Global Warming: Myth or Reality

Marcel Leroux book published May 2005

Prof. Leroux -- of the Laboratoire de Climatologie, Risques, Environnement -- concludes that "global warming" is undoubtedly a myth, without scientific basis. The book highlights the key importance of "mobile polar highs" in the dynamics of weather and climate.

---
Order Pat Michaels new book

"Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media".

now available in paperback (Oct 2005)

---
Order Bill Kininmonth's book

"Climate Change: A Natural Hazard"

---

Arctic Melting: How Global Warming is Destroying One of the World's Largest Wilderness Areas

- - - - - - - - - -

-- return to current news page --

September 7, 2005

EU help for China - coal plant technology to capture and store CO2

EU has agreed to give China the technology for a coal-fired power station with low greenhouse gas emissions. The clean coal-power plant will employ carbon capture and storage technology through which the coal plant can capture its own emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, burying them in porous rock underground for long-term storage.

[Source: Europe Information Service, "EU/China: deals on environment, energy and space signed at summit", European Report, September 7, 2005]

August 31, 2005

* Global Warming Doubt Dispelled? Not Really
Steven Milloy (junkscience.com), Canada Free Press

Purveyors of global warming alarmism have, for some years now, been claiming that the science is settled (enough). So the big surprise in last week's flurry of press about three new research papers is that some of the alarmists seem to belatedly admit that the skeptics had a bastion at all (and I think the commonly-expressed opinion that it was a "last bastion" is about as big an error as the previous propagandizing notion that there was no bastion). Steve Milloy of junkscience.com here highlights comments of some prominent scientists who still don't appear to have jumped on the alarmist bandwagon. Here's example from the world-renowned Prof. Fred Singer of George Mason University: "Greenhouse theory says (and the models calculate) that the atmospheric trend should be 30 percent greater than the surface trend -- and it isnÕt," says Singer. "Furthermore, the models predict that polar [temperature] trends should greatly exceed the tropical values -- and they clearly donÕt ... In fact, the Antarctic has been cooling," adds Singer. I think Mr. Milloy is exactly right when he concudes that "Despite alarmist media reports, global warming-mania is melting. ItÕs no wonder the alarmists are in such a hurry to close the book on the science." I also love his "inside joke" when describing his web site: "Since April 1, 1996, JunkScience.com has had a discernible impact in the fight against junk science ..." He's poking fun at the most-quoted line of IPCC's Second Assessment Report.

April 18, 2005

Fossil-fuel feedback
The Canberra Times (Australia), p. A6

New software is said to offer savings of billions of dollars to the offshore oil industry by predicting the effects of climate change on the seabed. Researchers from CSIRO, Geoscience Australia and two US institutions say that by forecasting how the seabed will change in a warmer world the Sedsim modelling package will enable oil companies to prevent fractures and spills from pipelines and other infrastructure.

March 21, 2005

Nuclear fuel cycle - greenhouse gas emissions comparable to wind, solar

"Nuclear power emits virtually no greenhouse gases. The complete nuclear power chain, from uranium mining to waste disposal, and including reactor and facility construction, emits only 2-6 grams of carbon per kilowatt hour," Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told a conference on nuclear energy in the 21st century. "This is about the same as wind and solar power and one to two orders below coal, oil and even natural gas", he added.

[Source: Reuters, "U.N.: Nuclear Energy May Be Back in Vogue", March 21, 2005 6:55 am ET]

March 17, 2005

Kilimanjaro - no link to global warming or CO2

... Emblazoned on the front pages [this week] were pictures of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, minus its iconic halo of pristine snow. The headlines screamed that these dramatic photos were a grim warning of the end of the world through human-induced global warming. The leaders of the G8 countries, about to meet in Scotland, were enjoined to put action on climate change at the top of their agenda before more naked Kilimanjaros appeared. ...[T]hose graphic photographs of Mount Kilimanjaro are definitely a smoking gun as regards global warming, aren't they?

Well, actually, no. Kilimanjaro is five times higher than Ben Nevis. At an altitude of nearly three miles, it is always below zero in temperature. The snow is disappearing on Kilimanjaro, but not primarily because of so-called global warming, and very few reputable scientists have ever claimed otherwise. In other words, the Guardian front page on Monday was a complete distortion of the truth.

Ernest Hemingway described Kilimanjaro's sublime snow crown as "wide as all the world, great, high, and unbelievably white in the sun." I'm sorry it has gone. But the process started long ago before modern greenhouse gas emissions.

Records show that some time in the middle of the 19th century, the equatorial regions of the planet grew much drier. Possibly this had to do with deep-seated and complex variations in global wind and tide patterns. Some historians also suggest that European colonial expansion in Africa was aided by the ensuing famines that afflicted native populations. Environmentally, the upshot was less moisture in the air. But moisture is precisely what you need to freeze and add to your mountaintop glacier.

In East Africa, recent research has found that after about 1880, local lakes were drying up quickly as a result of these changes. Such lake evaporation decreases the amount of precipitation and cloudiness around Kilimanjaro. This produced a double whammy. Less precipitation robs the glacier of the material it needs to grow. Worse, less cloud coverage lets more sunlight filter through. The increase in sunlight (not temperature) provides more energy for evaporation of the glacier - something that started well over a century ago.

Because nothing is ever simple in climate change, we should note two other factors that have added to the loss of Kilimanjaro's ice. First, remember it is not really a mountain, but the caldera of an active volcano that last erupted only a century ago. When scientists drilled for ice-core samples in 2000, they found the interior of the glacier was completely water-saturated: volcanic vents were heating the base of Kilimanjaro's ice sheet and melting the bottom layer of ice. I look forward to the G8 leaders having an active policy to discourage volcanoes.

Is any human agency involved in the disappearing Kilimanjaro glacier? The answer is, unfortunately, yes - but it is local. The Tanzanians have been burning nearby forests. For example, honey collectors start fires to try to smoke bees out of their hives. The resulting loss of foliage causes reduced moisture in the atmosphere around Kilimanjaro, leading to yet another round of reduced precipitation and cloud cover, further increasing solar radiation and glacial evaporation.

The mechanics of the birth, growth and death of mountain glaciers is highly complex and very long-term. Alas, the advent of the faddish doctrine of catastrophism has coincided with the birth of our 24-hour news culture and resulted in a very spurious vision of instantaneous change. Kilimanjaro's glacier was born ... with the end of the last great ice age, when the world actually got warmer. That warmth provided the vital precipitation that let the ice form. The subsequent disappearance of the ice has been a long-term, mostly natural phenomenon - not the result of you driving the kids to school.

[Source: George Kerevan, "Sermon on the mount a global scare too far", The Scotsman, March 17, 2005, p. 24]
---sbs---

March 13, 2005

CO2 - no scientific basis for multi-billion effort to control emissions, sez Baliunas

If both sides of the debate surrounding global warming should agree on one thing, it is these words: "We're scientists. And science is never settled." As Sallie Baliunas -- who visited Calgary on Thursday -- notes, nobody knows enough about the causes of climate change to have any confidence in the prescriptions of the costly Kyoto protocol... Quite simply, no one knows to what degree manmade CO2 contributes to the greenhouse effect that is suspected of warming the atmosphere... Historic and geological records indicate climate change has been continuous. Ice ages and their related sea-level fluctuations of hundreds of feet occurred before mankind could possibly be responsible. But quite how non-human factors -- such as solar activity, perturbations of Earth's orbit, and movement of its magnetic field -- come into play is simply not known. Importantly, little is known about the effect of clearcutting forests, building cities or manmade heat islands of any kind. Baliunas's conclusion is indisputable: "Climate is complex. And if you don't use science, what will you use?" ...

Those who press on with multibillion-dollar programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions do so on faith, potentially oblivous to more effective opportunities to temper climate change. Baliunas agrees there is merit in precaution. Reducing such emissions is prudent, she concedes. But such precautionary measures carry no scientific guarantee that they will be effective.

[Source: The Calgary Herald (Alberta), "No one knows why it's warming: Mankind's role in Earth's changes only beginning to be understood", March 13, 2005, p. A14]
---sbs---

Premature action risks public backlash against possibly better-grounded climate policies in future, sez Baliunas

There is also a risk of perverse consequences [of precautionary measures]. Sallie Baliunas fears there will be a public backlash against any kind of climate policy, if measures proving to be ineffective are undertaken at great cost.

[Source: The Calgary Herald (Alberta), "No one knows why it's warming: Mankind's role in Earth's changes only beginning to be understood", March 13, 2005, p. A14]
---sbs---

Spending big bucks now on reducing iffy risk 100- years hence seems immoral, sez Baliunas

Baliunas also questions the morality of spending huge sums in the hope of preventing a 2.5-centimetre rise in sea levels in 100 years time, when even smaller sums would alleviate health and hunger concerns in the developing world.

[Source: The Calgary Herald (Alberta), "No one knows why it's warming: Mankind's role in Earth's changes only beginning to be understood", March 13, 2005, p. A14]
---sbs---

Australia - warming projections for 2030, by CSIRO's McInnes

Forget the mild inconvenience of SA's erratic weather - what's to come is the real worry... MORE bushfires and floods, hotter days, higher sea levels, stressed waterways. Welcome to South Australia, 2030. To many scientists the impacts of global warming are becoming increasingly apparent and they paint a sobering picture for the future. Among those sounding alarm bells is Kathy McInnes, a senior research scientist who has spent the past 15 years studying the impacts of climate change across Australia. Dr McInnes works at the CSIRO's Department of Atmospheric Research in Melbourne and has completed several publications, including Climate Change in South Australia. She says global warming will have a dramatic impact on SA ... Dr McInnes' findings for SA show:
TEMPERATURES: By 2030, the average annual temperature for Adelaide and southern parts of the state will have increased between 0.2C to 1.4C. The average temperature in the north will increase between 0.4C and 2C. These increases are expected to be similar for daily maximums and minimums. "There will be pressure on industry because of the greater extremes," Dr McInnes says. "Because SA has such a harsh climate anyway, agriculture in general is well adapted. "But more work is needed."
RAINFALL: Average spring rainfall could decrease by up to 20 per cent by 2030. In summer, winter and autumn, rainfall is expected to decrease by up to 13 per cent. Despite reductions in average rainfall, heavy summer rain in SA's north is expected to increase in frequency and magnitude. Projections indicate floods in the north could increase by 20 per cent.
SEA LEVELS: By the end of the century sea levels are expected to have risen between 9cm and 88cm. "Even if you only get a very small increase . . . when you've got a storm the destruction can penetrate further inland, so it can have quite a devastating effect on erosion," Dr McInnes says. "In combination with an extreme sea level event such as a storm surge there would be greater erosion capacity and greater flooding capacity."
HOT SPELLS: Adelaide now experiences an average one day a year above 40C. By 2030 it is expected to experience up to three 40-plus days a year. In Outback towns, such as Oodnadatta, the number of days over 40C are likely to increase from the current 33 to as many as 55.
BUSHFIRES: The frequency of fires is expected to increase. "The conditions that bushfires would thrive on are likely to become more common," Dr McInnes says. "The hot, dry spells will dry out the environment and make it prone to bushfires."
RIVER MURRAY: Already struggling from reduced environmental flows, the Murray is likely to be impacted further by rainfall declines. "The health of the Murray could fall further if there's less water coming in via rainfall combined with greater usage," Dr McInnes says. "Greater agricultural demand on the declining water supply would further stress the Murray if adequate management processes don't take that into account."
ANIMALS: Native animals will struggle to adapt, especially as human settlement narrows their migration options. "Native wildlife in most places will find it hard going; in a perfect world for them, where there were no humans, they could adapt by migrating to other areas," Dr McInnes says. "But because the natural landscape is so fragmented now it makes it harder for them to migrate."
AGRICULTURE: While SA's already harsh climate has put it in good stead to handle climate change, there are some likely impacts on the agriculture industry. "The Goyder's Line might migrate further north as a result," Dr McInnes says. "For the viticulture region, it can mean grapes will mature earlier, which could potentially reduce grape quality because of the narrow window of opportunity for harvest."
HUMAN HEALTH: Heat stress is predicted to be a significant health problem as the weather warms, particularly given SA's ageing population. The projected increase in injury and death as a result of extreme heat is expected to be partly offset by fewer health problems in winter because of warmer temperatures. The increased risk of floods in the north could increase chances of drowning and vector-borne diseases.

[Source: Emma Graham et al., "Storms, floods, heat andÊ fires", Sunday Mail (South Australia), March 13, 2005, p. 76]
---sbs---

March 12, 2005

Kyoto outsiders - "coalition of the unwilling"

The Kyoto Protocol to reduce global warming went into effect on February 16. Ratified by 141 nations, the treaty aims to limit the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases by 5 to 8 percent in 35 industrialized nations by 2012. The United States, which leads the world by releasing 23 percent of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, is not one of those nations. President Bush started a coalition of the unwilling by withdrawing from the pact two months after taking office.

[Source: Brian Cook, "Defeated From the Start", In These Times, March 28, 2005, p. 3]
---sbs---

CO2 - 2 ppm rise in atmospheric concentration for 2nd year in a row may mark beginning of unprecedented rise, sez Keeling

In October, scientists found that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere jumped by more than 2 parts per million for the second year in a row. While the rise certainly could be an anomaly, Charles Keeling, who began such observations in 1958, said, "It is also possible that it is the beginning of a natural process unprecedented in the record."

[Source: Brian Cook, "Defeated From the Start", In These Times, March 28, 2005, p. 3]
---sbs---

Warming risk - survival of human race at stake, sez IPCC's Pachauri

In November, 300 scientists published a multiyear study that found the Arctic was warming twice as fast as the rest of the world. It was this study that prompted Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, to tell a conference on January 22: "We are risking the ability of the human race to survive." Pachauri's statements were surprising, as the Bush administration had heavily lobbied for him to lead the IPCC. The previous chairman, Robert Watson, chief scientist of the World Bank, had been replaced at the behest of the United States, after Exxon had written the White House a memo in 2001 urging his ouster for being too "aggressive."

[Source: Brian Cook, "Defeated From the Start", In These Times, March 28, 2005, p. 3]

nuclear.comMENT: Exxon was right. And the Bush Administration was also right in declining to re-nominate Watson. As Dr. Pachauri was the only person nominated for the job (although Watson somehow was given spot on ballot, too), the US decision to vote for him was not such a big deal. I don't recall any other "lobbying", heavy or otherwise, that the US did for the only candidate nominated.]
---sbs---

Kyoto's incredibly tame goals - "greatest value is symbolic", sez Pew's Claussen

... it is impossible to be too "aggressive" in combating global warming. Even the Kyoto measures -- should they actually be met -- are incredibly tame, the equivalent of an alcoholic recognizing his problem and promising to limit his daily intake to a six-pack. (No metaphors outside of suicide by keg stand come to mind for Bush's solution -- industry self-regulation.) Kyoto's proposed reduction in current emissions by 5 to 8 percent is a fraction of the 50 to 70 percent reduction that the IPCC believes will ultimately be necessary to stanch global warming. This unhappy fact is why even proponents of Kyoto, like Eileen Claussen of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, admit that the protocol's "greatest value is symbolic."

[Source: Brian Cook, "Defeated From the Start", In These Times, March 28, 2005, p. 3]
---sbs---

March 11, 2005

Global warming will increase El Nino frequency to every other year, sez PNNL's Scott

El Nino occurs roughly every 3-7 years. If there were no El Nino, a severe drought would occur [in Pacific northwestern US] roughly one year in 50. Add El Nino to the mix, and the average frequency for severe drought rises to 1 in 7. The El Nino years themselves average a severe drought year in every three. By conservative estimates, global warming will approximate El Nino severe drought conditions "once every 2 years," Scott said.

[Source: Michael J. Scott (staff scientist, Pacific Northwest National Lab), cited in "CLIMATE CHANGE: We're here, we're warming, can we get used to it?", Science Letter, March 15, 2005, p. 2]
---sbs---

Snowpack for US west coast - 70% reduction predicted by climate models, sez PNNL's Scott

Michael Scott presented findings from his and colleagues' decade-long case study - on water availability past, present and future in the Yakima River Valley of south-central Washington - at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting, during a session he organized on adapting to climate change. The Yakima River Valley is a vast fruit basket, with 370,000 irrigated acres of orchards, vineyards and other crops covering 6150 square miles from the river's headwaters in the Cascade Range east of Seattle to the Yakima's terminus at the Columbia River in Richland. In a typical year, five reservoirs and stream runoff provide agriculture with 2.7 million acre-feet of water. In a typical year at mid-century, that amount will fall an average of 20-40%. "The expected losses to agriculture alone in the Yakima Valley over the next several decades will be between $92 million at 2 degrees C warming and $163 million a year at 4 degrees" - or up to nearly a quarter of total current crop value, Scott said. Those losses will result from a projected shortage of water for irrigation. That water comes from reservoirs and runoff that are, in turn, tied directly to the amount of snow that accumulates in the Cascades over the winter - the snowpack. Scott, a natural resources economist, and colleagues at PNNL and Washington State University extrapolated the effects of warming to the region by applying data from bad drought seasons going back 80 years to computer projections of diminishing snowpack this century... Scott has pinned many of those drought years to El Nino, a disruption of the ocean-atmosphere system in the Tropical Pacific that affects global weather and climate. .. Models predict up to 70% reduction in snowpack for the entire West Coast, including the Cascades.

The model they ran assumed no change in precipitation. The key is availability of water when it is needed, not just for agriculture but also for salmon runs and municipal water supplies. The entire system is predicated on water being stored as snow in the mountains becoming available in spring with the thaw.

[Source: Michael J. Scott (staff scientist, Pacific Northwest National Lab), cited in "CLIMATE CHANGE: We're here, we're warming, can we get used to it?", Science Letter, March 15, 2005, p. 2]
---sbs---

March 8, 2005

Climate change - "a serious potential threat", sez Royal Society prez

Lord May of Oxford, president of the Royal Society, said "One thing we do know for sure is that we are changing the composition of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and that is going to have effects unless, by some implausible miracle, everything cancels out... If the public are misled into thinking climate change does not pose a serious potential threat, some policymakers could more easily find an excuse not to act. The United States administration has shown that this is the case." Lord May said the Bush administration must recognize the link between man-made pollution and climate change, warning that continuing to deny the impact of human activities on the environment may ultimately have catastrophic consequences for everyone on the planet.

[Source: Xinhua News Agency, "Top British scientist accuses Bush of undermining climate change treaty", Xinhua General News Service, March 7, 2005 8:30 am EST]
---sbs---

Kyoto cuts dwarfed by 13% increase in US GHGs since 1990

The Royal Society has calculated that the 13 percent rise in greenhouse gas emissions from the United States since 1990 will dwarf the cuts resulting from all other countries that follow the Kyoto protocol.

[Source: Xinhua News Agency, "Top British scientist accuses Bush of undermining climate change treaty", Xinhua General News Service, March 7, 2005 8:30 am EST]
---sbs---

February 26, 2005

Consensus crowd sexed up IPCC TAR, exhibits eco-McCarthyism, and promotes Kyoto straightjacket

Source: Lord Taverne, speech in UK House of Lords, February 23, 2005, Columns 1308-1310

My Lords, I have no very clear view about climate change. Indeed, I am somewhat worried that many people seem to be so sure. The issue is one of great complexity. There are so many factors that interact and have to be judged over such a long timescale that it makes predictions hazardous. About 75 per cent of expertsÑmost, although not all, as some claimÑagree that man-made greenhouse gases are a significant factor in global warning and everyone agrees that global warming is taking place. I feel that I must accept that majority view about the contribution of man-made factors, but how much warming will there be, how soon will it happen, what effect will it have and what should we do about it?

On the one hand, there are Sir David King's persuasive warnings both in his evidence to the committee and in his Zuckerman lecture; then there are reports of the melting of the glaciersÑto which the noble Lord, Lord Haworth, referred in his eloquent maiden speechÑand the polar ice, the recent findings of the heating of the oceans and the potential changes to the Gulf Stream. All of those suggest that we may be facing imminent catastropheÑby imminent, I mean some time in the next 50 to 100 years. Yet, let me list some doubts. The first, the hockey stick model often cited by the IPCC, which shows centuries of no rise in warming with a sudden increase as we started the massive use of fossil fuels has been effectively discredited by Hans Von Storch and others and also by Macintyre and McKitrick who demonstrated that the model was so designed that whatever data is fed into it ends up with a hockey stick curve.

Next, the IPCC's future scenarios are based on economic forecasts. These have been convincingly shown by David Henderson and Ian Castles, two eminent economists, to be flawed. It is likely that they exaggerate future emissions of greenhouse gases. The cavalier dismissal of this careful critique by the panel's president shows him to be a partisan advocate and not an objective chairman. He also likened Lomborg to Hitler. He does not inspire confidence.

An early draft of the IPCC's report stated cautiously that:

"Studies . . . suggest that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are a substantial contributor to the observed warming, especially over the last 30 years. However, the accuracy of these estimates continues to be limited by uncertainties in estimates of variability, natural and anthropogenic forcing, and the climate response to external forcing".

The final summary report said something slightly differentÑmore definite:

"In the light of new evidence and taking into account remaining uncertainties, most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely"Ñ

that means, by their definition, a 66 per cent to 90 per cent chanceÑ

"to be due to greenhouse gas concentrations".

The document seems to have been sexed up.

Recently, Dr Landsea, the Panel's leading hurricane expert, resigned in protest, because the IPCC attributed recent hurricanes to global warming. One year's events were taken as evidence, but, interestingly, barometric fluctuations in Stockholm have shown no systematic change in the frequency and severity of storms since Napoleon's time.

There is evidence that ocean levels in the Maldives are steady and have not risen significantly in the past 1,000 years. There is photographic evidence showing high-water marks in the past higher than those at present.

Next, do we know what percentage of warming is due to solar activity? Some experts say 30 per cent, some say 70 per cent to 80 per cent. What of clouds and aerosols, which can have a cooling effect?

I mention these uncertainties, not because I am a climate change denier, but because we should not be dogmatic. There is a sort of political taboo about the issue. If you express doubts, you must be in the pay of the oil industry or a Bush supporter. There is a slight whiff of eco-McCarthyism about.

I support measures to curb emissions of carbon dioxide, of which the most important would be, first, investment in nuclear energy and then carbon sequestration. I do not see it as a mortal sin to question the Kyoto Protocol, which will reduce warming by one-fiftieth of a degree Celsius by 2050, at considerable economic cost. I doubt if its targets will be reached, and there are no sanctions if they are not. I suspect that there will be less costly and more effective ways of dealing with whatever prospects lie ahead than the Kyoto straitjacket.

[nuclear.comMENT: Thanks and a tip-o-the-hat to Benny Peiser for publicizing and providing link]
---sbs---

Soot in the Arctic - distant origins [JGR, Feb 25]

Here's how GISS' Koch and Hansen close out an interesting paper published yesterday in Journal of Geophysical Research:

... The timing and location of Arctic warming and sea ice loss in the late 20th century is consistent with south Asian sources [of black carbon (BC) in the Arctic]. According to Baumgardner et al. [2004], BC concentrations in the UT/LS over the Arctic seem to have doubled between 1980 and 1995 (although they also indicate that the early data are highly uncertain). BC emissions from developed countries have declined and aircraft are apparently not to blame. However, during this time BC emissions from China and India have nearly doubled [Novakov et al., 2003]. Also, the model indicates that most of the concentrations in this region of the UT/LS are from south Asia.

According to the 2002 AMAP Assessment [MacDonald et al., 2003], the past three decades show significant decreases in sea ice thickness and extent. This recent decrease is greatest in spring and fall and occurs in the western Arctic (western North America and Siberia). These observations defy recent modeling efforts, which show the largest impact of increased CO2 on the Arctic winter rather than summer [MacDonald et al., 2003]. The pattern of sea ice loss is believed to be linked to the phase of the AO [MacDonald et al., 2003]. However it is interesting that these decades correspond to the increases in BC from south Asia, and that this BC is transported over the Pacific and into the western Arctic, during summer as well as spring. Prior to this, sea ice also decreased during the 1930sÐ1940s. However this occurred during winter in the eastern part of the Arctic. Again it is interesting to note that during this earlier period, pollution from coal burning in the United States, Europe and Russia [Novakov et al., 2003] would have been transported to the Arctic during winter-spring, and the Eurasian sources would deposit heavily in the eastern Arctic (see Figure 10).

Although our model has considerable uncertainties, we feel the results, together with other lines of evidence, warrant a careful look at the potential impact of south Asia and low-latitude biomass sources on Arctic BC. Studies which associate elements found in the Arctic with various pollution sources should consider these distant sources. For example, mercury has been observed to increase in the Arctic and this may be traced to coal burning in Asia [Macdonald et al., 2003]. Trace element studies of emissions from south Asia, along with Europe and Russia should be compared with those in Arctic pollution. Ideally such analysis would be done using aircraft observations, since much of the Arctic BC may never reach the surface but may remain at higher altitudes.

Ref: Dorothy Koch and James Hansen (NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies), "Distant origins of Arctic black carbon: A Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE experiment", Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 110, D04204, doi:10.1029/2004JD005296, 2005 -- http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2005/2005_KochHansen.pdf

Abstract: Black carbon (BC) particles, derived from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and biomass, may have a severe impact on the sensitive Arctic climate, possibly altering the temperature profile, cloud temperature and amount, the seasonal cycle, and the tropopause level and accelerating polar ice melting. We use the Goddard Institute for Space Studies general circulation model to investigate the origins of Arctic BC by isolating various source regions and types. The model suggests that the predominant sources of Arctic soot today are from south Asia (industrial and biofuel emissions) and from biomass burning. These are the primary global sources of BC (approximately 20% and 55%, respectively, of the global emissions), and BC aerosols in these regions are readily lofted to high altitudes where they may be transported poleward. According to the model the Arctic BC optical thickness is mostly from south Asia (30%) and from biomass (28%) (with slightly more than half of biomass coming from north of 40¡N); North America, Russia, and Europe each contribute 10Ð15%. Russia, Europe, and south Asia each contribute about 20Ð25% of BC to the low-altitude springtime ÒArctic haze.Ó In the Arctic upper troposphere/lower stratosphere during the springtime, south Asia (30Ð50%) and low-latitude biomass (20Ð30%) are dominant, with a significant aircraft contribution (10Ð20%). Industrial S emissions are estimated to be weighted relatively more toward Russia and less toward south Asia (compared with BC). As a result, Russia contributes the most to Arctic sulfate optical thickness (24%); however, the south Asian contribution is also substantial (17%). Uncertainties derive from source estimates, model vertical mixing, and aerosol removal processes. Nevertheless, our results suggest that distant sources contribute more to Arctic pollution than is generally assumed.
---sbs---

February 24, 2005

* Hydro's dirty secret revealed
Duncan Graham-Rowe, New Scientist, Feb 26

The green image of hydro power as a benign alternative to fossil fuels is false, says ƒric Duchemin, a consultant for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). "Everyone thinks hydro is very clean, but this is not the case," he says. Hydroelectric dams produce significant amounts of carbon dioxide and methane, and in some cases produce more of these greenhouse gases than power plants running on fossil fuels. Carbon emissions vary from dam to dam, says Philip Fearnside from Brazil's National Institute for Research in the Amazon in Manaus. "But we do know that there are enough emissions to worry about." In a study to be published in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Fearnside estimates that in 1990 the greenhouse effect of emissions from the Curu‡-Una dam in Brazilian Amazon, was more than three-and-a-half times what would have been produced by generating the same amount of electricity from oil. [nuclear.com note: Dr. Fearnside has spent a decade researching and documenting the carbon emissions from man-made reservoirs. His preliminary results from the Balbina dam in Eastern Amazonia shows eight times worse comparative disadvantage than Curu‡-Una figures. See December 2004 International Rivers Network report.]

