climate-debate

The LA fires were man-made, but not like they say

by C. Martz, Feb 13, 2025 in WUWT

The political fires that ignited with President Donald Trump’s second inauguration shifted national attention away from the devastating wildfires in California.

Now entirely contained, the Los Angeles County fires should not be allowed to fade into the history books, chalked up to yet another consequence of man-made global warming. Politicians trying to pin the blame for the disaster on climate change are not only attempting to avoid accountability but are just plain wrong.

Fires require three key ingredients: an ignition source, fuel, and oxygen. Wildfires do not spontaneously combust because the planet is 1.2°C warmer now than in 1850. There must first be an ignition source. These can be natural, such as lightning, or man-made, such as fireworks, sparks, or arson. Ninety-seven percent of fires between 1992 and 2012 had a human ignition source, according to a study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Mediterranean California is no exception. While the exact cause of the Los Angeles fires has yet to be determined, lightning has already been ruled out. Whether it was an accident, arson, or broken utility lines remains unknown. If it was a broken power line, Southern California Edison must explain why it didn’t deenergize its transmission lines in the foothills. What is known is that the weather conditions have been ripe for fires to escape containment and spread.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Jan. 2025 Climate Fact Check: NASA Data Shreds ‘Hottest January Ever’ Claim

by S. Millay, Feb 13, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch

This summary serves as a fact check on the most egregious false claim about climate change made in the media in January 2025. [emphasis, links added]

Counter-Narrative Reality vs. Counter-Reality Narrative

It was a busy January keeping track of President Trump’s first steps toward dismantling the federal government’s Climate Leviathan. It was also a very cold January and that’s what this edition of Climate Fact Check will cover.

Per the relatively unmanipulated NASA satellite data, January 2025 is estimated to have witnessed a substantial drop of 0.34°C from last January concerning the made-up metric of “average global temperature.”

This is despite that atmospheric carbon dioxide increased from about 422 parts per million (ppm) in January 2024 to 426 parts per million in January 2025.

That 4 ppm increase in carbon dioxide is worth about 78 billion tons of emissions. Therefore, 78 billion more tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulted in a January that was 0.34°C cooler than the previous January.

February is typically the coldest average month in the Northern Hemisphere. January 2025 was cooler than February 2016 and about the same as January 2016 and February 1998, hundreds of billions of tons of CO2 and a decade of “warming,” ago.

Faced with the counter-narrative reality of the NASA satellite data, the desperate climate hoax machine produced a counter-reality narrative, claiming that January was the hottest ever as in this Associated Press report.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

New Study: Today’s Climate Models ‘Do Not Agree With Reality’ And Thus Their Usefulness Is ‘Doubtful’

by K. Richard, Feb 11, 2025 in NoTricksZone

Because the current state-of-the-art general circulation models (GCMs) cannot simulate the trends and variances in global precipitation over the last 84 years (1940-2023), their usefulness should be reconsidered.

Hydrological processes – ocean circulation, water vapor, clouds – are key components of climate, easily overshadowing the impact of anthropogenic CO2 emissions by a factor of 2,100 (Koutsoyiannis, 2021).

The effect that cloud cover variability has on surface temperature is so uncertain, and our cloud-effect measurement capacities are so primitive, even NASA has had to admit that “today’s models must be improved by about a hundredfold in accuracy” to even begin to attribute current or future temperature changes to increases in atmospheric CO2.

…

In that vein, a new paper published by Dr. Koutsoyiannis, a hydrologist, statistically assesses the utility of today’s climate models. He documents the general circulation models’ capacity to simulate trends and variability in global (hemispheric) precipitation since 1940.

The results are not encouraging. The best computer models we have cannot accurately simulate what occurs in the real world.

…

only geology

Earth’s inner core might harbor volcanoes and landslides

by H. Richter,  Feb 10, 2025 in Science

Seismic waves radiating through the planet’s interior point to dramatic activity

 

More than 5000 kilometers beneath our feet, Earth’s iron inner core seems to be spinning, growing, and occasionally speeding up or slowing down. It’s also likely changing shape, according to research published today in Nature Geoscience, with some areas rising and falling up to 1 kilometer within a few years. Although most changes are likely subtle bumps in the iron landscape, some could mirror rising mountains and tumbling landslides. Though these movements—picked up as seismic waves traveling through the planet—have scant effect on us surface dwellers, they help bring into focus a more dynamic picture of Earth’s insides.

