JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
The voting for Climate Prat of the Year has begun. Have your say. Team Oz needs your support – they’re punching way above their weight this year.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/there-can-only-be-one/
Pointman
130
Haven’t both Turney & Obama been rather one offs on Climate this year, even if they were rather high profile one offs, whereas the consistent performers are getting a bit old hat ? I suppose Cook keeps excelling himself, but it seems he might rather relish winning the title, character that he is.
50
I disagree.
I’m sure you know how Obama, guided by his ignorance, has used his pen, his phone and the EPA to work to shut down the coal industry and dictate to the world because he’s on top of things.
Definitely prat.
You did read about the excellent CO2 deal he tricked the Chi-Coms into taking, didn’t you?
Definitely prat.
He still believes he can slow the rising tide and heal our sickened planet if the stupid flat earthers would stop whining and give him lots more money and power.
Very definitely prat.
I’ll keep an open mind but POTUS will be hard to beat.
And I didn’t even get to his Nobel Peace Prize?.
150
Well I suppose Pointy’s Award would be better earned than his Nobel, even if he did get all the pieces.
60
Of course he gave his grand speech at UQ (Prat Central) and made a global prat of himself just before it was revealed that the US dramatically INCREASED its CO2 emissions last year! Sorry, but John Crook can’t increase emissions by the equivalent of NSW while committing his prattery. It’s the Kenyan this year.
20
Milne continues spouting utter bilge.
“Red Faces for Tony Abbott “, but nothing surprising or outstanding.
40
CJR: In my humble opinion, Harper probably informed Abbott that he would be making a contribution to the fund and his reason why (therefore no ‘Red Face’ for Abbott).
Unfortunately, this is a game and with elections in the fall of 2015, Harper unfortunately has to play along to show that he is doing something and this will keep the ‘looney left’ at bay, they can only complain that he isn’t doing enough.
If he comes down hard against the nonsense such as Abbott did shortly after being elected (or was it during the election?), then we Canadians may be cursed with a ‘looney left’ government after these elections in 2015.
If Harper can keep everything stable without too much turmoil developing and if the ‘looney left’ Liberal leader Trudeau keeps sticking his foot into his mouth (he’s an extremely lightweight idiot), Harper has a good chance of getting re-elected and then, hopefully he can come out swinging.
70
Shouldn’t there also be a Lifetime Achievement award for people displaying continual prattishness above and beyond the call of duty?
Serial media [gullibles] like Suzanne Goldenberg or Roger Harrabin would then have their achievements immortalized in the Prats’ Hall of Infamy.
—-
“Media idiots” edited to media-gullibles. Forgive my edits. Let’s aim a little higher. They are not idiots, but they do fall for the weakest of excuses and fail to hard hard questions over and over. Yet they would think themselves hard-nosed and hard to fool. “Gullible” IMHO would hurt a lot more and is closer to the mark. – Jo
30
Serial media [gullibles]….plenty of those. Monbiot of the Grauniad; Geoffrey Lean of the Ex- Torygraph come to mind with no effort.
20
I guess you have a good point there Jo. OK, media-gullibles it is.
10
And a lifetime non achievement award as well. And Obama is the prime candidate for that one don’t you think? After all, except for causing all sorts of trouble and giving away $millions an hour he’s done nothing I can point to as an achievement.
00
It was all about The Pope sticking it to the European Union this week, criticising its complacent Bureacracy. All quite unprecedented.
“It is no secret that a conception of unity seen as uniformity strikes at the vitality of the democratic system, weakening the rich, fruitful and constructive interplay of organisations and political parties,” he said.
“This leads to the risk of living in a world of ideas, of mere words, of images, of sophistry and to end up confusing the reality of democracy with a new political nominalism.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/11252345/Pope-Francis-warns-European-ideal-replaced-by-bureaucratic-technicalities-of-EU.html
100
I think global homogeneity in politics and policy can only lead to bad things for most people. It will stifle creativity, diversity, and individualism.
Just look at the backlash from the Rosetta, and the Mangalyaan missions, with numerous imbeciles spreading pictures via social media saying that the money should have been spent on the homeless, or the poor instead, or, as the UK government funded ‘charity’ Solar Aid said in their attempt at a complaint: ‘…any chance you could do something about the 1.3 billion people who have never even seen a light bulb?…” yet all the people who think this is a good attack on ‘the rich’, completely fail to understand that their whole way of living is the result of many many occasions where money that could potentially have been spent on ‘the poor’, wasn’t (and wouldn’t have been), and in doing so, improved the way we all live now. I wish they would save their outrage for situations which deserve it. (like, for example, the way the South Australian government spent almost $600 million of taxpayers money on a football stadium redevelopment, or how the federal government has spent taxpayers money on carbon credits which may, or may not actually have any genuine carbon sinks behind them… not to mention the other problems with carbon credits…)
These people seem to desire that Röntgen had clothed and fed the homeless instead of discovering X-rays, Louis Pasteur hadn’t wasted his time on vaccinations and pasteurisation, and that Michael Faraday had run a soup kitchen… They complain that us ‘skeptics’ are anti-science, but they are the truly dangerous and idiotic section of society which hates science with an illogical and idiotic passion, and, mysteriously, they seem to have a very very loud voice, and, sadly, politicians listen to loud voices, whilst also lacking, in the vast majority of cases, an understanding of the fundamentals of science, and knowledge of the scientific method. Of course we need charities, but we also need R&D, unless we want to slide back from whence we came, socially, and technologically.
160
They seem to think (?) money should go to charities. Which ones? Like the RSPB? See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2805710/RSPB-spends-quarter-cash-saving-birds-Sir-Ian-Botham-leads-landowners-blast-charity.html
or perhaps http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/the-vampire-squid-rspb-attacked-by-other-conservationists-for-misusing-funds-9814685.html
Botham complained that the RSPB was taking money from the contributions to fund executive retirements, among other things. I would agree that as a shooter he had an agenda but spending more on fund raising than on birds? And installing wind turbines on their land hardly fits their aims, does it?
It would be interesting to see the real accounts of the “Charities”. What does Greenpeace, WWF etc. actually spend, and on what?
BY the way the SA Government spent ALMOST 600 million on a ootball (that’s australian ootball, there’s not much foot in it these days) is a bit misleading. The real total isn’t available.
40
Following all the Green money would be exceptionally interesting, but I am more concerned with organisations which claim no allegiance or bias, financial, or political, like GetUp! At least you know where you stand with Greenpeace and the WWF…
Yes, I was being uncharacteristically kind towards the SA state government, I do not know what came over me. I think maybe it is due to climate change?
10
If so it’s probably the only thing for which climate change can claim any credit.
00
In the SOURCE TSI data below (Column 5: Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) at 1-AU, W/m^2)the TSI has got up beyond 1362 only six times. All of these have been in 2014.
http://lasp.colorado.edu/data/sorce/tsi_data/daily/sorce_tsi_L3_c24h_latest.txt
60
According to the SMH Austria is Dismantling ski lifts as world warms up.
Meanwhile record snowfalls in the US.
Early onset of snow in Turkey causes power outages.