This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot. Then after this first pulse of decay, plant matter settling on the reservoir's bottom decomposes without oxygen, resulting in a build-up of dissolved methane. This is released into the atmosphere when water passes through the dam's turbines. Seasonal changes in water depth mean there is a continuous supply of decaying material. In the dry season plants colonise the banks of the reservoir only to be engulfed when the water level rises. For shallow-shelving reservoirs these "drawdown" regions can account for several thousand square kilometres. In effect man-made reservoirs convert carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into methane. This is significant because methane's effect on global warming is 21 times stronger than carbon dioxide's.

In the next round of IPCC discussions in 2006 the proposed National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme, which calculates each country's carbon budget, will include emissions from artificially flooded regions. But these guidelines will only take account of the first 10 years of a dam's operation and only include surface emissions. Methane production will go unchecked because climate scientists cannot agree on how significant this is; it will also vary between dams. But if Fearnside gets his way these full emissions would be included. With the proposed IPCC guidelines, tropical countries that rely heavily on hydroelectricity, such as Brazil, could see their national greenhouse emissions inventories increased by as much as 7 per cent. Colder countries are less affected, he says, because cold conditions will be less favourable for producing greenhouse gases.
---sbs---

February 23, 2005

* Australia - Howard takes heat for foregoing Kyoto's economic opportunities

[L]ast week Prime Minister John Howard said it was not in Australia's interest to sign the Kyoto Protocol because major polluters including China, India and Indonesia would not be subject to the same penalties and restrictions as Australia... Federal Labor MP Julia Irwin said Prime Minister John Howard's refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol had put Australia's reputation as an environmentally conscious nation at risk. "...[C]limate change ... is the greatest threat to the health of the planet," she said. "Our isolation from international environmental action also isolates us from the economic opportunities arising from emissions trading and renewable energy and has put at risk many job and investment opportunities."

[Source: Fairfield Advance (Australia), "Reputation at risk over Kyoto", February 23, 2005]
---sbs---

* Kyoto split reflects split between 'declining Europe' and 'the aspirational economies'

Our globalising world now contains two major politico-economic communities.

* The rich European nations, which have driven the Kyoto Protocol, are suffering serious population and economic decline. These self-destructing economies have turned their backs on their great past and believe they can solve future problems by destroying wealth and can ensure future safety by denying the fruits of technology. The Kyoto Protocol will hasten their economic decline unless their governments cheat, as they usually do. The Europeans' widespread adoption of the precautionary principle, and the consequent rejection of genetic modification and other leading-edge technologies, encourages Europe's scientists to flee to the United States, even to Asia, where they find their knowledge and skills are welcomed rather than feared. The collapsing markets of Europe invite protectionism and trade barriers. Such markets will offer little room for expansion and fewer buyers of our produce.

* On the other hand, on our own side of the globe, we have what I call the aspirational economies of Apec and the Indian sub-continent. Unlike the self-destructing economies of Europe, these nations are confident of their future and look forward to increasing national wealth and personal prosperity. They believe the best way to deal with future problems, such as climate change, is by increasing their wealth and their access to technology. Their markets are booming and offer huge opportunities to their neighbouring trading partners, including us. Apec has 21 members. They account for more than one-third of the world's population, about 60 per cent of world gross domestic product, and about 47 per cent of world trade. Apec includes some of the largest and fastest-growing economies in the world. These neighbouring aspirational economies are where our opportunities lie.

[Source: Owen McShane (director - Centre for Resource Management Studies), "Dancing to Kyoto tune turns us into an Apec dummy", The New Zealand Herald, February 23, 2005]
---sbs---

* New Zealand - Kyoto will undercut NZ exports to APEC, and won't improve exports to the pro-Kyoto nations

The Government [of New Zealand] is convinced that anthropogenic global warming is a major threat, that Kyoto is a workable response, that we must do our duty and accept the costs. Our strategic approach to energy, transport and economic growth and development is now determined by the protocol. Despite all this, Mr Hodgson believes New Zealand entrepreneurs will rise to the challenge and develop a host of Kyoto-friendly technologies, all exportable to a Kyoto-driven world. It won't happen. We are about to incur a host of taxes, levies and incentives, all driven by T-shirt slogans, which are, in turn, driven by junk science and junk economics. Any technologies we develop will address the needs of only those markets suffering similar distortions. We are unlikely to develop anything of use to Europe's nuclear sector or their waste-to-energy plants. We have already rejected both responses to the protocol. While we test every new technology against Maori animism and European nature-worship, the aspirational markets around us will be developing technologies driven by economic efficiency gains. They are working on genetic modification of biomass as a fuel. Their approach to waste-to-energy allows them to turn waste from farm and forestry directly into fuel oil. Our definition of renewable energy rejects such impure renewables.

Signing the Kyoto Protocol has made us the Apec outcast. The United States and Australia have refused to ratify the accord. Japan has "accepted" but it is a Clayton's commitment. Russia has signed, but doesn't have to do anything for at least five years. Canada is trying to weasel out of its commitments because it exports so much clean gas to the US. China, Singapore, Brunei, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea are all classed as developing countries and hence too poor to be expected to sign. So, too, are Chile, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. We are one of the "super rich", unlike such "desperately poor" economies as Singapore and Hong Kong. New Zealand stands alone as the sole enthusiastic ratifier, determined to do our bit to save the planet. We are dancing to the European tune, claiming virtue from the moral high ground. I suspect our Apec partners regard us as the dumbest clucks on the block.

[note: The Maori animism reference equates the religion of New Zealand's Maori aborigines with the European nature-worship.]

[Source: Owen McShane (director - Centre for Resource Management Studies), "Dancing to Kyoto tune turns us into an Apec dummy", The New Zealand Herald, February 23, 2005]
---sbs---

* Kyoto's biggest disadvantage - loss of individual liberties

... the biggest threat we New Zealanders face [from our signing on to Kyoto Protocol] is not the monetary cost. The central planners of the 20th century believed that the state should own the means of production, distribution and exchange, an idea that fell out of favour with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Our central planners have since realised it is cheaper and easier to simply control the means of production, distribution and exchange. The Kyoto Protocol is their perfect vehicle. Everything we do generates some carbon dioxide somewhere. Hence, the protocol provides every meddler with a lawful excuse to regulate our lives. Ride a bike, they say. But 40 per cent of the price of the bread which powers our own internal engines is the cost of the fossil fuel used to produce it. So maybe we shouldn't. The real costs of Kyoto will be our loss of freedoms as we travel down this second road to serfdom. But I remain optimistic. I cannot believe that New Zealanders will readily succumb to economic serfdom, especially while we watch Australia become ever more attractive to our own youngest, best and brightest.

[Source: Owen McShane (director - Centre for Resource Management Studies), "Dancing to Kyoto tune turns us into an Apec dummy", The New Zealand Herald, February 23, 2005]
---sbs---

* Thoughts from the consensus sheep and their alarmist shepherds

[A] small but vocal group of climate change dissidents gets far more media space to dispute the arguments of mainstream science than either its numbers or its highly selective arguments warrant... I'm inclined to take more seriously new reports from the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C. -- and this is one of the more conservative mainstream forums for peer-reviewed research -- that the evidence is in and it says human activity is rapidly altering the climate to the great peril of coming generations.

Even Mark Henderson, science correspondent at the far from shrill London Times, cites "the strongest evidence yet that global warming has been triggered by human activity." ... Extensive field observations by researchers from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California corroborate what computer models predicted. When reporters asked whether rising ocean temperatures and changes in salinity could be caused by changes in solar radiation or vulcanism or other natural mechanisms, the answer was: "Not a chance." "The evidence -- based on computer models and observations in the field -- is so strong that it should put an end to any debate about whether human-caused global warming is a real phenomenon," the formal media release said.

Other field observations cited at the conference further confirmed something I wrote about here several years ago -- first, that massive warming-induced environmental change is underway in the North; second, that melting glaciers in the Arctic are now flooding the North Atlantic with a vast plume of fresh water that could block the Gulf Stream... These reports from mainstream scientists should lay to rest the debate over whether human contribute to global warming, but I doubt that it will.

[Source: Stephen Hume, "Climate change dissenters fly, noisily, in the face of science", The Vancouver Sun (British Columbia), February 23, 2005, p. A23]

[nuclear.COMment: saying that the debate is over due to as-yet unpublished research seems premature. Wouldn't some rational folks want to have at least the opportunity to read a paper or somesuch? Claims that "the science is settled" have long been common. Before the first IPCC report hit the streets some fifteen years ago, MIT climatologist Richard Lindzen mused about the anthropogenic greenhouse warming theory being the first time climate science had adopted consensus before the research had hardly begun.]

[By the way, for those who might wonder if your friendly nuclear.com editor is being mean-spirited in referring to the sheeple, please consider the way that Mr. Hume begins and ends his op-ed: "There are those who believe the world is 4,000 years old and that all this stuff about Charles Darwin, the fossil record and carbon-14 dating techniques is a secular humanist plot... As we know from those who believe the government is covering up the truth about visiting UFOs, there's nothing as seductive as a good conspiracy theory." I've read a lot of "young earth creationists" over the years, and I don't recall a single one who thinks the Earth is but 4,000 years old. In fact, the most rigorous Bible-based timeline I've seen dates Creation at about 13,000 years ago. It's by Harold Camping, and is available here.]
---sbs---

February 22, 2005

* Sea level rise after ice age ~ 9,000 years bp was much quicker than uniformitarian assumptions

WHILE not quite the stuff of The Day After Tomorrow, sea levels on the Great Barrier Reef rose 10 times faster after the last Ice Age than the most alarmist of global warming predictions. The discovery by Australian scientists overturns the long-held belief that waters ascended gradually over the past 9000 years.

Triggering fears that global warming could produce a similar spike, Australian Institute of Marine Science researchers studying mangroves growing beneath the reef have found that sea levels rose about 3m in as little as 30 years after the ice age, drowning forests and flooding estuaries. Another sudden rise in sea levels of the same magnitude would cause widespread damage to low-lying coastal areas, washing away entire beaches, and swallowing lowland forest. AIMS biologist Dan Alongi said it had previously been thought that sea levels had gradually risen about 150m over the past 9000 years.

The latest discovery was made during the examination of nutrients on old river beds underneath the world heritage-listed reef and by studying remnant mangroves 70cm below the sea floor. "There is such an abrupt change in core composition from mud-like substance to intact mangrove branches -- the modern to the ancient -- that it suggests a large climate change happened," Dr Alongi said. "Previously, no one really had any idea how quickly these things actually happened, whether it was gradual or rapid."

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sea levels are expected to rise between 50cm and 88cm this century. Global temperatures are forecast to jump by up to 5.8C. Rising sea levels are due to the thermal expansion of ocean waters and the shrinking of polar ice caps and glaciers. It is estimated that even a modest rise in sea levels would displace millions of people. Colin Murray-Wallace, of the University of Wollongong's environmental science program, said the latest discovery confirmed that a similar rise could happen again. "In some areas it would have quite a significant impact in low-lying coastal areas ... and it means that there will be a major adjustment to some parts of the coastline," he said.

[Source: Ian Gerard (MATP), The Australian, February 22, 2005, p. 7. nuclear.COMment: note the differences in the headline used in two different editions of the newspaper. "Reef reveals how fast sea can rise" was the title in All-round First Edition. But in the All-round Country Edition it was "Rapid sea rise raises Reef fears"]

Feb 23 addition: AIMS press release, including one of the quotes from Dr. Alongi, is available here. Thanks to sci.environment contributor Michael Tobis for this info. BTW, after other sci.environment regulars contrasted the "150m over the past 9000 years" with other evidence, I emailed Dr. Alongi yesterday and asked permission to share any comments he'd be kind enough to provide. I'll let you know what I find out.
---sbs---

* Nutritional disadvantage of CO2 growth?

Chinese soil scientist Zhu Jianguo has warned that rises in global carbon dioxide emission may make grain less nutritious -- the protein level in cereal, for example, may be lowered by 10 percent in the coming four decades. "With higher density of greenhouse gas, plants will breathe in more carbon dioxide and grow faster -- but not necessarily better," said Zhu, a researcher with the Nanjing Institute of Soil Science, a branch of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Song's institute teamed up with a Japanese institute of agricultural environmental technologies in 2001 for a joint research program on how higher carbon dioxide density in the coming decades may affect the cropland ecosystem in Wuxi and Jiangdu cities of east China's Jiangsu Province. The scientists simulated a closed agricultural environment with increasingly higher density of carbon dioxide, and by the time the emission reached the level forecast for 2050, rice in the field had grown 10 to 14 percent faster than normal and wheat, 12 to 20 percent, said Song. "Higher density of carbon dioxide is like a 'gassy fertilizer' that speeds up their growth, but shortens their growth period, too, by an average six to nine days," said Song, who is chief scientist for the three-year research program. "As a result, the grain becomes less nutritious, with contents of protein, amino acid and trace elements such as iron and zinc all declining." He said these changes might impact China's soil as well as its grain quality and food security. "With more carbon dioxide inhaled, the rice may appear whiter and taste more glutinous, but you might feel hungry again two or three hours after a full meal because the actual intake of necessary nutritious elements has dropped".

Song welcomed the Kyoto Protocol that came into effect on Feb. 16, noting it marks mankind has finally taken a decisive step forward to safeguarding the planet by curbing global warming.

[Source: Xinhua News Agency, "Rising carbon dioxide emission may make grain less nutritious: expert", Xinhua Economic News Service, February 22, 2005 4:00 am EST]

[nuclear.comMENT: This article, and the version carried on another Xinhua feed, seems to skip to referring to somebody named Song. Such a glitch in tightly government controlled press always prompts your humble editor to ask, "Are they hiding something"? I've been reading some interesting stuff lately about the Chinese perspective on information warfare. I have concluded it is likely that their consistent publication of exclusively alarmist pro-Kyoto articles is a small part of a big strategy. Their word for information dominance is zhixinxiquan.]
---sbs---

* Early tsunami warning no good for Maldives if sea level rises a meter

Maldives President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom said an early warning system would be of little use to his low-lying island nation because his citizens had nowhere to run if killer waves struck again. "If the seas are going to rise by even one meter, that will mean that this country will be no more," Gayoom said. He appealed to the international community to curb greenhouse gas emissions that environmentalists point to as the main cause of global warming.

[Source: Margie Mason (AP writer), "Indonesia says fewer bodies being recovered as Japan offers expertise on tsunami early warning system", Associated Press Worldstream, February 22, 2005 4:18 am ET]
---sbs---

* A fallacy in the artful modeling consensus

Despite the fact that the Kyoto Protocol has now gone into effect in Europe, Canada and Japan, there is less scientific support for it than ever. In the eight years since Kyoto was first introduced, there has been a revolution in climate change science... What we have learned is that the fundamental scientific assumptions underlying Kyoto are false. Climate is not naturally constant and global warming need not be evidence of human interference. Climate ... changes all the time, on all scales - over decades, centuries, millennia and more... In fact the climate is now known to be what is called a far-from-equilibrium system. Such systems are characterized by nonlinear feedbacks that produce irregular oscillations from constant energy input. This means that the oscillations we observe, including 20th century warming and cooling, may be due to constant solar input. This would explain why we still cannot decipher why climate changes, despite spending tens of billion of research dollars... In short, human induced warming is a theory cooked up by atmospheric scientists and modelers who do not know, or choose to ignore, the natural history of climate. They dominate the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The reason they give for ignoring these effects is that we do not understand them. But that is fallacy, because we know these oscillations exist.

[Source: David Wojick, "Science still out on Kyoto", The Electricity Daily, February 22, 2005]
---sbs---

* An inverse relationship

The "Hockey Stick" graph has been the poster child of "global warming" since the day that the IPCC's Sir John Houghton was photographed for the press in front of the chart... Mann at first tried to shut down legitimate scientific debate about his study by refusing to disclose the data and the mathematical algorithm that he used to arrive at his conclusion. However, it has been revealed that Mr Mann's algorithm mines data for "hockey stick" shapes (a flat line that turns up sharply at the end), even where there are none! ... A Wall Street Journal editorial Friday concluded with "Businesses are gearing up, at considerable cost, to deal with a new regulatory environment; complex carbon-trading schemes are in the making. Shouldn't everyone look very carefully, and honestly, at the science before we jump off this particular cliff?". Well, the Wall Street Journal is obviously a corrupt tool of the Capitalist system. The less "conservative" Times would have us jump first, and ask "why" as we are plummeting down the face of the cliff. This astounding scandal continues to grow in inverse proportion to the reputations of many esteemed scientists.

[Source: D. Zivkovic (Aranda), "Why all the fuss? ...", letter to Canberra Times (Australia), February 22, 2005, p. A14]
---sbs---

* sequestration research - magnesium carbonate project at Arizona State U

Arizona State professors Andrew Chizmeshya and Michael McKelvy, who work in the Goldwater lab, neutralize CO2 by combining it at high heat with serpentine or olivine, two common minerals, in what they call "a dirty soda pop" -- a solution of water, sodium chloride and sodium bicarbonate. The reaction produces magnesium carbonate, a stable substance that can be buried, turned into road pavement or stored in other ways. "What we're trying to do is take what nature does over 100,000 years and do it in less than an hour for 10 bucks a ton" of sequestered carbon, McKelvy said. But right now, it costs about $70 a ton. The two researchers, who are working with more than a dozen other scientists in four other laboratories, are trying to make the reaction cheaper by breaking down a coating that forms over the minerals during the conversion process. "A lot will depend on the next few years," said Chizmeshya, whose group has received $1 million in federal funds in the past five years.

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Post staff writer), "Scientists Looking at Ways to Trap Greenhouse Gases; Arizona Study Aims to Ease Global Warming", February 22, 2005, p. A2]
---sbs---

* Perspective re: average Arctic summer temperatures have risen by about 1.2 degrees a decade since the 1980s

... in the 1930s and 1940s average Arctic summer temperatures were as warm as they are now. That warm period followed a cool period in the early 1900s similar to that in the 1970s and 1980s. No great global disasters followed the Arctic warming in the 1930s and the fact that polar bears still exist today shows that they are able to adapt to changes in their climate.

[Source: Stephen Jones (Bonython), "Why all the fuss? We've experienced Arctic warming before", letter to Canberra Times (Australia), February 22, 2005, p. A14]
---sbs---

* US could fulfill half of its Kyoto obligations for $7.2-billion/yr in tree planting

In the past four years, utility executives, eager to show they are countering their industry's contribution to global warming, have teamed up with environmental nonprofits to buy land that serves simultaneously as a carbon sink and protected wildlife habitat. Twenty-five U.S. energy companies have committed $3 million to establish six biological carbon sequestration projects in Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi through a group called PowerTree Carbon Co. The consortium aims to plant enough trees to capture more than 2 million tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. American Electric Power (AEP) has spent $24 million on such projects, restoring a bottomland hardwood forest in central Louisiana in collaboration with the Virginia-based Conservation Fund and buying timber rights in Bolivia with the Nature Conservancy. "It's something the public can identify with," said AEP's eco-asset manager Gary Kaster, who also heads PowerTree. Last month, the Pew Center on Global Climate Change issued a study by two environmental economists suggesting that the United States could offset a third of its annual carbon emissions by planting trees, at a cost of between $30 to $90 per ton. Under this scenario, the nation could meet half of the requirements mandated under the Kyoto global-warming treaty, which the United States rejected, for $7.2 billion a year. Harvard University economist Robert Stavins, a co-author of the Pew study, said this approach, while expensive, is comparable in cost to options such as fuel switching or greater energy efficiency. "It's something to look at right now, rather than a long-term solution," Stavins said, adding that over time it will become cheaper to use alternatives to fossil fuels.

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Post staff writer), "Scientists Looking at Ways to Trap Greenhouse Gases; Arizona Study Aims to Ease Global Warming", February 22, 2005, p. A2]
---sbs---

* Green Team of cities aim to inspire US govt action on GHGs

Seattle adopted the Kyoto Protocol four years ago. Now that it's in effect, Seattle's mayor Greg Nickels said he would work to pass a "clean-car" bill that would require more stringent emission standards for cars sold in Washington, similar to a law adopted in California. He directed city departments to reduce paper use 30% by 2006, and said sound environmental policies would be a consideration in deciding which neighborhood programs to fund... Last week, on the day the Kyoto Protocol went into effect, Nickels announced he would lead a campaign to get U.S. cities to adopt its terms, beginning with Seattle. He said his goal was to recruit 140 cities to match the 140 countries that signed the treaty. The mayors of 10 cities, including Los Angeles; Santa Monica; Portland, Ore.; Minneapolis; and Oakland, have signed on. ... Nickels said he planned to introduce a resolution at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in June to set up the coalition, which had been dubbed "the Green Team." The details still are being worked out but, in essence, cities wanting to join the team must agree to concrete steps that would lower so-called greenhouse gas emissions. ... Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson said it was imperative that cities take the lead on the issue, and he hoped county and state governments would follow suit. The world must "reverse the trend toward global warming," Anderson said. "If we do not, the consequences will be devastating."

[Source: Tomas Alex Tizon (Times staff writer), "Mayor Is on a Mission to Warm U.S. Cities to the Kyoto Protocol", Los Angeles Times, February 22, 2005, p. A15]
---sbs---

* Northwest US snowpack concern

[Seattle's mayor Greg] Nickels said he was worried about the warm temperatures and relatively dry weather throughout the Pacific Northwest this winter. In a typical February, Seattle would get more than 4 inches of rainfall. So far, there has been less than an inch, a continuation of a drier-than-usual January. Most ski resorts in Washington and Idaho have remained closed because of a lack of snow. On Jan. 20, nearly 80 record-high temperatures were set in mountains throughout Washington, Idaho and Oregon. Of most concern to Nickels is the snowpack in the Cascade Mountains, which provides water for Seattle and most of western Washington. Meteorologists say the snowpack is less than one-third of its usual mass this time of year, and is lower than it's been in nearly three decades. Nickels said it was still possible that heavy snow in the next two months could make up the shortfall. But according to the National Weather Service's long-term forecast for the Northwest, February, March and April will see mostly above-average temperatures and below-average rain and snow.

[Source: Tomas Alex Tizon (Times staff writer), "Mayor Is on a Mission to Warm U.S. Cities to the Kyoto Protocol", Los Angeles Times, February 22, 2005, p. A15]
---sbs---

* What happens if a country fails to reach its Kyoto emission target?

Countries that fail to meet their emission target by the end of the first commitment period (2012) must make up the difference plus a penalty of 30% in the second commitment period. Their ability to sell credits under emissions trading will also be suspended.

[Source: The Times of India, "Kyoto pact aims to tackle global warming", February 22, 2005]
---sbs---

* Climate research - $30-billion in last 8 years

... the industrial world, especially the U.S., has spent around $30-billion on climate research over the period [the eight years since Kyoto was first introduced].

[Source: David Wojick, "Science still out on Kyoto", The Electricity Daily, February 22, 2005]
---sbs---

* Hollywood is part of the calamitology rice bowl/industry triangle

The biggest ace a film publicity campaign can draw is landing press outside the entertainment pages. And last year, Fox played its cards to perfection, putting its bad-weather-themed f/x film, "The Day After Tomorrow," in the middle of the partisan, election-year debate on global warming. Prior to the film's Memorial Day release, the Bush White House had quietly ordered NASA scientists not to speak to media outlets seeking comment as to the film's plausibility. Far from ducking controversy, Fox turned the White House strategy on its head. When former Vice President Al Gore requested use of the film's trailer during his speeches on global warming, Fox not only accommodated him, it scheduled a special screening for him. Within days, not only was Gore touting "The Day After Tomorrow" as the film the Bush White House didn't want Americans to see, liberal activist group MoveOn was passing out pamphlets on climate change outside theaters. Top media outlets such as USA Today soon ran headlines screaming, " 'The Day After Tomorrow' heats up political debate." "It became newsworthy, as we knew it would be," says Jeffrey Godsick, Fox executive VP of marketing. But the Fox publicity team didn't stop at the local news. Weathermen from Fox TV affiliates and O&Os were brought to an ice house for a screening of the film. They were also given clips from "The Day After Tomorrow" to use during their reports. All of this, of course, had an impact at the box office. The film grossed nearly $86 million during its first weekend of release.

Not surprisingly, "The Day After Tomorrow" was one of the six feature films nominated this year by Hollywood union publicists for the Maxwell Weinberg Showmanship Award. Repped through the Intl. Cinematographers Guild after a merger three years ago, the praisers also nominated publicity campaigns for Paramount's "Mean Girls," Disney/Pixar's "The Incredibles," Warner's "The Polar Express," Universal's "Ray" and Sony's "Spider-Man 2." Winners will be announced at the 42nd annual Publicists Awards luncheon Feb. 22 at the Beverly Hilton. The award honors publicists who devise memorable campaigns that elevate their films beyond the entertainment section. "The goal was to get beyond entertainment coverage but also to create as close to 100% awareness as you can, says publicists guild board member Henri Bollinger, who also handles the org's PR.

[Source: Jennifer Netherby, Daily Variety, "Top pic praisers score beyond the entertainment section", February 22, 2005, p. A1]

[note re reference to rice bowl and triangle: In December, MIT climatologist Prof. Lindzen spoke of "the almost insoluble interaction of an iron triangle with an iron rice bowl." (The "iron triangle" consists of activists misusing science to get the attention of the news media and politicians; the "iron rice bowl" is a parallel phenomenon where scientists exploit the activists' alarm to increase research funding and attention for the issue. A pdf version of his speech is available here.
---sbs---

* Radical change specialists queueing up to join calamitology industry

Peter Knight (February 8) is, of course, absolutely right to have a go at Hefce circulars which, almost by definition, are bound to be twaddle. But in seeing the one on sustainability as just another example of a political orthodoxy undermining academic freedom, he spectacularly misses the point. Has he not been reading the almost day-by-day reports on human-made climate change, or grasping their apocalyptic import? The accumulating wisdom - compiled in significant part by none other than the relevant departments of British universities - make it perfectly clear that whether we would like to stand back and make up our own minds or not on the issue, the choice simply isn't there. Unless, of course, Knight can sleep soundly at night with the knowledge that rapid climate change - with all that it entails - will soon become irreversible.

The irony is that instead of worrying about the inanities of Hefce, the reality of global warming is offering universities their most important and responsible role ever. What is desperately and urgently needed is a prototype model for how society at large can rapidly refashion itself towards a radically carbon-reduced future. Who better than universities, with all their expertise and intellectual acumen, to help illuminate the path to this brave new world? University vice-chancellors should be getting together and queueing up to demand government cash for this very mission.

[Source: Dr Mark Levene (reader in comparative history, U of Southampton), "Action on climate change is urgent", letter to The Guardian (London), February 22, 2005, p. EDU-4]
---sbs---

* Sequestration research budgets

In its new budget, the White House is seeking $107.4 million for sequestration studies at the Energy Department, which is currently funding 65 projects at an annual cost of $80 million. The Agriculture Department is spending an additional $18 million a year on carbon research and sequestration projects and seeking $3 million more. The government also plans to spend $550 million in the coming decade on FutureGen, a coal-fired power plant that will capture all carbon dioxide emissions on site. David Conover, senior policy adviser to Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman, calls carbon sequestration "a very realistic option." "Just like any other technology," Conover said, "the key is to reduce the cost."

