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
New solar farm approved at Narrandera NSW. Covers a mere 2600 hectares of productive farnm land. I cannot understand the lack of outrage by green groups complaining that these grass lands will be converted to a solar panel desert.
251
Unfortunately your correlation of rationality and Green groups is a common mistake right up there with,
– Critical thinking.
– Humanity.
– Environment (the actual one)
– Abstract thought.
– Personal hygiene.
261
The Green types specifically want people to die. The politically correct term is “depopulation”. They want productive farmland to be removed from service to be substituted for Civilisation destroying solar panels.
121
People need to research the term “Rewilding” – in essence its emptying people out of 95% of all land area, cramming them into cities where they can be controlled, “farmed” and “culled” as needed…
All to protect the mythical New Age false god of “Gaia” of course….
111
Working away and it’s currently 34.5c in Hamilton Victoria, very nice weather compared to the December 2018 summer.
40
Judith Curry
“National Climate Assessment: A crisis of epistemic overconfidence”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/02/national-climate-assessment-a-crisis-of-epistemic-overconfidence/
80
It doesnt matter, the WHOLE thing is a scam (and they know it). These assessments arent worth the paper (digital or otherwise) they are written on.
The whole IPCC was set up for CONTROL of the worlds wealth. STOP end of story. They know the models are wrong (well fake to be precise). THEY even admit the thing is made up but that doesnt matter, as long as they have control over you and me and our use of energy.
I think we can figure out who THEY are.
Check https://windowsontheworld.net/video_type/end-times/ for good analysis from Mark Windows and Piers Corbyn.
101
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate
Former IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer.
(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.
71
Funnily enough, the ozone hole wasnt anything to do with humans either.
51
He does talk about limiting coal use but the concept that the atmosphere is a finite, limited resource is the giveaway.
World government by those who know better than us.
We are in deep doo doo.
KK
71
But coal is king – control coal, control people.
The globalists are, at heart, demented control freaks……
I’ve read the Book, I know how this will end.
PS – we win.
110
Hmm!
I’ve been doing the electrical data now for two sections of 13weeks at a time, and the most recent 13 weeks takes in just the first four weeks of Summer. During the benign Season of Spring, when power consumption falls from the Winter highs and then the lead up to the Summer highs, coal fired power plants use that time to do routine maintenance, so their Units will be ready for the Summer highs, and it was nothing to see weeks on end with ten to thirteen of those coal fired Units off line, and you could see as one came back on line, another somewhere else would go off line, so carefully was that maintenance scheduled.
Now, here we are with the approach of the highest consumption Month of the year, January, and then to a slightly lesser extent, February, and watch as power consumption increases as the schools go back.
So now with (most of) the maintenance done, there are only four of those coal fired Units off line.
You can see (from the data) just how much powerr is being delivered by those coal fired Units, anything up to (and sometimes beyond) 80% of every watt of power being consumed across the vast coverage area of the AEMO.
One of the things which might get lost in all that looking at so much data is the fact that coal fired power ramps up and down on a daily (and even on an hourly) basis. That ramping up and down sees swings from the daily low for coal fired power to the daily high during that evening Peak power time of 4500MW to 5000MW, and to place that in some sort of perspective, with coal fired power delivering so much, that ramping figure of up to 5000MW is higher than the total power delivered across the day from EVERY other source added together.
Okay then having painted the picture, now go and look at the image at this link. This is the costing structure for power across the AEMO coverage area. It is their official costing structure, the bid stack pricing mechanism.
It’s worked out on a five minute basis, and averaged at the end of each half hour for that half hour, and every power generating entity receives that half hourly average price for ALL the power they deliver across that half hour, if you can see that. As more power is required to meet consumption, they take the next bid in line which is the lowest, and add that power, and so on for as much as they need.
Okay now, picture painted.
Now go back to what I said above how coal fired power ramps up and down across the day.
As that bid image shows the lowest colour bar there is existing power, and as you can see, that is the cheapest, and as I have explained, most of it is coal fired power.
As coal fired power ramps up across the day, it is added to the overall total, but is added at their original bid price, the lowest price you see there, because they are already on line and delivering their power.
So then, let me see if I’ve got this right and I’ll make this next statement stand out by block quoting it in bold:
Quick, lets blow up some more of them, eh!
Tony
340
Good work Tony.
So the electricity price has NOTHING to do with the actual generation cost..oh my!
110
Nor the supposed low prices of renewables. The operators offer these in a scramble to get on the list, knowing that they will get the higher average price + the RET subsidy on top of that.
