There was no Medieval Warm Period in China. No little ice age either. Not warm in Roman times either.
Obviously CO2 controls this climate.
(Click to enlarge)
Quansheng et al show that weather is lumpy, that modern warming is a lot like past warming. They go so far as to say that there are regular cycles and hint that sun might have something to do with it, and volcanoes.
“…centenial variation is significantly correlated with long-term changes in solar radiation—especially cold periods, which correspond approximately to sunspot minima, as well as the frequency of large volcanic eruptions.”
They go on to say that rate of warming was about half a degree per century lately. It may have been the fastest rate, but then again, it may not. It was hard to tell with the error bars being so wide. It was all done with proxies and has a ten year resolution. Obviously it is in need of having homogenadjustoided thermometer data added after 1960 as is the custom in climate science.
The Medieval Warm Period was global
- Medieval Warm Period found in 120 proxies. Plus Roman era was similar to early 20th Century.
- Sun controls half of the groundwater recharge rate in China for last 700 years
- Ocean heat content around Indonesia shows Medieval Warm Period and 2C warmth in holocene
- Chinese 2,485 year tree ring study shows natural cycles control climate, temps may cool til 2068 (Liu et al, 2011).
- The Medieval Warm Period hit west Antarctica
- The message from boreholes
- See this excellent summary of global studies on CO2Science
Abstract
This paper presents new high-resolution proxies and paleoclimatic reconstructions for studying climate changes in China for the past 2000 years. Multi-proxy synthesized reconstructions show that temperature variation in China has exhibited significant 50–70-yr, 100–120-yr, and 200–250-yr cycles. Results also show that the amplitudes of decadal and centennial temperature variation were 1.3°C and 0.7°C, respectively, with the latter significantly correlated with long-term changes in solar radiation, especially cold periods, which correspond approximately to sunspot minima. The most rapid warming in China occurred over AD 1870–2000, at a rate of 0.56° ± 0.42°C (100 yr)−1; however, temperatures recorded in the 20th century may not be unprecedented for the last 2000 years, as data show records for the periods AD 981–1100 and AD 1201–70 are comparable to the present. The ensemble means of dryness/wetness spatial patterns in eastern China across all centennial warm periods illustrate a tripole pattern: dry south of 25°N, wet from 25°–30°N, and dry to the north of 30°N. However, for all centennial cold periods, this spatial pattern also exhibits a meridional distribution. The increase in precipitation over the monsoonal regions of China associated with the 20th century warming can primarily be attributed to a mega El Ni˜no–Southern Oscillation and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. In addition, a significant association between increasing numbers of locusts and dry/cold conditions is found in eastern China. Plague intensity also generally increases in concert with wetness in northern China, while more precipitation is likely to have a negative effect in southern China.
REFERENCE:
Quansheng Ge et al, Characteristics of temperature change in China over the last 2000 years and spatial patterns of dryness/wetness during cold and warm periods, Advances in Atmospheric Sciences (2017). DOI: 10.1007/s00376-017-6238-8
h/t Climate Depot, GWPF.
But it has been getting warmer since 1900, at least in China, and especially in the more industrialised parts of China.
That is the aspect of human progress that the Gaia worshippers of the west, will fasten upon.
It has little to do with nature. It has a lot to do with an ancient civilisation trying to reinvent itself into a modern civilisation in the shortest possible time.
160
earth temp is a non issue.
The only reason its a beat-up is so it can be used as a smoke screen to bring humanity under Communist UN-based rule.
Thats it, no more no less…..
Anyone who pushes this agenda needs to be viewed as Collaborators….( and yes, its the meaning you’re thinking of… )
132
RW,
Yes, well said, Ge’s paper is on China only, shouldn’t extrapolate this to the planet.
Also, interesting how the modelling used is not dismissed in this instance ?.
[sounds like Frank is admitting that modelling can be manipulated to a political outcome. Brilliant Frank!
Then again, Frank, are you conflicted when you hint that these models are not to be trusted? Or are you conflicted when you realize what you are hinting at is exactly what we’ve been saying about models. Poor Frank] ED
410
Poor Fronk, flattens his nose on the tyre, yet again !!
94
Ge Q extrapolates to the Northern Hemisphere.
“Since 1000 CE—the period covering the Medieval Climate Anomaly, Little Ice Age, and the present warm period—temperature variations over China have typically been in phase with those of the Northern Hemisphere as a whole.”
And if it was warmer in the NH, but not globally, then it has to have been cooler in the SH and where’s the evidence of that? Instead scores of other studies show it was probably global — from Indonesia, NZ, South America, Africa.
But thanks Frank, I’ve added some new links to the post that should have been there. Appreciate your help.
152
I suppose you could extrapolate it globally, if the global population were prepared to have the same level of pollution globally, that China has.