Severine Rosat, a geophysicist at CNRS, the French national research agency, who was not involved in the work, says she’s “surprised” the team was able to detect such subtle and fleeting changes in Earth’s core. “That’s quite encouraging for other seismologists.”

The inner core is a roughly 5200ºC, 2500-kilometer-long ball of mostly solid iron that helps power Earth’s magnetic field. Because no instruments can penetrate even remotely close to the depths needed to study the core, scientists instead take advantage of natural events that rocket straight through it: seismic waves from earthquakes. When these waves travel through Earth, they can either pass through the inner core or get deflected at its surface, logging their paths as wavy lines that detectors record on the opposite side of the planet. When two earthquakes occur in the same location at different times in history, scientists can compare their paths to see what has changed at the center of Earth.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Most countries miss UN deadline for new climate targets

by P. Homewood, Feb 10, 2025 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

BRUSSELS, Feb 10 (Reuters) – Many of the world’s biggest polluter nations have missed a U.N. deadline to set new climate targets as efforts to curb global warming come under pressure following U.S. President Donald Trump’s election.

The nearly 200 countries signed up to the Paris Agreement faced a Monday deadline to submit new national climate plans to the U.N., setting out how they plan to cut emissions by 2035.

As of Monday morning, many of the world’s biggest polluters – including China, India and the European Union – had not done so.

“The public is entitled to expect a strong reaction from their governments to the fact that global warming has now reached 1.5 degrees Celsius for an entire year, but we have seen virtually nothing of real substance,” said Bill Hare, CEO of science and policy institute Climate Analytics.

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/most-countries-miss-un-deadline-new-climate-targets-2025-02-10/

As we know, some countries who have submitted new plans, such as Brazil and Mexico have actually reduced their ambitions.

It is yet more evidence that most of the world does not see climate change as a threat.

climate-debate

EXCLUSIVE: Sensational Findings Point to Hunga Tonga Eruption as Prime Suspect Behind Recent Temperature Spike

by C. Morrison, Feb 8,2025 in TheDailySceptic

In January 2022, a massive underwater volcano called Hunga Tonga suddenly erupted and shot so much water into the upper atmosphere that levels in the stratosphere rose suddenly by at least 10%. It was a genuine one in 100, even 200 year event and was reasonably expected to produce temporary weather changes around the globe. Sure enough, subsequent temperatures showed a 0.3-0.4°C upward spike. Needless to say, the Net Zero fanatics claimed the rise as their own and blamed it on humans controlling the climate by increasing the trace gas carbon dioxide. Today the Daily Sceptic can give wider publicity to sensational recent findings that suggest Hunga Tonga was the main culprit in producing the recent spike. The scientists directly link a dramatic cooling in the upper atmosphere of between 0.5-2°C to Hunga Tonga. It is generally held that there is an anti-correlation between the lower and upper atmosphere and cooling at the top produces warming at the bottom due to a number of complex atmospheric processes.

Hunga Tonga was an unusual volcanic eruption since it produced few dust particulates that usually cool the surface. Two recent land-based eruptions, El Chichon and Pinatubo, caused a temporary downward spike of around 0.5°C. The team of Colorado-based scientists found that the Hunga Tonga cooling was “comparable in magnitude” to the stratospheric warming caused by the two surface volcanoes in 1982 and 1991. The scientists reported “good agreement of observations with chemistry-climate model simulations”. “Cooling is mainly due to Hunga Tonga H2O [water] impacts,” they state.

This is dramatic stuff. It appears to promote Hunga Tonga as the prime cause in explaining the recent spike in temperatures. Indeed it could be concluded that the temperature rise should have been a little higher – and higher even still if the effects of a recent strong El Niño natural oscillation are included. Satellite observations, confirmed by computer analysis, shows stratospheric cooling of 0.5°C to 1°C in the middle and upper stratosphere during 2022 through middle 2023, followed by stronger reductions of 1°C to 2°C in the mesosphere after the middle of 2023, note the scientists. Last year, two distinguished atmospheric scientists observed the anti-correlation between the higher and lower atmosphere and suggested the lower stratosphere cooled by approximately two degrees per degree of warming nearer the surface. Where the troposphere has been anomalously warming, the lower stratosphere has been anomalously cooling “and vice versa”, note the scientists.