As we say here in Australia, sometimes you just can’t get under it!
60
I’ve blogged my response European Alps Getting Colder yesterday:
Of course, the incidence of snow isn’t directly associated with temperature; except that a warmer climate produces more moist air resulting in more precipitation of various forms. A colder climate (ice age) would have more moisture locked up in ice sheets and evaporate as little as one tenth of available moisture: In absolute humdity ~3 g/kg when “icy” vs ~30 g/kg when tropical-humid.
The positive feedback of snow albedo means that ice ages tend to stick around for a long time, even when atmospheric CO2 levels are well above 1,000 ppm.
40
Not wishing to say anything that might be taken as defamatory, I will refrain from commenting on the way the Left push their agenda, so I won’t say anything too specific about the article about ski lifts being removed.
The article contains this line:
So they have given ONE example of a ski lift being demolished. I did a quick Bing and found this:
Since I am a conservative it means I have principles, so I will admit that I have no further information on this. The article from which the above was copied is undated, but it was possibly written in 2007. Here’s a 2006 article on the same site that raises further questions about the SMH article. I will let you draw your own conclusions about the accuracy of the SMH article and the possible motives of its author.
Also, it should be noted that there are two Stockhorns – one near Zermatt in the south-west and one in the Bernese alps in central Switzerland. The latter is not a dedicated ski resort and you will note their web site refers to snowshoeing. I wonder if the author of the SMH article might have been confused about this.
And, by the way, they have water cannons at most ski resorts so that they can be assured they have snow at the start of the season. They are used in resorts in Australia – you know, the ones that have been having record snowfalls of late.
90
Conservatives have gone belly up in Victoria. Main reason IMO, is their (oft stated) love of windmills and the message that sends. When will Conservative politicians around the world realise that their supporters are becoming ever more disillusioned as they are they ignored, while Conservative govts try to curry favour with those voters welded on to windmills and the like. Surely just this one word should do it, UKIP.
The windmillites are taking over and those opposed have no one to vote for.
200
Yes, I’m afraid Abbott is finished, the Liberals are finished and Australia is finished.
Just imagine how untouchable Abbott would be now if he had had the kahunas to come right out and say:
– the Left are brainwashing your children in school with lies about global warming and myths about Indigenous Australia. The purpose of school is to teach children social and vocational skills. Specifically, children will be taught about the economy, how to choose a career and then begin it and carry it through and how to make money. On the social skills side, they will be taught society’s norms and such essentials as manners, public speaking, dancing, music and so on. And that is why this government is completely scrapping and rewriting the national curriculum. In addition, school hours will be extended to match working hours so that parents are relieved of the stress and financial burden of child minding. Yes, it will cost. But, firstly, a conservative government is all about a stable, decent, civil society and a proper education system is one of the ways that is brought about. It is a cost we as a society have to pay. But it will be cost neutral, because the money will come from abolishing all the handouts to spivs and carpetbaggers, wasting it on green schemes and so on.
– Australia has become a violent society, our social cohesion is gone and that has led to a breakdown in respect, tolerance and civility. Our education reforms will go some way to reversing this, but another important plank of this agenda is to reform immigration so that we are not importing violence and crime into our society. Immigration will be much more selective and the New Zealand back door will be closed. Residency will be probationary and immigrants will not be entitled to permanent residency until they have served a probation period. Review processes controlled by the Left will be abolished or reformed.
– Conservatives believe in a free society. We want you to be able to debate sensitive issues without fear of being persecuted. That’s why 18C and in fact the entire RDA are gone. And with it goes that self-indulgent plaything of the Left, the AHRC. Shut the door on the way out, comrades.
– poverty has grown in this country, but it is not by accident. Government induced people into poverty by allowing welfare dependency as a lifestyle choice. There will be no dole. It will be replaced by having the government as an employer of last resort. If you can’t find a job, you will be employed on a minimum wage public works job by the government. No more sitting at the pub all day living like a feral on the fringes of society and letting your mind rot. No longer will sole parenthood be a lifestyle choice. No longer will the disability pension be a refuge in which you can withdraw from the workforce. Entrenched welfare dependency has given us a violent, angry, anti-social underbelly. It has poisoned our society. A conservative government will put an end to it.
And that’s just for starters. If the Liberals had had the brains and balls to run an attacking agenda they would be invincible today. But it is too late. They have put the boot into the people who voted for them – medicare co-payment, fuel excise, pension indexation etc – and, equally importantly, they have not done anything to show their constituency that they are trying to make our society a better place.
So you’d all better hunker down for another six years of Labor from 2016 and then a change back to the Liberals in 2022. Do you think the Liberals will have figured it out by then? I don’t.
261
Living in Victoria I’m once again disgusted in the people yet again (remember John Cain?) for being suckered in to thinking the Labor party actually cares about anything outside of the trade union movement and further instilling a socialist framework in society.
Locally in my seat of Buninyong Labor candidate Geoff Howard was voted back in after 15 years of continuous inactivity to his electorate, I personally had an appointment with him along with other families to raise a serious concerns of corruption within the Victorian department of housing regarding loans and the theft of public money high up in those ranks, this coward firstly tried to suggest we made a mistake then when shown proof he virtually ran out the door with no comment and we aren’t the only ones with similar stories of this behavior.
aussie pete and Barry you’re bang on about needing a genuine choice for conservatives in this country because at the moment the place is being run like a trade union where internal power struggles will give you a choice of voting for but it’s still the same bloody union!
210
Unionist fighting for power, huge debt will be incurred by spending, spending mentality of ALP. Victoria is stuffed.
R-COO- K+
100
And after the huge debt is incurred there will have to be another Kennett type government to take the razor to money draining schemes instilled by Labor with people screaming how unfair it is forgetting they helped to create the financial mess by voting it in without thinking ahead.
Except next time the razor will be moot as nothing will be left to cut!
80
Unionists will insist that another project like the desalination plant can be built urgently; to be mothballed before completion.
60
Barry…”- the Left are brainwashing your children in school”…..And have been for 40 years now, which means we are now into the third generation of it.
This election result tells us that 50% of Victorians now believe that Marxism is the way of the future. They have studied the Marxist texts, but wilfully deny the Marxist history.
If the ALP win government in 2016 the Liberal Party will cease altogether to be relevant. Gillard’s Carbon Tax was have been the last tool the Marxists needed to complete the demolition of the capitalist system and the “socialisation” of Australian industry. Should they get the opportunity to reinstate such policies by 2019 Australia’s economy will be scorched earth.
You are spot on when you declare that Tony Abbott must come out fighting. If the ALP and the Greens find it so easy to sell a pack of lies, how much easier should it be to sell the truth?
He should start by informing the ABC that their behaviour since the election has so far abused the trust he placed in them when making his promise to them that the promise is now voided. Their actions have gone far, far beyond the pale. Let them worry about what that means for them.
150
Now is not the time for wasting an opportunity to land a big blow, Tony Abbott had his chance at G20 to declare to the world and it’s leaders that CAGW really is crap and give sound scientific evidence to back it up, even the paid off MSM couldn’t have avoided covering it, but no he allowed an unpatriotic dumbass POTUS to bad mouth him, his party and the Australians that voted him in on his home soil without the slightest attempt at a shirtfront let alone a well worded rebuttal.