It is not interesting at all. In China, we have a clear and present problem with pollution, that needs to be solved.
One option is to extend that level of pollution to the rest of the planet, to ensure fairness to all.
We could start in the locality where you live, if you want to be seen as, “a leader”. Send your real name and address to Jo, and I will see if I can get you on the list of volunteers.
61
Unless you have irrefutable records over about 200,000 years its all bull.
13
I have been studying climate science since 6:00 am. It has definitely warmed since that time.
81
I am prepared to predict that it will get warmer in summer
41
and that’s on both sides of the Tasman sea, except that it was warmer sooner on the eastern side.
Maybe it’s cyclic …
11
It’s good to see how green globalists still respect some borders. The great climate shifts of the last few thousand years occurred “only” where they were studied. The droughts that came with cooling in the 17th century (yeah, sorry, but cooling absolutely does not = more rainfall) made a real mess for the Ming in China and the Mughals in India while Europe suffered in different ways…but you still have to show how every nob of ground experienced climate change. (Every nob of ground did, but if they can find a paddock in Patagonia without conclusive evidence of an MWP or LIA then it didn’t happen. The Southern Hemisphere is so handy that way: no volumes of history, no intricate harvest and ag records, no busy ancient seaports lying miles inland etc.)
Mind you, these same people seem to think that exporting masses of coal is somehow less reprehensible than using it domestically. Is there some border between the Australian atmosphere and the atmospheres of Japan, China, India, Taiwan and S Korea? Should we accept hordes of refugee emissions from Asian atmospheres or build that wall?
41
There may have been records, not in a language or method understood by the conquistadors, and thus destroyed. Or the peoples who might have understood the records (the priests, upper classes) were destroyed. Or both. We can only guess at whether or not there were records in the Americas. But, granted, no seaports as in Greece or Italy (Rome)to make sea level rise a known. The geology of the Caribbean Islands offers a clue to historical sea levels, but much of what I can find now relates to Gorisms about CAGW. The internet is awash in fear of a process that has been occurring for thousands of years.
This little blurb (https://ambergriscaye.com/geology/) attributes the formation of the caye to sea rise begun 6500 years ago – not modern at all. No records of the people who once lived on the land that is now gone remain, but the fact that this happened is in the geology.
This one is technical, and dry, and discusses how different cave formations relate to sea levels. It’s an older paper, not much fear-mongering in it. https://www.google.com/search?q=caribbean+island+geological+historical+sea+level&ei=EhakWZzmDsrWmwGOioWQDQ&start=60&sa=N&biw=1360&bih=951
Again, no records left behind by people, but some geological evidence can be used to at least arrive at processes and estimates of times of processes. Not too many geologists are ever included in the climate studies, though. No one cares about the rocks.
00
Rereke Whakaaro.
You seem to be agreeing that global warming can be human-caused.
37
Do try to keep up Harry.
It has been getting warmer in the more industrialised parts of China, because of the high levels of atmospheric pollution, a lot of it being toxic. The toxic particulates in the air, form an inversion layer that tends to trap heat.
As I said previously, “[It] … is the aspect of human progress that the Gaia worshippers of the west, will fasten upon.”, and here you are, right on cue.
But if you actually consider what I wrote, and not create words that I did not write, I was only addressing the high levels of particulate pollution.
CO2 is a colourless, odourless, gas, that is present everywhere, mostly in equal measure, and which underpins the entire food chain, from single celled aquatic plants, to large animals that would eat us, if given half a chance.
CO2 has nothing, or very little, to do with the Chinese particulate pollution problems, except that the anti-CO2 lobby
can only hold one thought in their minds at any given time, so they run around doing Chicken-Little impersonations.
61
“It has been getting warmer in the more industrialised parts of China, because of the high levels of atmospheric pollution, a lot of it being toxic.”
Reference please.
16
China is a believer of CAGW while the UN and other countries are willing to throw free money and business concessions at their feet if they follow the narrative but not back it up with actions, they must be laughing themselves silly behind closed doors.
181
Fixed:
131
Hmm. That too. I did not mean my earlier statement to be exclusive. You are right, we have to have to consider the duality of the oriental mind. Especially so, the closer they consider the past to be, and the further away their strategic visions lie.
63
…seem near when far and far when near. Ah so, Sun Tzu.
40
You spotted it. I have been a student for many years, although truly unworthy, to call myself one.
30
Hmm…so engineering a train wreck of civilisation….
IN times past, people went off intot he rain forest to invent thier Utopias.
Pol Pot decided to force thier delusional version of “utopia” on people, so did Stalin and so did Lenin so did Hitler and so did Chairman Mao…it always ends in tears.
The common thread – anti-human Socialism.
41
I have trouble believing this: does China have REAL scientists?
KK
41
Why not?
40
The russians had/have great engineers……
20
Just joking Paul.