In January 2022, a massive underwater volcano called Hunga Tonga suddenly erupted and shot so much water into the upper atmosphere that levels in the stratosphere rose suddenly by at least 10%. It was a genuine one in 100, even 200 year event and was reasonably expected to produce temporary weather changes around the globe. Sure enough, subsequent temperatures showed a 0.3-0.4°C upward spike. Needless to say, the Net Zero fanatics claimed the rise as their own and blamed it on humans controlling the climate by increasing the trace gas carbon dioxide. Today the Daily Sceptic can give wider publicity to sensational recent findings that suggest Hunga Tonga was the main culprit in producing the recent spike. The scientists directly link a dramatic cooling in the upper atmosphere of between 0.5-2°C to Hunga Tonga. It is generally held that there is an anti-correlation between the lower and upper atmosphere and cooling at the top produces warming at the bottom due to a number of complex atmospheric processes.

Hunga Tonga was an unusual volcanic eruption since it produced few dust particulates that usually cool the surface. Two recent land-based eruptions, El Chichon and Pinatubo, caused a temporary downward spike of around 0.5°C. The team of Colorado-based scientists found that the Hunga Tonga cooling was “comparable in magnitude” to the stratospheric warming caused by the two surface volcanoes in 1982 and 1991. The scientists reported “good agreement of observations with chemistry-climate model simulations”. “Cooling is mainly due to Hunga Tonga H2O [water] impacts,” they state.

This is dramatic stuff. It appears to promote Hunga Tonga as the prime cause in explaining the recent spike in temperatures. Indeed it could be concluded that the temperature rise should have been a little higher – and higher even still if the effects of a recent strong El Niño natural oscillation are included. Satellite observations, confirmed by computer analysis, shows stratospheric cooling of 0.5°C to 1°C in the middle and upper stratosphere during 2022 through middle 2023, followed by stronger reductions of 1°C to 2°C in the mesosphere after the middle of 2023, note the scientists. Last year, two distinguished atmospheric scientists observed the anti-correlation between the higher and lower atmosphere and suggested the lower stratosphere cooled by approximately two degrees per degree of warming nearer the surface. Where the troposphere has been anomalously warming, the lower stratosphere has been anomalously cooling “and vice versa”, note the scientists.

…

climate-debate

The “Collapsing Gulf Stream” Scare is Back—Again

by C. Rotter, Feb 5, 2025 in WUWT

Ah, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) collapse—our old friend. Like a horror movie franchise that refuses to die, the idea that the Gulf Stream is about to shut down and plunge Europe into an icy apocalypse has returned. This time, the BBC is breathlessly warning that “the chance of it happening is growing”​. But before you start knitting survivalist-grade wool socks, let’s take a moment to review how many times we’ve heard this story before—and why it never seems to pan out.

…

A Climate Catastrophe… Someday, Maybe, Possibly

According to the BBC, AMOC is supposedly “getting weaker,” but they immediately admit that direct measurements have only been taken since 2004—meaning we have barely two decades of actual data​. Now, call me old-fashioned, but when you’re talking about an ocean system that has been operating for millions of years, 20 years of data is like trying to predict a person’s entire life based on a single Tuesday morning.

And what’s their big evidence? Ocean floor sediments and a “cold blob” in the Atlantic. That’s right, they’re looking at dirt samples and a patch of water that isn’t warming like the rest of the ocean, and somehow, this is supposed to spell doom for civilization​.

This wouldn’t be so bad if they admitted the uncertainty. Instead, the article plays a game of “it’s probably not happening, but it totally could!” For instance, the IPCC says they have “medium confidence” that AMOC will notcollapse this century. But some other scientists say, well, maybe it could! As one of them warns, we “maybe need to be worried”​.

What kind of science is this? It sounds more like a horoscope than a serious climate analysis.

Fear-Mongering 101: Every Climate Scare is the Last One

…

climate-debate

Australian Heatwave Stories Slammed Some More. Part 2.

by G. Sherrington, Feb 6, 2025 in WUWT

There were 10 significant weather station/city sites explored for their heatwave properties in the first article of this series, 5 days ago.

Australian Heatwave Stories Cop Severe Criticism – Watts Up With That?

That first article shows 160 graphs of hottest heatwave temperatures over the years when records have been kept, for Adelaide, Alice Springs,  Brisbane, Cape Leeuwin, Darwin, Hobart, Longreach, Melbourne, Sydney and Perth. This second article deals with some patterns of interest.