110
The cost structure of that bid stack price diagram is indicative only, but when I asked the gentleman I spoke with at the AEMO about it, he mentioned that the low mark you see there is actually close to what you see there, and that’s $35/MWH, or 3.5 cents per KWH. So now, look at your most recent power bill and see what the Retailers are charging you. Also go to the daily AEMO hourly price costs for wholesale power, and see what they are.
When an entity (coal fired power as a whole) is generating so much power (16130MW of 21540MW Per hour across the last 13 weeks, or 74.86% of every watt of generated power) then they can afford to charge at such a small amount, considering that even on that low price they are still making a profit, and then the big kicker, they actually get the averaged half hourly cost for all the power they do deliver.
Coal fired power is not the big boogey man here. It’s actually the saviour, no matter who says what.
Tony.
250
My son is a sparky and quite bright, but he is hooked up with a green voting public servant. Try as I may I can’t convince him that he should come here and read the posts of some both smarter and better informed than he.
Keep up the good work Tony.
100
Our home grown terrorists have really convinced both major parties it’s worth us paying much higher power prices to reduce our emissions in the hope of doing something good for the planet’s climate. Strange that other nations are still going ahead building hundreds more coal fired power stations many using our coal. Can someone please explain why both Morrison and Shorten should not be classed as traitors?
141
And what is a traitor: “a person who betrays someone or something, such as a friend, cause, or principle” (Apple/Oxford dictionary).
Ergo, no other classification is possible for Morrison and Shorten. Worse, we have live with it and watch it deepen (as RickWill observes in #4.3).
40
Morrison i think sometimes is ignorant of the greenist stuff, Shorten, however….
00
Yes we might have to live with it but if only enough people would wake up – we could change things. Unfortunately reality bites and we have to live with the fact most people are still asleep.
30
That describes the plan of the two main political parties in Australia. So far it has been achieved in South Australia and Victoria has made some progress toward that target.
100
What will it take for so many pathetic pollies to understand that additional investment in wind/solar does not deliver any dispatchable power. Every MW of wind/solar must be 100% backed up by coal/gas/hydro/batteries. So there is double the investment, therefore higher costs. The only reason the grid has survived to date has been the long standing investment in peaking hydro. SA keeps proving how vulnerable and costly a network is that relies solely on wind/solar and high priced gas.
70
Missing hotspot found in Oz
https://pics.tinypic.pl/i/00977/de4gqy3g6lk8.png
50
Good demonstration of the boundaries of the circulation. Easily see the circum-antarctic current and jet stream (green). Aus gets hot as it has no significant mountain ranges as do other large continents. Argentina, also hot, is modified by the Andes.
50
The reason why its excessively hot in Australia at the moment is because of the low pressure troughs snaking down from the tropics to greet cold fronts in the Southern Ocean.
http://www.bom.gov.au/fwo/IDY65100.pdf
Have to give some credit to BoM, their seasonal forecast was for a hot dry continent this summer.
31
el gordo,
WA has been average or below, SE Queensland has been significantly below average. Don’t these “small” places count in the assessment that it is a hot dry continent this summer?
Australia is a hot continent every summer and has been since the white fellahs arrived. It is called WEATHER.
Please don’t get sucked in by the squeakiest wheels in Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra and the BOM propaganda machine.
It sure was hot in Melbourne for a couple of days this week, but what about the several days of low 20s which will follow?
62
Your long range prognosis for the climate may well prove to be on the button EG, But I think that I will take your shorter term weather forecasts with a grain of salt from now on. You promised a cool Summer a couple of threads ago ! Can’t find a ‘melting’ smiley so here,
20
RATS! I thought it would be that one of the 2 girls in brief bikinis “accidentally” shot on the beach during the recent 28℃ heat wave in Sydney.
60
Bloody cold in Perth at the moment. Is it summer?
30
Chang’e 4 lands in Aitken Basin, but no details on exactly where.
20
After the last few threads I’ve been unable to get the idea out of my mind that they have us by the short and curlies.
Consider,
1. At least 3 billion dollars is being creamed of our annual electricity payments, that’s not including industry, what’s left of it.
2. Both major partis, Libls and Laba, will Not acknowledge the cost burden imposed on Australians by the rigged electricity system.
3. These Partis encourage and foreshadow more immediate construction of Renewables generation capacity.
4. Total parliamentary numbers for state and federal governments would total about One thousand elected members.
5. Assuming that half of the 3 billion has to remain as profit for the original “entrepreneurs” and enablers leaves $1,500,000,000.