10
A lot of “modern” drugs derive from ancient Oriental herbal medicine. Marco Polo introduced them to the West, and the West found ways of synthesising them. A classic example being Aspirin.
50
Tell us something, Rerongki, after bringing aspirin back from China, did Marco Polo jump in his Tardis to go back 5,000 years to teach the Sumerians about it?
Your version of history might be completely incoherent but it is very entertaining. I’m starting to see why you haven’t been able to grasp the basics of climate science though.
06
Well Craig, you seem to assume that world-wide trade only came into being with the advent of European sailing ships. It did not, and I did not imply that it did.
I am quite prepared to accept you at your word, that the Sumerian’s knew about Aspirin, several millennia prior to the time of Marco Polo. It is derived from a plant that will grow almost anywhere.
And given that the Chinese were also great traders, the route would have been direct. No Tardis being required.
But it was Marco Polo, who introduced Oriental herbal medicine to the west. Which was the thrust of my previous point.
And by the way. I am a little saddened that you felt the need to deliberately misspell my name, in order to make a point. It always looks a bit petty, when people have to resort to such childish tricks, in print, don’t you think?
50
Craig is very big on Irish history.
Not so good at things involved with reality like science.
40
James Delingpole has an interesting artisle: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/23/delingpole-all-of-recent-u-s-warming-has-been-faked-by-noaa/.
72
Suitable theme music suggestion
“The Land of Makebelieve”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mLdUFw4Xfc
41
And here are a few studies on the MWP affecting the orient …
http://www.co2science.org/subject/m/summaries/mwpchina.php
and the LIA Chinese studies
http://www.co2science.org/subject/l/liachina.php
41
Some other studies covering extended periods
http://www.co2science.org/subject/a/asiantemptrends.php
41
An historical graph of temperature derived from proxies but with real error bars, no bolted on thermometer data, no fantasy data at the end and looking much like historical records would have us expect. Nothing like the Mann/IPCC Hockey Stick then. Real science, not fake science. Amazing. Real science, not Political Science.
Meanwhile our mad Premier in Victoria is passing laws to build solar farms and run our trams on sunshine and take us back to the Dark ages and violent protesters are trying to change history, redefine marriage and tear down our past. It would be Monty Python if it wasn’t real. Even Nelson at Trafalgar, a man who gave his life while saving his country and Europe is now an oppressor. What have the British done for us? Everything.
141
Why should Victoria be producing cheap coal generation to send to SA with a cheque for their LGCs when Victoria can also produce expensive power from more intermittents with gas backup and get money from the slow learners in Queensland who have not got onto this RET racket and are still sending cheap coal fuelled power south along with cheques to the intermittent intensive States.
As Queensland ramps up its intermittents to displace their coal there will be more skyrocketing electricity prices; as Victoria is experiencing since the closure of Hazelwood.
I actually heard a Victorian Government Minister saying that more renewable supply will naturally cause power prices to fall due to the economics of supply and demand. This shows a nativity that is hard to comprehend.
There is ZERO prospect of power prices falling in Australia while the RET is retained.
91
The RET is Communist-driven steel bar deliberately inserted in the spokes of Australias push-bike….
51
The ranks of Labor and the Greens are primarily made up of the unemployed, public servants, school teachers and union apparatchiks.
Few few engineers, accountants, project managers or others with commons sense and financial responsibility.
91
And ABC presenters, don’t forget them!
00
The “Hockey Stick” had error bars.
This Chinese graph has “bolted on” thermometer data.
This graph and the “Hockey Stick” are in full agreement…which isn’t surprising, seeing as every single scientific reconstruction of past temperature variations – using various proxies – has come up with essentially the same graph.
As usual, TDEF gives us the benefit of a glimpse into his anti-scientific and fact-free political views.
34
Really Vince?
The caption to the graph says it is a “2000 year temperature reconstruction synthesised from 28 proxies“! You can read that for your self by clicking on the graph.
42
Yes, I read it – they “bolted on” a whole lot of stuff.
15
Facts Craig – give us the facts.
You challenge me, so now it is your turn to list the “whole lot of stuff” that they “bolted on”, and how, and your understanding of why.
51
And here we are, still waiting for Craig to substantiate his previous assertion.
“All mouth, and no trousers”, is a very old English saying. I have no idea where that epithet comes from, but it seems to describe Craig to a tee.
41
Tdef.
“but with real error bars, no bolted on thermometer data”.
Have you actually looked at the chart from MBH98? The 2-sigma error bars are shown, the and reconstructed curve is shown separate from the actual data curve.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z3gAECFsxWc/VcrA0VphqaI/AAAAAAAAKT4/pYQFeaH29XY/s1600/hockey%2Bstick%2Bmbh98.png
19
You found the Hockey Stick!
WOW! You’re a legend! The IPCC have been trying to find your http://www.4.bp.blogspot.com Harry!