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Post staff writer), "Scientists Looking at Ways to Trap Greenhouse Gases; Arizona Study Aims to Ease Global Warming", February 22, 2005, p. A2]
---sbs---

* An eloquent alarmist

There seems little chance of the Americans changing their position. Their Administration is almost alone in denying climate science in spite of there being much more proof of climate change than things they were quick to believe in like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. What they need to understand, as a Pentagon report pointed out, is that climate change is a bigger threat to world stability than global terrorism because of its potential to create millions of displaced people.

... Although there are uncertainties, the science of climate change can no longer be denied.

* The recently-released Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment predicts the likely extinction of the polar bear and loss of the ancient culture and lifestyle of thousands of Inuit peoples. The Inuit culture relies on the summer harvest at the edge of the ice, as does the polar bear. This major study, conducted by scientists in Canada, the United States, Russia and Nordic Europe, says, because of global warming caused by human activities elsewhere, this sentinel ecosystem is on the verge of irreversible change that may have these tragic results. The study findings are that global warming is happening in the Arctic at twice the rate of the world average and that, given likely scenarios of future global emissions and resulting warming, the loss of summer sea ice could be total as soon as 2070. Over the next 100 years, Arctic temperatures are likely to increase between 4 and 7 degrees. This will force more warming across the planet's atmosphere as the white, reflective ice is replaced by heat-absorbing darker land and ocean surfaces. This study puts a human face on the risks of the unprecedented experiment that mankind is conducting with planet Earth. Emissions of greenhouses gases, mostly from fossil fuels from human activities, are resulting in the accumulation of heat-trapping gases in Earth's atmosphere at levels not seen for hundreds of thousands of years. The rate of increase of these gases, from industrialised countries and the developing world, is unprecedented.

* Other studies show we are perilously close to possibly triggering an irreversible melting of the Greenland ice sheet that would commit the globe to a sea-level rise of about 7m over time. Still more research into the rate of melting of the Antarctic demonstrates that there are clear signs of the huge ice shelf melting more rapidly than previously anticipated.

* More immediate are the possibilities of crop failures and food poverty for many millions in the Indian subcontinent, or the progressive die-off of the Amazon rainforest, or the oceans turning acid or the Gulf Stream stopping. These are not just the stuff of disaster movies: they are real possibilities with real consequences even in our part of the world. At the Environmental Defence Society's Climate Change and Business Conference held in Auckland last November, we heard from a West Australian farmer who told us cropping in that part of the region was close to collapse because of droughts. He called for urgent action on climate change from his Government. Recently I met representatives of the South Australian wine industry who are deeply concerned about the impact of climate change on the Barossa Valley. In New Zealand, we are already experiencing more extreme weather events.

It's not too late, but if there is no huge increase in global efforts to reduce emissions over the next 20 years, the odds are that we will have missed our chance. More emissions mean more atmospheric warming and more warming speeds up climate change and makes it more difficult to reverse or slow down. Yet every day, global emissions of greenhouse gases are rising. We are already at 370 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere and many respected scientists are saying we should not let it get above 400. ... If the world can combine good science, government policies and forward-thinking business efforts, we can make a difference. The protocol is merely a first step in what needs to become concerted and vigorous global action to control and reduce the proliferation of greenhouse gases.

Climate change is the biggest threat facing mankind. If we are to have any chance of dealing with it, businesses need to play a part and do what they do best - adapt, innovate and lead.

[Source: Gary Taylor (chairman, Environmental Defence Society), "Fright-film reality is just a tiny step away", New Zealand Herald, February 22, 2005]
---sbs---

* Sequestration wrongheaded

[note: when I see criticisms of sequestration, I look for some insight into how folks who express so much alarm about CO2 in atmosphere can be so cool to removing CO2 from the atmosphere]

Detractors say all these efforts are wrongheaded. Each one has potential liabilities, they say: Mineral sequestration requires unearthing massive amounts of rock to produce the final carbonate, and biological sequestration only works until the trees are disposed of or burned. "To balance out a rainforest in Bolivia with a coal-fired plant in Ohio is not a fair trade," said Kert Davies, research director at Greenpeace USA. "Meaningful greenhouse-gas cuts are what we should be investing the big bucks in now."

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Post staff writer), "Scientists Looking at Ways to Trap Greenhouse Gases; Arizona Study Aims to Ease Global Warming", February 22, 2005, p. A2]
---sbs---

* Lloyd's hometown paper sounds just like him

Americans might pay more attention to environmental issues if they were packaged as reality shows or steel cage death matches. For example, it's hard to beat the sideshow over President Bush's Clear Skies initiative for sheer entertainment value... [S]upporters point out that Clear Skies would, for the first time, limit power plant emissions of mercury, a heavy metal that accumulates in fish and can cause birth defects in children when consumed by pregnant women. What they don't say is that the president's plan could allow far more mercury to be released than tighter controls the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could mandate under the Clean Air Act. The EPA's inspector general has determined that politics, not science, has been driving the agency's weak regulatory efforts to control mercury emissions.

... And while Clear Skies threatens to fix what isn't broken, it would leave untouched the biggest loophole in the nation's air pollution control strategy: Carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming. Despite mounting evidence that carbon and other greenhouse gases pose catastrophic environmental risks, neither the White House nor Congress is seriously considering the bipartisan "Climate Stewardship Act" drafted by Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that addresses the problem.

[Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, editorial, "Take a whiff of Bush plan; it reeks", February 22, 2005 p. 10A]
---sbs---

February 15, 2005

COP-11 expected to be held in Canada, Nov 7-18, 2005

The Toronto Star (Canada) meanwhile notes that Canada will play host to a mammoth UN meeting of climate experts and government officials from around the world to look at how well the Kyoto protocol is being implemented. A formal announcement of the Nov. 7-18 conference is expected to be a key element in Wednesday's Canadian Kyoto kickoff by Prime Minister Paul Martin and Environment Minister Stephane Dion, government sources confirmed. Between 4,000 and 5,000 climate scientists, activists and officials from more than 180 countries are expected to attend the 11th session of what's known as the Conference of the Parties, a meeting normally held annually to discuss the 1992 United Nations treaty on climate change that led to the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases. But COP-11, as this year's meeting is known, will be first such session after Kyoto officially goes into effect Wednesday.

[Source: World Bank Group, "Kyoto, World's Most Ambitious Environmental Treaty, Set To Take Effect", Press Review, February 15, 2005]

---sbs---

Kyoto - visions of lucrative carbon trade market prompted many developing countries to ratify

The Jakarta Post (Indonesia) writes that World Wide Fund Indonesia climate and energy program coordinator Eka Melisa said the treaty was a step toward containing the climate change threat at a manageable level. She pointed out that with the treaty becoming effective, a new market revolution -- a carbon market -- would emerge, whereby companies and countries in the Kyoto Club would be obliged to value their CO2 emissions as they would now have a formal price tag. As a result of this progress, she said, companies from developed countries that had or would have investment in developing countries such as Indonesia, would have to calculate the total emission they would produce and, ultimately, would have to choose more clean energy sources and/or sustainable technology for every new investment. Agus P. Sari, executive director of Pelangi, an environmental policy research institute, said Indonesia had about 250 million tons of emission reduction potential that could be certified under the carbon trade mechanism in the period between 2008 and 2012. ÒThis means about $1.25 billion, if (the carbon is) valued at $5 per ton. Usually, this is what motivates many developing countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol," he said.

[Source: World Bank Group, "Kyoto, World's Most Ambitious Environmental Treaty, Set To Take Effect", Press Review, February 15, 2005]

---sbs---

Climate scientists may be wrong, but we can't risk losing the polar ice

The scientists make one sort of argument, about the physical effects and their practical consequences. This is necessary and important. But as I journeyed through the frozen north, I encountered something less tangible, something about our guardianship of the dreams of successive civilizations, the myths of our planet. Tread softly because you tread on my dreams, that sort of thing.

There can be no more significant symbol of the loss of Thule -- and all the dreams that came with it, all the beauty and strangeness -- than the melting of the polar ice. It might be speculation, to be disproved at a later stage; the forecasts of these climate scientists might be mocked by later generations as one more theory of the ignorant. The question that kept running through my head as I wandered through the north, sifting the ideals of lost civilizations, was how we could be so crazy as to risk it. And I kept imagining a time when the frozen ocean and all the creatures that lived in it would be nothing more than fairy tales, stories from a vanished world.

[Source: Joanna Kavenna (author of the forthcoming book "The Ice Museum: In Search of the Lost Land of Thule"), "A legend melts away: The lost land of Thule", The International Herald Tribune, February 15, 2005, p. 8]

---sbs---

Global warming will unfairly hit the very poor, such as sub-Saharan areas

Kyodo (Japan) further reports that sub-Saharan areas would be affected most by global warming, where droughts are expected to become even more serious and island nations that could be submerged when sea levels become higher. Ian Johnson, World Bank vice president for the environment and development, said the hardest-hit victims are very poor countries which are emitting almost no greenhouse gases. The international community should think seriously about this blatant unfairness, he said.

[Source: World Bank Group, "Kyoto, World's Most Ambitious Environmental Treaty, Set To Take Effect", Press Review, February 15, 2005]

---sbs---

UK's plan to raise CO2 limits illegal, sez EC

... The Financial Times reports that the European Commission Monday branded the UK's plan to raise its greenhouse gas emissions "illegal", as the government stuck with its proposal to allow British industry to emit more carbon dioxide. The dispute over the European Union's greenhouse gas trading scheme threatens to undermine Tony Blair's bid for global leadership on climate change, on the eve of the Kyoto protocol on climate change coming into force. The EU's mandatory trading scheme, which began on January 1, limits the amount of carbon that industries may produce. The UK submitted its original emissions plan in April, which was accepted by the Commission in July. But in October, the government revised the limits in the plan upwards. If the revisions are not accepted by the Commission - as looks likely - the electricity generating industry is set to bear the brunt of the cost. Should the UK go ahead with its revised plan it is likely to face an infringement procedure that could result in a ruling by the European Court of Justice, the EU's highest court.

[Source: World Bank Group, "Kyoto, World's Most Ambitious Environmental Treaty, Set To Take Effect", Press Review, February 15, 2005]

---sbs---

February 4, 2005

*

*

January 26, 2005

Environmentalism has died and the leaders of the movement are in denial about their political power

The roughly 100 participants [at a Middlebury Vermont conference on climate change organized by Jonathan Isham, an assistant professor at Middlebury College] held open discussions about their vision for a climate movement and their frustrations about where the movement currently stands. Making that shift will require dramatic social change, speakers said.

"Great social movements like great corporations are firm about their core values and they're radically flexible and experimental about their strategies and tactics," said Michael Shellenberger, co-author of a controversial essay, "The Death of Environmentalism." "The environmental movement is just the opposite," he said. "It tends to be rigid about its strategies and tactics." He pointed to environmentalists' "20 years of failure" to increase fuel efficiency in cars and trucks. "So we need to take a step back. We need to figure out how to create a majority of Americans who share our values and build a political movement around those values," Shellenberger, head of the San Francisco-based Breakthrough Institute, said.

Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus wrote last year that environmentalism has died and the leaders of the movement are in denial about their political power. "Many environmental leaders actually say they performed well in the 2004 elections - despite progressives losing five seats in the Senate and losing the presidency to the most anti-environmental president in U.S. history," Shellenberger said. "The sooner that we can say environmentalism as a framework and a set of institutions is dead then the sooner we can give birth to something more powerful and expansive and more relevant to the lives of the American people."

[Source: Lisa Rathke (AP writer), "Environmentalists say movement has failed and must change", The Associated Press State & Local Wire, January 26, 2005 6:38 pm ET]

Japan - nuclear power, and export of nuclear technology, is vital for CO2 control

... if we proceed on the principle of coexistence between the economy and the environment, there is no way to sidestep the issue of nuclear power, despite the inevitable objections. The government's current outline for promoting global warming countermeasures is rooted in the premise that four new nuclear power reactors will be constructed by fiscal year 2010. Of course, the obvious requirement for such a step is safe operation of plant facilities. I believe, however, it is time for Japan, which has pursued the use of nuclear power solely for peaceful purposes over the years, to also consider transferring that knowhow overseas. Both intellectuals and people in the government continue to tiptoe around this debate. Ultimately, however, I am confident that the pooling of our collective wisdom to truly resolve this problem can lead to greater prosperity for Japan. It can also lead to a more meaningful international contribution on such an increasingly critical front.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

USA has spent $23-billion on climate science since 1990

The US has spent more than Dollars 23bn on climate change science since 1990.

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "Kyoto agreement may come into effect, yet be ineffective", Financial Times (London, England), January 26, 2005, p. 3]

china #2 in CO2 emissions (14.8% of world total in 2000, more than EU)

The Pew Centre on Global Climate Change, a US-based research organisation, found that China was the second biggest emitter of carbon in 2000, responsible for 14.8 per cent of the world's emissions against the US's 20.6 per cent. The EU accounted for 14 per cent, India 5.5 per cent and Brazil 2.5 per cent.

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "Kyoto agreement may come into effect, yet be ineffective", Financial Times (London, England), January 26, 2005, p. 3]

USA CO2 projects - 5-billion/yr even without Kyoto

... the US says it is already committed to numerous projects that will combat climate change, either by developing new technology or lowering its emissions without mandatory caps on industry. Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary of state for global affairs ... pointed to a number of bilateral and multilateral agreements between the US and other countries that deal with various aspects of climate change. The US can boast initiatives such as "methane to market" - which aims to harvest methane leaked from industrial processes - and investments in technologies that lower use of fossil fuels. It spends more than Dollars 5bn a year on such projects.

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "Kyoto agreement may come into effect, yet be ineffective", Financial Times (London, England), January 26, 2005, p. 3]

Japan - proposed gasline tax would not reduce demand, as shown by failure of 10X higher price rise since April to do so

Considering the consumer and transportation sectors, under the environmental tax proposed by a Liberal Democratic Party division last year, gasoline would be taxed at a rate of 1.9 yen per liter. There has already been a surge in the price of gasoline at the pump of 15 to 20 yen per liter triggered by the steep rise in crude-oil prices since April. Yet, there has been no drop in consumption.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

EU nations' environmenal taxes aren't so anticompettive since they mainly trade amongst themselves

I am opposed to introducing an environmental tax ... [One] reason concerns the adverse effects of such a tax on internatioinal corporate competitiveness. In Europe, where environmental taxes have been introduced in several countries, intra-regional business transactions comprise some 70 percent of all trade. This stands in stark contrast to Japan. It competes heavily with China, the United States, Asian nations and other countries that have chosen not to share the burden of reducing greenhouse gases by joining the Kyoto Protocol (to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change). The passage of an environmental tax would put Japan at a competitive disadvantage to such nations.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

Japan might already be wasting 1.2 trillion yen/yr on global warming countermeasures

... there has been no verification that the annual budget of more than 1.2 trillion yen already earmarked for global warming countermeasures has been effective in curbing emissions.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

China's increased CO2 emissions in 2003 is more than half Japan's total CO2 emissions

... greenhouse gas discharged by China in 2003 are believed to have grown by more than 700 million tons. That increase alone is equivalent to over half the total emissions from Japanese sources.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

Japan - CO2 tax would be 10X less efficient than CDM projects overseas

According to a proposal by the Ministry of the Environment, reducing greenhouse gases with an environmental tax in Japan, a country where substantial investment in energy conservation is already under way, would require outlays of about 10,000 yen per ton (carbon conversion basis). On the international emissions credit trading market, which includes developing countries, it would require less than 1,000 yen per ton to achieve the same results. It is quite clear which approach offers greater efficiency.

As things stand now, target regions for this tally are limited to countries ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, with use of the mechanism itself requiring United Nations clearance for each specific project. We need to appeal to the international community for a more flexible means of applying this system.

[Source: Kazumoto Yamamoto (co-chairman of Nippon Keidanren's -- the Japan Business Federation -- Committee on Environment and Safety), "Environmental tax will sap competitive edge", The Asahi Shimbun, January 26, 2005]

January 20, 2005

Quotable

Have you heard about Global Dimming? No, well neither had I until I watched Horizon on the telly the other night... Only my opinion of course, but I think we have to assume that this is all a matter of fact... When scientists begin to admit that they have made a complete bodge up of their calculations it somehow has a certain ring of truth about it. After all, ... all those clever dicks with letters after their names ... are usually so very confident about the most preposterous of their theories.

[Source: Andy Cooper, "Don't wait until waves lap the top of capstone", North Devon Journal (UK), January 20, 2005, p. 6]

December 24, 2004

Global warming - how one of the great scams of our time took hold

State of Fear by Michael Crichton ... is a fascinating expose of one of the great scams of our time. Crichton believes green groups have invented this crisis ... the phony global warming crisis ... to attract members and money. For the greens, no crisis means no cash. Once a sense of crisis is created, governments usually go along with it, to appeal to scared voters. And once governments go along with it, the scientists who depend on them for funding often fall into line. So with this massive consensus based on greed and fear, it's hard to find the truth.

[Source: Michael Duffy (MATP), "Putting the heat on global warming", The Daily Telegraph (Sydney, Australia), December 25, 2004, p. 14]

"Everybody has an agenda. Except me", sez Crichton

In an author's message at the end of State of Fear, Crichton lists a series of conclusions he reached on the basis of three years' research, the last of which is, "Everybody has an agenda. Except me." Tempting though that is to believe, his agenda is obviously to generate controversy by contradicting the politically correct position on the environment and, thereby, sell loads of books. Which is perfectly legitimate. Except that his debates between the debunkers of global warming and those who believe it exists are as deliberately constructed as an Abbott and Costello exchange. Kenner has an infinite selection of journal citations at his fingertips to counter global warming authoritatively, while his interlocutors are totally ignorant of the facts. Regardless of where one stands on the issue, surely both sides deserve eloquent defence.

[Source: Tod Hoffman (freelance), "Crichton thriller casts doubt on global warming: Fast-paced novel posits that environmental groups are manipulating data and media coverage to stoke fears", The Gazette (Montreal), December 24, 2004, p. G1]

[nuclear.COMment: As to the alarmists being ignorant of the facts, it's not really so far-fetched as this op-ed piece suggests. For example, a few weeks ago, a press conference was held to announce the availability of a summary-style report on the Arctic. Attending the press conference was one of the graybeard skeptics. The skeptic asked a quite fundamental question about the historic Arctic temperature graph shown by the report authors at the press conference. The question was, what is the source of the data used to generate the graph? The presenters could not answer the question. The formal report doesn't provide that info, either. Surely the full report, whenever it finally gets published, will answer this question.

And as to the notion that Crichton needed to be a skeptic (shouldn't they be called realists, instead) to write an entertaining moneymaking book seems silly. Out of about 600 pages, only a few pages present the scientific case for realism. He could have written an action tale par excellence without voicing his disdain for the calamitologists.]

December 13, 2004

* Cheers, and concern, for Kyoto Protocol
Larry Rohter and Andrew C. Revkin, The New York Times

Nuclear power vendors are right there in the "greenhouse bazaar", the convention hall in Buenos Aires trying to reach the 6,000 or so COP-10 attendees there.

December 12, 2004

Save the world, ignore global warming

Professor Lomborg, of "The Skepical Environmentalist" fame (or infamy, in Kyoto Club circles), actually agrees with the CO2-climate alarmists on some fundamental matters, but he disagrees that global warming should be anywhere near the priority recommended by those for whom, he says, global warming has become "the obsession of our time". Action on global warming, he says, "is basically a very costly way of doing very little for much richer people far into the future... We live in a world with limited resources, where we struggle to solve just some of its challenges. This means that caring more about some issues ends up meaning caring less about others. If we have a moral obligation, it is to spend each dollar doing the most good that we possibly can. So in a curious way, global warming really is the moral test of our time, but not in the way its proponents imagined. We need to stop our obsession with global warming, and start dealing with the many more pressing issues in the world, where we can do most good first and quickest."

[Source: Bjorn Lomborg (prof - political science, University of Aarhus), "Save the world, ignore global warming", Sunday Telegraph (London), December 12, 2004, p. 18]

November 16, 2004

Antarctica has bucked recent greenhouse warming largely because of ozone depletion effects on wind patterns; Antarctic warming is thus likely to occur in coming decades, sez NASA official, as ozone layer heals due to Montreal Protocol

A key to understanding the significance of ... Antarctic ice phenomena lies in being able to predict if and how the Antarctic continent will change in the future. We have developed models that couple our satellite data with our best understanding of atmospheric processes to tackle this complex problem. Ground and satellite observations show that while the Antarctic Peninsula has warmed more rapidly than most places on Earth, most of the continent has cooled. Recent modeling activities at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) indicate that this cooling phenomenon is likely caused by the strong state of what is called the Southern Annular Mode (or SAM). The SAM is a coherent pattern of winds and pressure changes that describe much of the variability of the mid to high latitudes in the southern hemisphere. When the pressure differences between the mid-latitudes and the pole are high and winds are strong, we refer to this as a positive (or high) SAM and when it is small we refer to it as negative (or low).

The SAM in the last several decades has been strongly positive. The most recent NASA study on the subject indicates that greenhouse warming and low ozone levels over Antarctica have contributed to this condition by lowering temperatures in the stratosphere. Greenhouse warming lowers these temperatures by increasing the efficiency with which the stratosphere emits its energy. Reductions in ozone, which is a greenhouse gas, have cooled the stratosphere directly by reducing its ability to trap heat. These low stratospheric temperatures set up a condition that strengthens the westerly winds that tend to circle Antarctica and create a barrier to the movement of warmer air from the low latitudes toward the main parts of Antarctica. The result is a cooler continent.

According to this model, as these ozone levels increase (following the agreements under the Montreal Protocol that were established to reduce the emissions of CFCs that destroy ozone), their cooling effects will diminish, which will inhibit further strengthening of these westerly winds. Consequently the model predicts that the westerly winds will no longer offset the radiative effects of increased carbon dioxide. As a result, the Antarctic continent will likely reverse this cooling trend and experience accelerated warming in the next several decades. In view of the importance of the high-latitude regions in global climate and the rapid responses of ice sheets to changes in climate, such changes would have important implications for global climate and sea level.

[Source: Dr. Ghassem R. Asrar (NASA Deputy Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate), Senate hearing testimony (written statement submitted for the record), "Global Climate Change", Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, November 16, 2004]

November 11, 2004

Climate model output - dubious predictive value

Natural climate variations are still unpredictable, not very well known and poorly understood, and impossible to parameterise to models. All the projections, scenarios and storylines presented have no predictive ability.

[Source: Timo Hameranta (Climatesceptics, Finland), "Models aren't so super after all", letter to editor, The Guardian (London), November 11, 2004, p. 10]

Doubled CO2 concentration by 2100 - best data supports only 0.5 - 0.75¡C warming, sez Singer

... the best measurements we have show no appreciable warming, even though carbon dioxide has already increased by 35% over pre-industrial values. We predict that even if CO2 doubles by 2100, we might see the global temperature rise by only 0.5C, and certainly not more than 0.75C. This is well below the conventional estimates derived from computer models. It boils down to this: Do you believe the theoretical models or the atmospheric data? I go for the atmosphere.

[Source: S Fred Singer, PhD (The Science & Environmental Policy Project, Arlington, Virginia), "Models aren't so super after all", letter to editor, The Guardian (London), November 11, 2004, p. 10]

"Industries of the Future" program has saved 1.6 Quad in US, $6.5-billion worth of energy

Industries of the Future is a R&D partnership program that DOE has launched with nine industries to maximize its technology investments. Operating within DOEÕs Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and more specifically under that OfficeÕs Industrial Technologies Program (ITP), Industries of the Future consists of collaborative R&D partnerships with nine industries: agriculture, aluminum, chemicals, forest products, glass, metal casting, mining, petroleum, and steel. Each of the nine industries uses a large amount of heat and energy "to physically or chemically transform materials." Combined, the nine industries supply 90% of the materials needed in the U.S. economy, produce $1 trillion in annual shipments, employ more than 3 million people, and indirectly provide an additional 12 million jobs. More than 500 R&D projects are currently being conducted. Cumulatively, it is estimated that ITPÕs projects have saved more than 1.6 quadrillion Btu - worth approximately $6.5 billion.

[Source: Marcus D. King et al., "U.S. Business Actions to Address Climate Change: Case Studies of Five Industry Sectors", Sustainable Energy Institute and Numark Associates, Inc., November 2004, p. 94]

Business Roundtable's voluntary Climate RESOLVE Initiative

The Business Roundtable (BRT) is an association of chief executive officers of leading corporations with a combined workforce of more than 10 million employees in the United States. [I]n February 2003, BRT launched an initiative to voluntarily reduce the GHG emissions of its member companies. Dubbed Climate RESOLVE (Responsible Environmental Steps, Opportunities to Lead by Voluntary Efforts), the initiative is intended to encourage BRT members to report their GHG management efforts to DOE. Additionally, BRT provides its member companies with "support and tools to effectively manage greenhouse gas emissions. The BRT will assist companies through workshops, one-on-one consulting support, an implementation workbook and examples of cost-effective options to reduce, avoid, offset, and sequester greenhouse gas emissions." The key element of the initiative for these member companies, of course, is its voluntary measure. As the CEO of American Electric Power (and chairman of the BRTÕs Environment, Technology and the Economy Task Force) stated during the unveiling of the Initiative, Climate RESOLVE "will show that voluntary actions can deliver solid results without government mandates and rigid compliance timetables." Contending that "developing and deploying breakthrough technologies without undermining the competitiveness of our economy," is the best way for addressing global climate change, The BRT believes that "voluntary programs represent the best approach for controlling GHG emissions. These programs will deliver results at less cost than mandatory approaches and will simultaneously foster innovation and investment in new technologies." In fact, the BRT argues that "strong and sustained support for voluntary action is the best way to avoid undesirable mandatory GHG controls. Reflecting this voluntary nature and the fact that each member company is different, the Initiative does not set specific emission targets to be met. In a letter to Senate leaders in June 2003, while promoting voluntary private sector initiatives (such as its own Climate RESOLVE), the BRT noted its staunch opposition to mandatory measures. Speaking of legislation that was pending at the time, the group wrote that it "... opposes amendments to the energy bill that would place emission caps or other mandatory controls on some or all sectors of the economy. These requirements could result in major dislocations in energy supply that reduce fuel diversity and increase energy costs. In this event, U.S. economic growth and the competitiveness of U.S. industry would be threatened. Unwarranted GHG controls could also limit flexibility and innovation, create bureaucracy and increase the costs of managing GHG emissions."

[Source: Marcus D. King et al., "U.S. Business Actions to Address Climate Change: Case Studies of Five Industry Sectors", Sustainable Energy Institute and Numark Associates, Inc., November 2004, pp. 93-94]

November 9, 2004

Climate modelers - incentives for alarming results

Models are intended to help us understand how the world works. When an aircraft engineer wants to know how a particular aircraft design might work, she builds a model and tests it in a variety of circumstances. This helps her to predict how the full-size craft might work under similar conditions, and helps ensure that the design is robust. Increasingly, models of all kinds have moved from physical representations to computational representations. The latest Boeing Aircraft, for example, the 7E7 'Dreamliner' was entirely designed using computer-based models.

For models to be useful, however, they must accurately represent the world. A scale model of an aircraft made with materials twice as heavy as those used to manufacture the real machine would lead to spurious interpretations and a poorly-designed aircraft. Unfortunately, this is similar to what has been done in the case of climate change. First of all, models have been used that do not accurately represent the past climate. Second, inappropriate assumptions about the future have been fed into these models, generating misleading projections concerning changes to the earth's climate over the course of the next century or so.