Sorry I’ll piss people off here but we don’t need another useless mongrel we need an Australian with the right amount of mongrel in them.
And yes I’m in a bad mood.
120
I’m in a bad mood to and angry at the wasted opportunity. Look at all the other states, Libs are well ahead in polls. Bailleu messed the Libs in Vic up but a soft Napthine couldn’t cut it. At least Ryan got back in in W’dyte. Naphthine just too soft. Abbot and Hockey not on the same page and not for the first time. Feds need to GET tough. Morrison for PM.
R-COO- K+
50
You mentioned UKIP.
We have one, if enough of us get behind it and push.
Australian Liberty Alliance Ltd
PO Box 260
South Melbourne, VIC 3205
Phone 1300 188 869
Facsimile 08 6315 6415
ABN 986 019 780 63
60
Do they have a web page that spells out their policies/agenda
R-COO- K+
60
The Rise up Australia Party (RUP) is another one with good ideas, Lord Monckton gave a cracking speech at the Victorian party launch a few weeks ago, the video’s on the home page.
Maybe an Australian version of UKIP (AUSIP)? can be formed with the independent conservative party’s here coming together to form an alliance, I mean how hard can it be if the Poms have done it? 😉
20
Ahem Yonnie! We Poms led the way but it is still to come to fruition.
20
I noticed this article: http://scitechdaily.com/2014-highest-global-mean-sea-surface-temperatures-ever-recorded/ and can’t help but wonder about a few things.
Firstly, the University of Hawaii is happy to accept and consider accurate, ocean temperature readings taken, presumably, by sailing vessels et al bobbing around the ocean dating back to before the turn of last century. However, our very own BOM won’t accept similar older temperature readings taken on land, at the same locations, by dedicated individuals. The former appears to be accepted without question.
Secondly, I do wonder about the accuracy of the older readings, compared to the latest satellite readings that commenced, I believe, only recently. Do we have something akin to the Hockey Stick happening here by virtue of somewhat inaccurate older readings being mixed (and perhaps homogenised) with newer, accurate, readings. Also, do the current readings really accord with the same locations as the older readings?
Finally, to suggest that these results reflect ‘2014 – The Highest Global Mean Sea Surface Temperatures Ever Recorded’ may be semantically true, but scientifically it once more discredits all those who publish articles that potentially deceive the less knowledgeable. But then again, the show must go on.
100
It would appear that one of the recent ocean temps have been adjusted
Catastrophists will stop at nothing!
50
See https://chiefio.wordpress.com/ Comment on Hiatuses in the rise of Temperature
If I may quote a small part…
“First off, the two “data sets” you use are not data. They are a processed adjusted product of computers. GIStemp in particular is one I’ve investigated in great depth (including running my own copies of it) and it is, IMHO, not ‘fit for purpose’ for many reasons.
Then, setting that aside, the whole thing is based on ‘average temperatures’ treated AS temperatures. They are not. Temperature is then treated as a proxy for heat. It isn’t. Doing calorimetry requires the mass, specific heats, heats of fusion and vaporization, and all phase changes be accounted. It isn’t. But since temperature is an intrinsic property, a ‘global average temperature’ is not a temperature. (And since GIStemp carries the temps AS temperatures through the calculations and averages and only makes the anomaly at the end, don’t launch that anomaly canard. It isn’t. Not till well after loads of averages of temperatures have been used…)”
The use of ‘anomalies’ put as temperatures is deliberate as it confuses the gullible.
110
Sunday Funny
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/clip_image0027.jpg
40
Back at you e g…
20
Aren’t the old ones the best ones eh gordo.
30
I have just realised who blackadderthe4th is.
He is Adam Bandt, the Green member of the House of Representatives.
As you may realise, the current leader Christine Milne is in the running (as Prune Face) for Pointman’s Prat of the Year. Should she win then she will be off on a (taxpayer funded) world trip to examine the plight of the polar bears starving in Paris.
Adam is planning to take over from Christine Milne and is practicing making inane statements in public while keeping a straight face. He will then be too busy to post anymore rubbish here, so VOTE for PRUNE FACE !
132
I see that the climate circus has moved to Lima, Peru for the latest collective pants wetting session. Link.
The Pacific Island nations look like the biggest pants wetters at this session. Nothing is pledged by Australia and I doubt any will by this government.
60
Lima has an average of 13mm of rain each year.
It was even that low before the warmists crawled out of the woodwork.
It’s a good city for archaeologists – dig a bit and you might find Tim Flannery (he’s a colossal fossil).
40
Scaper,
I hope the clowns attending this circus take extra care to measure their height. Apparently climate change is responsible for stunting the growth of poor Peruvian Children – shame on those CO2 polluters!!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/25/us-climatechange-peru-idUSKCN0J902K20141125
30
Weather records are not always accurate even in modern times and in modern cities. In Brisbane I lived near a creek which often overflowed in heavy downpours. My house was always safe. A busy road below me often flooded trapping cars. About 1988 a very heavy downpour made the creek rise far higher than any previous flood since living there from 1958. Many cars were trapped and as it was night I helped police stop cars entering the water. I measured about 3 inches in an hour or so.
A few years later, about 1993, I was with a group examining the creek regarding a development near its banks. I mentioned the 1988 downpour experience. A bureaucrat from the BOM was next to me and said there was no rain that night. He showed me some data to prove his point. Yet, the nearest official weather recording site was no more than 300m from where I was that night. I have seen heavy rain in a small area but the huge amount of rushing water was coming from the very direction of the weather station site.
Did the rain jump over it?
90
Nah, you just weren’t under it!
20
The BoM said that there was no rain,so it must be true,there couldn’t be a flood because there was no rain recorded.
This is the difference between data and facts.
Rain in one small area and none in another,it happens all the time but to a bureaucrat unless it says that it rained nothing happened.
On the 6th of Aug 1945 a US “weather plane” was seen over Hiroshima.
So be careful what you place your trust in.
30
It’s a good weekend for John Setka – he won the Victorian state election and now controls the state.
51
I wonder how long it will be before Setka and Gatto pay a call to Spring St and put in a bill for services rendered?
40
Two Monkeys Were Paid Unequally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiU6TxysCg
(2.43 minutes)
50
scaper –
your ABC link re the 12,000 delegate Lima CAGW talkfest aka summit says:
“Pledges in recent weeks by China, the United States and the European Union to limit emissions have helped brighten prospects for a new global deal”
whereas –
29 Nov: BusinessStandardIndia: Nitin Sethi: Lima climate talks: Setting the ground for a Paris agreement in 2015
India to argue for a deal that has more than just mitigation at its heart
All expectations that the 2015 agreement will lead to ambitious requirements of countries to fight climate change in the short run have already been dashed by a US-China pact, with the two collaboratively deciding their respective emission-reduction targets for the near future. While the US has announced a target for 2025, China has done so for 2030, with little expectation that the two will scale these up in the near term. Earlier, the European Union (EU) had set the tone by taking a less-than-ambitious route, too…(WORTH READING ALL FOR DETAILS)
http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/lima-climate-talks-setting-the-ground-for-a-paris-agreement-in-2015-114112700164_1.html
who is reporting the facts?