Keep it up mate, you’re a legend!
Daniel Andrews can be contacted at Spring Street Melbourne! 🙂
92
The hokey stick graph has been well disproven, Harry as you can read at Climate Audit.
But. whatever you do, don’t waste your time. Here’s your chance, Harry, to really make a name for yourself!
You could ask the authors of the paper for their data, or, because they are honest scientists, go find it for yourself, download it and subject their analysis of it all to a close scrutiny.
You could:
– find where they duplicated data and faked data by infilling for missing data as in MBH98
– you could pass their statistical methodology through a microscope to look for the same mathematical errors as in MBH98
– you could pass their statistical methodology through a second microscope to look for any errors at all
– you could pass pink noise through their method and see if the output replicates the same trends as their real data, as did the (erroneous) statistical method in MBH98
– you could find the join between the proxy data and the thermometer data as exists in MBH98.
So what are you waiting for, Harry? Here’s your chance; don’t miss it.
61
sophocles,
Don’t waste your time, mate. All Harry can hear is, “bleh, bleh, bleh, honest scientists, bleh, bleh, download, bleh, bleh, to a close”.
51
sophocles.
Disproven? Baloney.
You just repeat myths created by climate change denier blogs. Some people will believe anything.
But if “climate audit” wrote a rebuttal paper and published it in a respectable peer-reviewed scientific, I will go and have a look.
I have a question for you: why do you believe a blog such as “climate audit”, and not believe the research done by climate scientists?
15
Probably because they are not climatologists, or meteorologists, or atmospheric physicists.
There are rules of entry into the various scientific disciplines, with standards of quality and openness and provision for external audit, and other such mechanisms, that put them all on a par with other learned professionals, in the wide spread of scientific and civil endeavour.
Climate Science is no more than an offshoot of Political Science, and probably on a par with Domestic Science, that used to be taught to girls in school, whilst the boys did stuff like woodwork and metalwork.
81
In other words you didn’t answer my question. Then followed up with a subject change. Then followed up by a bizarre insult directed at, well, someone.
The is why I usually do not bother posting questions to a denier blog, they rarely (actually never) get answered.
Anyway I will see if Sophocles answers.
16
In other words, you didn’t like my answer.
So, you tell me …
What are the fundamental differences between a Climatologist, a Meteorologist, an Atmospheric Physicist, a Climate Scientist, and a Weather Presenter. They all appear to be distinct occupations, so presumably there are different academic requirements for each field. Surely someone with your skills and experience, can answer that question for me, straight off the bat?
51
“Surely someone with your skills and experience”
ROFLMAO…
Now, that’s just rude, RW! 😉
Well done.
41
Yes it is a graph, of sorts. But I notice that there is no attribution. It also appears to have been constructed in a CAD package.
It is the sort of graph that a ten year old might draw, to impress his (or her) mates.
31
There could be a CO2 signal there, who knows, but if there is Earthians ought to be very grateful for it.
The graph is misleading in that the heavy black line which looks like maybe 20 year or even 50 year smoothing is extended to both ends, which is incorrect:
“… extending smoothed [time-series] graphs beyond their formal endpoints represents an unfortunate habit which should be avoided …” (Prof Humlum climate4you).
The time series stops at 2000, we know the atmosphere hasn’t warmed since.
42
Good point. This is a 2017 graph. Why stop at 2000? Perhaps because Global Warming has created massive markets for Chinese solar panels and windmills? It would be politically wise to stop at 2000.
72
manalive.
The simple answer is the proxy data used by the Chinese scientists ended around 2000. But I will go and have a look (as everyone else should).
14
And, apart from the 2015/16 El Nino, there has been NO WARMING since 2000.
So.. what is your point ??
41
History, if used correctly and from authentic source material is a very powerful weapon against fairy tales like AGW. It’s a real shame that our education system doesn’t follow that process. Instead they teach fairy tales of all kinds. No wonder the West is in decline.
51
Now, suddenly and simultaneously worldwide, the violent extremists want to pull down monuments to our past and completely rewrite history. The US Civil war was not about slavery. That was a convenient retrospective excuse for an appalling and devastating economic conflict in which there were no winners, awful carnage and never a high moral purpose. The industrial revolution, coal and the steam engine freed the slaves to a life of poverty in the Northern slums. The Hollywood Left continue to rewrite history. Next Winston Churchill will be a villain. We already know Stalin was a hero. Global Warming Science must be cooling rapidly for the extreme left, so it’s time to crank up another attack on Western society, religions and history.
71
If there was any country in the world to gain more from CAGW ideology and has gained more I’m not aware of it .
21
From the graph: “the solid line indicates the cone of influence”.
Up until now, i thought climate scientists only operated in a secretive “cone of silence”.