Contributors to this report have become increasingly concerned that the public is being fed a series of exaggerated claims regarding likely future climate change, based on these inaccurate models. At its most innocent, this is a result of widespread ignorance regarding the limitations of models. But it is implausible to assume that all those engaged in this discussion are ignorant of the limitations of the models; some people are clearly using these implausible predictions as a scare tactic to encourage more aggressive policies.

The test of a good model is that it works in the real world. An engineer often faces a real-world test of his or her design within a few months or years. If their design fails, it has a direct impact on their credibility and consequently their employability. This provides a strong incentive to 'get it right'. By contrast, many of those developing climate models will have retired by the time their predictions face such a reality test Ð in 2020 or 2050 or even 2100. Climate modellers differ from aircraft engineers in another way: whereas most aircraft engineers are employed by the private sector and are rewarded according to the usefulness of their designs to the travelling public, climate modellers are funded primarily by governments, and are rewarded according to the extent to which their models are useful to politicians and their entourage. Since politicians seem more willing to fund research when the outcome might give them an excuse to impose The impacts of climate change regulations and/or taxes, we cannot be surprised that the modellers have responded to these incentives by generating models that exaggerate the impact of humanity's impact on the climate.

[Source: International Policy Network, "The impacts of climate change: An appraisal for the future", November 9, 2004, pp. v-vi]

November 5, 2004

It's official - Kyoto comes into force in 3 months

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed the federal law on ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the presidential press service said on Friday. With the addition of Russia, the Protocol has now met the last outstanding requirement for coming into force -- ratification by nations which emitted 55% of the 1990 anthropogenic greenhouse gas inventory. Roshydromet chief Alexander Bedritsky said Russia would try and defend its interests in the course of the future negotiations, citing its geographical characteristics.

[Source: TASS (Russia), "Putin signs law on Kyoto Protocol", November 5, 2004 3:45 am ET]

November 2, 2004

Increasingly shaky science seen underlying Kyoto Protocol

The scientific basis for global warming seems increasingly shaky. Andrei Illarionov, President Vladimir Putin's economic adviser, is right to question whether global warming has any grounding in scientific reality. The whole Kyoto process has been driven by political expediency and has little to do with sound environmentalism or economic reality.

[Source: Dr. Tim Evans (President and Director General, Centre for the New Europe, Brussels, Belgium), "Beware Kyoto's heavy economic costs", letter to editor, Financial Times (London, England), November 2, 2004, p. 16]

Global anti-poverty efforts need revamping, due to inextricable link to climate change

Environmental and scientific measures are insufficient responses to climate change, according to a report titled 'Up In Smoke' released by a consortium of NGOs last month. The report discusses how climate change is intertwined with prospects for ameliorating the obscene poverty conditions in the world. All 191 U.N. member nations have agreed to a set of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), such as halving the amount of people who live on less than a dollar a day and providing primary schooling to all the world's children, all by 2015. The report concludes that the international community's approach to development must change radically to include consideration of the impacts of climate change. Marginalised communities are hardest hit by drastic weather events like floods, drought and landslides. Preparing those populations to deal with the rising number of such weather events, which many experts believe signals climate change, is a growing concern: if it fails, the world's development goals will be missed, the report warns. The report recommends: "a global risk assessment of the likely costs of adaptation to climate change in poor countries; development models based on risk reduction and incorporating community driven coping strategies," and "co-ordinated plans ... for relocating threatened communities with appropriate political, legal and financial resources." The consortium calls itself The Working Group on Climate Change and Development, and includes the following NGOs: ActionAid International, Institute of Development Studies, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the new economics foundation.

According to the draft version of a separate study by a coalition of environment and development agencies, "economic losses from 'weather-related' disasters have skyrocketed, with an estimated 432.2 billion U.S. dollar loss reported for the 1990s, up from 128.4 billion dollars in the 1980s." In an analysis of phase one of a project to identify how vulnerable communities adapt to "climate variability," and how the rest of the world can learn from those local lessons, this study suggests climate change "threatens to exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and create new ones for the poor." "These new vulnerabilities may include loss of livelihoods through increased extreme events, displacement by sea-level rise and coastal inundation, food insecurity due to changes in temperature and rainfall patterns and falling crop yields ... and a deepening poverty cycle associated with diversion of livelihood assets towards recovery and coping, to name a few." "These are people who live on lands that are naturally fragile, marginal lands," says Erika Spanger-Siegfried of the Stockholm Environment Institute - Boston Centre (SEI-B), commenting on three case studies her group and a partner organisation in Sudan prepared for the draft report. The other partners that helped produce the draft, titled 'Sustainable Livelihoods and Climate Change Adaptation', are The World Conservation Union (IUCN), the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the Swiss Organisation for Development and Cooperation (Intercooperation).

The communities studied by SEI-B and its local partner, the Sudan Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources (HCENR), "have become in many cases more marginalised due to converting rangelands, grasslands, to farmland," says Spanger-Siegfried. "There is this draw down of the natural resource base for survival, for subsistence, like the overuse of rangeland ... and it's that that is really compounding that condition of vulnerability." "These are poor countries and people are vulnerable not only because of the likelihood of drought but also because of their socio-economic status," she adds.

One case study looked at a project that included the United Nations Global Environment Facility (GEF) and 17 villages in Sudan's western Bara province, whose people were asked to suggest and then help develop methods to rehabilitate the overexploited rangelands in the drought-hit region. For example, says Spanger-Siegfried in a telephone interview, locals were given incentives to replace herds of goats with sheep, because the latter have a smaller impact on rangelands and provide villagers with more options for setting up cottage industries, such as making wool. Based on a survey of changes to people's household assets and access to assets after the GEF project ended, "the community seemed to say (the changes) had the net effect to increase their capacity to deal with drought and to be much more resilient in the face of it," she adds. "They had alternative options for bringing in income, for getting credit and starting over, for planting a different type of crop, for storing grains, for women's irrigated gardens, access to markets -- things of that nature."

The draft study concluded that keys to successfully adapting to climate variability include: a thorough understanding of local livelihoods and vulnerabilities; community-driven implementation; community organisation; strong participation of women; local training and capacity building; and blending traditional and modern approaches.

[Source: Inter Press Service, "PanAfrica: Guess Who Extreme Weather Hits Hardest?", Africa News, November 2, 2004]

October 31, 2004

Britain to push for global project: CO2 sequestration under seabed, such as in depleted oil fields

The UK will propose international project to pursue CO2 sequestration on a massive scale. The proposal will be presented to the world's leading industrial nations at an international treaty meeting tomorrow in London. Experts who back the proposal claim that, technically, the UK could store all its carbon emissions for more than 100 years in exhausted oil and gas fields in the North Sea. Around the world, similar projects could theoretically hold all man-made carbon emissions. They claim the gas will be safely trapped in the bedrock for tens of thousands of years or more - long enough for the human race to stop and even reverse global warming, and to find a long-term alternative to the use of fossil fuels. "If we are to move ahead with this option," UK environment minister Elliot Morley said, "we need to involve the international community, particularly to ensure we can be satisfied that it has proper safeguards built in for the marine environment." Mr Morley is expected to ask the convention to set up a series of working parties to investigate the scientific and technical feasibility of the plan and address fears that the gas will leak out.
Ministers believe that the proposal - which has infuriated some environmentalists - has been given increasing urgency by the latest scientific studies, which warn that the effects of climate change are accelerating and posing fresh problems for the environment. The Government's chief scientist, Professor David King, warned earlier this month that there had been a sudden and unexplained jump in CO2 levels in the atmosphere over the past two years - risking a sudden surge in global warming. Scientists also fear that man-made CO2 is making the seas more acidic - and could kill off plankton and coral reefs.
Greenpeace claims the plan is a technically unproven "distraction" from the real task of deeply cutting our use of oil, gas and coal. Blake Lee Harwood, Greenpeace's head of campaigns, said: "This is the big excuse that oil giants like Exxon and Texaco are looking for, to avoid having to do anything about climate change. They will be dancing for joy at the prospect of a huge international push in this direction." Minister Morley notes that "Our priority is to reduce emissions but, as an interim move, carbon sequestration is an option we should be exploring," he said. The proposals envision sequestering tens of millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide in underground reservoirs around the globe by pumping liquified carbon dioxide at high pressure from places such as coal- and gas-fired power stations, along pipes on the ocean floor, to disused oil fields and old water sources.

[Source: Severin Carrell, "Britain To Push Greenhouse Gas Plan", Independent on Sunday (London), October 31, 2004, p. 4]

Hansen sez NASA chief stifled him on climate, consistent with Bush administration's

James Hansen, whom the Times calls "the government's pre-eminent climatologist", reportedly said in a speech in Iowa last week that he had been instructed by Sean O'Keefe, administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, not to discuss publicly the human contribution to global warming. NASA officials said that Mr. O'Keefe had no similar recollection and that Dr. Hansen may have misinterpreted a cautionary comment about the complexity of the issue as a direct order not to discuss it. The Times, without pretending to know the facts of this particular Hansen claim, congratulates Hansen for speaking out: "Dr. Hansen said he knew he was risking his credibility and possibly his job by criticizing Mr. Bush in the final days of the campaign, but had decided -- properly so, in our view -- that the risks of silence were greater."

[Source: The New York Times editorial, "Subverting Science", October 31, 2004, p. 4-10]

[nuclear.comMENT: The notion that Hansen was told not to discuss the human contribution appears to be another New York Times exaggeration. In their news coverage last week of the Iowa speech, the Times reported a rather narrower version of this particular: that Hansen was upset that O'Keefe interrupted him when he spoke of "dangerous interference" in the climate system.Ê Hansen told the Times that "he told me that I should not talk about dangerous anthropogenic interference, because we do not know enough or have enough evidence for what would constitute dangerous anthropogenic interference". O'Keefe was right to urge employee to refrain from portraying the exaggerated as fact, and the Times was wrong in adding yet another exaggeration to the mix. In all fairness to the Times, nuclear.com is happy to note that of all the newspaper reports we saw about Hansen's speech (which included endorsement of Kerry for President), the Times was the only one which mentioned that Hansen had received a $250,000 Heinz Award from foundation controlled by Kerry's wife.

October 29, 2004

Russia faces CO2 accounting hoops before selling emissions credits under Kyoto

It will be some time before Russia will be able to start selling CO2 emission credits, because the means of monitoring how much carbon Russian industries produced are not in place as required by the Kyoto Protocol. "Russia does not have the institutional framework in place yet to begin carbon trading", is the way Abyd Karmali, director of European climate change strategy at ICF Consulting, an international energy consultancy, explains it. Eventually, there's a potential of big revenues. Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Centre on Global Climate Change in the US, said: "Russia will not run up against its (emissions) limits within the next period (under the protocol) until 2012. There is no question about that." Point Carbon, a carbon consultancy, says Russia could earn up to $10-billion by selling its spare emissions quotas.

[Source: Fiona Harvey (Financial Times - London), Doubts cast on benefits of Kyoto protocol for Russia, Financial Times (London, England), October 29, 2004, p. 9]

"a dramatic landmark in the global warming debate"

The long-awaited move [ratification of Kyoto Protocol by upper and lower houses of Russia's parliament] is considered a dramatic landmark in the global warming debate.

[Source: Energy Intelligence Group, "Russia finally ratifies Kyoto Treaty", Energy Compass,ÊOctober 29, 2004 (subscription required)]

China urges signatories and non to help Kyoto Protocol succeed

Calling climate changes "a long-term challenge to humanity," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokewoman Zhang Qiyue said China would like to team up with other countries and actively explore methods able to reverse the trend of global warming. She urged other nations to accelerate their decision-making mechanism on the Kyoto Protocol to get it implemented soon. Zhang urged countries having not approved the document to make active efforts to work together with the international community to protect the global environment by quickening the protocol's coming into effect and curbing greenhouse gas emissions as fast as possible.

[Source: The Press Trust of India, "China hails Russia; urges other nations to sign Kyoto Protocol", October 29, 2004 9:09 am]

Canada - govt's Kyoto plan to be presented to provinces Nov 2

Canada's environment minister Stephane Dion has summoned provincial environment ministers to Ottawa on Tuesday to unveil his Kyoto "framework". There has to be a "new way of thinking and acting," he told a delegation from the Canadian Chemical Producers Association. Also this week, Dion talked of the "profound changes required in the way we think about the environment. "Our quality of life is at stake," he said. "We need to notch up our joint action considerably," he warned. A week earlier, Dion complained mightily about a mysterious $40 billion the feds allegedly gave to the oilsands, and how things are going to change. "There is certainly work for us to do together," he boasted.

[Source: Neil Waugh (Edmonton Sun), a href="http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/Business/2004/10/29/691311.html">"Caring about Kyoto; Federal enviro minister calls for 'profound changes in our thinking'", Edmonton Sun (Alberta, Canada), October 29, 2004, p. 63]

October 28, 2004

Taiwan vows to implement Kyoto-conforming reductions, despite not being a party

Taiwan's Vice Minister Chen Ruey-lung, said Tuesday that his nation's Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) is very concerned about the energy issues underlined by the Kyoto Protocol and that it has actively been promoting public awareness of energy efficiency, energy diversity and pollution prevention. The MOEA has worked out a program to help Taiwan's top 100 energy consumers save energy, he said. Claiming that Taiwan will undoubtedly conform to the Kyoto Protocol's stricter regulations, Chen said that Taiwan will consider resorting to the World Trade Organization mechanisms to seek resolutions to disputes should Kyoto Protocol member states impose trade barriers against Taiwan.
Chen's comments were echoed by an MOEA spokesperson Thursday. Although Taiwan is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, the country will do its utmost to abide by its new rules aimed at easing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), he said. As a constructive member of the global village, Taiwan is poised to comply with the pact's new measures, whatever they may call for, the spokesman said, adding that the ministry and relevant agencies are already carefully assessing the possible impact on Taiwan industries.

[Source: Flor Wang (CNA), "Taiwan to do its best to conform to Kyoto Protocol mandates: MOEA", Central News Agency (Taiwan), October 28, 2004 19:17:14]

October 27, 2004

Russia - Kyoto ratification preempts international criticism of antidemocratic measures

Observers interpreted the move [towards ratification of Kyoto Protocol] as a means of deflecting international criticism of Russia for anti-democratic measures announced after the Beslan hostage tragedy in early September.

[Source: Deutsche Presse-Agentur, "Russian parliament completes Kyoto Protocol ratification", October 27, 2004 09:27:48 Central European Time]

Russia's ratification bill stresses that participation beyond 2012 is yet to be determined

The approved bill on ratification notes that obligations of the parties in the second and following periods of the protocol, that is after 2012, will be determined in the course of negotiations to be started in 2005. The document states, "According to results of these negotiations Russia will make a decision on its participation in the protocol in the second and following periods."

[Sources: gazeta.ru and polit.ru, October 27, 2004, translated from the Russian by Agency WPS, in "Federation Council Approved Ratification Of Kyoto Protocol", The Russian Business Monitor, October 29, 2004 (subscription required)]

Climate change - US should join "the one fight that is crucial for the future of humankind", sez EC prez

"We are happy that the Russian Duma has decided to ratify", European Commission President Romano Prodi and Margot Wallstrom said in a joint communique. Making a public statement to thank President Vladimir Putin for the personal efforts he made towards this end, Mr Prodi said he hopes "the United States will now re-consider its position". "The Kyoto Protocol may not be perfect but it is the only effective tool that is available to the international community", he stressed, adding that the "United States should not abstain from the one fight that is crucial for the future of humankind".
... A champagne glass in her hand, Wallstrom could not hide her delight when she spoke to reporters on October 22. "This is a victory for the EU", she claimed.
... "We will look back on today as the moment in history when humanity faced up to its responsibilities", according to Greenpeace.

[Source: Europe Information Service, "EU/Russia: delight at Moscow's decision to ratify kyoto protocol", European Report, October 27, 2004]

Next COP (Buenos Aires, Dec 6-17) will be able to focus on China, Brazil, India etc.

The next Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Climate Change, to be held from December 6 to 17 in Buenos Aires, will thus be able to make a fresh start. The Russian decision will allow a debate on the post-2010 period to be opened and talks to be started with the emerging economies (China, Brazil, India) and with developing countries about ways of helping them to "get on board", according to the Commissioner. She harbours few illusions about the United States: whether Bush or Kerry win the Presidential election is unlikely to affect the country's short-term position.

[Source: Europe Information Service, "EU/Russia: delight at Moscow's decision to ratify kyoto protocol", European Report, October 27, 2004]

Kyoto Protocol "crucial for humanity's survival", sez Russia senator

The Federation Council, the upper chamber of parliament, has approved the decision to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. 139 senators supported the bill On the Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, whereas 90 senators' votes were required for the bill to be passed. Mikhail Margelov, the head of the Federation Council's committee on international affairs, said the protocol was designed to streamline green house gas emissions, which was crucial for the humanity's survival.
The State Duma, parliament's lower house, approved the bill on October 22. The document is yet to be considered by the president.

[Source: RIA Novosti (Russia), "Federation Council Approves Kyoto Ratification", October 27, 2004]

Kyoto ratification - some non-climate advantages (global politics, economics) for Russia

Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol meets Russia's national interests, and the move will have a number of important foreign political effects. In particular, by ratifying the protocol Russia will demonstrate to the world community its consistency and predictability in addressing political issues of a global scale, according to the senator. This move will also allow Russia to influence decision-making in international economic relations and activate the global market tools stipulated in the protocol.

[Source: RIA Novosti (Russia), "Federation Council Approves Kyoto Ratification", October 27, 2004]

Russia - estimates of new govt spending related to Kyoto

Russia will spend RUR20m (about USD689,000) in non-recurrent payments within two years after the ratification. Later it will allocate RUR20m (about USD689,000) per year in spending related to the Kyoto Protocol and RUR20m (about USD689,000) more per year starting 2008. Russia's payments transferred to the budget of the Kyoto Protocol are estimated at $150,000.

[Source: RosBusinessConsulting Database, "Federation Council ratifies Kyoto", October 27, 2004 4:34 am EST]

Russia's Kyoto decision "purely political"; there is no scientific substantiation sez Bedritsky

Alexander Bedritsky, Chair of the Russian Hydro Meteorological Committee, who insisted on ratification on behalf of the government, did not hide that "this decision is purely political" and there is no scientific substantiation of the protocol. Parliament members representing the opposition are convinced that ratification of the protocol very unfavorable for Russia is a payment for entrance into WTO.

[Source: Gazeta, "The Duma Ratified The Kyoto Protocol", October 25, 2004, translated from the Russian by The Russian Business Monitor, October 27, 2004]

Russia's Kyoto decision "a politically motivated step", sez senate chair Mironov

Sergey Mironov, the Chairman of the Federation Council, expressed hope that countries of the world community would appreciate the fact that Russia had ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Mironov called the decision to ratify this document "a politically motivated step." At the same time he admitted that scientists had different opinions on whether industrial emissions negatively influenced the atmosphere. Nevertheless, he believes that the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol will positively affect the ecological situation in Russia and in the whole world. "This is a landmark decision for our country, since the agreement comes into force only after it is ratified by Russia," he added.

[Source: RosBusinessConsulting Database, "Federation Council head on ratification of Kyoto Protocol", October 27, 2004 6:04 am EST]

October 22, 2004

McIntyre and McKitrick to present Mann et al. as case study at AGU Fall meeting

The following abstract has been accepted for presentation at the AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco in December as Paper PP53A-1380.

Verification of multi-proxy paleoclimatic studies: a case study

Abstract: Multi-proxy studies have been the primary means of transmitting paleoclimatic findings to public policy. For policy use, such studies should be replicable in the sense of King (1995). The best-known and most widely applied multi-proxy study is Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) ("MBH98") and its 1999 extension, which claimed to have exceptional "robustness" and "skill".

We attempted to replicate MBH98 results and found, among other problems, that MBH98 methodology included two important unreported steps:
(1)ÊÊÊÊÊ Subtraction of the 1902-1980 mean prior to principal components (PC) calculations (rather than, say, the 1400-1980 mean in the AD1400 step);
(2)ÊÊÊÊÊ Extrapolation of a duplicate version of the GaspŽ tree ring series.

We show that, due to high early 15th century values, their results are not robust for the following cases:

a)ÊÊÊÊÊ Presence or absence of the extrapolation of 4 years at the beginning of the GaspŽ tree ring series;
b)ÊÊÊÊÊ subtraction of the 1400-1980 mean rather than subtraction of the 1902-1980 mean, while using the same number of retained PC series in each step as MBH98;
c)ÊÊÊÊÊ the presence or absence of the North American PC4, while subtracting the 1400-1980 mean and using 5 PCs in the AD1400 step;
d)ÊÊÊÊÊ presence or absence of a small subset of high-altitude tree ring sites, mostly "strip bark" bristlecone pines, mostly collected by one researcher, Donald Graybill.

The subtraction of the 1902-1980 mean dramatically inflates the role of the bristlecone pine sites, which then impart a distinctive hockey stick shape to the MBH98 PC1 and then to the NH temperature reconstruction.

MBH98 claimed "skill" through apparently significant Reduction of Error (RE) statistics, reporting 0.51 in the AD1400 step, as compared to a reported 99 percent significance level of 0, which they calculated through simulations using red noise with low AR1 coefficients (0.2). We benchmarked a more realistic significance level by applying MBH98 PC methods to 10,000 sets of 70 red noise series modeled through fractional difference models to have the same red noise persistence as the critical North American AD1400 tree ring network. These calculations regularly resulted in "hockey-stick" shaped PC1s with sharp inflections at the start of the 20th century. We then modeled the resulting 10,000 PC1s against NH temperature and found that the 99 percent RE significance level was 0.59. By this benchmark, the reported RE statistic (0.51) in MBH98 for the AD1400 step lacks statistical significance.

Most dendroclimatic reconstructions also provide statistics other than an RE statistic, including R2 and Coefficient of Efficiency, but MBH98 does not and the authors have refused to provide supporting data from which the statistics can be calculated. In our emulations of their calculations, we have been unable to replicate anything close to the reported RE results other than through re-tuning, a procedure not described in MBH98. With a re-tuning step, for the critical AD1400 step, we have obtained an RE of 0.46, but with an R2 of only 0.02 and a CE of minus 0.26, all of which lack statistical significance.

This case study illustrates for extreme caution in basing public policy on articles, such as MBH98, whose claims cannot be verified.

Russia - Duma passes Kyoto Protocol after 2-hour debate

After a two-hour debate in which three factions said the treaty ran counter to national interests, the 450-seat house [the Duma lower chamber of Russian parliament] duly voted 334 in favour of the Kyoto Protocol, with 73 votes against and 2 abstentions. The document must now pass through the Kremlin-loyal Federation Council upper chamber before Putin adds his final signature.

[Source: Deutsche Presse-Agentur, "Russian parliament ratifies Kyoto Protocol", October 22, 2004 14:11:46 Central European Time]

Russia sees Kyoto CDM as source of valuable free investment from abroad

In an interview last week with a German newspaper, Russia's minister for economic development and trade, German Gref, said the Kyoto Protocol should provide the means to reduce wasteful energy consumption by increasing investment in Russian industry. He indicated that he also wants to use the pact to help modernize Russian industry. The mechanism offers the opportunity to any developed country to achieve part of its Kyoto commitment by investing in emissions reduction projects in other developed countries to get carbon credits. A top candidate for such help would be Russia's electricity monopoly, Unified Energy System, which produces nearly 30 percent of total Russian emissions. Vladimir Grachev, chairman of the Duma's ecology committee, said Kyoto would "open up the possibility of significantly solving (Russia's) problems of energy efficiency, energy supply and adaptation to climatic changes by receiving in fact free international resources."

[Source: Judith Ingram (AP writer), "Russia's lower house of parliament ratifies Kyoto Protocol", Associated Press Worldstream, October 22, 2004 10:03 am ET]

Russia - Kyoto not expected to harm economic recovery in near future, and post-2012 period will be negotiated

First Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov has said restrictions of greenhouse gas emissions imposed by the pact wouldn't affect Russia's economic growth in the near future. Even after a five-year economic recovery, the collapse of Soviet-era industry in the 1990s has left emissions some 30 percent below the baseline. Zhukov has said Russia would try to negotiate terms for its participation in cutting emissions after 2012.

[Source: Judith Ingram (AP writer), "Russia's lower house of parliament ratifies Kyoto Protocol", Associated Press Worldstream, October 22, 2004 10:03 am ET]

Worst possible climate change would be worse than worst possible n-plant accidents

"The worst possible nuclear disasters are not as bad as the worst possible climate change disasters," declared the Centre for Alternative Technology in Britain recently, urging "a modest revival of nuclear energy ... to sell the idea to the skeptics."

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (Canadian journalist based in London), "Nuclear plants blooming: As oil prices soar and countries strive to meet Kyoto goals, expect some growth in A-power again, especially in China, India, Japan and South Korea", Toronto Star, OctoberÊ22, 2004]

N-plant economics transformed by Kyoto - suddenly sexy again

The original wave of enthusiasm for nuclear powered electricity in the 1950s and 1960s, an uncritical love affair with high tech, created most of the 444 nuclear plants now operating all over the planet. In France, reliance on nuclear power for electricity attained the remarkable level of 78 per cent, but more typical levels for large industrialized countries are in the range of Japan's 25 per cent, Britain's 24 per cent and America's 20 per cent. Worldwide, nuclear power accounts for about the same share of all electricity generation as hydroelectric power, but far less than the share of oil, gas and coal.
In a world of cheap, plentiful fossil fuels and no worries about carbon dioxide emissions, the low capital cost and short build time of oil-, gas- and coal-fired generating plants put the nuclear power industry at a huge disadvantage, and concerns about nuclear safety provided the coup de gr‰ce. But when oil gets expensive and future reserves get scarce, the shoe starts shifting to the other foot Ñ and then rising concern about carbon emissions does the rest. The Kyoto accord on reducing greenhouse gas emissions is making the idea of paying for excess carbon emissions a reality, which transforms the economics of low-carbon energy sources like nuclear power. Oil priced at $54 per barrel doesn't hurt the competitiveness of nuclear energy either.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (Canadian journalist based in London), "Nuclear plants blooming: As oil prices soar and countries strive to meet Kyoto goals, expect some growth in A-power again, especially in China, India, Japan and South Korea", Toronto Star, OctoberÊ22, 2004]

N-plants - more will be built, perhaps double or triple over 25 years

As the International Atomic Energy Agency noted recently, nuclear power's 16 per cent share in global electricity generation saves around 600 million tonnes of carbon emissions per year. By contrast, electricity generated by burning fossil fuels accounts for one-third of the entire human contribution to greenhouse gases worldwide. The whole nuclear power cycle from uranium mining and reactor construction to waste disposal has a carbon emission cost comparable to solar power and wind power Ñ so suddenly, nuclear power is sexy again. The nuclear power lobby has naturally leaped on this new argument for their product. "With carbon emissions threatening the very stability of the biosphere," says Ian Hore-Lacy of the World Nuclear Association, "the security of our world requires a massive transformation to clean energy." Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?
But is this really going to push the world back into a major commitment to nuclear energy? The jubilation in the nuclear power industry is probably premature. There will certainly be more reactors built than seemed likely a year or two ago; indeed, it would be surprising if their numbers didn't double or triple in the next quarter-century. But the very slowness of their construction makes them poor candidates for a quick fix in an accelerating climate change crisis.
Solar energy, wind and other natural forces can be exploited to meet rising demands for electrical power far more quickly: Britain hopes to be generating 15 per cent of its electricity from wind-power in the next five years.
Simple conservation measures are even faster and cheaper. The Rocky Mountain Institute calculates that saving a given amount of electricity by using energy more efficiently costs only one-seventh as much as generating the same amount of energy through nuclear power.
So expect to see a few more nuclear power stations, even in Europe and North America, but not forests of the things.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (Canadian journalist based in London), "Nuclear plants blooming: As oil prices soar and countries strive to meet Kyoto goals, expect some growth in A-power again, especially in China, India, Japan and South Korea", Toronto Star, OctoberÊ22, 2004]

Kyoto - USA will return when corporations see rivals profiting from emissions credit trading

... [S]ome Kyoto supporters fervently believe in an eventual US return. That faith is rooted in Bush's departure from the White House (next year or in 2009) and by corporate lobbying if US rivals start to make money from Kyoto's market mechanisms.