6. $1,500,000,000 divided by the 1,000 interested parties comes to $1,500,000.
No accusations are being made, but the entire electricity generation, delivery and governance Leaves a Lot to be Desired.
Remember, both sides of politics has made it quite clear that they want this to continue and, unbelievably, they want to expand it.
They think that collectively, we are Stupid.
KK
151
Yes your observations are correct. We are indeed faced with the fact that both major parties are on the same page to destroy our coal power industry. There can be no question about it. What’s even worse is hundreds more new coal fired power stations are coming on-line around the word over the near future, many to use our coal. So our feeble efforts to reduce our emissions will have absolutely zero impact on the climate. I can only come to the conclusion neither major party deserves to form a majority government.
150
…or all “parties” are controlled by The Party…..
We don’t have democracy any more.
And why do people shy away from what appears an actual conspiracy to trash our energy production, from calling it a conspiracy?
Language is powerful, lets use it wisely.
60
All states are striving to be South Australia. SA is the global hero in the fight against Climate Change. The linked report gives a perspective on relative achievement of the Australian states and territories:
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/States-Renewable-Energy-Report.pdf
This is a quote from the report:
Big money is being invested in intermittents and involvement of households in the program creates a powerful lobby. One third of households in Queensland now has solar. My sister is a pensioner living in Queensland and she was overjoyed to get an electricity statement with a positive number rather than a bill. I do not know where she got the funds for the installation and she would have no idea how much the financially disadvantaged contributed to her installation. Solar will be a great help with her finances.
There will be a huge push to ensure Shorten makes good on his 50% RET in 2019. Even if the present government got a new coal generator financed, it would be out of office before there was any progress on the construction. Any contracts would go the way of Victoria’s east-west link.
86
Rick, this is a ‘wind up’, right?
Man, if I wanted Science Fiction, I’d go to Isaac Asimov.
Tony.
130
You can take the report as you like. It just gives a different perspective from the chat on this blog and I do not see any political will to alter it. In fact all the momentum favours accelerating take up of intermittents.
30
I have a question, Rick.
Suppose take up of rooftop solar power is so successful that every household has a set of panels and every household then
expects to receive a dividend. Where does the money come from?
At the moment the households benefiting from the solar energy payback are effectively harvesting the sun as a free resource. Imagine instead of panels on your roof you had grapevines and the rain watered them and the sun ripened them . You could them harvest them, take them to market and get paid. Where then does that money come from? Obviously from the person buying your grapes. So in the case of rooftop solar power, when everyone has it, who buys the harvest of excess energy or power? Not the domestic user because they are expecting to be net sellers. Industry? When every Australian politician wants to close down industry? Are there enough schools and hospitals and offices without their own solar power facility to take up the domestic generation? If not then the dividend will dwindle to virtually nothing,surely.
30
“My sister is a pensioner living in Queensland and she was overjoyed to get an electricity statement with a positive number rather than a bill.”
I commented to friend who had solar panels put on his house, I can’t begrudge anyone when the government is giving away money.
You would be a mug not to take it.
50
“I do not know where she got the funds” [Rick Will’s sister]
I do. She probably got a massive discount and an additional subsidy as a pensioner, like I did. 5kw for $8,500. As an administrator for my wife in residential care, I was required by QCAT to invest any joint income wisely and subject to audit.
Solar on the roof fitted the requirement, and made a short-term difference. As I work from home and am here most of the time my bills were never negative, but I was saving $450 – $600 per quarter. If the whole scam falls over I won’t be disappointed. I assume the panels can be reconfigured to run some local services such as water heating, or charge sla batteries for a low voltage secondary circuit. As my wife died recently I no longer have to satisfy any QCAT requirements, and I’m no longer having to pay the massive residential care fees. On the other hand, the inverter broke back in November due to a very minor spike on the mains during an electrical storm. SolaX sent a new inverter up from Melbourne. Aussie Solar have made loads of promises to fix it this week/this month/before the end of 2018, and pigs might fly. All now in the hands of Consumer Affairs, and I’m posting adverse comments on social media.
80
Well there you have it. Inverter gives up the ghost. How much did the replacement cost? Fitted? How old was it?
$8,500 + replacement Inverter already purchased ($1,500) plus another before the 20 years is up ($1,500) = $11,500.
Do the Cost benefit.
Depreciation over 20 years = $575 pa
Opportunity Cost @ 6%pa = $690 pa
Total Standing Costs = $1,265 pa
Now, add to that the cost of the additional power you’ll need to buy off the grid, minus the FiT pittance you receive. Add in a couple of hundred pa for cleaning and maintenance.