31
OT , anyone catch the poor little me piece on their ABC , was Shillary talking about her new book and how Donald sabotaged her in the 2nd debate by invading her space and looking at her .
11
Maintain the rage, or is that temper tantrums.
31
Mrs Clinton imagines that people will find her compelling, invade her space, and stare at her in a ‘creepy’ fashion.
The idea probably came from the same source that imagined her winning the election in 2016.
Sad, really sad.
21
I thought she had been put into a secure facility for her own safety from self-harm, and the stares of others.
21
Good post Jo. BTW Dr Roy Spencer has written a new book to counter Gore’s deceptive AIS Sci- fi flick. Here’s his summary and a great title for his book.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/08/an-inconvenient-deception-how-al-gore-distorts-climate-science-and-energy-policy/#comments
31
‘…. significant 50–70-yr, 100–120-yr, and 200–250-yr cycles. ‘
There we see the well documented 60 year cycle, the centennial Gleissberg and bicentennial Gleissberg.
41
See Professor Carl-Otto Weiss spectral analysis close correlation to long
temperature record. Climate is cyclic, close match to the Chinese paper cycles.
\https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAELGs1kKsQ
No Tricks Zone has also covered the spectral analysis papers.
52
It appears the sun is wot done it:
Also, historical CO2 is often shown as relatively constant until SUVs were produced. If this were the control knob for global temps, how can there be any cooler temps as shown in this China graph?
42
…because CO2 isn’t the only forcing that affects climate. Duh.
44
There’s no real proof that it is a forcing which affects any climate.
31
sophocles.
“There’s no real proof that it is a forcing which affects any climate.”
Really? Not even Ice Ages?
If you are claiming forcings do not affect the climate, you will have a difficult time explaining why ANY climate change is possible.
36
“Really? Not even Ice Ages?”
No, CO2 does not “force” anything.. it is a benign, BENEFICIAL traveller, (when there is enough of it)
It certainly has NOTHING to do with causing ice ages, except that it tends to get to the “barely sustainable” atmospheric level.
41
Well, I don’t think that the climate should be forced at all. It has been around for long enough to make its own mind up.
51
So, what are the other forcings, Vince?
41
A Holocene denier is a climate change denier. And don’t let the deniers change the subject to events many millennia ago. The shifts of the last few thousand years are what should concern us most, and those shifts have been substantial.
Who harp loudest about climate change have no interest in climate change. Even slight blips like the expansion of Arctic ice after the 1960s (and the ensuing global cooling scare) are to be stuffed down the memory hole if they present the slightest challenge to orthodoxy and revelation.
And supporting this dank obscurantism is a modern media which would do credit to a travelling indulgence-seller of the 1600s. You ask for patient, curious science and instead you get deGrasse Tyson, Cox, Nye and Suzuki smirking, dancing, giggling, preaching and threatening on behalf of green globalism. Whoever is most smug and most certain is the most “scientific”. Then it’s over to Masterchef, The Voice and Big Brother for more scripted reality.
Turned ’em off yet?
71
There was increased volcanic activity around the end of the 13th century, which may have had an impact on the start of the Little Ice Age, and I wonder if a weak sun is correlated to eruptions?
Keeping in mind that correlation doesn’t prove causation.
Apart from that, our variable star is the major driver.
31
After the Copenhagen Conference I read that the delegation from China had reported to other delegates that during 3,600 years of civilisation in China there were three periods warmer than the present day, each brought greater prosperity as crop yields increased they said.
31
Anybody know the background history of this green author?
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/05/08/germany-breaks-solar-record-gets-85-electricity-renewables/
21
So part of one day which happened to be a holiday and all coal fired was turned off , how did they maintain baseload power ?
More crapola from watermelon central .
31
What is the upper limit of electricity prices?
I think the upper limit is set at the cost of generating your own with a diesel generator or natural gas fired generator which I believe to be about 60c per kWh.
41
No and not a realistic outcome even.
Presumably, if the price got that high those fuels would also have risen since they would be linked in some way to the price increase, so it would be more than 60. Plus a great many people would not be able to outlay the upfront costs on those generators and their maintenance and infrastructure which would be even more expensive and unavailable if 1 million households sought them out. Many would opt not to have such generators due to noise and living circumstances (renters, apartment dwellers), further easing the pressure to keep prices down.
00
Alan Kohler put up an interesting graph which showed our power consumption is decreasing while costs have soared, ‘the gap is the carbon tax’.
51
Good point, I should have included consumption decreases due to awareness and the consequence mitigation of costs (ie via efficient appliances and switching things off) – this means that energy bills and power prices will not be linearly correlated and the tipping point will go up as a result. Wont need as big generators if people were to switch, plus, if solar panels plus battery combo is cheaper than generator plus fossil fuel then…
10
We have to get rid of this carbon tax because CO2 does not cause global warming, the RET has distorted the market.