[Source: Richard Ingham and Odile Meuvret, "Whether Bush or Kerry, Kyoto must do without the US", Agence France Presse, October 22, 2004 2:34 pm GMT]

A Kerry win won't bring USA back to Kyoto Protocol

Whoever wins the White House on November 2, the world's biggest polluter, accounting by itself for a quarter of global carbon emissions, is likely to remain outside Kyoto for many years to come.
On one side is President George W. Bush, a bogey figure among greens for having ditched Kyoto in March 2001. Bush even questioned the scientific evidence for global warming, a stance that made him the butt of withering scorn from experts and activists alike.
But -- break it to them gently -- the environmentalists' preference, Democratic contender John Kerry, is no Kyoto fan either. He tacitly shares Bush's argument it would cost America too much to honour the commitment it signed up to in 1997 and whose rulebook it largely shaped.
Both Bush and Kerry "have agreed that they can't do Kyoto," Jonathan Pershing, former president Bill Clinton's climate negotiator, told AFP. "There is a consensus in US (politics) that it is virtually impossible for the US to meet Kyoto without an economic cost we're not prepared" to meet, he said. "The Kyoto Protocol doesn't enjoy much support."
Kerry's opposition to Kyoto is in fact on the record. He joined a 95-0 vote of a Senate resolution in 1997 that warned against making Kyoto unfair or too burdensome for the American economy. Under US law, a two-thirds Senate majority is needed to approve a treaty.
Even though they share the same instincts about Kyoto's political feasability, Kerry and Bush have very different views about global warming.
Unlike Bush, Kerry has no doubts about the scientific evidence for the danger.
Whereas Bush is unilateralist, Kerry is warm about multilateralism.
What this means, though, is unclear. Kerry has not spelt out whether this means dovetailing national measures with some of those in Kyoto or perhaps doing more initiatives under Kyoto's parent treaty, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), of which the United States remains a member.
Kerry also has a somewhat tougher approach on energy efficiency and government help for promoting clean energy. Bush has a voluntarist, free-market approach to which he has added help for hydrogen research.
...[S]uccessive years of strong growth, negligible efforts in energy efficiency and the failure to switch to non-fossil fuels mean that, as of today, US emissions are nearly a fifth higher than they were in 1990 and the country is ever more dependent on imported oil. So to meet Kyoto's targets and deadline would be political suicide in a country so dependent on cars and cheap power. "A change back to a Democratic administration resulting from the 2004 elections may bring a more positive attitude to multilateral climate strategy," said Michael Zammit Cutajar, former UNFCCC executive secretary. But "it cannot be counted upon to produce a complete change of heart on the protocol. It will still be necessary to address the economic concerns of the United States. So one has to take a somewhat longer view of prospects."

[Source: Richard Ingham and Odile Meuvret, "Whether Bush or Kerry, Kyoto must do without the US", Agence France Presse, October 22, 2004 2:34 pm GMT]

Example of green activist turned bank analyst

Kate Hampton, a former green activist, is now policy analyst with London merchant bank Climate Change Capital.

[Source: Richard Ingham and Odile Meuvret, "Whether Bush or Kerry, Kyoto must do without the US", Agence France Presse, October 22, 2004 2:34 pm GMT]

Global warming-policy-wise, Bush administration is but a short blip

"The Bush administration is a major obstacle, but it is a historical blip, to be honest. The science is undeniable and people are starting to take action." [California and northeastern US states are pushing through their own laws or initiatives on emission control and emissions trading, and a so-called "Kyoto lite" initiative launched in the Senate by John McCain and Joseph Lieberman was defeated in October 2003 by just 55 votes to 43.] "The US suffers from an administration that is not representative at all of the groundswell of public opinion on this issue."

[Source: Kate Hampton (policy analyst - London merchant bank Climate Change Capital), quoted in Richard Ingham and Odile Meuvret, "Whether Bush or Kerry, Kyoto must do without the US", Agence France Presse, October 22, 2004 2:34 pm GMT]

Global Warming - "the most serious environmental threat of our time", sez WWF official

... global warming, the most serious environmental threat of our time.

[Source: Katherine Silverthorne (director, U.S. Climate Change Program - World Wildlife Fund), "Russian Duma Approval of Kyoto Sets Historic Change in Motion", World Wildlife Fund press release, October 22, 2004 10:37 am ET]

Kyoto - isolation threatens long-term competitiveness of USA businesses

Russian ratification will leave the U.S. virtually alone among industrialized countries in failing to address climate change. And as the rest of the world begins adopting climate friendly technologies, American businesses are in danger of being left as far behind as a Model T at NASCAR.
Concerned about maintaining their competitiveness, a number of U.S. companies are already beginning to realize this and, on their own, started to incorporate C02 reduction plans into their long-term business strategies. They understand what politicians apparently do not: that the transition to sustainable, renewable and non-polluting fuels is inevitable and that reducing CO2 emissions is simply part of a smart business plan. World Wildlife Fund remains committed to working with such companies, through programs like Climate Savers and Power Switch, to help them position themselves to stay competitive in the post-fossil fuel future.
To end its growing isolation, guarantee the long-term competitiveness of its industry and ensure that our children inherit an environmentally liveable world, the United States needs to join the coalition to stop global warming.

[Source: Katherine Silverthorne (director, U.S. Climate Change Program - World Wildlife Fund), "Russian Duma Approval of Kyoto Sets Historic Change in Motion", World Wildlife Fund press release, October 22, 2004 10:37 am ET]

October 20, 2004

IPCC - flat-earth physics and inadequate modeling

The global warming of recent decades is part of a natural cycle that has seen warming since the middle 19th century as we emerged from the Little Ice Age conditions.
Where is the IPCC wrong? Firstly, IPCC proposes a simple construct of the climate system to explain its hypothesis of greenhouse gas related radiative forcing of the climate system. The constructÊis inadequate. It demonstrates that there is a greenhouse effect; that increasing concentrations of human generated greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, etc) will lead to global warming; but it cannot tell the timing, magnitude nor regional impacts of global warming. These were the conclusions emphasised in the 1990 First Assessment Report of the IPCC. The simple flat-earth physics in the IPCC construct of the climate system ignores the need for the atmosphere and oceans to transport excess heat from the tropics to the polar regions. The transport is necessaryÊin order to achieve global radiation balance. However, the magnitude of the transport is so large that even small variations will have an impact on surface temperatures and the extent of polar ice. Over the past three decades we have witnessed an increase in the poleward transport of energy by the atmospheric circulation and observed 'global warming' - a natural event within the climate cycles.
Secondly, the IPCC relies on computer models for its projections of anthropogenic global warming. ... IPCC suggests that the computer models do an adequate job of simulating the climate system. Unfortunately IPCC has used completely inadequate benchmarks for validating the performance of the computer models. IPCC accepts that so long as the computer models reproduce a range of basic statistics of the climate system then they are performing OK. InformationÊabout the rate of energy transport from the tropics to the poles, as simulated by the atmospheric ciculation of the computer models,Êwas available to the IPCC. The information was not published in the IPCC 2001 assessment. Perhaps this is because the computer models underestimate this transport by about 20 percent. The underestimation of the energy transport is a huge error when we consider that an increase in the poleward transport by just one percent is sufficient to accumulate enough additional heat to melt the sea ice of the Arctic Ocean within 10 years! The computer models do not show this error because they have an offsetting error in their specification of longwave radiation - the process whereby greenhouse gases interact with the thermodynamics of the climate system. The computer models overestimate the net surface radiation exchange in the tropics and underestimate the exchange in polar regions. The errors are about 20 watts per sq. metre (W/m2). The variation between models is about 20 W/m2, highlighting the uncertainty of the modellers in the appropriate specification. These are to be compared with the proposed direct radiative forcing of 4 W/m2 for a doubling of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere and the current increase of about 1.5 W/m2 since industrialisation that has supposed to have caused recent warming.

[Source: William Kininmonth (Australasian Climate Research, Kew Victoria, Australia), "Global Warming and Professor Lovelock' Nuclear Solution", letter to Tony Jones and Producers of Lateline at Australian ABC, October 19, 2004. Dr. Kininmonth's book, "Climate Change: A Natural Hazard" (ISBN 0906522269) was published last month by Multi-Science Publishing Company, UK - see [Ref: The Science & Environmental Policy Project, , The Week That Was, November 6, 2004]

October 16, 2004

The hockey stick shape of Mann et al's famous multiproxy history is due more to faulty analysis than to the proxy data

Progress in science is sometimes made by great discoveries. But science alsoÊadvances when we learn that something we believed to be true isnÕt. When solving a jigsaw puzzle, the solution can sometimes be stymied by the fact that a wrong piece has been wedged in a key place.

In the scientific and political debate over global warming, the latest wrong piece may be the Òhockey stick,Ó the famous plot, published by then-U Mass geoscientist Michael Mann and colleagues. This plot purports to show that we are now experiencing the warmest climate in a millennium, and that the earth, after remaining cool for centuries during the medieval era, suddenly began to heat up about 100 years ago -- just at the time that the burning of coal and oil led to an increase in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide.

... But now a shock: independent Canadian scientists Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick have uncovered a fundamental mathematical flaw in the computer program that was used to produce the hockey stick. In his original publications of the stick, Mann purported to use a standard method known as principal component analysis, or PCA, to find the dominant features in a set of more than 70 different climate records.

But it wasnÕt so. McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken.

Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called ÒMonte CarloÓ analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!

That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen? What is going on? Let me digress into a short technical discussion of how this incredible error took place.

In PCA and similar techniques, each of the (in this case, typically 70) different data sets have their averages subtracted (so they have a mean of zero), and then are multiplied by a number to make their average around that mean to be equal to one; in technical jargon, we say that each data set is normalized to zero mean and unit variance. In standard PCA, each data set is normalized over its complete data period; for the global climate data that Mann used to create his hockey stick graph, this was the interval 1400-1980. But the computer program Mann used did not do that. Instead, it forced each data set to have zero mean for the time period 1902-1980, and to match the historical records for this interval. This is the time when the historical temperature is well known, so this procedure does guarantee the most accurate temperature scale. But it completely screws up PCA. PCA is mostly concerned with the data sets that have high variance, and the Mann normalization procedure tends to give very high variance to any data set with a hockey stick shape. (Such data sets have zero mean only over the 1902-1980 period, not over the longer 1400-1980 period.)

The net result: the Òprincipal componentÓ will have a hockey stick shape even if most of the data do not.

McIntyre and McKitrick sent their detailed analysis to Nature magazine for publication, and it was extensively refereed. But their paper was finally rejected. In frustration, McIntyre and McKitrick put the entire record of their submission and the referee reports on a Web page for all to see. If you look, youÕllÊsee that McIntyre and McKitrick have found numerous other problems with the Mann analysis. I emphasize the bug in their PCA program simply because it is so blatant and so easy to understand. Apparently, Mann and his colleagues never tested their program with the standard Monte Carlo approach, or they would have discovered the error themselves. Other and different criticisms of the hockey stick are emerging (see, for example, the paper by Hans von Storch and colleagues in the September 30 issue of Science).

Some people may complain that McIntyre and McKitrick did not publish their results in a refereed journal. That is true--but not for lack of trying. Moreover, the paper was refereed--and even better, the referee reports are there for us to read. McIntyre and McKitrickÕs only failure was in not convincing Nature that the paper was important enough to publish...

[Source: Richard Muller (prof physics - University of California, Berkeley), "Global Warming Bombshell: A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics", Technology Review, October 15, 2004]

Carbon cycle may be weakening, thus decreasing removal of atmospheric CO2

An unexplained surge in the rate at which global warming gases are accumulating in the atmosphere left scientists baffled this week. ... What exactly caused the abrupt increase, which cannot be explained by any corresponding growth in terrestrial emissions from power stations and motor vehicles because there has been none, has now become the subject of heated debate. Some climate experts believe the new rise may be proof of the much-feared climate change "feedback" mechanism, by which global warming causes alterations to the earth's natural systems and causes the warming to increase even more quickly than before. ... [S]cientists ... fear that the carbon cycle - the earth's ability to remove huge amounts of CO from the atmosphere by absorbing it into its forests and oceans - may be weakening because it cannot keep pace with the overload of fossil fuels in the atmosphere. Forests and oceans are known as carbon sinks because of their ability to absorb the gas but it is possible that natural systems are no longer taking up carbon and have started to release it instead.

"This may be just a temporary glitch but if not, it means either we are not measuring carbon levels correctly or the earth's removal mechanisms are not working," says Dr John Sweeney, Department of Geography, NUI Maynooth. "When levels of CO in the atmosphere increase, the earth responds by increasing the rate of removal of the gas. The oceans, or carbon sinks, take out more carbon than they normally would. There is speculation however that the biospheric sinks are not working as efficiently as they should. It is still far too early to come to any definite conclusions but if we have got it wrong, we will see climate change happening over a shorter time span."

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Global warming - Ecuador glaciers could vanish in 20 years

Concrete examples of the effects of global warming on the planet are becoming more and more evident. This week, South American scientists reported that Ecuador's cherished mountain glaciers could have disappeared by 2025. Between 1976 and 1997, the country's cone-shaped Cotopaxi volcano, which soars to almost 20,000 feet, lost 31% of its ice cover, according to a report by Ecuador's Meteorology Institute. The country's famous Avenue of the Volcanoes, a dramatic strip of ice-capped mountains and the pride of the Andean nation, could have vanished in 20 years' time, the report claimed.

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Global warming - UK flood prevention barrier for London raised > 88 times in 20 years

Concrete examples of the effects of global warming on the planet are becoming more and more evident. ...[N]ew figures show that rising sea levels and stormy weather have forced authorities in London to raise the Thames Barrier more than 88 times in the last 20 years to prevent the city from flooding.

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Climate disaster 60y away, sez Sir David King

Britain's leading scientist Professor David King recently warned that the world was just 60 years away from an irreversible climate disaster. But here [in Ireland], experts are taking a more cautious line, claiming it is too early to come to conclusions.

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Global warming is happening and fossil fuel use is the cause, sez Prof. Simmie

"Global warming is happening because we have seen an increase in the mean average temperature of the planet and fossil fuels are the cause," says Chemistry Professor John Simmie of the newly-opened Environmental Change Institute at NUI, Galway.

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Warming - Ireland won't be affected much if sea level doesn't seriously rise

"... [I]n Ireland we would need a very serious rise in sea levels to be affected [by global warming]. We may see malarial mosquitoes and changes in vegetation but weather is so variable it is difficult to draw any conclusions."

[Source: John Simmie (prof Chemistry, Environmental Change Institute at NUI, Galway), quoted by Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

Environment - other nations' best contribution might be pressuring USA to join Kyoto Protocol, sez Simmie

"I don't lose any sleep over the contribution we make to carbon emissions which is minute, when you compare it to the US, a country responsible for 25% of worldwide levels," says Professor Simmie. "One of the best things Ireland can do for the planet is to put pressure on America to sign up to Kyoto."

[Source: Gemma O'Doherty, "It's all set to be . . . Apocalypse Soon", Irish Independent, October 16, 2004]

October 14, 2004

Sir David King's alarm

The world faces an environmental catastrophe unless global warming is tackled, the Government's chief scientist warned yesterday. Prof Sir David King said climate change could not now be avoided. He added: "Action is affordable, inaction is not. "We must act quickly to reduce the impacts of climate change and to adapt to those which cannot be avoided." CO2 emissions have doubled in the last two years, a study this week showed.

[Source: The Mirror (London), "New alert over CO2", October 13, 2004, p. 2]

nuclear.comMENT: The Mirror does a disservice to its readers in suggesting that there's any reasonable basis for a claim that CO2 emissions have doubled in the last two years. Presumably, the paper is misconstruing the alarmist speculations in the press this week about the Mauna Loa data released back in June. The Mirror's 3-star edition was phrased a little differently than the Lancs Slip edition quoted above. Here's how the 3-star edition put it: "This week it was revealed CO2 emissions had doubled in the last two years."

On the implications of CO2 concentration rise anomalies for 2002 and 2003

In 2002 and 2003, measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa rose above two parts per million (ppm) - way above the average increase. Dr Richard Betts, the manager of ecosystems and climate impact at the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Change, said: "I would not be at all surprised if this increase in output of returns to normal levels consistent with the general pattern of the results." His theory goes against that of Professor David King, the chief scientific adviser to the government, who warned last night that the unexplained increases in the quantity of the main "greenhouse gas" could not have been caused by natural events, and he called for global action to reduce carbon emissions. At the Greenpeace business lecture in London last night, Prof King directly linked the increase to "man's action in burning up the reserves of carbon ... at a rate that has never been exceeded before" and called for reductions in the use of fossil fuels.

Dr Betts disagrees and believes the increases in are due to freak events around the globe. "Carbon dioxide tends to mix around globally," he said. "The extra rise in the northern hemisphere is consistent with an extra source of here last year, which could quite easily have been forest fires in Siberia, caused by the hot, dry summer across Europe and Asia. "That seems to be the most plausible explanation. This could well have caused the anomaly. It is too early to say whether there has been a shift in the rate of rise in , and, realistically, there probably hasn't been." He went on: "The increase shows that there are relationships within the climate system that we don't fully understand, and no-one would sensibly claim that the science is settled on climate change."

Dr Peter Cox, the head of the carbon cycle group at the Hadley Centre, added that the measurements taken in Hawaii had not been uniformly repeated across the globe, with increases of in Australia and at the South Pole being slightly lower. He said he was concerned that too much might be being read into the figures, although he conceded that a five- or six-year increase similar to the previous two years would be "very difficult to explain".

[Source: James Reynolds (environment correspondent), "Forest fires are hot suspect for increase, says climate expert", The Scotsman, October 13, 2004, p. 19]

October 13, 2004

Bad corporate citizens should be held accountable for their embrace of global warming fanaticism

In recent months dozens of major Fortune 500 companies have waved the white flag of surrender to radical environmental groups by signing on to the anti-growth agenda on global climate policy. Like prisoners who come to admire their captors, many leaders of corporate America have agreed to lobby beside the very interest groups in Washington that would put them out of business. In August, the Conference Board -- an organization of hundreds of major corporations in the U.S. and around the world -- issued a self-righteous and scientifically dubious statement insisting that government and corporate boards must take action. Just a few months before that, dozens of Fortune 500 firms became signatories to and funders of the radical left-wing lobbying and research activities of the Pew Research Center on Climate Research. Pew has been about the most apocalyptic and irrational of any organization in the country about the coming catastrophe of melting ice caps, massive flooding and soaring temperatures. These firms have bought a separate peace with organizations such as the Environmental Defense Fund.

Meanwhile, the environmental groups relentlessly attack firms such as Exxon that have refused to be bullied by the environmental movement. So what has emerged is a vicious cycle: Firms are intimidated into submission by radical environmental groups, which empowers these organizations with even more money and more credibility, which they then use to bludgeon and isolate corporate holdouts, which forces more capitulations, which leads us ever closer to an anti-industry policy agenda that will puncture the American economy.

The drastic steps outlined in the Kyoto Treaty and the McCain-Lieberman anti-global warming legislation would involve strangulating governmental regulations on business activity and economic growth. The environmentalists are promoting dramatic reductions in fossil fuels and mandatory cutbacks in carbon dioxide emissions (the so-called greenhouse gases). No one knows for sure just how damaging to growth these emission reductions would be. But one recent report by Management Information Services suggests some alarming numbers: a 25% slowdown in economic activity by 2025. (The last recession reduced growth by just 3%). Charles Rivers Associates calculates that about 600,000 jobs could be put at risk. Energy costs could rise by 30% to 50% if the McCain-Feingold legislation were approved -- which could drive gas prices to $3 a gallon at the pump.

It's not a stretch to say that the Kyoto Treaty would constitute the largest threat to our financial well-being and personal freedoms since Sen. Hillary Clinton unveiled her plan to socialize the American health care system a decade ago. She might have succeeded if the business community had rallied around her plan the way firms are embracing global warming fanaticism. CEOs who would bring us closer to that future are bad corporate citizens. They are robber barons of growth. They should be held accountable for the dangers that their political cowardice imposes...

[Source: Stephen Moore (president - Club for Growth), "CEOs Melt Under Warming Myth, Robbing Nation Of Future Growth", Investor's Business Daily, October 11, 2004, p. A21]

Spencer and Christy's Sept 2004 update

click for high resolution map

Preliminary data for September and revised data for August are available. A large area of warmer than normal air covered most of Eastern Canada and the U.S. in September, with the "warmest" air between Hudson Bay and the Great Lakes, notes Dr. Christy.

Sept anomalies (compared to 20-year average for Sept)
+0.12 C - global
+0.19 C - northern hemisphere
+0.05 C - southern hemisphere

August anomalies
-0.07 C - global
+0.08 C - northern hemisphere
-0.23 C - southern hemisphere

Global temperature trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.08 C per decade

[Source: University of Alabama in Huntsville, "Global Temperature Report: September 2004", Oct. 7, 2004]

October 11, 2004

CO2 credit trade tripled in EU since Russia's announcement

The amount of carbon dioxide being traded in Europe has almost tripled since Russia moved to ratify the Kyoto protocol on climate change 10 days ago. About 670,000 tonnes of carbon emissions were traded in the first week of October, according to carbon consultancy Point Carbon, compared with the record 1m tonnes in September. Early this year, fewer than 50,000 tonnes were traded a month.

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "London set to become a force in CO trades", Financial Times (London, England), October 11, 2004, p. 5

EU CO2 trading center might be London, Leipzig, Austria, Amsterdam or Norway

Analysts say London's International Petroleum Exchange could become a leading platform for trading in a market, which although small in absolute terms, is seen as offering great potential. By the end of this year, companies will be able to trade in carbon financial instruments at IPE after it made a deal with the European Climate Exchange, a subsidiary of the Chicago Climate Exchange, which has been trading in emissions for several years. Peter Koster, chief executive of the European Climate Exchange, said: "This link with the IPE offers a standardised product, a regulated exchange, a clearing structure via the London Clearing House, and a proven electronic trading platform." Anthony Hobley, senior associate at Baker & McKenzie, the law firm, said London was well positioned, partly because of the government's implementation of a Pounds 215m voluntary system of emissions trading three years ago. He said: "That experience has proved very useful. This is a huge business opportunity, and the expertise and the services are here in London to take advantage of that." London, however, will face competition from other European cities. The European Energy Exchange in Leipzig is an obvious choice for some to trade. Austria, Amsterdam and Norway have also been mooted as possible sites.

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "London set to become a force in CO trades", Financial Times (London, England), October 11, 2004, p. 5

CO2 credit trading draws bankers' interest as fundamental driver of coal, gas, metals markets

As carbon emissions trading increases, the financial services industry is preparing itself for a potentially lucrative market. Louis Redshaw, head of environmental markets at Barclays Capital, said carbon emissions trading was becoming an essential part of general commodities trading. "CO impacts a large number of other commodities we trade in," he said. "The electricity price is expected to be influenced by CO2 allowances and there is a knock-on effect on coal, gas and metals prices. One of the ways you get good at trading commodities is by understanding the drivers of the markets, and CO2 is becoming a fundamental driver in these markets." Other banks with significant interests in carbon emissions trading include Fortis Bank and Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein. Some carbon broking boutiques are involved in the trade, including Evolution Markets. Mr Koster, a former chief executive of Fortis Bank in the UK, said "As an ex-banker, I say banks should be looking at learning about this (because of the effect it is having on many companies)."

[Source: Fiona Harvey, "London set to become a force in CO trades", Financial Times (London, England), October 11, 2004, p. 5

Atmospheric CO2 concentration rise prompts more alarmist speculation

Atmospheric CO2 measurements have been made since 1958 at Mauna Loa by physicist Charles Keeling. Throughout the series, peaks, all associated with El Ninos, have been followed by troughs, and there has been no annual increase in CO2 above 2 ppm that has been sustained for more than a year. Until now. From 2001 to 2002, the increase was 2.08 ppm (from 371.02 to 373.10); and from 2002 to 2003 the increase was 2.54 ppm (from 373.10 to 375.64). Neither of these were El Nino years, and there has been no sudden leap in emissions. The greater-than-two rise is also visible in two separate sets of CO2 measurements made by America's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, at Mauna Loa and other stations around the world.

"The rise in the annual rate of CO2 increase to above two parts per million for two consecutive years is a real phenomenon," Dr Keeling said. "It is possible this is merely a reflection of the Southern Oscillation, like previous peaks in the rate, but it is possible it is the beginning of a natural process unprecedented in records. "This could be a decoupling of the Southern Oscillation from El Nino events, which itself could be caused by increased CO2 in the atmosphere; or it could be a weakening of the earth's carbon sinks. It is a cause for concern."

Leading British scientists and environmentalists agree. "If this is a rate change (in the CO2 rise), of course it will be very significant," said Dr Piers Forster of the meteorology department of the University of Reading. "It will be of enormous concern, because it will imply that all our global warming predictions for the next 100 years or so will have to be redone. If the higher rate of increase continues, things will get very much worse. It will makes our predicament even more catastrophic."

Tom Burke, a former government adviser on green issues who is now an academic and environmental adviser to business, said: "This series of CO2 measurements is the world's climate clock, and it looks as if it may be ticking faster... That means we are running out of time to stabilise the climate. Governments and business will both have to invest dramatically more if we are to avoid the global warming catastrophe that Tony Blair has warned against."

The jump in atmospheric levels of CO2 cannot be explained by any corresponding jump in terrestrial emissions of CO2 from power stations and motor vehicles - because there has been none.

Some scientists think instead that the abrupt speed-up may be evidence of the long-feared climate change "feedback" mechanism, by which global warming causes alterations to the earth's natural systems and then, in turn, causes the warming to increase even more rapidly than before. The feedback phenomenon has already been predicted in the supercomputer models of the global climate on which the current forecasts of warming are based. A key aspect is the weakening, caused by the warming itself, of the earth's ability to remove huge amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere by absorbing it annually in its forests and oceans, in the so-called carbon cycle. (The forests and oceans are referred to as carbon "sinks".) Hitherto, however, that weakening has been put decades into the future.