Add it all together, use it as the denominator to divide the total electricity used (in kWh) and that tells you how much your “renewable” energy costs.
Compare it to the cost of buying direct off the grid. Is it cheaper? Is it dearer?
If cheaper, does the saving add over 20 years to more than the Standing Costs? If not, you’ve just dudded yourself.
110
Numerator. Not denominator.
But then, nobody seems to do Arithmetic these days, so why would it matter?
So much for peer review.
🙂
30
I think where the benefit will be, is when the australian political New Age puppet masters ( globalists ) do thier next MacBeth impersonation and consult thier occult Gaian priestesses ( witches ) to tell them when to stick the knife into our civilisation….
When power prices keep going up, solar will be about just survival, as the New Agers are literally hell bent on killing our way of life. These people are evil.
30
Martin, sorry to hear about the passing of your wife….
20
Mark M,
I am the mug, because it is my money they are squandering.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GOVERNMENT MONEY.
100
It is not the government that is giving it away. The money comes from electricity consumers unable or unwilling to install their own rooftop solar.
80
May your scam be with you – long live the force SARC.
50
If you give people perverse incentives like “free stuff” they are sure to take them. It comes at the expense of other people however.
60
We in Nth Qld aren’t “Australia” but our Christmas/new year has been quite moderate. known a lot worse. Cairns, a few hundred Ks north has been very wet. I expect the Tableland hydro generation to be 118MW for some time. 🙁
70
They are not wrong ! Collectively , we are Morons ! It’s a three way race between AUS, NZ and Canada to determine the winner in the Moron World Championships. I think we may be leading by a head. An empty head at that !
10
<<>>>
❶①❶①❶①❶①
❶①❶①❶①❶①
❶①❶①❶①❶①
❶①❶①❶①❶①
<<<>>>
Temperature anomalies don’t kill people, absolute temperatures kill people.
Sign my petition, to ban absolute temperatures !!!
We are better off, without them.
My latest article, shows just how evil absolute temperatures really are. They are not quite as evil as CO2, but CO2 has been quietly increasing absolute temperatures, while everybody has been busy looking at temperature anomalies.
.
Global warming temperature distributions. (I know that this is a boring title, but the article is incredibly exciting !!!)
========================================
Where else can you see 10.0 and 15.0 degrees Celsius of global warming?
Using a single number to represent global warming, like 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius of global warming, makes it hard to see how bad the problem really is. Is 2.0 degrees Celsius of global warming a major change from what we have now, or is it a minor change?
Using temperature anomalies to represent global warming, removes (or ignores) what is “normal” for temperatures. “Normal”, becomes a single temperature anomaly, 0.0 degrees Celsius. Does 0.0 degrees Celsius, really represent the “normal” temperature distribution of the Earth.
What is the solution to this problem? The answer is to look at temperature distributions, rather than single numbers. Temperature distributions make global warming multi-dimensional, rather than a one-dimensional number. Temperature distributions show how the temperature varies with latitude, elevation, proximity to the ocean, size of the landmass, UHI (urban heat island effect), and many other factors.
Comparing the “normal” temperature distribution, to a “global warming” temperature distribution, makes it easier to judge the size of the problem. Are “alarmists” trying to turn a molehill into a mountain? Or are “deniers” trying to turn a mountain into a molehill?
This article will show you the temperature distributions for a range of global warming “amounts”. People with weak hearts should not look at the more extreme amounts of global warming. Seeing 10.0 or 15.0 degrees Celsius of global warming on a graph, may be too much for those with a vivid imagination.
This article offers a choice of global warming simulations.
1) with NO polar amplification
2) WITH polar amplification
https://agree-to-disagree.com/gw-temperature-distributions-1
33
Truly terrifying Sheldon, I’d say I was chilled to the bone but the warming is just too much.
21
China is expanding its presence in Antarctica.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=6028
10
And also their presence on the “Dark Side of the Moon”
Food for thought:
Oh, wait – they only landed a craft on it, NO people, not returning to Earth and no communications from that side either.
So, USA landed a craft on the moon, with two astronauts in it, took off, returned to orbiter, returned to earth with no loss of life in July 1969.
Heck, that means China is only OVER 50 years behind the USA at a minimum – they’ve still got to do it with real people on board and then return back to Earth without any loss of life!