40
Not at their ABC, Pat.
But then again…our MSM has to yet report the Black Plague in Madagascar. Fishbowl comes to mind.
40
ESA’s Swarm mission will unravel one of the most mysterious aspects of our planet: the magnetic field.
Although invisible, the magnetic field and electric currents in and around Earth generate complex forces that have immeasurable impact on everyday life.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/The_Living_Planet_Programme/Earth_Explorers/Swarm/ESA_s_magnetic_field_mission_Swarm
30
Julie Bishop goes pro-nuclear. Good.
40
This article, ostensibly about Julie Bishop supporting the Nuclear option for generating electrical power, mentions the UMPNER report, carried out by (Nuclear Physicist) Ziggy Switkowski. That report was a 294 page pdf document, and in fact was well worth reading ….. in its entirety.
That report was handed to Government in 2006.
It mentioned at the time that, if discussion was started as a result of this report being accepted and implemented, Australia could have had Nuclear power plants in operation in ten years, so that meant that if the report was implemented, we could have those plants in operation by 2016. Wonderful intentions. Never going to happen.
The report was handed to Government, hands were shaken, there was smiling for the cameras, and when all concerned left the room, the report was dropped in the nearest trash can. (figuratively speaking)
Here we are now, 8 years later, and still only mooting the idea of beginning the discussion, to setting up a committee, to discuss who gets to be on the committee, to have an inquiry, to raising a new white paper, to setting an agenda, to present the findings and then say we could have all this done in another, say 10 to 15 years.
At this rate, we’ll just be doing it all again in 2025, and by then, 10 years too late.
Now, note in this latest Julie Bishop article, she says this: (my bolding)
Hooray. Someone gets it.
Note again how this is aligned along party political standings, so Barnacle Bill will undoubtedly be against it, just like his predecessor at the time of UMPNER, Kim Beazley was, and let’s look at what dear old Kim had to say, proving once again how totally uninformed politicians are, and how they don’t even bother to get their gophers to find out the facts for them. Kim said this: (again, my bolding)
25 of them Kim. Really.
That would have supplied two and a half times Australia’s absolute total power needs at that time, and the largest power consumers, big Industry has fled Australia so power consumption has eased back from that total when he said this.
In reality, we would have only needed 8 or 9 of them, absolute tops, to have done away with EVERY coal fired power plant in Australia, but trust me on this, it won’t ever happen. All you’re going to get is talk, and political points scoring.
There was an image from UMPNER that gave me thought that perhaps we might see them in my lifetime. It was an artist’s impression of a new next generation Nuclear power plant, and rather than link just to the image itself, I’ll link you to the Post of my own at my Home Site, only because the image has no text, whereas the Post itself provides a description of that image, and this is for a next generation PWR. (Pressurised Water Reactor)
Nuclear Electrical Power Generation – Why The Fuss? (Part 11)
Julie Bishop is right to bring this up, but forgive my cynicism here, because this is just a preamble long before we even get to step one where we, as a Country, actually begin the discussion, so all of this is at least 15 years off into the future if everything goes right ….. right now.
Tony.
90
Switkowski’s report was “complete” at the time that it was written.
However, the substantial fuel cycle, specifically the fabrication and the consequential “refueling”, is currently undergoing revision with increased R&D into molten salt reactors (MSR). MSR’s are still (realistically) a decade away from production models with a (known) demonstration reactor scheduled to be operating some time in the Czech Republic in 2016. China is also working on MSR, but their schedule is difficult to ascertain. Even with the simpler build of an MSR resulting from it not having to potentially contain a huge volume of radioactive steam, earliest deployment of pilot production reactors isn’t likely before 2030 unless there’s a major shift in R&D and policies in government bodies such as the US-NRC.
Meanwhile, companies like KEPCO have demonstrated the ability to construct and commission “conventional” Gen III+ reactors in under a decade; after approval. There are other players who can provide “turnkey” nuclear power plants. Some of them are not the flavour of the month.
In my opinion, it’d be advantageous for Australia to try to build one ASAP; not just for the electrical power generated and valuable isotopes for medicine and industry; but for a hands-on environment to train nuclear power engineers and technicians. A “sub-optimal” location for the plant in terms of connectivity to large consumers may be justified on other grounds. Brownfields such as those in Whyalla (South Australia) can still connect to the SE grid, providing for some of the baseload-capable requirements.
Initial fuel supply and reprocessing in the medium term can be done abroad. It’s not smart to build it in Australia as the dominant fuel cycle technology may suddenly favour the MSR because of competitive advantage; and Australia has close to no competence at all in fuel cycle maintenance at this point in time anyway. If there is a huge investment into fuel fabrication/re-processing domestically, then that has the tendency to influence what sort of fuel cycle the next generation of reactors would use.
The question of who’ll pay for the first plant is vital. Eventually and ideally; consumers of electrical power will pay for it but a couple of billion dollars have to be put on the table and risked over the course of about a decade of reasonably productive and efficient power generation. The costs of building a nuclear power in the USA are substantially escalated by regulatory costs; including a “license”. Waiving regulatory fees, other than the direct costs of regulation and supervision for the first generating reactor built may be attractive to investors and potential plant operators.
Minimising the risk to investors is a necessary guarantee by government that the plant will be allowed to operate and make money from supplying electrical power; as long as it abides by the pre-determined rules.
Regulatory régimes must not (in effect) exclude “novel” reactor technologies as they do in the USA. A “free market” of technologies will be sensitive only to operational costs and price pressure from competitors; including coal. Government must not penalise one technology to the advantage of another. Such penalties are a subsidy. Subsidies for production encourage inefficiency.
50
I’d like to show you something here.
Let’s do a comparison, starting at this point in time, right now.
It takes ten years for ALL the ducks to line up perfectly to get a power plant off the ground, and that goes for virtually any power plant, from the thought bubble to actual power delivery.
Let’s say we build one of those big Nukes, currently Gen 3+ or even Gen4, and that’s not wishing for any of the new technologies, that’s what we have right now. I’m not even going to ballpark a cost for this, as there’s no need, and you’ll soon see just why.
One new Nuclear power plant current existing technology. It has 2 reactors, each driving a 1,300MW generator, so a Nameplate Capacity of 2600MW. It will have a prospective life span of 50 years, and over that time, it will generate 530TWH of power, and be aware here that this is based upon current U.S. Capacity Factor for ALL its nuclear power plants, just on 93% CF, even though the average age of them is around 40 years.
Have you got that? The important figure here is that power delivery.
530TWH.
OK then, let’s build an equivalent wind power for that same Nameplate, 2600MW. With the current average sized nacelle housing a 2.5MW generator that comes in at 1,040 of those towers. The average HUGE scale wind plant is 500MW, so that’s 5 of them, each with a few extra towers to make up the total. A 500MW wind plant currently costs $2.2 Billion, so now we have $11 Billion for those 5 Wind Plants, and see now how 10 years comes into play from thought bubble to power delivery, not just the ONE nuke, but FIVE wind plants.