[Source: Michael McCarthy (Environment Editor, The Independent), "Surprise CO2 rise may speed up global warming", The Independent (UK), October 11, 2004]

nuclear.COMMENT - The speculation in this article is overwhelmingly alarmist. That's by choice, not requirement. Notice the point about climate models already incorporating this type of feedback? That's downright misleading. The Brits, for example, do indeed have a model configuration that projects CO2 emissions from soil to rise several decades from now, due to temperature increase, but there is no indication that the same postulated mechanism is behind the 2002-2003 rise. If the current rise in CO2 is due to response to warming, how about the previous rise? Man's CO2 emissions are puny compared to the natural flux of CO2 between oceans and atmosphere, and the warming since Little Ice Age began well before the bulk of industrial age CO2 emissions. Despite the model projections, CO2 increase since World War II may not have much effect on temperatures; not now, nor a hundred years hence.

more from the end of another mostly alarmist article:

Peter Cox, head of the Carbon Cycle Group at the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Change, said the increase in carbon dioxide was not uniform across the globe. Measurements of CO2 levels in Australia and at the south pole were slightly lower, he said, so it looked as though something unusual had occurred in the northern hemisphere. "My guess is that there were extra forest fires in the northern hemisphere, and particularly a very hot summer in Europe," Dr Cox said. "This led to a die-back in vegetation and an increase in release of carbon from the soil, rather than more growing plants taking carbon out of the atmosphere, which is usually the case in summer."Ê But Dr Cox, like other scientists, is concerned that too much might be read into two years' figures. "Five or six years on the trot would be very difficult to explain," he said.Ê

David J Hofmann of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration centre, which also studies CO2, said "I don't think an increase of 2 ppm for two years in a row is highly significant - there are climatic perturbations that can make this occur," he said. "But the absence of a known climatic event does make these years unusual.Ê "Based on those two years alone I would say it was too soon to say that a new trend has been established, but it warrants close scrutiny."

[Source: Paul Brown (environment correspondent, The Guardian), "Climate fear as carbon levels soar; Scientists bewildered by sharp rise of CO2 in atmosphere for second year running", The Guardian, October 11 2004]

Climate scientist tells what's the best aspect of his work

Dr Kevin Hennessy says 10 years ago when he went to parties and told guests that he was a climate scientist, "their eyes glazed over". Now, the CSIRO global warming expert is a hot science talent in demand on the global conference circuit.
Q: What sparked your interest in climate science?
Kevin: I had a great lecturer at Monash Uni who made it entertaining. He had us climbing hills at 3 am with a Thermos of coffee to measure air temperature and pressure. But it wasn't until fourth year that I zoomed in on weather and climate as the things I wanted to do.
Q: What made you decide?
Kevin: It was a chance to apply mathematics to the real world.
... Q: Best aspect of your work?
Kevin: I was in Vienna for a conference and was able to travel across to Switzerland to see the mountains. But usually I'm locked up for days in meetings.

[Ref: Canberra Times (Australia), "Q&A", October 11, 2004, p. A4]

October 10, 2004

Gerhard: huge amount of observations, data, and information about how climate changes is ignored in the hunt for a human imprint on climate change

Lee C. Gerhard, the former Kansas state geologist, has an interesting new article which might surprise many who think Kyoto Protocol is grounded in science

Here are some excerpts from the article, which was published in a peer review journal of The American Association of Petroleum Geologists:

* ... there is little to sustain the opinion that carbon dioxide concentration is a major driver of global climate.

* Modern literature abounds with good observations and measurements. Few lend credence to any measurable human impact on Earth's climate, but many demonstrate great natural variability of climate.

* The IPCC interpretation of discernible human impact on climate is based on the elimination of demonstrable natural major climate change over the last 2000 yr ... Since then, Esper et al. (2002), also using tree-ring data, demonstrated that there was significant warming and cooling during the past two millennia and demonstrated that current temperature change is consistent with past changes during recorded human history. ... Broecker (2001) also found evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was a global event, using borehole temperatures, that these warm and cold cycles last about 1500 yr, and that the change in temperature is about 2¡C. Soon et al. (2003) have developed a synopsis of literature about the past 1000 yr and argue forcefully for the global extent of the Medieval Climate Optimum and subsequent Little Ice Age. They also tested the 20th century as "nominally the warmest of the last millennium" and "warmest year of the last millennium" (Mann et al., 1999, as cited in Soon et al., 2003, p. 29) and found that they are neither the warmest nor particularly unique. Observations such as these run counter to computer models, but are the basis for any rational scientific discussion of climate change.

* There are several research gaps in the debate. First and most important, the general circulation models should be opened to all scientists so as to include modeling of natural variability based on observations. A global time-temperature curve covering the last 10,000 yr would be a helpful addition to the record and can be developed in a conference setting to debate proxies and develop a baseline of global climate change. We need to investigate processes by which solar and orbital variability affect climate. Testing of GCM against the historical record is highly desirable.

* The old Wernerian hypothesis is comparable to today's computer modeling of greenhouse gas control of climate change, in that its adherents try to prove it correct, instead of testing the validity of the hypothesis. ... I find it amazing that the huge amount of observations, data, and information about how climate changes is ignored in order to continue the hunt for a human imprint on climate change. Why is it that we spend so much time and resources trying to prove a theory of greenhouse gas climate control instead of testing the hypothesis? We would serve science in public policy better if we would bring the scientific method to the quasipolitical argument over climate change.

* I suggest that the efforts of human beings cannot modify the enormous amount of solar energy driving Earth's dynamic climate system, regardless of how much science, technology, and engineering are currently available. There are political forces at work that seek to exploit fears of human control of the Earth's climate as a device to transfer wealth and to effect social policies. Strong social forces and a very large amount of human ego are committed to ignoring rational science. Our job as scientists is to test climate change arguments against observations and data and to advance data-driven science.

* Current continuing debate over whether humanity is changing the Earth's climate is an example of a debate in which science plays a secondary role to social policy and international economics. It is also a debate complicated by the mystique of computer modeling that obscures observational science. The purpose of this paper is to update the reader on the latest in scientific studies of climate change and to discuss roles of natural variability in the context of modern climate change. The issue, simply stated, is that the Earth's climate has likely been warming over the last 150 yr, roughly coincident with the industrial revolution and with the end of an abnormal cold spell commonly referred to as the Little Ice Age. With the warming has come an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, some of which is attributable to human oxidation of carbon-based fuels, both fossil and biomass. The cause, the effects, and the relative scale of climate variation are in dispute. Polarized arguments are human versus natural climate change, small amount of warming versus unprecedented warming, and fossil fuel greenhouse gas-driven change versus natural drivers, largely solar and orbital.

* The argument that human civilization induces climate change is derived from computer models of greenhouse theory (general circulation models [GCM]; among the best known are the Hadley Center model in the United Kingdom and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration model in the United States). Although these models are complex mathematical simulations of atmosphere behavior according to greenhouse theory, they have not been able to replicate past climates and climatic change prior to the Little Ice Age (Mann et al., 1999) and are simplistic representations of what is currently understood about climate behavior (Soon et al., 2001a, b). Nonetheless, the models have vigorously pursued support from non-earth scientists and the media. The result is public policy proposals to control greenhouse gases to control changes in the Earth's climate (the Kyoto Protocol) without substantial credible scientific evidence to support the assertion that greenhouse gases from human activity are significant drivers of the Earth's climate.

[Source: "Climate change: Conflict of observational science, theory, and politics", AAPG Bulletin 88(9):1211-1220, September 2004]

October 9, 2004

Plankton give clues to climate change

There's a research ship off the coast of Africa right now studying plankton blooms in ordinarily plankton-barren waters, with a variety of goals, including identifying which blooms are due to upwelling from the deep ocean. This is important for CO2-climate science because the same upwelling that brings nutrients to surface can act as natural chimneys for greenhouse gases to escape deep sequestration and enter the atmosphere. We can see plankton blooms from satellites, but we can't tell from the satellite instruments what caused a particular bloom. Since postulated causes, like nutrient-rich Saharan dust storm deposition, do not involve chimneys from the deep. The present research is hoped to provide insights to help get a better understanding of the ocean-atmosphere system. The current voyage is part of the Atlantic Meridional Transect Program. Eventually, the data is expected to help understand how climate change affects the greenhouse gas "sink" and "source" factors, and other climate-related plankton matters, like plankton production of the aerosol Dimethyl sulphide, which is considered a significant type of cloud formation nuclei over the ocean. Various members of the research team are publishing "diaries" on the web. You can see them at AMT website.

October 8, 2004

Warming-induced cloud cover change predicted to deplete ozone layer over Arctic, increasing Inuit UV dose by 30%

A new report [the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, a 1,800-page report, produced with the input of more than 500 scientists and Arctic experts, be released to coincide with the Arctic Council meeting in Iceland in November] predicts a serious threat to Inuit health: young people growing up in the Arctic will receive 30 per cent more ultraviolet radiation than any previous generation. Increased ultraviolet radiation, which is associated with increased rates of skin cancer, is forecast because changes to cloud cover triggered by global warming is expected to enhance depletion of the protective ozone layer.

[Source: Margaret Munro (CanWest News Service), "Arctic meltdown may be permanent", Windsor Star (Ontario), October 7, 2004, p. C12]

Arctic Climate Impact Assessment sees rapid warming, with worse soon to come

There is little hope the Arctic meltdown threatening the Inuit way of life and the northern ecosystem can be stopped, say leading polar researchers. The World Conference of Science Journalists this week were told by scientists that the Arctic is warming, polar bears could disappear from Hudson Bay within 30 years and an Arctic shipping passage could open up by the middle of the century. Environment Canada scientist Terry Prowse, one of the co-authors of an 1,800-page Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, says there are 10 key findings in the report. Topping the list is the conclusion "the Arctic is warming rapidly," with much larger changes to come at a rate two to three times the global average, Prowse told the conference. "Let's get ready for it, and see how we can best deflect the impacts," says Louis Fortier of Laval University, head of a national effort to document the changes transforming the North. Fortier led the scientific voyage of the Amundsen, Canada's refurbished icebreaker, which has spent a year in the Arctic looking at everything from how much carbon dioxide is absorbed by sea ice to Inuit health. He says there is clear evidence of remarkable change in the region. An air temperature high of 32C was recorded in Inuvik this summer.
More than 500 scientists and Arctic experts have reached the same conclusion, and have documented their findings in the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Creatures that depend on the Arctic ice will be hit hard as ice thins and melts, the assessment says. A decline in seals and bears threatens the diet of the Inuit and their way of life, the report says. The report will be released to coincide with the Arctic Council meeting in Iceland in November, where Canada and the five other Arctic nations will be asked to take concrete action to deal with climate change.

[Source: Margaret Munro (CanWest News Service), "Arctic meltdown may be permanent", Windsor Star (Ontario), October 7, 2004, p. C12]

Canada - climate change threatens sovereignty and security

The Liberals promised a new northern strategy in Tuesday's throne speech aimed at protecting Canadian sovereignty and security -- both of which observers here say are threatened by climate change.

[Source: Margaret Munro (CanWest News Service), "Arctic meltdown may be permanent", Windsor Star (Ontario), October 7, 2004, p. C12]

Shindell and Schmidt: Antarctic cooling expected to quickly reverse

A study by Drew Shindell and Gavin Schmidt of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies prompts them to expect that the South Polar region will do an about-face and warm up over the next 50 years. The researchers found that depleted ozone levels and greenhouse gases are contributing to cooler South Pole temperatures. Low ozone levels in the stratosphere and increasing greenhouse gases promote a positive phase of a shifting atmospheric climate pattern in the Southern Hemisphere. Antarctica has mostly cooled over the past 30 years but that trend is likely to rapidly reverse, they conclude, as ozone levels are expected to recover due to international treaties. "Antarctica has been cooling and one could argue some regions could escape warming, but this study finds this is not very likely," Shindell said. "Global warming is expected to dominate in future trends."

[Source: United Press International, "Researchers see South Pole warming up", October 7, 2004 5:52 pm ET]

Western Antarctic glaciers are shrinking "substantially" faster

Antarctica shows signs of a significant climate change. Three international studies reported by NASA on behalf of the various research teams show more ice loss and glacial movement than had been expected. While glaciers all over the world are losing ice, the release of vast water masses locked in Antarctic land-based ice would cause the biggest rise in sea level. The studies show western Antarctic glaciers are shrinking "substantially" faster than observed in the 1990s, NASA reports. "They are losing 60 percent more ice into the Amundsen Sea than they accumulate from inland snowfall." Moreover, ice shelves floating in that sea appear to be thinning. Such shelves put brakes on the speed with which inland glaciers can slide into the sea. Removing the shelves would uncork a rapid glacier advance that could raise sea level significantly. Right now, Antarctic melting contributes about 10 percent of the annual 1.8 millimeter rise (about 1/16th of an inch) in sea level. Pull out the cork and you're looking at a potential 39-inch rise in sea level all over the world. The studies cover too short a time to prove whether the glacier changes are part of a natural cycle or a response to global warming. The scientists suspect warming. If they're right, the melting shows how fast big changes can happen. "If anyone was waiting to find out whether Antarctica would respond quickly to climate warming, I think the answer is 'yes,' " says Ted Scambos with the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo.

[Source: Robert C. Cowen, "Warming signs: thinner glaciers and saltier oceans", Christian Science Monitor (Boston), October 7, 2004, p. 14]

Curry: tropical Atlantic getting saltier, probably linked to global warming

Earth has a message for global warming skeptics: Its effects are starting to appear where it really counts... The tropical "firebox" that drives the atmosphere's weather machine is running hotter. This development could significantly change our planet's weather patterns. Roughly speaking, Earth's weather machine is like a steam engine with a boiler (the tropical and subtropical oceans) and a condenser (the cooler higher latitudes). Masses of water vapor flow into the atmosphere from the boiler and travel north or south. These masses condense into rain or snow, releasing the heat they absorbed when they evaporated. Much of the water finds its way to the polar seas and flows back to the tropics. This interchange maintains our planet's distribution of solar heat and fresh water. Research suggests that this heat/moisture distribution is changing, which could shift the location and timing of rainfall, droughts, and floods. The telltale signal: salt. When the boiler evaporates seawater, it leaves salt behind. The hotter the boiler, the saltier the water. Indeed, the tropical seas across the Atlantic are getting saltier, according to a Nature article last December by Ruth Curry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts and colleagues - and an update by her last month. To suggest that this condition is causing the rise in Atlantic hurricane activity would be a stretch. But Dr. Curry and her associates think the accumulation of salt probably is linked to global warming.

[Source: Robert C. Cowen, "Warming signs: thinner glaciers and saltier oceans", Christian Science Monitor (Boston), October 7, 2004, p. 14]

New Zealand - political parties split on whether to withdraw from Kyoto after first period if US, Australia don't make binding commitments

National leader Don Brash says he will pull New Zealand out of the Kyoto climate change agreement if Australia and the United States do not sign up. "We will withdraw from the protocol if, by 2013, countries like Australia and the United States have not made binding commitments on emissions," he said. However, the convener of the Government's ministerial committee on climate change, Pete Hodgson, has said the Government will stick with the agreement. He warned that New Zealand would risk international censure and damage international trade if it contemplated withdrawing from the Kyoto agreement. In his weekly newsletter the National leader said he was not concerned about the first commitment period of the protocol, between 2008 and 2012, because New Zealand would have more tradeable carbon credits than debits, thanks to its expanding plantation forests. New Zealand is expected to qualify for credits worth about $Ê500 million at the current $Ê15 a tonne price of tradeable carbon credits.
National has also promised to scrap the Government's proposed carbon tax, which at current prices would add 4 cents a litre to petrol and diesel and 4 per cent to domestic power bills from 2008. The Government has pledged to recycle the extra revenue back into the economy so it is "fiscally neutral".

[Source: The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand), "Brash threat to quit protocol", October 7, 2004, p. A5]

New Zealand expects windfall from Kyoto Protocol first period

In the initial Kyoto Protocol commitment period, New Zealand is quite well placed thanks to our large forests and relatively high proportion of renewable energy production. Both the Government and the National party agree that in the first period New Zealand will be a net beneficiary from Kyoto. Countries which reduce their emissions below their target level can trade their excess "emission units" on the international market. In May it was calculated that we had emissions equivalent to 399 million tonnes. Ranged against that were an allowance of 308 million tonnes, a bonus for our post-1990 forestry plantings of 95 million tonnes and an estimated 29 million-tonne "credit" generated by various government policy moves, leaving a surplus of 33 million tonnes. On the current market, which values carbon emissions at about $15 a tonne, the surplus would be worth just under $500 million to the Government. It is yet to decide where to put that "windfall". It could recycle it into the economy, hold it as extra government revenue or, most likely, retain it for the second commitment period after 2012 when New Zealand is likely to need significant reductions in emissions.

[Source: Vernon Small, "Kyoto's effects are coming to an emitter near you", The Dominion Post (Wellington, New Zealand), October 7, 2004, p. C2]

New Zealand's Kyoto considerations include carbon tax effects and windfall profits for renewable power

The main bone of [Kyoto Protocol-related] contention [in New Zealand] is over the Government's plan to make the cost of emissions explicit to "polluters" by way of a carbon tax based on the internationally traded price of carbon. At current prices that would add about 4c a litre to petrol and diesel, 4 per cent to domestic power bills, and even more to industrial energy costs (though Labour has pledged to make the tax fiscally neutral to the Government by recycling into the economy in other ways). A bill implementing the tax (which National has pledged to scrap) is likely to be introduced before the election and come into force before 2008.

The Government has moved to mitigate the extra costs to big businesses; to help keep them competitive, by negotiating exemptions provided they adopt best emission-minimisation practices. It has also promised to exempt farmers from the tax on their agricultural emissions. No fart tax. That still leaves the first of the significant policy issues the Government is yet to address; the impact of a carbon tax on smaller businesses. The convenor of the ministerial group on climate change Pete Hodgson believes for most small- to medium-sized firms no help is needed, and therefore none is planned. For most there is good money to be made -- actually bad wastage of money to be avoided -- through energy saving and efficiency measures. But he acknowledges there might be a "policy gap" for some medium-sized enterprises, be it a small smelting operation or a horticulturalist burning coal to grow hothouse tomatoes.

Iron logic would suggest that if coal-fired hothouse-heating is uneconomic that is the very policy signal a carbon charge is designed to send. But the Government is sensitive to the fall-out even if "uneconomic" undertakings fall foul of the tax. Policy work is underway on that, as it is on the second hole in the carbon tax framework; whether those producing power from renewable energy sources, such as Meridian's hydro-dominated portfolio, will get a windfall gain from the increase in power prices without paying the carbon tax. One option would be to redesign the market to allow a sort of progressive pricing model for different types of generation, but that would require heavy-handed intervention.

In the meantime, the Government is keen for business to see the opportunities, local and global, which Kyoto offers, not just from energy savings and emissions credits but from the paraphernalia surrounding the industry -- from carbon testing equipment to new technologies and techniques to cut agricultural emissions. A conference next month in Auckland is being convened to assess the prospects for business, at which Mr Hodgson will speak. He will be hoping it will generate enough good news to drown out the litany of Kyoto-woe coming from Business NZ.

[Source: Vernon Small, "Kyoto's effects are coming to an emitter near you", The Dominion Post (Wellington, New Zealand), October 7, 2004, p. C2]

All but 4 developed nations have ratified Kyoto

Only four of the 34 developed nations are still outside Kyoto Protocol -- Monaco, Liechtenstein, Australia and the United States.

[Source: Vernon Small, "Kyoto's effects are coming to an emitter near you", The Dominion Post (Wellington, New Zealand), October 7, 2004, p. C2]

CO2 emissions rights market jumped upon Russia's Kyoto announcement

Russia's ratification of Kyoto will open the way for full international emission trading in carbon. While Chicago Climate Exchange prices have been less than $1/tonne, the price of CO2 emission rights in the European Emissions Trading Scheme jumped to over US$11 per tonne ($40/tC) following the announcement. [FT 30/9/04]

[Source: World Nuclear Association Weekly Digest, "Russia likely to ratify Kyoto", 8 October 8 2004]

CO2 emissions rights market outlook drawing big players

The price of CO2 in Europe rose 20% to nearly euros 10 (£7) per tonne on the back of the news from Moscow last night, and many industry experts predict further gains with massive new volumes changing hands. More than 1m tonnes of carbon were traded in September - double the figure for all of 2003. Some are forecasting annual volumes will grow to 8m tonnes or even 10m tonnes by the end of 2004. Henrik Hasselknippe, senior analyst with emissions trading consultant Point Carbon, believes Russia alone could earn up to $10bn from selling quotas on the carbon market. He estimates the financial value of the European carbon market will be worth euros 10bn (£6.9bn) a year by 2007.
Leading energy companies such as BP, Shell and RWE in Germany, have been among the most active in the trading of permits to date. Last night BP described Russia's decision as "helpful". Just as large financial institutions have started to play a big role in trading oil contracts on the IPE, so have they started to make an appearance trading emissions. Like the oil markets, a network of specialist brokers is beginning to grow around the business with names such as Ecosecurities and Natsource. The relative values of CO2 transactions are still minuscule compared with the oil markets but they are expected to grow from euros 96m worth of carbon trades globally last year to euros 360m for 2004. no one can predict what will happen to carbon values. Climate Change Capital believes prices could drop from yesterday's level and bounce about depending on issues such as the relative prices of coal and gas, the influence of the weather on power production and general levels of economic development.

[Source: Terry Macalister, "Russia's CO2 promise will kickstart carbon trade", The Guardian (London), October 1, 2004, p. 24]

Cook et al. extend western USA drought history, find current drought to be puny

A team lead by Edward R. Cook of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory reconstructed droughts in the western U.S. over the past 1,200 years. They found that this drought pales in comparison to an earlier period of elevated aridity and epic drought in AD 900-1300, an interval broadly consistent with the Medieval Warm Period. The study, published yesterday on ScienceExpress, the online version of the journal Science, uses tree ring records to reconstruct drought and wetness over large portions of North America to as far back as AD 800, a substantial increase over the [approximately] 300 years available from the previously published reconstructions that all began in 1700. Cook et al. identified megadroughts that occurred around AD 936, 1034, 1150, and 1253. Compared to those, they report, the current drought does not stand out as an extreme event because it has not yet lasted nearly as long.
Future droughts in the West of similar duration to those seen prior to AD 1300 would be disastrous. Since the turn of the 20th century, says the study, overall aridity in the West has increased in an irregular manner from AD 1900 to 2003. This high-resolution segment of the reconstruction shows the classic Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s and the severe 1950s drought. In the past 100 years, the western U.S. has become densely populated in many places, and much more developed. Cook et al. note that "If elevated aridity in the western U.S. is a natural response to climate warming, then any trend toward warmer temperatures in the future could lead to a serious long-term increased in aridity over western North America."

[Source: The Electricity Daily, "Boffins: Current Western Drought Puny", October 8, 2004]

von Storch et al: ironic support of Soon & Baliunas conclusion about the hockey stick

In a short "Perspective" in Science that evaluates von Storch et al's article, East Anglia's Timothy Osborn and Keith Briffa comment, "If the true natural variability of NH temperature is indeed greater than is currently accepted, the extent to which recent warming can be viewed as Ôunusual' would need to be reassessed." In the larger context of climate politics, their phraseology ("currently accepted") becomes piquantly ironic. The clear implication is that Mann's temperature reconstruction (the one favored by the IPCC) is what the majority of the world's climatologists believe to be most accurate. If that is the case, then most of people studying climate must believe the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age to be minor excursions on a Northern Hemisphere temperature curve dominated by 20th century warming. The problem is, such thinking flies in the face of literally hundreds of research papers that document the existence and widespread impacts of the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age.
Wouldn't it be nice if scientists could actually get together and compile evidence of those climatic events from the scientific literature? Tah dah! Guess what? Harvard scientists Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas have done just that and published their results in the journal Climate Research, last year.
There were howls of protest by IPCC scientists, including Mann, claiming it to be necessary to change the editorial policies of Climate Research to prevent any future Ômishaps' of this kind. Von Storch was appointed Editor-in-Chief. His first, and ultimately only, act was to prepare an apology for Climate Research allowing the Soon and Baliunas review to see the light of day. This was quickly nixed by the journal's publisher; von Storch resigned in protest.
Here's the irony, the results von Storch just published in Science effectively agree with what Soon and Baliunas wrote in Climate Research in 2003: the Mann reconstruction severely underestimates past variability. So why did von Storch protest so vociferously when he was Editor-in-Chief? And why doesn't he reference Soon and Baliunas in his Science article, especially considering that their technique (i.e. comparative literature review) is an example of a method that is essentially free from the type of errors von Storch identified in the work of Mann and others?
Refs:
Osborn, T.J., Briffa, K.R., 2004. The real color of climate change. Sciencexpress, September 30, 2004.
Soon, W., and S. Baliunas, 2003. Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1,000 years. Climate Research, 23, 89Ð110.
Von Storch, H., et al., 2004. Reconstructing past climate from noisy data. Sciencexpress, September 30, 2004.

[Source: The CO2 & Climate Team - www.co2andclimate.org, "Ironies Abound in Hockey Stick", World Climate Alert, October 2004]

Post-Litte Ice Age warming amassed long before IPCC-embraced hockey stick suggests

It is becoming ever more evident that the lion's share of the warming experienced since the end of the Little Ice Age occurred well before mankind's CO2 emissions significantly perturbed the atmosphere, which indicates that the majority of post-Little Ice Age warming was due to something other than rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations, which in turn suggests that the lesser warming of the latter part of the 20th century may well have been due to something else as well.

[Source: "Journal Review: Reconstructing the Climatic History of the Northern Hemisphere Over the Past Millennium from Proxy Temperature Data: Problems with Mann et al.'s Methodology", CO2 Science Magazine, October 6, 2004]

Australia - world's worst per capita CO2 emissions

Australia is the world's worst polluter per head of population, emitting about 27.6 tonnes of carbon equivalents against 14.1 tonnes per person by New Zealand.

[Source: Vernon Small, "Brash: NZ to follow US, Aust on Kyoto", The Daily News (New Plymouth, New Zealand), October 7, 2004, p. 2]

October 7, 2004

South Africa government regards climate change as urgent crisis

Government has launched its Climate Change Response Strategy after it was adopted by Cabinet yesterday. ... Regarded as an urgent crisis, government awaits reports from all the departments regarding the implementation of the response strategy in the next six months. ... Research shows that global surface temperatures have risen by more than half a degree while rainfall was decreasing with sea levels rising and all indications show human activity as the direct cause. Temperatures in Southern Africa are expected to rise by up to three degrees with rainfall expected to drop by up to ten percent... Environmental Affairs and Tourism Director General Crispian Olver said water resources, agriculture, forestry, human health and biodiversity were vulnerable to climate change direct impacts. He said it would impact directly to economy since South Africa was a developing country. "The impact of climate change is physical and economic. Our climate change response programme is based on growing the economy and competitiveness within globally negotiated response, focusing on areas that promote sustainable development," said Dr Olver. ... Environmental Affairs and Tourism Deputy Minister Rejoice Mabudafhasi said the strategy would address government's priorities of poverty eradication, job creation and commitment to sustainable economic, social and environmental development. "It is quite clear that our struggle to fight against poverty and our mandate to manage the natural resources will be undermined unless climate change response strategies are developed and implemented at local, regional and continental levels to ensure that problems associated with climate change are dealt with in a proactive manner," she said.