BTW – if you’re a conspiracy theorist (which I’m not) USA effort was all done in a film studio – ROTFLMAO
Cheers,
40
Nobody can take anything away from the Americans who achieved great success through hard work, tenacity, courage and technical brilliance, but do you know why the Chang’e landed in the Von Kármán crater?
31
sadly there is a lot of past tense in that EG.
Never have I wished so hard that a POTUS succeed. I believe Trump has three months, six max, to start the perp walks.
30
Go and check the ACTUAL photos of the so called moon landing, there are many experts that have proved the photos are questionable, AND the fact that humans coudnt go beyond the Van Allen belts at that time, actually admitted by NASA. Im on the fence about the moon landings, knowing the state of the cold war in 1969 Id go with a fake landing 60-40.
22
Yup. Cause the Russians were in on it too.
The one nation that had the most to gain by proving the USA lied about the moon landings? In TOTAL COLLUSION!
Seriously, if you honestly have any doubts about the moon landings you are outing yourself as someone who can’t analysis basic problems very deeply.
30
China’s stated GDP growth has shrunk to 1.x% PA. How the mighty have fallen from the once touted 10%. Interesting coincidence that this is after just two years of the unstable Trump’s Presidency. Anyone heard of fat Kim lately doing anything other than talking to the South? While they are talking Trump can step back, leaving it to the locals to come to terms.
It is now up to Trump to ensure China no longer gets a free ride, that it can’t finance debt traps for Malaysia and all the other small nations and take over airports and harbours on default, with US$ trade imbalances. I think these far flung bases could bleed the treasury for more than they can afford soon.
BTW As with all things political I doubt Oz has the gutz to put our exports at risk. We are also on the list of US friends who have challenged China’s grab to claim all of the Sth China Sea. Their plan is to destroy two US carriers with hyper-sonic missiles [technology sold to China for some donations to the Clinton Foundation]. They figure that the US will not accept the losses and will run up the white flag. That didn’t work for Hitler bombing London nor did it work for Japan In Okinawa. They too thought they could negotiate some sort of truce rather than surrender, with a high US body count. Might have worked but for the memory of Pearl seared into the US psyche..
50
So if China said we can turn your deserts into a lush landscape we should say no?
10
North Atlantic Oscillation goes negative, with the promise of a freezing western Europe.
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao_index.html
50
“Delingpole: Twelve Debunked Climate Scares We Can Laugh at in 2019”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/03/delingpole-twelve-debunked-climate-scares-we-can-laugh-at-in-2019/
40
On the other hand
“Delingpole: My Six-Point Plan for Saving the World in 2019…”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/02/what-i-want-in-2019-more-democracy-truth-integrity-sexism/
21
3 January: another pleasant day maxing-out at 26.5˚C (according to the Mercedes’ thermometer – it’s a work van) even though a brisk southerly took the edge off that (was reading 23˚C most of the day apart from that momentary blip). Had a bodysurf after work – brr! – ocean’s still trying to make it up to 20˚C (was a fun punchy little wave, care of a little low south of Tonga, peeling off the reef while a bunch of kids were enjoying getting blasted in the backwash, like us groms did 40+ years ago… some things never change). Then driving home listening to the radio, his majesty‘s moany-droney-sappy voice interrupted and the day turned surreal:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/109707579/2018-warmest-year-on-record-for-new-zealand-says-climate-scientist
Climate
scientistcharlatan Doktor Jim-Jam Salinger (of climategate infamy) said 2018 “was the warmest year on record in New Zealand.” Not to worry – he says this every year. With his own unique special cooking recipe which he calls global heating, he’s managed to crank NZ’s 2017 ‘record’ of 13.4˚C up to a whopping 13.5˚C for 2018. PANIC! Thankfully most of the commenters in this shonky article (linked above) didn’t believe him neither, eg. “Lovely, absolutely lovely. I’m really enjoying it.” We’re not all mad over here 😉61
Did a lot of body surfing as a kid. Bar Beach __ a brilliant place.
40
You really are a genuine Newy boy KK.
The only other person I know who body-surfed was my father, an ex-lifesaver of the 40s.
My dad’s cousin decided to build himself a hollow plywood surfboard after the war when boards were just starting to take off. The idea was that you soaked the ply of the top deck towards the nose so that it swelled, then screwed it onto the side rails and as the ply dried it shrank, pulling the nose into a natural upward curve. He did something wrong and ended up with the only surfboard at Cronulla with a downward curve on the nose. It was not helped by the fact that his board weighed roughly the same as an average prawn trawler. His surfing career ended before it began.