I wrote the articles because many Establishment sources make claims like this one from the Climate Council of Australia, 2014:

“Climate change is already increasing the intensity and frequency of heatwaves in Australia. Heatwaves are becoming hotter, lasting longer and occurring more often.”

HEATWAVES: HOTTER, LONGER, MORE OFTEN

An Internet search using “heatwaves longer hotter more often” returns these 6 hits and more.

Climate change study: Australia is in the crucible of slower, longer heatwaves | SBS News

Heatwaves: hotter, longer, more often – Macquarie University

Heatwaves: hotter, longer, more often – Environmental Health Australia (Western Australia) Inc

Australian heatwaves more frequent, hotter and longer: Climate Council report – ABC News

nationalacademies.org/based-on-science/global-warming-makes-heat-waves-hotter-longer-and-more-common

Heatwaves to be hotter, longer and more frequent, climate change report says – ABC News

HOTTER?

Using practically all years of data recorded, I examined each of 4 heatwave durations of 1, 3, 5 and 10 days. The raw data are from the Climate Data Online CDO source by the Bureau of Meteorology.

The first half of the heatwave numbers is compared to the last half. The first half numbers are subtracted from the second half numbers. If there is warming, the difference is positive. If there is cooling, the difference is negative.

This example summarises the method by a graph.

…

energy and fields

Equinor Cut Green Investment In Half

by P. Homewood, Feb 6, 2025 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

Norwegian energy giant Equinor is halving investment in renewable energy over the next two years while increasing oil and gas production.

Chief executive Anders Opedal said that the transition to lower carbon energy was moving slower than expected, costs had increased, and customers were reluctant to commit to long term contracts.

Mr Opedal told the BBC he was confident that Rosebank – a giant new oil field in the North Sea – would go ahead, despite a recent court ruling that consent had been awarded unlawfully.

He also warned that gas prices could rise next winter as European gas storage levels were lower now than this time last year.

“We are scaling down our investments in renewables and low carbon solutions because we don’t see the necessary profitability in the future,” Mr Opedal said.

It will cut investments in renewables to $5bn over the next two years, down from about $10bn.

It will also drop a target to spend half of its fixed assets budget on renewables and low carbon products by 2030.

By contrast, Equinor will be increasing oil and gas production by 10% over the next two years.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jg7k1kjwyo

This is of course part of a much wider trend, as we saw today with Orsted’s decision to call a halt to offshore wind development. Renewable energy is wholly dependent on govt subsidy, which as President has shown is illusionary.

Incredibly the far-left BBC still believe that “Rosebank is not straightforward”

What could not be more straightforward than a British oil field which could supply ultra cheap oil and gas to the country, sustain thousands of well paid jobs, send millions in tax revenues to the govt, provide an element of energy security and actually reduce emissions in comparison with importing the stuff.

Only the British hating BBC could object to that!

BTW

I cannot help but be reminded what the Xi’s useful idiot, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard said last week, when he said that the world’s investors were chasing green energy because that was where the money was!

Dream on, Ambrose!!!!!!!!!!!!!

climate-debate

Hottest January? Latest BBC Lies!

by P. Homewood, Feb 6, 2025 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

Last month was the world’s warmest January on record raising further questions about the pace of climate change, scientists say.

January 2025 had been expected to be slightly cooler than January 2024 because of a shift away from a natural weather pattern in the Pacific known as El Niño.

But instead, last month broke the January 2024 record by nearly 0.1C, according to the European Copernicus climate service.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyjk92w9k1o

The reality is somewhat different, as satellites show that global temperatures have been in freefall in recent months. Since September 2024, they have fallen by a full half a degree celsius.

Last month was not even the hottest January, as January 2024 was 0.4C hotter

 

https://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

Scientists have now said that much of the recent spike in temperatures has been caused by reduced sulfate emissions from shipping, thanks to new clean air regulations.

Wildfires

The BBC lead their article with a photo of the LA wildfires. The impression, which they clearly want to create, is that these fires are connected to global temperatures.

It proves that their whole article cannot be taken seriously.

climate-debate

Drying and rewetting cycles substantially increased soil CO2 release

by Niigata University, Feb 5, 2025 in ScienceDaily

Soil incubation experiments revealed a comprehensive increase in CO2 release by drying-rewetting cycles (DWCs) among Japanese forests and pastureland soils, suggesting a significant contribution of the DWCs-induced destruction of microbial cells and reactive metal-organic matter complex to the CO2 release increase.
…
…
The research group revealed that the amount of CO2 released from soil increases significantly due to repeated drying and rewetting cycles (DWCs) expected to be caused by changes in precipitation patterns due to global warming.
better to know...?