[Source: BuaNews, "SA Launches Plan to Respond to Climate Change", Africa News, October 7, 2004]

Southern Africa - warming risks starvation of millions within 50 years, and malaria spread too, sez SA govt

South Africa's leading climatologists warned that changes in global temperatures over the next half century would threaten food security across most of the impoverished and drought-stricken southern African region, putting millions of people at risk of starvation. South Africa will become hotter and drier, which will be disastrous on the country's biodiversity and the agricultural sector, particularly in the western half of the country, said Bob Scholes, a climatologist at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. There is no doubt that the world is warmer now than any other time over the past 1,000 years, he was quoted as saying by local newspaper ThisDay on Thursday. Chippy Olver, director-general of the Environmental Affairs and Tourism Department, said climate change would likely wipe out the Cape Floristic Kingdom within 50 years and malaria could move out of its isolated hold in northern KwaZulu-Natal and strike in North West province. Olver said the Department of Agriculture was researching more climate-sturdy crop strains, and would also develop "advisory packages" to tell farmers what their options were as the weather changed around them. "Within two generations, what we know as the maize triangle will no longer exist. We will need to introduce new crops," he said.

[Source: Xinhua News (China), "South Africa launches national strategy on climate change", October 7, 2004 1:00 pm ET]

Russia - Duma presented with Kyoto Protocol; Putin hopes for action this month

President Vladimir Putin sent the Kyoto Protocol on climate change to Russia's lower house of parliament on Thursday for ratification, the Kremlin said. The Kremlin has expressed hope that lawmakers will consider the 1997 protocol this month.

[Source: Associated Press, "Russian president sends Kyoto Protocol to lower house of parliament for ratification", October 7, 2004 7:58 am ET]

Russia's in, Kyoto lives on in a game of environmental smoke and political mirrors

The EU bribed Russia into ratifying the climate treaty. The reality is that it's all a game of environmental smoke and political mirrors. Reality really doesn't seem to matter when it comes to global climate change. London's Independent newspaper correctly dissected the deal, noting that the EU agreed to support Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization in return for Kyoto ratification. That means Russia gets much easier access to large capital investments from the West into its shaky economy. It's a major boon to the dicey Russian economy, and, as Konstantin Kosachev, head of the Duma's foreign affairs committee, noted: "Ratification will remove many irritants in our relations with the EU."
What does the EU get out of this to justify a bribe? Most of all, the Eurocrats buy themselves political cover. They get Russia into the treaty, assuring that it will technically go into effect; they are able to buy Russian allowances in order to meet their own reduction targets without domestic reductions; and they diffuse the pesky greens, now a major political force in most of the Western European polity. The price was very low. It doesn't cost the EU much to support Russia s desire to join the WTO. And any private-sector, hard-money investments in the Russian economy presumably will be because the private-sector investors believe they can make a competitive return on their investment (although, given the way Putin treated Yukos, that seems entirely problematic).
The sale of carbon dioxide emissions reductions to European nations that won't be able to make their Kyoto targets on their own will yield substantial profits to Russia, although there may be so many emissions reductions for sale that prices are far lower than Russia has assumed. This is why a recent George C. Marshall Institute analysis concluded that Russia s presence in the treaty won t result in net global reductions.

[Source: Kennedy Maize (The Electricity Daily), "Analysis: Russia's Kyoto Motivation", The Electricity Daily, October 7, 2004]

Russia - excess emission credits and potential for joint implementation projects may help EU reach Kyoto targets

The EU is likely to fall a little short in meeting its Kyoto targets on its own, he says [David Victor, director of the Program on Energy and Sustainable Development at Stanford], but Russia's participation will come to Europe's rescue. Because the Russian economy was in such shambles in 1990, the base line against which Kyoto targets are measured, Moscow's emissions targets are far above existing emissions. So Russia has carbon "credits" it can sell to EU members. European countries can also earn credit against their emissions targets for helping Russia build cleaner, more efficient power plants and factories. Such "joint implementation" projects, permitted under Kyoto's ground rules, are expected to allow the EU to claim victory in meeting its targets by 2012.

[Source: Peter N. Spotts (staff writer - Christian Science Monitor), "Emissions pact goes forward; But tougher work of cutting greenhouse gases under Kyoto Protocol remains", The Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), October 7, 2004, p. 11]

Russia's Kyoto commitment doesn't represent buy-in to long-term reductions

Russian Federation Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Zhukov told a news conference in Moscow that "As regards the first stage" -- the period of up to 2012 -- "the Kyoto Protocol has more pluses than minuses for Russia... Taking into account serious economic implications for Russia ..., we plan to adopt a statement on the beginning of talks on the second stage of the protocol's implementation." "In the government's opinion, the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol has considerably more pluses for Russia," he said.

[Source: Interfax news agency (Moscow), "Russia may ratify Kyoto Protocol before end of year - deputy premier", October 7, 2004 1302 gmt (translated from the Russian by BBC Monitoring)]

Kyoto Protocol - "the most complicated, sophisticated effort at directed change" ever attempted

After seven years of bruising negotiations, repudiation by one of its early architects, and repeated pronouncements of its imminent demise, a 1997 pact to curb the growth of greenhouse gases tied to global warming is limping toward ratification. Now comes the hard part: putting its complex rules into effect, and planning for what will follow once the agreement's first - and so far, only - formal commitment period ends after 2012. "This is the most complicated, sophisticated effort at directed change" in international environmental policy ever attempted, notes Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. "Is it possible? We'll find out."

[Source: Peter N. Spotts (staff writer - Christian Science Monitor), "Emissions pact goes forward; But tougher work of cutting greenhouse gases under Kyoto Protocol remains", The Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), October 7, 2004, p. 11]

Kyoto Protocol - virtually no effect on climate, but a first political and diplomatic step

By the end of this century, atmospheric CO2 is expected to double over preindustrial levels. That's because of the world's widespread use of coal, oil, and natural gas since the start of the Industrial Revolution as well as changes in land-use patterns. Many atmospheric scientists agree that carbon-dioxide emissions are at least partly responsible for an increase in average global temperatures. Those temperatures are expected to rise for the foreseeable future, with disruptive consequences worldwide. Even if every signatory to Kyoto Protocol meets its emissions-reduction goal, the effort would barely slow the rate of increase of CO2 and have virtually no effect on climate. Yet the value of the agreement lies less in its immediate effect on the atmosphere than on the political and diplomatic chemistry needed to deal with a problem that is likely to take decades to solve, some analysts say. The 1997 accord "puts real pressure on countries to deliver on their commitments. Countries will demonstrate that it can be done affordably. And most important, ratification sets in motion the diplomatic machinery" to look beyond 2012, Mr. Diringer says [Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change]. He notes that the accord requires signatories to begin talks next year on a new round of targets and timetables for emission reductions. "This is the first step in what will need to be a decades-long process," adds David Sandalow, a Brookings Institution scholar who has served as assistant secretary of state for oceans, environment, and science under President Clinton.

[Source: Peter N. Spotts (staff writer - Christian Science Monitor), "Emissions pact goes forward; But tougher work of cutting greenhouse gases under Kyoto Protocol remains", The Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), October 7, 2004, p. 11]

Japan - plan for higher fuel economy standards was subject of WTO threat by USA

Other industrial countries, such as Canada and Japan are further behind [than EU in meeting Kyoto targets]. Japan's biggest problem is emissions from autos, notes Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, an environmental group in Washington, D.C. Three years ago, the country tried to lay plans for higher domestic fuel-economy standards to meet its Kyoto commitments, Mr. Clapp says, but the US threatened to challenge those standards before the World Trade Organization. Japan's move would constitute a trade barrier against American auto imports, the US argued. Now, analysts say, Japan is said to be exploring an internal carbon-trading system, as well as taxes on emissions to help it meet its Kyoto targets.

[Source: Peter N. Spotts (staff writer - Christian Science Monitor), "Emissions pact goes forward; But tougher work of cutting greenhouse gases under Kyoto Protocol remains", The Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), October 7, 2004, p. 11]

Japan - business lobby opposition to proposed carbon tax

At a meeting of senior officials from Japan's Environment Ministry and the nation's business lobby, Environment Minister Yuriko Koike expressed her willingness to introduce measures against global warming, including a so-called environment tax. The chairman of Nippon Keidanren (Japan Business Federation), Hiroshi Okuda, said "We are opposed to the environment tax, although I won't comment on a possible future position." Not all Nippon Keidanren members were happy with Okuda's level of opposition, claiming, unlike the chairman, to be "unalterably" opposed to the tax.

[Source: The Asahi Shimbun, "Environment Tax Triggers Heated Debate", October 7, 2004]

Global warming - steps to minimize won't break us, might cost 1-2% of global GDP, sez Broecker

Q: Can we take action against global warming without seriously harming the economy?

A: A lot of people think we can take the steps needed at a cost of 1% to 2% of global gross domestic product. But it's not all negative. It would create new industries and bring a lot of construction work. And while time is short, it's not that short that we have to turn everything upside down and only spend money on this right now. When we stand way back and say, "If we could solve this problem for 30 cents more a gallon of gas," most people in the world would agree to that. It's not going to break us.

[Source: Wallace Broecker (professor and climate researcher - Columbia U's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory), interviewed in "Voices of Innovation: Wallace Broecker", Business Week, October 11, 2004, p. 146]

Carbon sequestration is the one sure solution, sez Broecker

Q: Are there innovative ideas for tackling the problem?

A: There's only one sure solution, and that's capturing CO2 and putting it away. [i.e., grabbing the carbon dioxide as it's produced when fossil fuels are burned, and storing it deep underground or turning it into rock.] It's not the only solution, but I think it's the ultimate solution.

[Source: Wallace Broecker (professor and climate researcher - Columbia U's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory), interviewed in "Voices of Innovation: Wallace Broecker", Business Week, October 11, 2004, p. 146]

Climate change may turn out to be a big bust, but it would be dangerous to bet against it

Q: What are the consequences if we don't try to combat global warming?

A: We still don't understand the mechanisms [of climate change], and it's scary that we can't tell what the future may bring. It is a vast problem, and a dangerous experiment. Maybe Lindzen [Richard S. Lindzen, professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a noted skeptic of global warming] is right, and climate change will be a big bust. But to bet on that happening would be very dangerous.

[Source: Wallace Broecker (professor and climate researcher - Columbia U's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory), interviewed in "Voices of Innovation: Wallace Broecker", Business Week, October 11, 2004, p. 146]

Kyoto proponent's irrational optimism - David Victor

Next year, talks are set to begin on a post-2012 [greenhouse gas] emissions-control regime. A key goal is likely to be a hunt for ways to get countries, including China and the United States, to buy in to a new agreement. That will require thinking outside the 1997 protocol box, some analysts say. The challenge will be to overcome the inertia that could build behind Kyoto's existing mechanisms if they prove successful during the first commitment period. "When a model is seen as effective, it's hard to swim against the tide," Dr. Victor says [David Victor, director of the Program on Energy and Sustainable Development at Stanford]. [Source: Peter N. Spotts (staff writer - Christian Science Monitor), "Emissions pact goes forward; But tougher work of cutting greenhouse gases under Kyoto Protocol remains", The Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), October 7, 2004, p. 11]

[nuclear.com explanation: this seems irrational because, if the mechanisms are successful in avoiding the incredibly high costs for very little return, then the US and perhaps the developing nations won't be so averse to joining in.]

Goulson et al: 3¡C temperature rise will double Britain's fly and maggot population

Britain's fly and maggot population will double in the next few decades, increasing the spread of disease, according to a study by Dr. David Goulson, a biologist at Southampton University. Researchers investigating the effects of global warming have found that a three-degree rise in temperature will boost the number of house flies by 97 per cent. Dr. Goulson based his prediction on a four-year study of house flies at a landfill site. The findings are due to be published in a peer reviewed journal this year.

[Source: The Telegraph (London), "U.K. warned of fly in ointment", in The Calgary Herald (Alberta), October 7, 2004, p. A9]

October 6, 2004

Kyoto will affect USA because competitors will be forced to be more efficient

The United States will not rejoin the treaty in the near future, but in the long run, the protocol imposes a discipline on energy use in America's industrial rivals that will make them more efficient and push them into new technologies. Concerns about economic competitiveness may drive Washington back to the negotiating table even before the tangible evidence of climate change convinces American public opinion of the need to do so.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

EU CO2 allowances leave room for 11% increase in emissions by 2007 (compared to 2000)

U.K.-based Enviros Consulting says that carbon dioxide emissions in the European Union could rise under the emissions trading scheme that will be implemented Jan. 1, 2005. Enviros projects that on the basis of allowances allocated to existing facilities covered by the ETS, European industry will be allowed to increase annual carbon dioxide emissions by 5 percent during the first phase of the scheme (2005-2007) relative to their emissions in 2000. Additional allowances set aside for the construction of new plants will permit an additional increase of 6 percent. These increases are in stark contrast to the commitments of [EU] member states under the Kyoto Protocol, which require a collective reduction in emissions across all EU 15 countries of 8 percent by 2010 from 1990 levels, Enviros said. Under business as usual emissions from existing plants would increase by 7 percent between 2000 and 2006. Consequently, the net reduction associated with existing plants would be only 2 percent. This shortfall would stimulate a moderate degree of market activity and, based on our analysis, would see prices settle in the region of [$6] per ton, Enviros said. Even if allowances are tightened in phase II of the scheme (2008-2012) and allowance prices rise significantly, the stimulus necessary to make the required investments will be lacking. This is principally due to the long asset lives of most capital assets in the energy sector compared to the relatively short period over which the EU ETS incentives will exist and the perceived risks associated with tradable environmental instruments, Enviros concluded.

[Source: The Electricity Daily, "Could UK Emissions Rise Under Trading?", October 7, 2004]

Climate alarmism - no solid grounds for assumption, shared by UK's Blair and Howard, that immediate and far-reaching action is necessary

Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition made major speeches last week on climate change and the policies that are supposedly required to deal with it (reports, September 14 and 15). It appears that, in this area, Tony Blair and Michael Howard are of one mind. They hold the same alarmist view of the world, and call for much the same radical -- and costly -- programme of action. Both leaders assert that prospective climate change, arising from human activity, clearly poses a grave and imminent threat to the world. Such statements give too much credence to some current sombre assessments and dark scenarios, and pay no heed to the great uncertainties which still prevail in relation to the causes and consequences of climate change. There are no solid grounds for assuming, as Messrs Blair and Howard do, that global warming demands immediate and far-reaching action.

[Source: Lord Lawson of Blaby (Nigel Lawson, former U.K. chancellor of the exchequer) and others, "Political action on climate change", letter to The Times (London), September 24, 2004, p. 23]

Russia - majority of Duma supports ratification, sez Speaker Gryzlov

Mikhail Fradkov, Russia's prime minister, signed a government order Wednesday officially approving the Kyoto Protocol on climate change and sending it to President Vladimir Putin, who is to submit it to parliament for ratification. When the Cabinet approved ratification six days ago, Fradkov said the pact would likely face tough debate in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly (the lower parliament house). But Duma speaker Boris Gryzlov said Tuesday that a majority of the deputies support ratification. First Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov has said that a vote in the Duma - which is dominated by the Kremlin-controlled United Russia party - was expected this month.

[Source: The Associated Press, "Russian prime minister signs order approving Kyoto Protocol", October 6, 2004 4:10 am ET]

Russia parliament will ratify Kyoto, predicts upper-house chair Mironov

The Federal Assembly (two-house parliament) of Russia will ratify the Kyoto protocol, believes upper house chairman Sergei Mironov. "There are all grounds to believe that Russia, having signed and ratified the agreement, will not suffer much," Mr. Mironov told a Wednesday press conference. He stressed that in his opinion, joining the Kyoto protocol is rather a political than an economic decision. "There is political pragmatism, and in the long run, I believe, we can ratify the Kyoto protocol provided a number of conditions," said Mr. Mironov. He explained that these might be oral agreements. "As for me, having received pragmatic explanations from the government on ratification of the Kyoto protocol, I am ready to back it," he said. Mr. Mironov added that for the protocol to be ratified by both houses of the Federal Assembly, the government had to provide clear explanations. "When we know what Russia's advantage is, in the long run pragmatism will dominate," Mr. Mironov said.

[Source: RIA Novosti (Russia), "Russian Premier Signs Resolution On Kyoto Protocol", October 6, 2004]

Russia was offered enticements from EU for Kyoto, including visa-free travel

Why did Russian President Vladimir Putin decide to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change last week, only six months after his top adviser, Andrei Illarionov, called it a "death treaty"? One reason is that the European Union offered Russians visa-free travel within the 25-country bloc, plus EU support for Russia's membership in the World Trade Organisation...

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

Russia's de facto veto power over Kyoto put it in position to extract goodies from EU

The treaty that the Bush administration thought it had killed lives again. Why? ... The Bush administration was deceiving itself if it thought that Russia was really opposed to Kyoto; Moscow was simply playing hard to get. The only real reason that Moscow delayed ratification was that the Bush administration had given Russia what amounted to a veto on the treaty, which it then used to extort major concessions from the European Union. That game is over.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

Kyoto - rules for all who have ratified take effect 90 days after (if) Russia ratifies it

Once it is ratified, the rules of the [Kyoto] accord will be up and running in 90 days.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

Kyoto - next round negotiations begin in 2008, with goal in mind of bring developing nations on board to achieve global 60% cut in emissions

Talks on the next round of targets, running to 2020, will start in 2008. They are bound to include much deeper cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by industrial countries, and this time, developing countries will have to be included in the limits, too. Ultimately, scientists estimate that cuts of about 60 per cent are needed globally to avoid runaway climate change, mass extinctions and a catastrophic rise in sea levels. But at least the principle that every country has a responsibility for the global climate has been accepted, and stabilisation of industrial country emissions (the US and Australia apart) is on the way. ... [The 1997 protocol] exempted developing countries like China and India from quotas until the next bargaining round, on the grounds that the current problem was mostly caused by the developed nations.

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

Kyoto - an expensive solution that might not work, for a problem that might not exist

Bad news for Canada: Kyoto is alive again -- an international treaty that proposes a solution that might not work, to a problem that might not exist. In yesterday's Throne Speech, Ottawa vowed to implement the Kyoto Protocol. It will cost billions and negatively impact on our economy. It requires the creation of a huge bureaucracy - no wonder the federal Liberals couldn't resist. Cost estimates vary from $17 to $45 billion. No matter which figure, it's money that could be spent on health care or our deteriorating urban infrastructure. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation says increased prices and taxes from Kyoto will cost each family $2,700. ... Canada has no plan/clue as to how it will accomplish its requirements -- despite spending billions. It's committing Canadians to pay big bucks for a popular idea -- not an action plan. We only know fuel will be more pricey, costs and taxes on industry products will rise, unemployment will as well and fuel rationing is possible. Despite opting out of Kyoto, the U. S. has also spent billions and is already creating technology to reduce emissions. Most importantly, scientists are divided as to whether Kyoto is needed -- or will work. It's based on computer modeling that relies on unpredictable factors and prominent scientists are requesting that it be shut down. It defies common sense to commit so much money to so much uncertainty. But Kyoto's bureaucratic machinery is too big to be stopped and its commitment to indulging environmentalists is too sacred to be broken.

[Source: Susan Martinuk (Vancouver columnist), "Kyoto more a costly idea than an action plan", The Vancouver Province (British Columbia), October 6, 2004, p. A20]

Canada - "the world's top polluter", sez Vancouver columnist

Yes, Canada is a global bad boy... For all our talk, we [Canada] are one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the world. From 1990 to 2000, our emissions increased by 10 per cent: more than the OECD average of 4.8 per cent and the U.S. rate of seven per cent. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities reports that if everyone in the world consumed resources at Canada's rate, we would need four more planets like Earth to sustain humanity. The irony is rich. Canadians believe we are an environmentally-friendly country, yet we're the world's top polluter. In contrast, we demonize the U.S. as the global leader of environmental evil.

[Source: Susan Martinuk (Vancouver columnist), "Kyoto more a costly idea than an action plan", The Vancouver Province (British Columbia), October 6, 2004, p. A20]

Kyoto may exacerbate emissions

Every reasonable indication suggests Kyoto is not the right thing and some scientists say it may exacerbate emissions.

[Source: Susan Martinuk (Vancouver columnist), "Kyoto more a costly idea than an action plan", The Vancouver Province (British Columbia), October 6, 2004, p. A20]

Europe-US rift over Kyoto was headline news during Clinton administration, too

It takes little research to discover front pages blaring, margin-to-margin, "Europe-U.S. Rift Widens," bemoaning U.S. unilateralism. "Chirac Remarks Provoke Pessimist U.S. Senators." One inside page juxtaposes "German Scolds U.S." and "Chirac says what others mumble." The complaint? U.S. refusal to accept Kyoto's terms. The dateline? The Hague, November 2000, during the Clinton administration.

The U.S. refusal to accept the EU suddenly changing key terms came during negotiations coinciding with the 2000 Florida recount. The party that ultimately walked away from the deal, after seeking to muscle desperate Al Gore acolytes into ridiculous concessions was the EU. The leader of the U.S. delegation seeking to save this treaty from EU perfidy? John F. Kerry.

It's true. Look it up. Particularly enjoy the visibly saddened, saddened Kerry working the phones to avert the EU tanking a struck deal, prominent in the Nov. 22 Earth Times. ... Yes, in fact the EU killed Kyoto in 2000 by mendaciously seeking to change critical terms on a vulnerable United States. For this, we should be ever thankful, despite the sloppy and/or agenda-driven reportage to the contrary. The United States said "no" to the EU's proffered Kyoto terms under Clinton-Gore. Bush has not altered Clinton's stance on Kyoto in any way other than saying he doesn't like it.

[Source: Christopher Horner (attorney, director - Cooler Heads Coalition), "Kerry's curious Kyoto claim", United Press International, October 6, 2004 3:03 am ET

Clinton fought hard, in vain, for CTBT ratification, but not for Kyoto

To review, President Clinton agreed to Kyoto on Dec. 1, 1997, yet steadfastly refused over more than three years to send it to the Senate for ratification. Yet he did not fail to promote the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. He demanded a vote, and campaigned hard. Senate Republicans received a briefing by attorney Douglas Feith (now at the Pentagon civilian) warning of the commitments that actually do accompany un-renounced treaty signatures. They called his bluff and a major fight ensued. CTBT lost. No such vote has still ever occurred on Kyoto. The reason is that President Bush, too, refuses to transmit the treaty to the Senate. He did, however, say mean things about it, which journalists accepted as sufficient.

[Source: Christopher Horner (attorney, director - Cooler Heads Coalition), "Kerry's curious Kyoto claim", United Press International, October 6, 2004 3:03 am ET

Kyoto - USA has not, contrary to popular opinion, legally rid itself of commitments incurred when Clinton signed the treaty

... President Bush, too, refuses to transmit the treaty to the Senate. He did, however, say mean things about it, which journalists accepted as sufficient. In fact, uttered words have no meaning in this context, and environmentalist groups have already prepared lawsuits that could turn on the fact that the United States never actually "unsigned" Kyoto. Like Clinton-Gore, Bush has told his base what it wants to hear but made no effort to consummate his promise, leaving the matter for his [successor] to conclude as he sees fit. A simple review of the State Department's Web site would inform the intrepid journalist -- or angry European -- that the requisite step for an executive to reject a signed-but-not-ratified treaty is glaringly absent. ... Bush has not altered Clinton's stance on Kyoto in any way other than saying he doesn't like it. That is meaningless, as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Article 18), customary international law, and even section 312 of The Restatement of the Law of Foreign Relations will tell you. No diplomat does not know both of these facts. [During Clinton push to get CTBT ratified,] Senate Republicans received a briefing by attorney Douglas Feith (now at the Pentagon civilian) warning of the commitments that actually do accompany un-renounced treaty signatures.

[Source: Christopher Horner (attorney, director - Cooler Heads Coalition), "Kerry's curious Kyoto claim", United Press International, October 6, 2004 3:03 am ET

Climate change - Dr. Bellamy explains basis for his argument

My argument (about climate change) . . . is based on the past record of natural climatic change, and questions how a rise in the tiny amount of carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere could have such a drastic effect when water vapour makes up some 96% of all the greenhouse gases.

[Source: David Bellamy, letter to George Monbiot reprinted in "Blow by blow ...", The Guardian (London), October 6, 2004, p. 12]

Climate change - moving into first "hot period" in mankind's history, sez Sir David King

... Sir David King, the British government's chief scientific adviser, who said in July: "We are moving from a warm period into the first hot period that man has ever experienced since he walked on the planet."

[Source: Gwynne Dyer (London-based independent journalist), "Earth to Russia: thank you", South China Morning Post, October 6, 2004, p. 13]

Kyoto - no climate benefits

"There will be no benefits to the atmosphere or the climate." [Dr. Singer was commenting on Russia signing up to Kyoto Protocol on climate change].

[Source: Fred Singer (president - Science and Environmental Policy Project), quoted in "Eco Quotes", The Guardian (London), October 6, 2004, p. 12]

Warming - we might lose Holland

"What's wrong with global warming? We might lose Holland . . . but there are other places to go on holiday."

[Source: Jeremy Clarkson [(right) in the Sun], quoted in "Eco Quotes", The Guardian (London), October 6, 2004, p. 12]

CO2 & climate change - yet another way of saying "the science is settled" used by columnist George Monbiot

[Re:] whether or not man-made climate change is taking place. The science is now as unequivocal as the science of a complex system can be.

[Source: George Monbiot, letter to David Bellamy reprinted in "Blow by blow ...", The Guardian (London), October 6, 2004, p. 12]

Climate change - example of positing, then sloughing off, caveat re: the science is settled enough

Although there is no certain scientific causation between human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and the El Nino phenomenon, it is clear that our emissions are changing the climate.

[Source: Shane Olsen (Sandy Bay), "Russia clears the way", letter to editor, The Mercury (Australia), October 6, 2004]

Climate change issue framed as restoring Earth's health, as if some damage has already been done

... [T]he Kyoto protocol [is an] ... international effort ... to restore the health of the planet. Future generations will wonder at our [Australia's] choices that place economic wealth before ecological prosperity.

[Source: Melanie Fitzpatrick (Climate scientist - Cascades), "Russia clears the way", letter to editor, The Mercury (Australia), October 6, 2004]

October 3, 2004

Greenhouse gas emissions - increasing state regulation, fragmented, will likely prompt industry to beg Congress to act, sez Pew's Claussen

Ultimately, domestic developments might have more of an impact on U.S. policy [than international pressure], such as the decision by 10 Northeastern and mid-Atlantic states to develop a cap-and-trade carbon emissions program, which is due to be unveiled next spring. California is drafting standards to reduce automobile greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent, and New York may follow. Seventeen states, including Texas, have renewable energy requirements for electricity production.

"At some point, industry's going to throw up its hands and say we don't want to be regulated by 35 different states," said Claussen [Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Climate Change], who also served in the Clinton administration and predicted this would influence "how Congress will move on this, no matter who is president."

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Washington Post staff writer), "U.S. Firms Look Ahead To Emissions Cuts Overseas; Whether Russia Ratifies Treaty Is Key", The Washington Post, October 3, 2004, p. A13]

CO2 emissions trading stats - doubled in 2003 to 78-million tons, and expected to double again in 2004

Europe has moved ahead with a carbon emissions trading system without the United States, kicking off a program in January that affects 12,000 installations across the continent. European countries traded 2.5 million tons of emissions allowances last year, according to the New York-based emissions trading firm Natsource. Global carbon dioxide trading rose from 29 million tons in 2002 to 78 million tons last year and is expected to double again this year.

[Source: Juliet Eilperin (Washington Post staff writer), "U.S. Firms Look Ahead To Emissions Cuts Overseas; Whether Russia Ratifies Treaty Is Key", The Washington Post, October 3, 2004, p. A13]

October 2, 2004

Kyoto - costs are so bad, and social effects so great, that EU politicians will get out of meeting commitments

... Kyoto will also ultimately prove to be an economic disaster for Europe - and the developing world... [I]t will ... carry with it excessive economic costs that will stifle economic growth and thereby undermine research into alternative technologies...