20
I have found it interesting that people will pick up or be given a fact and not have the nous to actually check it. One such, while trying to demonstrate how Aussie he was, came from Jonathan Pilger in a book he wrote long ago.
Perhaps this explains it:
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/09/shaking-the-foundation-of-medical-research-half-of-peer-reviewed-papers-spun-as-success/#comment-1741261
KK
30
Re The Lancet on this
““The current Editor in Chief of the British journal Lancet, Dr. Richard Horton, wrote a scathing editorial saying: “Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue; science has taken a turn towards darkness.””
I’ve been at a seminar where Horton was one of the speakers. He is NOT one of the good guys. The half he is referring to is not necessarily the half you might think, and he is one of the prime gatekeepers of whether bad science gets published. His editorial policy is troubling, politically, because Lancet is not meant to push ideology or policy, but it does. Don’t just believe me, check out his history.”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2018/12/29/w-o-o-d-29-december-2018/#comment-105875
20
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/379422/a-year-of-wild-weather-cyclones-lightning-storms-flooding-and-cold-snaps
The loonies of academia are out in force and it’s only the first week of the new year: “Climate scientist James Renwick wouldn’t be surprised to see another year of extremes as global temperatures rise [sic] … ‘I wouldn’t be surprised if there was thunderstorms and windstorms and all the rest of it.'” Shocking! And pray tell, what is the rest of it Jammy? Cold snaps and unseasonal snowfalls, eh Jammy, in every single month (winter and summer, 12 months’ worth) of 2018.
http://www.bom.gov.au/wa/observations/waall.shtml?ref=hdr
Whatever happened to that so-called heat wave hitting you fellas – Albany Airport, WA dropped to a single digit this morning while Wandering took out the coldest town in Aus award again… 4.8˚C. Hopefully my staunchly green – as in naïve – niece in Melbourne survives this afternoon’s 50% temperature drop from 42˚ to 21˚ as the cold front goes through. It’s all fun and games until someone gets hurt. Enjoy the cool change Victoriastanites! Onwards to Glorious Next Tuesday™…
30
Tony Heller has produced graphs showing that the number of extremely hot days in the US has significantly decreased over the last 100 or so years.
Has anyone produced similar graphs for Australia?
61
All James Hansen’s testable predictions from 30 years ago for 30 years into the future have been proven invalid.
Therefore AGW hypothesis is invalid.
We can now start building more coal plant and demolishing windmills and solar panels. That’s a relief!
Tony Heller looks at Hansen’s predictions. https://youtu.be/U2z-UPTDjW0
72
As a few of us here have stated before and now Tim Blair of The Daily Telegraph is saying, Morrison should start growing a backbone like Trump’s and stop accommodating the leftist media and instead oppose them simply because it’s worth a shot and under the circumstances Morrison has nothing to lose. I doubt he has what it takes but I would love to be proven wrong.
SCOMO’S TRUMP CARD
81
I have repeatedly said that there are no votes to be gained by cow-towing to the leftist agenda.
90
There’s a lot of behind the scenes Renewables “investments” that have to be shepherded along. Just check with John Hewson and the Labs looking after the bruvvers supra funds, ethically invested, of course.
KK
60
Andy, I have a post addressing you directly below.
Regards,
Mat
10
Just like his predecessor, he has no business pretending to be a Liberal PM. Morrison always was a fence-sitter; a nothing-man who has merely risen to new heights of nothingness in his policies. One lump of coal in the chamber does not make him a rebel and a man of action. I doubt he knew what coal looked like before that.
50
kowtowing to tyranny is never the answer – tyranny is evil, it will take amy good faith in an action, ignore it, and always demand more.
Hitlers negotiating style was one where he would demand spmeting, and when he had it, raise hus demands even higher. This is how the leftist ” microagression” stupidity works – its a game thats designed such that you can never win, and the demands are cinstantly being lifted.
“Hitlerism” 101….
30
Australian total government debt (federal, state and local) now over $842 billion.
http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/
40
Will we ever see the clock go the other way because if we don’t and I can’t see how it will then eventually we as a nation will have to default. Same with the US. The clock is ticking.
40
The AUD went down to 0.67 U.S. today.
30
Has recovered much. Bad news lead to fast fall due to a lack of market liquidity over the Christmas/New Year break. Still the big picture is not good for us long term. We are stuffed along with other Western nations. When the US dollar becomes worthless in the years ahead we will quickly follow.
40
Initially yes, but as we maintain a stable economy and the chinese keep buying our real estate, the chinese wont want thier assets drop too much in value, so our economy will be propped by by asian interests…
20
The Chinese have other options. For example we could become just another province of China, and very likely will. I’m sure that would sit very nicely with their grand plans.