New Study: Sea Levels Around Japan Are ‘Not Rising, Nor Accelerating’ Since The 1800s

by K. Richard, Feb 4, 2025 in NoTricksZone

In a region of the world where tide gauges are not compromised by land subsidence or uplift, sea levels have not been observed to be rising since measurements began in 1894.

According to a new study, when sea levels rise it usually has more to do with declining land movement (subsidence) or 20- to 60-year oscillations than it has to do with thermostatic sea level change.

“In Japan, there are many long-term trend tide gauges recording the sea levels since 1894. The tide gauges of Hosojima, Wajima, Tonoura, and Oshoro, not suffering from subsidence or isostasy, show multi-decadal fluctuations of periodicity quasi-20 and quasi-60 years, but not rising, nor accelerating, relative sea levels.”

…

Another study published earlier in the year by the same author (Boretti, 2024) indicates the sea level pattern around Japan is similarly occurring around the Polynesian island of Tuvalu.

Sea level changes are said to be influenced more by multi-decadal oscillations and land subsidence than by a global change in the amount of water stored in ocean basins.

“The significant increase in sea level observed at Tuvalu’s current tide gauge is attributed more to multidecadal oscillations, significantly affecting short-term records, and the subsidence of the tide gauge, rather than the global thermosteric contribution.”

“The suggested analysis aligns with prior research, reinforcing the perspective that the sea levels are gently rising and the surfaced area of Pacific islands and atolls is not diminishing, contrary to inaccuracies found in selective studies that emphasize certain data while disregarding others.”

climate-debate

Climate Alarmist Stefan Rahmstorf Struggles With The Reality Of Uncertainty

by P. Gosselin, Feb 2, 2025 in NoTricksZone

By Frank Bosse

(Translated from the original at Klimanachrichten)

We have kept you, dear readers, very promptly informed about AMOC conjectures.

Recently, we also informed you about a new study that found a stable Atlantic overturning circulation since the 1960s. It is not the only one in the recent past.

However, Prof. Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) is a great advocate of the “The Day after Tomorrow” scenario of a collapsing oceanic current. As recently as June, 2024, he noted on X (formerly Twitter) that the AMOC mitigation saga “is even more dramatic than it ever was”.

He himself had been responsible for a whole series of papers as author or co-author, which also contributed to the scenario, and he initiated an “open letter” in the fall of 2024 that dramatically addressed politicians. We also reported on this.

Of course, the new findings could not couldn’t pass him by without comment. Under the headline “The AMOC is slowing down, is stable, yes, no, no, yes…” he commented on it on the blog “Real Climate”, which is run by scientists, including himself, Gavin Schmidt from NASA, and others.

What he has to say there can be stated in a nutshell: He defends his approaches and lists the problems of the more recent studies. That was to be expected. For example, he emphasizes that the new climate models (CMIP 6) hardly show any connection between “his fingerprint”, the sea surface temperatures of the “warming hole” in the North Atlantic (see the article here from 17 January 2025) and the actual current, but that the approximately 4 years older ones called CMIP5 do. He also questions whether the new ones are really more reliable in this respect than the older ones. However, the effort for the former was considerable.

He summarized:

I don’t believe that the newer methods are more reliable than the old ones (his, the author). … However, since we don’t have measurements going back far enough, there is still some uncertainty in this respect…“

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

California Blows It Again

by W. Eschenbach, Fab 3, 2025 in WUWT

Encouraged by the reception of my previous post “Eight Ten-Thousandths Of A Degree Per Gigaton“, which ranged from warm acceptance through amused contempt to outright hostility, I’ve expanded my research to analyze the CO2 emissions of the late great State of California.

In my post linked above, I found that IF the IPCC is correct (which is a big “IF”), for each gigaton (Gt) of avoided CO2 emissions, there is an avoided global warming of 0.0008°C. Please read that post for the detailed calculations.

And utilizing that relationship, here are the past and projected future California CO2 emissions.