The total power delivery for these 5 wind plants comes in at 135 TWH over the life of the wind plants.
So now we only get just a tad over 25% of the power.
That means effectively, to get the same power delivery over the life of the Nuke, you need to construct four times that original total, so now, 20 wind plants, at $2.2 Billion each, (in today’s dollars) so, an all up total of $44 Billion.
See now why there was no need for me to give a cost for the Nuke. There’s no way known it would cost that much.
Then there’s actual power delivery. The Nuke will deliver its power 24/7/365, and the wind plants average 7 hours a day of full power delivery.
That $44 Billion needs to be recovered over the life of those wind plants, so you can see here how the (end consumer) per unit price of electricity is more expensive for Wind than for the Nuke.
One plant versus 20 of them, or more than 4,100 wind towers.
You be the judge.
Tony.
70
Not quite. The working life of wind turbine is as short as 8 years. “half-life” is in the vicinity of 12 years for land-bound ones. Even the rated/claimed life of 20 to 25 years means that all the wind farms have to rebuilt at least once in the life of the Nuke.
“Re-powering” wind farms is already big business; sounds simple but because the newer towers and turbines are much bigger than the ones being replaced, it’s not just a bolt-in replacement; completely new footings (typically more than 1000 tonnes of concrete and steel) have to be built to support the newer towers. Removal of defunct footings is avoided.
It’s worse than we thought.
40
The death stare goes atomic.
30
http://enenews.com/79334
Video on WIPP storage leak. Just another “It cannot happen” that did!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVpsj7x3tug
00
does DC-based, CAGW-gatekeeper Goldenberg believe a word she writes?
25 Nov: Guardian: Suzanne Goldenberg: Obama’s climate change envoy: fossil fuels will have to stay in the ground
Todd Stern claims the world will have to forgo developing reserves of oil, coal and gas in order to solve global warming
In the clearest sign to date the administration sees no long-range future for fossil fuel, the state department climate change envoy, Todd Stern, said the world would have no choice but to forgo developing reserves of oil, coal and gas.
The assertion, a week ahead of United Nations climate negotiations in Lima, will be seen as a further indication of Obama’s commitment to climate action, following an historic US-Chinese deal to curb emissions earlier this month…
“It is going to have to be a solution that leaves a lot of fossil fuel assets in the ground,” he said. “We are not going to get rid of fossil fuel overnight but we are not going to solve climate change on the basis of all the fossil fuels that are in the ground are going to have to come out. That’s pretty obvious.”..
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/25/todd-stern-fossil-fuels-ground-climate-change-obama
only “1000 gigatonne of carbon dioxide” left to spend! how does IPCC get away with this nonsense? countries holding out for the false promise of a $100 billion a year climate fund and free transfer of technology need to walk away from this scam now and get to work on pressing domestic issues:
29 Nov: Deccan Herald: Kalyan Ray: Lima climate meet: Will India stand up to pressure?
A bloodbath on the negotiation table in Lima and subsequent meetings is almost assured because climate change is intractably linked to economic growth and no country has ever built a low carbon economy…
According to an IPCC calculation, the world’s total carbon budget is 3670 gigatonne if the rise in temperature can be restricted to two degrees. Out of this, almost 2900 gigatonnes were spent since the beginning of the industrial era in the 19th century. This leaves less than 1000 gigatonne of carbon dioxide is to spend…
Unfortunately, not much carbon space is available unless rich nations reduce their emissions…
It remains to be seen if the 19-member strong Indian team at Lima can stand up to the pressure or will give in. The government has so far claimed there would be no compromise on development – associated with carbon emission – but New Delhi would stick to its 2009 promise of voluntary reduction of carbon intensity by 20-25 per cent by 2020 from the 2005 level.
In the process, the three major polluters agreed on shifting the goalposts by changing the base year from 1990 as agreed in the Kyoto protocol, to 2005…
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/444471/lima-climate-meet-india-stand.html
30
reminder, The Australian & Business Spectator also picked up this rubbish from Elaine Prior of Citi(bank), whereby African countries would allegedly have uneconomic renewables, which even Germany can’t afford, thrust upon them, to save the world from CAGW!
26 Nov: SMH: Stephen Cauchi: Coal not the panacea for poverty
Indeed the booming African electricity market has an “everything but coal” approach, US financial group Citi says.
The recently released World Energy Outlook 2014 by the IEA supported Citi’s view, the financial group said.
“Despite coal industry optimism about the role of coal in alleviating energy poverty in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa, our interpretation of WEO-2014 almost suggests an “everything-but- coal” approach,” the Citi paper said.
The IEA said African energy demand from coal in 2012 was estimated at 105 million tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe). By 2040, this would rise to 164 Mtoe.
***However, as a share of the total energy pie, coal would go from producing 56 per cent of Africa’s energy needs in 2012 to just 27 per cent by 2040.
Most of the projected coal growth would occur in South Africa, Citi said. Hydro, gas and a suite of renewables would meet demand elsewhere on the continent. Furthermore, mini-grid or off-grid systems could provide the most viable access to electricity for the large rural population that is distant from power grids, it said.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/mining-and-resources/coal-not-the-panacea-for-poverty-20141126-11ug3m.html
anything missing from Prior/Citi’s “interpretation”?
26 Nov: HuffPo: Mission Impossible
by Nezir Sinani, Climate Change Consultant at Bank Information Center
Co-authored with Vrinda Manglik, Sierra Club Associate Campaign Representative, International Clean Energy Access
The World Bank’s current developmental mission is to end extreme poverty and to promote shared prosperity in the world. In this latest report, the Bank already admits that achieving this would be seriously affected by further global warming and practically impossible if world leaders fail to act.
Nevertheless, the Bank’s own investment portfolio and policies in place that result in the current investment outcomes are far from matching the urgency, raised by President Kim himself, to act on climate…
When management published the first draft of new policies in July, CSOs were astonished to see only a couple of lines on climate change in the whole new set of policies. Almost half of Bank’s investment portfolio, known as the Development Policy Loans (DPL) and Program for Results (P4R) portfolios, won’t be covered at all by any climate policies. For the part of portfolio that is covered, the policies don’t require any assessments to identify potential climate change impacts on the resilience of host communities and ecosystems. CSOs rejected the new draft and asked the Bank to withdraw it to address real needs vis-a-vis climate change…
Besides not addressing climate issues systematically in its policies, the Bank’s portfolio continues to inlclude investment in fossil fuel projects. In 2010, the World Bank approved a $3.75 billion coal power project for South Africa. The new 4,800 MW coal power plant, the fourth largest in the world, will come online and start polluting more in the next few months. On the other hand, the Bank’s private lending arm, International Finance Corporation, continues to finance the Tata Mundra project, a 4,000 MW coal plant, in Gujarat, India. President Kim has, in many instances, declared that the Bank will continue financing coal and has called this approach a difficult “trade-off” that will be embraced in the countries where other options of energy don’t exist. Kosovo seems to be the next country where the Bank is set to invest more money into coal and the institution is eyeing countries in Africa for possible such projects in the future. According to a study by Oil Change International on subsidizing coal, the Multilateral Development Bank that provides the most coal funding is the World Bank Group with $6.1 billion between the years of 2007 – 2013…
Despite having a nearly $4.1 billion dollar annual energy portfolio, the World Bank has failed to pony up a meager $500 million in investment for beyond-the-grid clean energy markets…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nezir-sinani/mission-impossible_b_6220514.html
40
We must continue to take the money out of the pockets of poor people in rich countries and put it into the pockets of rich people in poor countries.