30
Sort of like a Pacific Switzerland.
20
So each Australian, man, woman, child and baby has had over $30,000 of debt incurred on our behalf by our wonderful, trusty political elites.
They know we have broad shoulders.
Thankfully MalEx444 only made up $20 per head for the save the Great Big Barrier Reef donation.
ELONs last battery sale to S.A. was also part of the deal.
KK
60
David,
The last 3 senior politicians in this country who cared two hoots about the National Debt were Abbot, Hockey and Campbell Newman.
They were all slaughtered by their own party for having the temerity to suggest that something should be done to curb the National Debt.
71
Tick tock … Venezuela here we come…
‘It first started as a trickle, but really in the last year, it became a wave of people fleeing both for reasons of persecution and simply because they could no longer sustain themselves,” Todd Chapman, the U.S Ambassador to Ecuador, told Fox News.
The depth of the catastrophe threatens to unravel the stability and wreak financial havoc beyond just Latin America – with little end in sight. It’s quite simply “the worst crisis the region has seen in modern history,” according to Moises Rendon, associate director and fellow for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)’.
30
China’s first 100MW solar power plant turned on
https://www.euronews.com/2018/12/28/china-s-first-100mw-solar-power-plant-turned-on
Not commenting on the viability of this, but the video is quite spectacular.
30
AndyG55,
I’m glad to see you in this thread. When discussing global temperatures, you made a bet with me five years ago where you said:
That was on 4th January 2014 when the UAH 13 month rolling anomaly was about 0.15°. It’s now about 0.25°, excluding the El Nino in 2016. That’s a rise of 0.2°C / decade.
I said:
You responded with:
So you agreed you would revise your thinking if temperatures did not go down in 2-5 years. It has now been 5 years and the temperatures have gone up. I’m now checking in to see what your position is?
Regards,
Mat
32
Temperatures ARE heading down. QED !!
43
Andy, since your prediction of imminent cooling at the start of 2014 the UAH 13 month average has been higher at every point in time, cooling has not occurred. You said you would revise your thinking after 2-5 years if cooling had not occurred.
It sounds like you are still sure cooling is “just around the corner”. So, i’m interested, hypothetically how many more years of warming would it take for you to revise your thinking now?
32
Been cooling for the last 2 years at least.
32
And if 2019 warms, what then?
11
There could be more solar energy stored in the oceans.
The Grand Solar maximum ran for several solar cycles.
There may be another small El Nino (struggling to get there)
But is NOT from enhanced atmospheric CO2, its from solar energy.
There is NO EVIDENCE of warming by enhanced atmospheric CO2.
Enhanced atmospheric CO2 DOES NOT cause ocean warming.
You know that, so why the childish juvenile behaviour?
21
I don’t agree
00
“I don’t agree”
Provide empirical proof then
How much does an increase of 10ppm of atmospheric CO2 warm the ocean?
You must know.. or do you just “believe”
There is NO MECHANISM for DWLWR to penetrate the ocean surface and cause ocean warming.
The warmer the air above the ocean, the more evaporation.
Every used a s Coolgardie sack ?.
11
Please don’t put words in my mouth, I don’t agree with your statement. Even skeptics like Watts, Spencer, Lindzen, Monckton and I believe even our good host here accept CO2 warms the atmosphere somewhat – even if they disagree with the mainstream position on how much warming. With even a slightly warmer atmosphere, by the second law of thermodynamics, the ocean it is in contact with will warm. So you’re holding a very lonely position on that one.
But to summaries you overall position, correct me if I’m wrong: cooling is imminent, but it may well continue to warm. However, at no point will you revise your thinking that cooling is just around the corner?
00
” I don’t agree with your statement.”
So what.
Do you have any empirical evidence that enhanced atmospheric CO2 causes ocean warming
If we increase the atmospheric CO2 concentration by say 10ppm.. exactly how much ocean warming do we get
Come on mat, you MUST KNOW.. or are you EMPTY of any such basic information?
You obviously don’t understand that DWLWR from the atmosphere CANNOT warm the ocean. The penetration is a couple of microns at most. Warmth above an ocean causes EVAPORATION, and it actually COOLING the surface.. (observed measured and quantified.
No wonder you struggle with basic comprehension, when you seem to be missing the very basics of science.
The last two El Nino events have been from energy built up in the ocean. (almost certainly from the solar effects of last century)
How much of that stored energy is left? what will solar cycle 25 do?