71
Gee says:
WTF?
but they can afford solar panels and inverters that do not work when needed?
Yes they’d opt to freeze to death?
You are such a phony plastic-leaf-of-in-denial- stupidity
30
as prices become more expensive there is more pressure/ motivation on the consumer to use less energy therefore, although a bill goes up it does not do so in direct proportion to the energy price since consumption goes down.
11
GA , can you please splain this to me .
“as prices become more expensive there is more pressure/ motivation on the consumer to use less energy therefore, although a bill goes up it does not do so in direct proportion to the energy price since consumption goes down.”
20
It is observed that consumption is going down due to a variety of things. I think I already posited some of these – efficent use of appliances, awareness of waste, thicker curtains, better insulation etc. People do this to save money. So as price pressure increases people use less since bills equal amount used times price, if use goes down and price goes up, there is not a linear relationship between total bill and energy price.
I feel like I’ve written this simple thing 3 times now so if it is still not understood I am going to accept that I’ve failed to communicate my meaning.
00
What happens to the aged and retired persons, living on a fixed pension, whose only options are to pay up or die?
11
you words not mine.
I am suggesting that both of these alternatives, because of their up front costs, will be avoided and it is a factor in determining this “tipping point” (if one exists). I have no idea which would be chosen and by whom and why but I would think that a passive (ie no need to stick fuel in it), quiet and already available, scalable already mass produced choice would be the preference.
01
Gee:
In the same comment you said: “your words not mine”? Duplicitous ratbag!
You don’t have a clue and I agree that you do not.
31
thanks for the personal abuse. Very reasonable comment given that I was referring to what was said earlier. I still never said that either option is affordable to some but of course, some can afford gold plated wood fired steam engines and a team of engineers to runs them. duh again
10
obviously not. People will respond appropriately and if they need a generator to stop them freezing and they can afford one and one is available to buy, they will buy it and use it.
duh
00
Ehem, Duplicitous Ratbag, when they cannot afford the energy they will respond by “appropriately” (your words)freezing to death.
You do not understand what poor is.
DUH!
20
OK.. I never took a moral position, I was examining DMs point and questioning how he derived a tipping point. Obliviously (duh again) people will take measures to survive from burning their own furniture to living in huddled groups. I don’t see your point. I never once said this is a good idea. I was not advocating higher prices.
Salut, Skål, Proost, Sei gesund
01
Gee Aye, you mention this:
And then this:
The problem with that is that you are still thinking on the (absolute) micro level.
All that consumption you mention is only in the Residential Sector, and that’s only 25% of power consumption, and those efficiencies you mention are such a minute part of that Residential sector consumption only, and would only be being done by a small part of that residential sector, so a small fraction of a small fraction of only 25%.
After so many years of watching the data, that consumption in Australia has hardly changed, in at least the near ten years since I started, also evidenced with one of my early Guest Posts here at Joanne’s site back in early 2012. (at this link) where the minimum Base Load was 18000MW, and here we are five years later and it’s still 18000MW+.
It’s not just you who is thinking like this, but virtually every commentator, who thinks that if we make small adjustments in our personal homes, we can reduce consumption.
You can make tiny adjustments at home, and it makes zero difference to power generation as a whole.
Even with the so called plethora of rooftop solar power going in, that Base Load, and the daily Peak consumption numbers have stayed virtually rock solid. The amount of people who are actually going off grid with battery storage has also made no difference. 15 to 20KWH per day in one home here and there is the tiniest fraction of 25000MW average consumption per day. Just one home going off grid amounts to only 0.00008% of actual average daily power consumption.
Can you see the point here?
It frustrates me that people think that tiny changes in their homes can make any difference at all, because even when I do attempt to explain it, the ad homs begin, immediately.
I know you’ll see the point here in the spirit of the manner I am trying to explain it.
Tony.
40
I was responding to the original poster who seemed to be talking about households. He said
in other words I was addressing DM’s point that when it gets expensive people make their own and Mark D., partly using abuse, stayed on topic by considering the same scenario (they need to avoid freezing).
I appreciate everything else you wrote and have no beef with it but please find someone else to scaffold your point around.
04
Gee Eye
Over 30% of Australian households are renters
You will forget these people are NOT eligible for Solar Rebates etc.
30% plus of Australians are suffering from increased electricity prices.
The poor are being penalised!
60
I noted this already
13
Around my way the bills are coming in, up 50% on last year, so its the carbon tax we had to have. This will go down like a lead balloon.
50
It depends, if you use solar plus diesel with a small lead acid battery charged by solar during the day and a diesel Generator at night three break even is around 35c per kWh, taking into account service charges, standalone power systems are competitive now. Especially if they use the waste exhaust heat for hot water. If you are on a 50c feed in tariff my modeling shows its possible to sell all the solar to the grid, and completely offset fuel costs delivering free electricity.