100
We already do that via drug dealers.
50
“The new 4,800 MW coal power plant, the fourth largest in the world, will come online and start polluting more in the next few months. ”
sorry, but “start polluting more” ???
What a load of unmitigated BS that statement is.
Very little real pollution comes from a modern coal fired power station, just benign H2O and biosphere enhancing CO2
These new power stations will in fact MASSIVELY CUT real pollution, as people turn to using solid reliable coal-fired electricity in preference to wood, cow sh*t, or whatever else they have been using.
60
Hey, I can’t believe I actually got a reply.
The Senate is going to be holding an Inquiry into Wind Power next year, led by five Independent Senators (No Greens or PUP’s, thankfully) so, on the off chance, I hit those 5 Senators with an email as follows:
Here’s the link to that image I enclosed.
So far, I have received two automated responses, but in the last hour I received an actual reply, as follows:
Beauty!
Time to get to work.
Tony.
210
Don’t be too surprised if your submission, whenever that may be, is of higher quality than the eventual enquiry report, which will be dutifully ignored by the Labor government of the day. Let’s face it, Abbott is well on the way to being a one-termer.
50
I wish you well, of course
But it’s all over now. The newly elected ALP Govt in Vic will now successively reduce the power output from LaTrobe (do not bother asking about replacement sources) and allow the CFMEU to control construction of wind plants
The inner-city leftoids have won, with the unerring help of the meeja (who didn’t deign to report the RC into CFMEU corruption with any prominence or accuracy). It’s sad that a majority of the populace actually believe what the meeja tell them to, but this is a fact
The Libs in NSW are of absolutely no use at all. The Fed Libs are completely hamstrung by the Senate and are at savage odds with themselves on how to deal with this. If the temptation for a DD rears its’ head, the high probability of a Greens balance-of-power outcome in the Senate may act as a cold shower. Q’ld is the last outpost of common sense, and that’s because it’s the most decentralised of the States
Perhaps I may be considered defeatist, but I do know when the war is lost. It’s no good hoping that unplanned power losses will turn public opinion around – compulsory installation of “smart grids” will solve the demand problem
20
ianI8888
there’s something awful in what you say, but maybe a, umm, situation, may actually make people scratch their heads and wonder about the power which comes out of the hole in the wall.
Victoria requires, absolutely, 4500MW of power on a 24/7/365 basis, the classic Base Load Requirement.
Add these up.
Hazelwood – 1600MW (8 Units)
Loy Yang – 2200MW (6 Units)
Yallourn – 700MW (2 Units)
Of course there are other plants as well to take up the slack when each of those plants has a unit down for maintenance, and to supplement that Base as well.
Take away just one unit at each plant, and Victoria is right on the edge of the abyss.
Another one goes down, and you’re taking away a large lump of power.
The fury of the people who are, umm, rationed will be something to watch.
I cannot see Melbourne CBD being rationed, the trains, the trams, etc.
These politicians have no idea whatsoever.
I wait to see what the Upper House in Victoria does here.
This could turn very bad very fast.
Tony.
60
I drove past the wind turbines at Learmonth, Vic (Just north of Ballarat) this afternoon.
Just a few were turning. I asked myself, Why? There was no wind! Where they working in reverse? ie power turbine working as an electric motor to make the blades turn?
Why would they do that?
To fool the people about the potential of wind power!
30
Yes Peter, the simplest explanation is a conspiracy.
02
Two reasons:
1. Bearings. Rolling element bearings used to support the main turbine shaft have to be kept moving or their bearing races (the grooves in which the rollers or, less likely balls, run) will suffer from Brinelling from constant high stress cycling in the same location, resulting from vibrations in the structure from any number of sources. The resulting pits will accelerate the bearing’s wear, which, if not maintained, will result in the bearing over-heating and possibly seizing. At the very least, the resulting rough running will propagate damage throughout the generating equipment as a flexible coupling which’d absorb such vibrations at such large torques is very expensive and not likely implemented.
2. Heavy shafts bend under their own weight. If left sitting too long in the one position, the material eventually creeps, resulting in “set”; a minute bow that will induce high stresses from misalignment and an imbalance in the rotating mechanism once the wind blows.
Either will severely shorten the “productive” life of the machine, turning an already marginal investment into a certain loss.
Offshore plant such in the North Sea is sometimes plumbed up to a gas pipeline for gas heating the nacelle in winter. Without heat, the hydraulic fluid might freeze and, if the wind comes up quickly, the whole shebang can go “bang” in wonderful ways.
10
Stick to the TOR for your submission. Some personal background can assist but put your main points at the top.
10
The Western Australian Dr Barry Marshall AC and his research partner Robin Warren AC received their Nobel Prizes for “their discovery of the bacterium Helicobacter pylori and its role in gastritis and peptic ulcer disease”.
Prior to that discovery the science around peptic ulcers was “settled”. Zantac and a less stressful job was the treatment.
Now, in accordance with the way true science should work, we have an interesting and speculative thought on depression and its causes.
In a deliberately speculative article, Turhan Canli from Stony Brook University, USA, argues “for a reconceptualization of major depressive disorder (major depression) as an infectious disease” and suggests “that major depression may result from a parasitic, bacterial, or viral infection and present examples that illustrate possible pathways by which these microorganisms could contribute to the etiology of major depression”.
http://www.biolmoodanxietydisord.com/content/4/1/10
If only the warmists would take a leaf out of the science text-book.
50
29 Nov: UK Telegraph: Royal Society epitomises ‘noble cause’ corruption
Warmists say they hope ‘evidence of trends in extreme weather’ will help to ‘galvanise’ worldwide ‘action’. What evidence, asks Christopher Booker
Introducing the Society’s new report, Resilience to Extreme Weather, part-funded by the warmist billionaire Jeremy Grantham and assembled by like-minded academics and green lobby groups, its president, the geneticist Sir Paul Nurse, hopes that its “evidence of trends in extreme weather” will help to “galvanise” worldwide “action”.
The only problem is that its 128 pages produce virtually no evidence to support the belief that “extreme weather events” are becoming more frequent and intense – for the reason that virtually no such evidence exists, as even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seems to accept…
Fortunately, thanks to China, India and others, the chances of agreement on the global treaty they are all lobbying for are non-existent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11262103/Royal-Society-epitomises-noble-cause-corruption.html
20
So it has been a long weekend here at the house. The temperatures have gone from single digits to above freezing and back again. All of it cold but it does show the variation in nature.