…

WOW! For all of our sacrifices here in California, for all the money we’ve spent and are projected to spend, we MIGHT cool the world twenty years from now by 0.006°C … be still, my beating heart …

Now, as to how much that has cost and will cost, the numbers are hard to come by. Here are some major costs:

• The California solar mandate is estimated to increase the cost of newly constructed single-family homes by approximately $8,400 each. There are ~ 60,000 new single-family homes built each year in California. That’s about half a billion dollars per year for the next 20 years until 2045, or $10 billion total.

• The “Renewable Mandates” and rooftop solar subsidies have made current California electricity about $0.15 per kWh more expensive than its neighbors. Average since 2004 is about $0.10 per kWh more expensive. California’s annual electricity consumption in 2023 was approximately 287,220,000,000 kWh. That’s a cost of $35 billion per year times 20 years (2025-2045) equals $700 billion, plus $29 billion times 20 years (2004-2024) gives a total of $1.3 TRILLION. And that’s with the totally unrealistic assumption of no increase in either consumption or electricity costs.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

The Green Deal in the light of geology

by A. Préat, Jan 31, 2025 in ScienceClimatEnergie

The Green Deal, an extension of the Paris Agreement (COP21, 2015), concerns three simultaneous transitions: ecological, energy and digital. Its aim is to develop a totally carbon-free economy in Europe by 2050, i.e. to achieve the Net Zero objective set by the European Commission.  How will this be achieved? By developing an electricity grid, a car fleet made up of 100% electric vehicles equipped with batteries (NMC) and an energy mix that is more than 80% (from 2030) supplied by wind turbines and photovoltaic panels. Intermittent renewable energies will be used for the most part. This also means replacing the fossil fuels used for transport and heat (‘flames’) with electricity from renewable sources.

To achieve this goal, which will require gigantic quantities of critical metals, the European Commission has no other solution than to revive mining activity by re-exploiting old mines, opening new ones and extending or deepening existing mines. The required quantities of critical metals are enormous and Europe, our continent, doesn’t have them. For lack of a favorable geological context, Europe is a ‘mining dwarf’ on a global scale. We account for 6% of the world’s population, we consume 25 to 30% of the worldwide production and produce only 5% to meet our needs. Since the 1990s, we have been at the bottom of the list in terms of exploration efforts, with just 3%. We are far behind the Anglo-Saxon and Asian companies, which dominate not only exploration but also the production of minerals. Our reserves are small in relation to what is at stake. Only 2% of the metals we need for the energy transition are available on the European continent (CDS, 2023).

So, how can we achieve the energy transition if we don’t have the materials to do it? The Commission has laid down 4 rules to remedy our shortcomings: (i) to product 10% of our annual consumption (in other words, we will always be 90% dependent on the outside world!); (ii) to process at least 40% of our annual consumption on site; (iii) to recycle at least 15% of metals for our annual consumption; and (iv) not to depend on any one country for more than 65% of our annual consumption in order to avoid excessive criticality. To date, none of these recommendations has been met. Europe also favors the development of a circular economy at a rate of 75%, which currently stands at just under 12% and has fallen in recent years.

EU is faced with a challenge. Has it considered the short-term agenda it has set itself for Net Zero? This agenda must include the long-term dimension of mining: exploration and prospecting are long phases. It takes an average of 17 years and very large budgets to open a new mine, in the hope that it will fully meet expectations. What’s more, because of the tense global economic and geopolitical situation, exploration efforts in non-ferrous metals have recently fallen by a few percent… According to the UN (2024), there is a shortfall of 225 billion dollars in investment in projects to extract essential minerals. What’s more, unlike in the past, to open a mine you will have to face determined opposition from environmental NGOs and citizens, who will lodge numerous legal appeals, which will delay the opening for a long time.

Ultimately, this transition will replace dependence on fossil fuels with dependence on metals. This was the case with forests: wood had been the exclusive fuel for metallurgy for several centuries and was replaced by coal in the 19th century to preserve the forests. Coal was then replaced by oil and gas (less polluting) and today fossil fuels will be replaced by metals to achieve decarbonation, as requested by the European Commission.

Programs to identify our mining potential have already been launched in 2018. They tell us, for example, that we have limited potential in rare earths, which are ultra-dominated by China and are a central pillar of so-called ‘high-tech’ technologies. We have no rare earth mines. However, a deposit of rare earths was discovered in January 2023 in Lapland (Sweden). It is thought to contain 1% of the world’s reserves, and production is planned within 10 to 15 years. Yes, mine time is a long time…

Doesn’t this decarbonation seem like a forced march? Many think so… others go further and question it…

…