Note that diesel will NOT follow electricity because it is a transport fuel. They can’t split industry supply from consumer supply because transport fuels are privately operated unlike government controlled electricity. The government knows doubling the cost of diesel would be an unmitigated disaster which would see one nation elected ( anyone but them , even now it seems to be only labor that is willing to double down on stupid)
00
The abc science guru was going on about Exxon Mobil misleading the world about CAGW , how can they mislead anyone when it’s up to NASA and BOM and others to perform that function .
32
My mis-leader is bigger and better than your mis-leader?
41
Perhaps the ABC science guru was mislead about Exxon misleading the world. Perhaps it is the ABC that is misleading the world in regard to the misleading reportage about the activities of NASA and the BOM being involved in misleading the ABC science guru.
That might explain a few things.
11
Shorten getting a political hiding…..
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/socialist-revisionism-mathias-cormanns-doomsday-warning-of-success-exodus-under-bill-shorten-20170823-gy2b34.html
Nice to see Labor outed as USSR-lite….. which is correct.
Who’d want to lumped in with Corbyn?…*shudder*
31
the latest gotcha fast appearing on FakeNewsMSM worldwide:
23 Aug: SanFranciscoChronicle: Jenna Lyons: UC Berkeley prof spells ‘impeach’ in resignation letter to Trump
A UC Berkeley energy professor resigned from his science envoy position with the Trump administration Wednesday, citing the president’s “hate-filled rally” in Phoenix the night before, his recent remarks on violence at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., and his decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord.
Professor Daniel Kammen used the first letter in each of the seven paragraphs in his resignation letter to Trump to spell out I-M-P-E-A-C-H.
Kammen said he was inspired by last week’s resignation letter from members of the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, which spelled the word R-E-S-I-S-T.
“You don’t do that kind of thing by accident,” Kammen said in an interview Wednesday. “It’s a reflection of my dissatisfaction with the job he’s doing.”…
Kammen had focused on energy and climate in Africa and the Middle East as a science envoy, a largely ***honorific position facilitated with the resources and platform of the State Department…
***He was appointed to the post in 2016 under the ***Obama administration…
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/UC-Berkeley-prof-spells-impeach-in-11952932.php
now he’s Trump’s science envoy?
Trump’s science envoy quits in scathing letter with an embedded message: IMPEACH
In-Depth-Washington Post-7 hours ago
Donald Trump’s science envoy Daniel Kammen quits with hidden …
NEWS.com.au-4 hours ago
Wikipedia: Daniel Kammen
Daniel M. Kammen is the Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy at the University of California, Berkeley and a former climate Science Envoy for the State Department. He holds a dual appointment at the Energy and Resources Group (part of the College of Natural Resources) and the Goldman School of Public Policy. He is also a coordinating lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for their report, Climate Change 2007, assessing man-made global warming…
On September 9, 2010, Kammen was appointed chief technical specialist for renewable energy and energy efficiency at the World Bank…
In 2016, he was selected as a U.S. Science Envoy by the United States State Department…
3 weeks ago and no mention of any position at the State Dept, much less as Trump’s science advisor:
2 Aug: ThinkProgress: Study: Batteries and clean energy will outcompete fossil fuels by 2020
Government spending on research is key to energy storage cost reductions, study says.
by Mark Hand
Research and development investment for energy storage projects have brought the cost of a lithium-ion battery down from $10,000 per kilowatt-hour in the early 1990s to an expected $100 per kilowatt-hour in 2018, the researchers said. Residential solar and electric battery storage could become cost-competitive with grid electricity by 2020, they added…
The federal government provides seed money for energy technologies, including energy storage. In 2016, the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) was funding 75 battery system projects that the agency said have the potential to transform renewable energy storage in the next five to 10 years.
However, the House passed a so-called minibus spending bill last week that eliminates funding for ARPA-E, which would end agency’s research into battery projects. President Donald Trump also called for the elimination of ARPA-E in his proposed fiscal-year 2018 budget…
The potential for drastic cuts to federal research and development of energy storage technology, as proposed by the Trump administration, “would certainly be a short-term blow” to innovation, ***DANIEL KAMMEN, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley and director of its Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, said in an email to ThinkProgress.
KAMMEN, who was one of the three co-authors of the energy storage study, argued that dramatic funding downturns limit the competition between different competing technologies.
“We saw a great increase in positive competition under the Obama-era ARPA-E program, when many candidate technologies competed for recognition and support,” he said. “Now, if the Trump cuts do take place, this will not only cause a short-term tightening, but can also cut into this ‘diversity-competition’ which is so important over the long-run.”…
https://thinkprogress.org/study-sees-significant-drop-energy-storage-costs-77b1f2b15c71/
41
It’s good to see people here discussing temperature reconstructions. Previously they were just dismissed out of hand.