This got me thinking about variations or, in the current popular and politically correct terminology, diversity.
We skeptics who look for evidence of claims being forced upon us are, in the eyes of the alarmist crowd, the “enemy.” With those who disagree with us advocating everything from death camps to branding us with tattoos much as the Germans did to the Jews during WWII. The more things change the more they stay the same it would seem.
So, the youth of today are inundated with the virtues of diversity. Whether it is how you dress, who you sleep with, how you speak, what you do for a living and on and on. Diversity, embrace difference. Yes, they are taught to embrace difference in trivial matters that really shouldn’t be any one else’s business or of any consequence really. But the one thing that has moved humanity forward and provided the youth of today with the ability to embrace this diversity is the one thing they seem to despise with a pathological hatred.
That would be diversity of thought.
In one of the recent threads here the subject of totalitarianism had come up with the observation that today’s youth seem to feel that is the solution. When one fears anyone thinking differently than they do, when one fears anyone questioning the group think, is it any surprise that they would not see totalitarianism as something to fear but rather something to embrace?
We just “celebrated” Thanksgiving here in the US, though for many of us there isn’t a lot to be thankful for given who we have as president and what his goals appear to be. But we do our best.
We see our children being taught to hate, and in typical leftists fashion they try to project that hatred onto those they hate calling them the “haters.” I wonder if they will ever realize how much hatred they embody in their “beliefs” and willingness to denigrate anyone who thinks differently from them even when those people are their own family?
They say children are the future. Looking at the youth of today, embodied by those like sillyfilly, Fin, BA^4, et. al. I can’t help but wonder “what future?”
They call us “deniers” yet when one looks at those who call us that one cannot help but see the parallels between the German people who persecuted the Jews. At least one can’t help but see those parallels if they were decently educated and have a good grasp of history.
The sad thing is, these people that call us “deniers” haven’t been educated well enough nor do they understand history well enough to realize who they have become.
At least for the moment there are more of us than there are of them. But for how long?
50
Christopher Booker apparently knows China is holding firm:
26 Nov: SouthChinaMorningPost: AFP: Wealthy nations must lead emissions fight, senior Chinese climate negotiator says
Rich countries should do more to reduce emissions than developing ones, senior Chinese negotiator says ahead of key talks in Lima
The meeting, to be held in the Peruvian capital Lima from Monday to December 12, is intended to pave the way for a global deal on cutting earth-warming carbon emissions to be agreed next year in Paris as a replacement for the Kyoto treaty…
“Developed countries … should continue to take the lead in cutting emissions by large margins and at the same time provide developing countries with support for financing, technology and capability building,” said Su Wei , Beijing’s senior climate negotiator and a senior official of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).
China hoped the Lima conference would uphold the principles of “common but differentiated responsibilities” in tackling climate change, he told a briefing…
Developed countries were wealthier and had greater capabilities, while economic growth and poverty alleviation remained “the most urgent priorities” of developing states, said Su, whose organisation is China’s top economic planning agency.
“The agreement to be reached in 2015 must face the facts squarely and its relevant institutions and arrangements must reflect the common and differentiated responsibilities of developed and developing countries,” he said…
Xie Zhenhua , China’s top negotiator at international climate talks and the vice-chairman of the NDRC, said the approximate date of “around 2030” for China to reach emissions peak made the target “more scientific and objective”, because the country might face great uncertainty in terms of development in the next 16 years.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1648825/wealthy-nations-must-lead-emissions-fight-senior-climate-negotiator-says
20
Research that you can get your teeth into; unless you’re tardy or on the wrong shift.
The survival time of chocolates on hospital wards: covert observational study
50
I enjoyed that; thanks Bernd Felsche.
30
An excellent example of how science should be done. (Notice the no outside funding.)
20
A divergence problem, CO2 found not guilty of the charges laid against it.
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c01b7c71107fc970b-pi
30
***always so-called self-proclaimed, or MSM-proclaimed CAGW “experts” to keep the dream alive, even when faced with gigaton figures that totally destroy any possibility of that dream being realised. talk about throwing facts and figures out the window!
28 Nov: NBC: John Roach: We’re Kidding Ourselves on 2-Degree Global Warming Limit: Experts
A temperature rise that could cause irreversible and potentially catastrophic damage to human civilization is practically inevitable, according to rising chatter among experts in the l
ead up to a year of key negotiations on a new climate change global accord…
Given the world’s historic emissions combined with a continued reliance on fossil fuels to power humanity for the foreseeable future, limiting the increase to 2 degrees Celsius is all but impossible, according to David Victor, a professor of international relations and an expert on climate change policy at the University of California, San Diego.
“There is no scenario by which any accord that’s realistic on this planet is going to get us to 2 degrees because the trajectory on emissions right now is way above 2 degrees,” he told NBC News…
To stay below 2 degrees C of warming, the world can emit no more than 1,000 gigatons of additional carbon by 2100, according a new report from the United Nations Environment Program. ***To avoid exceeding that budget, global emissions should be no more than 44 gigatons of carbon a year by 2020, with an aim of even lower emissions after that point. The world currently emits 54 gigatons a year and emissions are growing. On the current path, emissions will reach 87 gigatons annually by the middle of this century…
“There is a huge gap in terms of the pathway that we need to be on for the 2-degree target,” Kelly Levin, a climate policy expert at the World Resources Institute, a Washington-based think tank, told NBC News.
***”But it is still possible if we adopt aggressive measures that rapidly reduce emissions. We haven’t closed that window yet.”…
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/were-kidding-ourselves-2-degree-global-warming-limit-experts-n257006
10
Ah! Linear extrapolation, the domain of the (I’ll have to get back to you on that with something sort of expressing what I mean, but polite enough to get past the Mods).
30
What do you expect from a Madison Ave Liberal Arts type?
John Roach wouldn’t know what real science was if it bit him on the butt.
00
OK, Co2 going up. Temperatute going down!
IS CO2 correlated with warming? NO
IS CO2 is correlated with Cooling! YES! That seems clear.
Does anyone want to explain the Greenhouse Theory again!
30
WEEKEND UNTHREADED IS CETTING SHORT THRIFT!
Not happy.
10
NYT gives voice to more “experts”. starts with the usual, unsupported drivel about “extreme weather” & ignores the very real problems facing Mexico today:
29 Nov: NYT: Victoria Burnett: As Mexico Addresses Climate Change, Critics Point to Shortcomings
Faced with the growing threat of extreme weather — droughts, hurricanes and rising coastal waters — Mexico has positioned itself as a leader in the fight against climate change…
“Mexico put on the climate change T-shirt because it was in vogue,” said Carlos Tornel, a public policy analyst at the Mexican Center for Environmental Law, known as Cemda, an environmental advocacy and research organization. “We are the champions of the climate change fight — the good boy who does his homework — but the resources dedicated to climate change are few.”…
***“There is a very strong perception that oil is part of our culture, and that renewables aren’t viable,” said Miguel Soto, spokesman for Greenpeace Mexico’s renewable energy program.