In reality, the economic and social costs of Kyoto will be so great that European politicians will never actually deliver. As with a host of other promises, weasel words and get-outs will be used, while key targets are missed. One has only to look at the politics surrounding the European Stability Pact to see how politicians use obfuscation and rhetoric to get around such commitments. The economics of Kyoto are so bad for Europe that it will never be turned into a reality.

I believe that European and developing countries need to have environmental policies that promote, rather than hinder, economic growth and human prosperity. It is only by basing decisions on sound science and by encouraging economically viable solutions that we will all be able to move forward.

[Source: Tim Evans (President and Director-General - Centre for the New Europe, Brussels), "Kyoto will chill the global economy", letter to the editor, The Daily Telegraph (London), October 2, 2004, p. 27]

Canada - more people support Kyoto Protocol than have heard of it

A CROP poll released on Sept. 5 ... While 81 per cent of Canadians say they support the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, nearly two-thirds have no idea what it is about, and half have never heard of it. Support for Kyoto shrinks, however, as people understand its impact.

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Canada - Kyoto will cost about as much as health care

[A] Fraser Institute study pegs the annual cost of Kyoto at $4,700 per Canadian for the next five years, about the same as per-capita health-care spending.

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Canada - Kyoto's de facto financial penalty for immigration will cost billions

... because Canada's immigration laws will produce increases in population (and therefore greenhouse-gas emissions) beyond that which Europe, for instance, will experience, "the federal government will likely have to buy billions of dollars of credits on our citizens' behalf," says Mr. Fink. (George Fink, environment committee chair of Calgary's 340-member Small Explorers and Producers Association of Canada)

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Canada - utility benefits financially from Kyoto-style clean development mechanism

On Aug. 24, Canada's second-largest single emitter of greenhouse gases announced the first Canadian purchase of certified emission reductions from a Chilean company under the Kyoto Protocol... TransAlta ... will recover the costs from consumers by increasing electricity rates, says George Fink, environment committee chair of Calgary's 340-member Small Explorers and Producers Association of Canada. "It may even be a benefit to a utility, since utilities are usually guaranteed a rate of return on expenditures."

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Kyoto - at best, unnecessary; at worst, for Canada, will destroy capability to adapt to climate change

Canadians want to conserve resources and to restore those that have been damaged, but Kyoto -- at best an idealistic if misguided scheme to ameliorate climate change -- isn't needed to achieve this. On the contrary, Kyoto could, in the worst-case scenario, set the stage for cynical manipulation of nations, corporations and taxpayers that will bankrupt and ultimately destroy our ability to adapt to fluctuating and uncontrollable changes in the climate.

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Kyoto ineffective - excludes developing world emissions

... Kyoto ... will ... be ineffective because it fails to take account of emissions in the developing world...

[Source: Tim Evans (President and Director-General - Centre for the New Europe, Brussels), "Kyoto will chill the global economy", letter to the editor, The Daily Telegraph (London), October 2, 2004, p. 27]

Canada - CO2 emissions are insignificant

... reductions in Canada's carbon-dioxide emissions will have virtually no impact on the direct and indirect emissions of the world's 6.3 billion people and natural emissions such as forest fires, ocean vapours, active volcanoes and plant decomposition

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Emissions trading - income redistribution between nations, and within multinational corporations

... trading emissions effectively redistributes income between nations and between branch plants of multinational corporations.

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Climate - uncertain that human effects warrant big expense

Perhaps we are devoting too many resources to correcting human effects on the climate without being sure that we are the major contributor.

[Source: Dr. Bill Burrows (climatologist, member, Royal Meteorological Society of Britain), quoted by Margret Kopala (columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Global temperature - evidence that (pre-industrial) 15th century was hotter, and that sun drives recent warming

... the causes, remedies and even the existence of climate change remain controversial. While no one disputes that temperatures rose during the 20th century, Tim Patterson of Carleton University has written how the 15th century may have been hotter, with higher temperature peaks. In addition, University of Ottawa professor Ian Clark has shown how temperature peaks and valleys since 1860 more closely relate to solar sunspot activity than they do to carbon dioxide emissions. Not so surprisingly, he concludes, the sun is driving climate warming, not carbon dioxide.

[Source: Margret Kopala (western Canada perspectives columnist - Ottawa Citizen), "Kyoto's benefits aren't worth the cost", Ottawa Citizen, October 2, 2004, p. B7]

Sir David King explains his peculiar behavior at Moscow seminar last summer

Dr Madhav Khandekar accused me of behaving in a "peculiar fashion" at the recent climate change seminar in Moscow (Letters, Sept 25). In brief, this is what happened.

In February, the president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Yuri Osipov, and I agreed to co-organise a joint Britain-Russia one-day meeting on the current state of climate change science. A programme was jointly agreed, bringing together key British and Russian experts for a serious scientific discussion.

Yet even as I was heading to the airport, a totally different two-day programme was sent to me. The event was no longer to be jointly chaired, and Academician Osipov had a much reduced role. The revised programme was designed to give prime time to a handful of climate change sceptics.

Despite this, the British delegation contributed as fully as possible, and I addressed the conference as planned.

[Source: Sir David King (Chief Scientific Adviser, UK), letter to the editor, The Daily Telegraph (London), October 2, 2004, p. 27]

Climate change scientists - very clear consensus that much of the last 50 years' warming is anthropogenic

The very clear consensus of climate change scientists is that we are experiencing global warming, and that much of it over the past 50 years is anthropogenically driven. The science of understanding this process, far from being immature, is firmly based on work performed by leading scientists in the 19th and 20th centuries. Much work still needs to be done, though, on the impacts of global warming on different countries and population groups, and on adaptation and mitigation measures to reduce or avoid the most dangerous outcomes.

[Source: Sir David King (Chief Scientific Adviser, UK), letter to the editor, The Daily Telegraph (London), October 2, 2004, p. 27]

Global warming - increasingly uncertain scientific basis

... the scientific basis of global warming [is] increasingly uncertain ...

[Source: Tim Evans (President and Director-General - Centre for the New Europe, Brussels), "Kyoto will chill the global economy", letter to the editor, The Daily Telegraph (London), October 2, 2004, p. 27]

Once Kyoto Protocol comes into force, carbon credit trade will entice Australia, and perhaps USA too

Greenpeace energy and climate change team leader Catherine Fitzgerald said the Russian decision to ratify inevitably meant Australia would sign the Kyoto protocol, no matter which party won the coming election. If Kyoto Protocol comes into force, Australia and the US would be isolated from the benefits of a new global trade in carbon credits, Labor federal environment spokesman Kelvin Thomson explained.

[Source: Nigel Wilson and Bernard Lane (MATP), "Greenhouse rift underscored by Russian move to sign Kyoto - Election 2004", The Weekend Australian, October 2, 2004, p. 10]

Australia - has already done better than Kyoto specified, despite not signing on

The ALP (Labor Party) has committed to signing Kyoto before Christmas if it is elected. But the Howard Government maintains that Australia is one of only three countries that has exceeded its Kyoto targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, so a formal treaty is not necessary.

[Source: Nigel Wilson and Bernard Lane (MATP), "Greenhouse rift underscored by Russian move to sign Kyoto - Election 2004", The Weekend Australian, October 2, 2004, p. 10]

Kyoto Protocol an essential first step, sez UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan hailed Russia's move [towards ratification of Kyoto Protocol]. "This is the essential first step in tackling the planetary challenge posed by climate change," Mr Annan said in a statement.

[Source: Agence France Presse, "US resists Russian embrace of Kyoto", The Weekend Australian, October 2, 2004, p. 17]

Kyoto will, without US, reduce emissions 0.6%, not original target of 5.2%

Without the US on board, the overall reduction in emissions is likely to be 0.6 per cent if Kyoto is honoured, well below the initial target of 5.2 per cent, according to the US-based environment group World Resources Institute.

[Source: Agence France Presse, "US resists Russian embrace of Kyoto", The Weekend Australian, October 2, 2004, p. 17]

US sez each nation should decide whether Kyoto is in its own interest, as US has done, and as Russia is doing

The US stood firm in rejecting the Kyoto Protocol on global warming yesterday despite renewed pressure to yield after Russia ended years of hesitation by moving to ratify the treaty. The US State Department had no comment on the decision by the Russian cabinet to submit the document to the Duma for approval, but said Washington remained committed in its own way to battling climate change.

"The US position on the Kyoto Protocol has not changed," spokesman Richard Boucher said. "We thought at this point it wasn't the right thing for the US, but it's up to other nations to independently evaluate whether ratification is in their national interest."

[Source: Agence France Presse, "US resists Russian embrace of Kyoto", The Weekend Australian, October 2, 2004, p. 17]

Kyoto - 2nd-step negotiations begin next year, with eye on India, China

Negotiations open next year on the post-2012 Kyoto targets, and fast-growing countries like India and China will be under intensifying pressure to join industrialised countries in agreeing to targeted reductions.

[Source: AAP, "Russia to go green; New Kyoto affiliation welcomed", Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia), October 2, 2004, p. 38]

Kyoto - Russian cabinet decision prompts chorus of delight in EU, UN

Heading the chorus of delight after the Russian cabinet approved the Protocol and sent it to lawmakers to ratify was the EU, which has been battling to save an accord mauled by a US walkout. "This is a huge success for the international fight against climate change," declared European Commission chief Romano Prodi. In Bonn, Joke Waller-Hunter, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto's parent treaty, said Putin had sent "an inspiring signal to the international community".

[Source: AAP, "Russia to go green; New Kyoto affiliation welcomed", Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia), October 2, 2004, p. 38]

Kyoto countries will enjoy an advantage denied to non-signatories, sez UNFCCC head

Defenders of the Kyoto Protocol, led by Europe, challenged the United States and Australia to join the fight against climate change after Russia, ending years of hesitation, took steps to ratify the United Nations' global warming treaty. The UN suggested Russia's move would put pressure on Australia to also sign up to Kyoto. ... In a veiled warning to holdouts Australia and the United States, Ms Waller-Hunter [Joke Waller-Hunter, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto's parent treaty] said Kyoto countries would enjoy an advantage denied to non-signatories.

[Source: AAP, "Russia to go green; New Kyoto affiliation welcomed", Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia), October 2, 2004, p. 38]

Kyoto - "meaningless, ineffective and toothless", sez utility lobbyist Maisano

Russian ratification "is largely symbolic," Mr Maisano [Frank Maisano, a Washington lobbyist for the US utilities industry] said in a newsletter, describing the treaty as "meaningless, ineffective and toothless".

[Source: AAP, "Russia to go green; New Kyoto affiliation welcomed", Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia), October 2, 2004, p. 38]

Greenhouse gas emission cuts of 60% may be needed to stave off the worst

... by some scientific estimates, a massive 60 per cent cut [in greenhouse gas emissions] is needed to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.

[Source: AAP, "Russia to go green; New Kyoto affiliation welcomed", Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia), October 2, 2004, p. 38]

Japan govt considering environment tax as essential tool in meeting Kyoto Protocol target

Corporate Japan is preparing to step up its criticism of a proposed tax aimed at curbing carbon dioxide emissions -- an idea that was tabled years ago but only now looks likely to become a reality. Calls for the environment tax will likely gain momentum following the Russian Cabinet's decision on Thursday to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, ... which obliges industrialized economies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, [and] is expected to take effect as early as the first half of 2005. An environment tax, which would include a carbon tax on fossil fuels, is gaining support within the environment and agriculture ministries, which see it as an essential tool to reduce the use of fossil fuels. The two ministries for the first time included calls for the creation of the tax in their requests for tax revisions for next fiscal year. The specifics of the environment tax differ widely depending on the proponent, however. The move has sparked fierce opposition from industry executives, particularly heavy users of fossil fuels such as coal and oil. Companies say an additional financial burden unique to Japan would undermine their international competitiveness. ... Government ministries are far from unanimous on the need for the environment tax, however. The industry ministry, heeding calls from various industries, has traditionally taken a dim view of the proposal. The Finance Ministry is also circumspect, saying it is still unclear whether the new tax will be effective in containing greenhouse gas emissions. Hiromitsu Ishi, chairman of the government's Tax Commission, said Friday it will be difficult to introduce the environment tax next year because the government will have to look into a variety of options.

[Source: The Asahi Shimbun, "Environment tax ruffles corporate feathers", October 2, 2004]

Japan - carbon tax could prompt steel industry to move overseas

At a news conference on Sept. 17, Akio Mimura, chairman of the Japan Iron and Steel Federation, warned that steelmakers will have no choice but to relocate production abroad if the environment tax is introduced. According to the federation's estimate, the steel industry would owe 150 billion yen ($1.36 billion) in additional taxes if carbon dioxide emissions are subject to an environment tax of 818 yen ($7.44) per ton.

[Source: The Asahi Shimbun, "Environment tax ruffles corporate feathers", October 2, 2004]

Japan - voluntary programs have reduced industrial greenhouse emissions to below 1990 levels, but not enough to meet Kyoto Protocol target

Nippon Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) maintains that greenhouse gas emissions should be curtailed through voluntary private-sector efforts, not by coercive steps like an environment tax. Since 1997, various industry associations have been trying to cut emissions based on the voluntary action programs they formulated under the initiative of Nippon Keidanren's predecessor. Nippon Keidanren officials say voluntary efforts have been paying off, but emissions from the industry sector in fiscal 2002 fell only 1.7 percent from their fiscal 1990 level. A government target, set in 2002, calls for a 7-percent cut in industry-sector emissions by 2008-2012. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Japan promised to cut its annual average emissions of greenhouse gases from 2008 to 2012 by 6 percent from the 1990 level.

[Source: The Asahi Shimbun, "Environment tax ruffles corporate feathers", October 2, 2004]

Jet fuel taxes, long held at bay, may well crop up

The International Civil Aviation Organization has discouraged member states from introducing carbon dioxide emissions charges related to aviation fuel. Many in the EU, however, think the time is nigh. A couple of weeks ago, EU Energy & Transport Commissioner Loyola de Palacio said that aviation emissions of CO2 need to be addressed internationally, "otherwise ICAO will lose its credibility as a forum for addressing aviation environmental issues". During his successful confirmation hearing last week, EU transport commissioner Jacques Barrot said that, "When fuel prices have settled down we'll be able to look at the question of the tax exemption for aviation fuel because there, too, there are risks of distortion of competition" with other types of transportation. Last week, the issue of climate change was at top of agenda at the 35th Assembly of the ICAO, with expectation that guidelines for member states will soon be issued.

The International Air Transport Association wants to be sure that the aviation industry doesn't get snared by imposition of policies which haven't been tailored to aviation's specific characteristics. More efficient traffic control management systems would save fuel use, they note.

[Source: Jet Fuel Intelligence, "Climate Change Takes Center Stage At ICAO Assembly", October 4, 2004]

Green-worshipping "elite" media stifles climate change realists

British professor David Bellamy is a botanist famous for saving endangered species. But now he's a famous victim of endangered speech -- speech stifled by "elite" journalists when it challenges their green religion. ... "[G]lobal warming -- at least the modern nightmare version -- is a myth", Bellamy declares. It is "largely a natural phenomenon that has been with us for 13,000 years and probably isn't causing us any harm". Putting more carbon dioxide in the air just means giving plants more of the "most important airborne fertiliser in the world". Yet we "may be about to divert billions, nay trillions of pounds, dollars and roubles into solving a problem that doesn't exist."

Such waste. If you relied on The Age for your news, this would seem shocking. You'd protest: So why is no one else saying this? Oh, they do. But let me show you how even the experts suffer endangered speech when they say "wrong" things. ABC's PM program, while covering Bellamy's trip, quoted three of his green critics, but no supporters. Melissa Fyfe, The Age's environment reporter, did even better. In her news report, she warned us off Bellamy with the false claim that he'd "aligned himself to a small, discredited group of scientists", and "lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry". ... And she gave more room to the views of two of his critics -- both greens -- than she gave to those of Bellamy himself. Naturally, no supporters were quoted.

This kind of loaded reporting is, sadly, usual in such outlets. Indeed, The Age ran a staff profile of Fyfe, saying: "She worries that the global warming issue has been distorted in some sections of the media. In the pursuit of balance, climate change sceptics are so often approached for comment it seems there is a 50-50 split of scientific opinion."

Bad news for Fyfe. There is indeed a deep split, even if it's not reported in the proudly unbalanced "elite" media.

There are sceptics everywhere, and no wonder... Claims that humans cause most warming are "more junk science than solid evidence", says a new study from Delaware University's Center for Climatic Research, and "temperature trends do not show unprecedented warming". Predictions of a much hotter world are "highly misleading," adds the Danish Academy for Futures Studies.

In fact, much recent warming may have been caused by a brighter sun, Germany's Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research says. And so on.

There is no certainty about what causes global warming, or how bad it is. But what is sure is that those who say so will be treated by a green-worshipping "elite" media as cranks, and suffer endangered speech.

[Source: Andrew Bolt, "Greenies see red; Bellamy stifled over global warming 'myth'", Sunday Herald Sun (Melbourne, Australia), October 3, 2004, p. 23]

Climate - the Oregon Petition Project has not been discredited; but rather independently verified

Melissa Fyfe, The Age's environment reporter... said a petition by scientists that he [British professor David Bellamy] cited in his support was likewise "discredited". ... [T]he petition Fyfe called "discredited" was actually organised by a past president of the United States Academy of Sciences, Professor Frederick Seitz, and signed by 17,800 independently verified scientists, including climatologists and geophysicists, some prominent in their field. Their claim? "Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons (such as fossil fuels) is harmful." The Kyoto Accord is a mistake.

[Source: Andrew Bolt, "Greenies see red; Bellamy stifled over global warming 'myth'", Sunday Herald Sun (Melbourne, Australia), October 3, 2004, p. 23]

September 27, 2004

National Research Council report on climate feedbacks an example of social "consensus", downplaying uncertainty

An upcoming journal paper in Environmental Science & Policy sheds some light on the distortion of climate science by "consensus" politics. Daniel Sarewitz of Arizona State University, who was on one panel that authored a 2003 climate report for the National Academies of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC), provides an inside view of the NRC report's publication process, and details what outsiders may get as "consensus." It isn't what most people would expect from a scientific body... [T]he charge to the NRC panelists was ... sensible, as it was embodied by the title of the draft report: "Climate Change Feedbacks: Characterizing and Reducing Uncertainties." ... But along the way, discussion on research uncertainties was shifted to an insistence that science should look as tidy as possible - a social consensus. As Sarewitz notes, the final NRC report title omitted the highlight on uncertainties, and read merely "Understanding Climate Change Feedbacks."

Source: Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, "Uncertainties about global warming", Scripps Howard News Service, September 27, 2004 1:21Êpm ET

Kyoto, based on misanthropic ideology, is an attack on human civilization

Andrei Illarionov, President Vladimir Putin's top economic adviser, told an investment conference that if Russia is to double gross domestic product in 10 years, as Putin called for in 2002, its carbon dioxide emissions would likely exceed the limits set in the 1997 treaty that aims to combat global warming, Interfax reported.

Illarionov likened emissions controls set by the pact to the Soviet Union's Communist-era central economic planning system, Interfax reported.

"The Kyoto Protocol, based on misanthropic ideology, is the broadest, most interventionist, aggressive attack on economic growth, science and human civilization," the agency quoted him as saying.

Source: Associated Press, "Russia's loudest Kyoto critic speaks out again", Associated Press Worldstream, September 27, 2004 2:07 pm ET

Newly-added "oldies"

February 2004

Hansen didn't want to testify about global warming in winter 1987, preferred the height of summer 1988

Global warming first became big news as a doomsday scenario about 15 years agoÑjust as the Soviet bloc was about to collapse. A joint session of Congress held hearings on global warming as a possible threat to life on earth. The environmentalist lobby Friends of the Earth (FOE) arranged for a NASA scientist named James Hansen to testify. Officially, Hansen would be speaking as a private citizen to avoid having his testimony edited by his employers, the (first) Bush White House.

Hansen was originally invited to address Congress in November 1987 but protested to FOE that in the cold of autumn, his remarks wouldnÕt get much attention. Instead, the following summer, on June 23, 1988, during a drought, with the temperature at 101 degrees Fahrenheit in Washington, D.C., Hansen spoke. He testified that according to computer simulations he and other scientists had been developing, the hot weather was no mere summer heat wave but a sign of much worse to come.

There is Òa strong cause-and-effect relationship,Ó he said, Òbetween the current climate and human alteration of the atmosphere.Ó Impatient with the scientific etiquette of probability and uncertainty, Hansen told reporters afterward, ÒItÕs time to stop waffling so much, and [to] say that the greenhouse effect is here and affecting our climate now.Ó

HansenÕs remarks made a sensation in the media, and Hansen himself was lionized by Senator Al Gore in the Senate and later in GoreÕs best-selling book, Earth in the Balance. By 1990 President George H. W. Bush and the Senate cooperated to begin spending more than $1 billion per year to fund scientists at universities and institutes to study global warming.

[Source: Duncan Maxwell Anderson (upstate New York science, religion, and politics writer),"The EmperorÕs New Climate: Is Global Warming Real?", Crisis Magazine, February 2004]

$10-billion wasted over last 15 years in welfare program for climate modelers

IÕm shocked by the lengths some scientist-believers go for the global warming cause, and I mention this to Patrick J. MichaelsÑa climatologist, professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute, and author of The Satanic Gases: Clearing the Air About Global Warming.

Michaels is surprised that IÕm surprised.

He says: ÒNo one in Washington gets large grants by saying something isnÕt a problem. Meanwhile, the $10 billion thrown at climate modeling research in the last 15 years was wasted.Ó

I protest, ÒWhereÕs their concern for the truth? Some of these guys are worse than the politicians!Ó

ÒI believe you guys in the Catholic Church have a concept called original sin,Ó Michaels explains. ÒPicture this: ItÕs 1992 and thereÕs a hearing. Senator Albert Gore says he thinks global warming is a serious issue, and do you think it would be worthwhile to spend $1 billion or so studying it? No one is going to speak up and say itÕs an overblown problem. If he did, all his colleagues would take out their knives and throw them into his back before he could leave the hearing room.Ó The result is a theory of impending doom thatÕs hard to test, since the proof is 100 years away. In the meantime, you could argue that it has become a form of welfare for liberal scientists.

Michaels is fond of bringing in Thomas KuhnÕs thinking from The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: Scientists have created a global-warming paradigm for themselves that benefits themÑas a cause and as a livelihood. They wonÕt easily be dissuaded from it. According to Kuhn, scientists tend to resist new information that upsets their paradigm till a new paradigm from a new generation finally supersedes it. In the meantime, when their hypotheses donÕt work out, itÕs typical to see them come up with more and more complicated explanations and lash out personally at their critics.

[Source: Duncan Maxwell Anderson (upstate New York science, religion, and politics writer),"The EmperorÕs New Climate: Is Global Warming Real?", Crisis Magazine, February 2004]

Kyoto - "a ticket to a second Great Depression"

The agreement called the Kyoto Treaty, proposed through the UN in 1997 to limit CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, is likewise seen by Michaels and many other critics as a vehicle for economic self-interest rather than for the environment.

Long in the works at previous international meetings, Kyoto would have been a ticket to a second Great Depression. Its provisions assume the truth of the CO2Ðglobal warming hypothesis and obligate the wealthy industrial countries to reorder their nations to cut CO2 emissions to their 1990 levels by 2010. Since that in effect puts commerce under tighter state control, it pleased the anticapitalist environmentalists of the West. ÒDevelopingÓ states favor the treaty because it puts no limitations on their CO2 emissionsÑeven though countries like China burn increasing amounts of high-carbon fuel such as coal.

The UN and European Union (EU) support the treaty because it establishes their authority to set CO2 standards, collect fees, and regulate transportation. For the EU, thereÕs also the chance to entangle the powerful U.S. economy in a web of regulation sufficient to bring it to the 17th-century level of innovation and efficiency that Europe now enjoys.

Meanwhile, even scientists in the global-warming camp deride the treaty as ineffective. As Mahlman put it, ÒIf Kyoto were successful, it would produce a small decrease in the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. It would take 40 Kyotos to actually stop the increase.Ó

[Source: Duncan Maxwell Anderson (upstate New York science, religion, and politics writer),"The EmperorÕs New Climate: Is Global Warming Real?", Crisis Magazine, February 2004]

USA may be a net sink, not a net source, of CO2

A funny thing happened as James Hansen was fielding questions from reporters in Washington, D.C., in 1988, terrifying senators with global warming predictions: The forests of eastern North AmericaÑno doubt including the Blue Ridge Mountains 60 miles to the west of the capitalÑwere quietly absorbing CO2. A study by Princeton University, Columbia University, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) conducted between 1988 and 1992 showed that the eastern forests were so efficient a ÒsinkÓ or absorber of carbon dioxide that they more than made up for all the emissions from AmericaÕs factories, power plants, campfiresÑeven its SUVs. Published in Science in 1998, it got comparatively little notice, but if the years covered by the study are typical, the implications for the worldÕs climate could be enormous. It would mean that America, rather than being a force oppressing the rest of the world with its huge economy and its greenhouse emissions, is actually picking up other countriesÕ greenhouse Òtrash.Ó If CO2 is a problem, itÕs the rest of the world thatÕs causing it.

[Source: Duncan Maxwell Anderson (upstate New York science, religion, and politics writer),"The EmperorÕs New Climate: Is Global Warming Real?", Crisis Magazine, February 2004]

Carbon fuels much better for environment than so-called soft energy; even SUV vs bicycling

Peter Huber, a fellow of the Manhattan Institute, shares the environmentalistsÕ desire for a cleaner, wilder planet less dominated by manÑbut he says their solutions are all wrong. Fossil fuels are good, he says, because they take up so little space. Solar cells are bad, because they block out the sun over an area that canÕt be a habitat for trees or animals. He even says that to go a given distance, an SUV is more earth-friendly than a guy on a bicycle, because the extra food consumed by the cyclist to make the journey takes more area to grow than all the space consumed by the SUV, its gasoline, and its share of the road.

America, not the low-tech world, is earth-friendly, because our farms are so efficient that they leave more room for the wilderness that heals the worldÕs air and serves as wildlife habitat. AmericaÕs forests, he points out, have been expanding every year since 1920, as people have left farms to live in cities, while our agricultural production has vastly increased. Another factor: Feeding the horses and donkeys formerly needed for transportation and farming tied up twice the acreage used today by all our roads and highways, oil pipelines, refineries, and wells. Much of that extra acreage has reverted to trees.

The environmentalists can say, ÒIf everyone lived like Americans, weÕd need two planetsÑone to live on and one to exploit.Ó But turnabout is fair play: If the whole world farmed as efficiently as AmericansÑusing fossil fuels, productive cultivars, and modern tillage techniquesÑand most of the population lived in cities, as in America, there would be no environmental problems. People would have plenty to eat, even in the Third World, and tropical forests everywhere would be expanding, instead of getting slashed and burned for primitive agriculture. The air would be clean, as it is even in AmericaÕs industrial cities, instead of choked with ozone, as it is in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Austria. Instead of trying to shackle enterprise in rich countries, Huber says, the greens should be promoting American-style democracy and entrepreneurship in the Third WorldÑwhich is fast becoming the source of most of the worldÕs pollution.

[Source: Duncan Maxwell Anderson (upstate New York science, religion, and politics writer),"The EmperorÕs New Climate: Is Global Warming Real?", Crisis Magazine, February 2004]

[nuclear.com's climate news archives]