17
Yes but what do you think of their assertion that the cycles they discovered ‘significantly correlated with long-term changes in solar radiation’?
81
el gordo.
It’s plausible I guess. Solar radiation is a forcing. They also mention volcanic eruptions which are also a forcing.
26
Going into the LIA there was a lot of volcanic forcing at the end of the 13th century, but more importantly increasing iceberg activity in the North Atlantic by 1250 AD indicates a solar effect on the NAO.
51
Why do they ignore the mutual solar and planetary gravitational flux?
71
Barycentric behaviour.
‘Interestingly, every 11.07 years, the Sun and the planets Venus, the Earth and Jupiter are aligned,’ Stefani says.
‘We asked ourselves: Is it a coincidence that the solar cycle corresponds with the cycle of the new conjunction or the opposition of the three planets?’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3822306/The-mysterious-alpha-effect-revealed-Tidal-activity-Venus-Earth-Jupiter-linked-solar-activity.html#ixzz4qkgPJPw8
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
51
“Why do they ignore the mutual solar and planetary gravitational flux?”
Subject change?
05
There is a difference between a “reconstruction” and a “fabrication”, twot.
51
This is the kInd of paper that Mann would have written if climate science was not politicised.
41
Like many other denialists, you either didn’t read the paper or you’re misleading your readers on what the paper said. The paper says:
“This suggests that, before the 20th century, regional differences in global warming were driven by natural climate forcing—perhaps because the MCA [the Medieval Climate Anomaly, between AD 950 and AD 1250] and other epochs with elevated temperatures were warmed by increased solar radiation and were dominated by the thermostat and associated stronger gradient patterns; whereas, global warming in the 20th century was driven by increased greenhouse gas volumes, leading to increased atmospheric stability, weaker zonal circulation, and an associated weaker SST gradient, which characterizes the greenhouse-gas mode. Thus, warming due to increased volumes of greenhouse gases generates a different climate signature from that caused by changes in solar radiation, as demonstrated by results based on an ECHO-G climate model simulation (Liu et al., 2013), and has led synchronized global warming throughout the 20th century, especially in the NH”
“https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00376-017-6238-8
So the paper affirms that greenhouse gas increases caused the recent global warming, despite what happened during the medieval period from 950 to 1250. This is in agreement with what informed scientists have been telling you denialists for years:
“These examples illustrate that different climate changes in the past had different causes. The fact that natural factors caused climate changes in the past does not mean that the current climate change is natural. By analogy, the fact that forest fires have long been caused naturally by lightning strikes does not mean that fires cannot also be caused by a careless camper.”
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-6-1.html
“Critics have argued that, if temperatures were as warm or warmer than current conditions before the onset of anthropogenic forcing, this would provide evidence that “natural” fluctuations alone could explain current conditions, since greenhouse gases were only ~280 ppmv during Medieval time (versus 400 ppmv today).
[…]
With the increase in irradiance and a decline in explosive volcanism in the early 20th century, global temperatures might then have returned to an unperturbed level similar to that of the MQP [Medieval Quiet Period], but the rapid rise in anthropogenic greenhouse gases propelled temperatures well beyond that level, as positive anthropogenic radiative forcing overwhelmed natural variability (Myhre et al., 2013).”
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291523102_The_Medieval_Quiet_Period
Anyway, regional temperature fluctuations do not necessarily equate to global warming. So please don’t pretend as if regional temperature patterns from some parts of China debunk the hockey stick pattern seen in temperature reconstructions that are more globally representative. The hockey stick shows up in these more global representative reconstructions, as shown in sources such as:
“Continental-scale temperature variability during the last two millennia”
“A global multiproxy database for temperature reconstructions of the Common Era”
“Inter-hemispheric temperature variability over the past millennium”
“Ensemble reconstruction constraints on the global carbon cycle sensitivity to climate”
“Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures: Examination of criticisms based on the nature and processing of proxy climate evidence”
“Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia”
00
Atomsk — so interesting that you can see those messages in the proxy graph — a gift like those who read runes and crystals, but alas for you, merely because scientific authors state that they too can see “causes” doesn’t make it so, and the paper itself contains no evidence at all for that conclusion.
We don’t “pretend” that regional proxies represent global ones. We cite studies (that you appear blind too) of proxies all over the world. Nevermind.
Myhre et al, etc and whatnot all use broken models (at best) to declare things are anthropogenic since 1850 or so. None of their models explain temperatures or predict the MWP, LIA, Roman warming, because none of their overly simplistic models think the sun is anything other than a ball of light. Too bad about solar magnetic, solar winds, or solar spectral shifts — none of those are in the models.
CO2 levels don’t match any of the turning points — though they can be aligned with a smoothed temperature graph that has the right scaling on the axis between certain years, and only if the data is adjusted to remove the raw ups and downs that don’t fit.
00