***He and other experts blame government inefficiency and the power of entrenched interests for a lack of progress toward the country’s lofty climate goals…
Mr. Ruiz, who has no permit to dig a well and cannot afford one anyway, said he had little choice but to watch the clouds and pray…
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/world/americas/as-mexico-addresses-climate-change-critics-point-to-shortcomings-.html?_r=0
30
David and Jo,
This is probably a complete misunderstanding of David’s Notch delay filter but I’ll put it
forward anyway:
A. Definitions:
1. The perigee end of the lunar line-of-apse realigns with the Sun roughly once 411.7844(3) days = 1.1274 sidereal years. This is called the Full Moon Cycle.
[quoted current value = 411.78443029 days (411 d 18 h 49 min 34 s) (at the epoch J2000.0)]
2. Estimates for the best period for the Chandler Wobble (CW) vary between about 430 to 434 days
with likely mean values ranging from 431 to 433 days, over decadal time scales.
Reference: http://www.gao.spb.ru/english/as/j2014/presentations/gross.pdf
3. The ascending node of the lunar orbit realigns with the Sun roughly once every 346.6200(7) days = 0.94897(7) sidereal years. This is called the Draconic (or Eclipse) Year (TD).
[quoted current value = 346.620075883 days (346 d 14 h 52 min 54 s) (at the epoch J2000.0)]
1 ¼ TD = 433.2751 days = 1.1862 sidereal years = CW
B: A value of CW = 433.7 days [towards the high end of the estimated range] gives:
(433.7 x 411.78) / (433.7 – 411.78) = 8145.7249 days = 22.30 years
which very close to double the mean Schwabe Cycle length of 11.1 years.
[alternatively using CW = 433.28 days you get (433.28 x 411.78) / (433.28 – 411.78) = 22.72 years]
This suggest that the realignment time of the Chandler Wobble with the precession of the lunar-line of apse with respect to the Sun has a natural ~11 year Cycle.
If this ~ 11 year re-alignment cycle peaks at solar minimum (i.e. is 180 degrees out of phase with the Schwabe Sunspot cycle) and it is responsible for the sequencing of El Nino events then you would get a natural ~ 11 year lag between the sunspot cycle and the changes in the Earth’s mean temperature.
Solar Peak in Sunspot Number –> ~ 5 years to the peak in 11 year re-alignment cycle [that influences the sequencing of El Nino events] –> ~ 6 years between the El Nino/La Nina events and the response of the World’s mean temperature caused by the oceanic lag.
i.e. 5 + 6 years ~ 11 years.
Just a speculative thought.
C. Connection to the inner planets
TCW = 1 / [ 1 − [(1/SVE) − (1/SEMa)] ] = 1.186249 sidereal years = 433.285(1) days
where the following values have been used:
Synodic_VE = 1.5987 = 1.599 (3 dp) sidereal years using TV = 224.70069 days
Synodic_EMa = 2.1354 = 2.135 (3 dp) sidereal years using TM = 686.9600 days
Connection to Jupiter
Sidereal period Jupiter’s orbital period from GSFC Ephemeris:
TJ = 4332.6 days
TJ / 10 = 433.26 days = CW
00
David and Jo,
You might want to read one of the latest posts at:
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/paul-pukite-sloshing-model-for-enso/
to see where I am coming from.
00
Shock horror! Waste at the ABC?
http://m.smh.com.au/comment/the-abc-has-flab-to-be-cut-20141123-11rtki.html
00
Offshore wind farms are no public benefit
By Barbara Durkin
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/226050-offshore-wind-farms-are-no-public-benefit
The Obama administration and Department of Interior (DOI) have announced their planned Jan 29, 2015 auction of hundreds of thousands of acres of North Atlantic ocean area to wind developers under President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.
While U.S. energy policy should address the needs of citizens for reliable energy sources that are commercially reasonable and reasonably safe, offshore wind has historically failed to deliver these public benefits to Europeans.
UK’s offshore wind energy projects’ results should serve as the catalyst for termination by the administration of its proposed ocean auction to wind limited liabilities corporations. U.S. rate and taxpayers are unacceptably exposed by this administration’s blind eye to the UK’s failed offshore wind program. Neither the ocean area the federal government holds in trust for U.S. citizens, nor U.S. citizens themselves, should be exploited by an industry that historically fails to deliver public benefits.
Germany’s flagship BARD Offshore I is a 400MW wind project intended to supply the energy needs of 400,000 households. But Bard Offshore 1 remains out of operation according to industry source Offshore Wind Biz (June 2014) citing: “frequent technical problems with the converter substation,” “a smoldering fire,” “failure of the system,” “five unplanned outages since the beginning of 2014” and “transmission problems.”
WindPowerOffshore (September 19, 2014) reports the Danish company Vattenfall is going to dismantle the Yttre Stengrund in Swedish waters after only 13 years of operation. “Only one in (5) turbines is currently operational.”
Europe’s offshore wind energy endeavors reveal the challenges of the harsh and corrosive marine environment. GE deployed the Cape Wind prototype GE 3.6 MW wind turbines at Arklow, the wind farm offshore of Ireland. GE subsequently “discontinued” the Cape Wind 3.6 MW wind turbine even while Cape Wind, the wind farm planned for offshore Massachusetts, was under permit review by the DOI. That review advanced Cape Wind as a “reliable” energy source.
Cape Wind changed specifications to Siemens 3.6 MW during their power purchase contract negotiations with the national grid. But Siemens is not boasting offshore wind success, according to the Wall Street Journal [1/08/14]:
“Siemens, the world’s largest manufacturer of offshore wind turbines, and its partners concede they underestimated the challenges behind offshore wind. The financial fallout from these challenges was highlighted on Thursday, when Siemens said it booked €128 million ($171 million) in new charges related to connecting offshore wind farms to the power grid. It blamed unexpectedly high costs for shipping, installing and starting up grid components.”
A Spiegel International article ‘Turbine Trouble: Ill Wind Blows for German Offshore Industry’ says, “Operators of offshore wind farms depend on sufficiently high electricity prices to refinance their investments.” This runs contrary to public interest. Citizens need commercially reasonable energy sources that are reliable, while offshore wind energy technology is historically not reliable, yet its price is high.
The stunning and sobering candor of an executive of the “world’s largest” manufacturer of wind turbines, Vestas, would be comical if not for the serious context — billions in public funding along with the sacrifice of the thousands of ocean acres that DOI intends to grant to wind LLCs.
In 2011, Anders Søe-Jensen, then president of the offshore division at Vestas said, “It’s a bit like buying an old crappy car. It’s starts cheap, but spends most of the time in the workshop costing you a fortune, so you didn’t drive much, and your cost per driven mile is staggeringly high. It’s the same with the cost of energy when you look at capital expense and operating costs with overall production.”
While President Obama’s energy goals should be to deploy energy sources that are commercially reasonable, reliable, and reasonably safe, based on the best science, offshore wind has miserably failed to deliver public benefits to Europeans.
U.S. citizens are entitled to a fair return for the use of the nation’s oceanic resources. It’s not too late for President Obama to call off the January 29, 2015 DOI North Atlantic auction that would exclusively serve the interests’ of wind developers.
00