AMO is turning downward, this will cause NH cooling, like in the 1970s
10
If you don’t accept the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy… there is nothing I can do for you.
How about this: an experiment you can do at home:
Prove longwave radiation can warm water: put a tray of water on the oven.
Now measure the temperature of the water. Is it warmer or cooler than when you put it in?
00
That’s an interesting response Mat, because I believe Andy was right and I’m therefore presuming that you were wrong. But you haven’t acknowledged this. Instead, you now challenge Andy to another prediction. What happens if Andy is right for the third year running? Would you then challenge him yet again for another year?
But if you believe Andy to be wrong, you would need to offer some valid reason as to why he is wrong.
00
Greame, Andy is not right.
He predicted cooling from 2014 onwards, but temperatures have gone up. Look at the UAH plot. At no point since his prediction have temperatures been below what they were at the start of 2014. Temperatures have gone up, and have remained higher than they were at the start of 2014. They are now 0.1°C above 2014, which is 0.2°C/decade warming.
00
It has been COOLING for at least 2 years now.
GET OVER IT. !!
01
You aren’t seriously counting the remnants of last century’s solar warming, manifesting as El Ninos, as “human forced” warming are you.
An enormous amount of energy was released from the oceans at the last El Nino..
Maybe there is still a bit of that stored solar energy left, but another El Nino is really struggling to form.. its an on-again off-again thing
AMO is finally turning downwards… North Atlantic cooling.
When the El Ninos slow down, cooling begins.
55
3 Jan: Financial Times: Surge in energy company collapses sparks UK call for action
by Myles McCormick
Regulator urged to tighten rules for newcomers as number of failing companies grows
Lower barriers to entry have contributed to a more crowded energy market, which includes this wind farm in Yorkshire
It was a bad week for the 36,000 customers of energy provider One Select. On the Saturday the company that supplied their gas and electricity was crowned the worst provider of customer service in the sector. On the Monday it went bust.
The failure of One Select in December was not only an unwelcome surprise to its customers, it was a part of a growing trend of collapses that have prompted calls for fundamental reforms of a market that has become overcrowded and unruly.
Eight providers across the UK failed last year, not counting a further four which exited through corporate transactions, and as many as 10 more could follow suit over the coming months, according to leading industry figures.
“We’ve got to a point where the industry, the regulator and the politicians need to sit down and think about this,” said Keith Anderson, chief executive of ScottishPower, one of the “Big Six” incumbent suppliers.
“I think they need to look at the mess that currently exists and how it can be dealt with and cleaned up.”…
But the models of many of these so-called “challengers” have proved to be unsustainable, causing them to crash out and leaving others to pick up the tab…
Industry bosses say four major issues must be addressed relating to new entrants: a lack of checks on entry, unfair cost exemptions, loss-leading tariffs, and the lack of consequences for failure…
Currently, a would-be supplier can buy a licence to supply energy for as little as £450 plus some cursory background checks.
“It’s easier to become an energy supplier than it probably is to set up a bank account,” said Iain Conn, chief executive of Centrica, the owner of British Gas, the UK’s largest provider…
https://www.ft.com/content/156a9446-fc7d-11e8-aebf-99e208d3e521
30
The Guardian is ridiculous:
1 Jan: Guardian: Time for politicians to make ‘stark choices’ over climate change
MPs must show leadership on issues such as meat production and air travel, says Clive Lewis
by Heather Stewart
Politicians must persuade consumers to make dramatic lifestyle changes if devastating climate change and mass extinctions are to be averted, according to the shadow Treasury minister Clive Lewis.
From cutting back on red meat to taking fewer flights, the Norwich South MP said the public must face up to “real, stark choices” in the years ahead…
In a wide-ranging interview, Lewis also mused about everything from the four-day week to universal basic income, and how to ensure the rapid technological innovation of the “fourth industrial revolution” benefits the wider public…
“The next manifesto needs to be a radical manifesto, which builds on the reset, and is 21st-century socialism in action. There’s a hunger for that.”…
He said he believed countering the human threats to the environment would have to mean junking “the obsession with flat-screen TVs and consumption”…
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/01/time-for-politicians-to-make-stark-choices-over-climate-change
Wikipedia: Clive Lewis (politician)
Lewis’ first job was at the BBC, as a security guard at BBC World News in London. After completing a post-graduate diploma in journalism, he worked on local newspapers in Northampton and Milton Keynes before being accepted into the BBC’s News Trainee Scheme. He went on to work as a broadcast journalist in Nottingham, Norwich, and Coventry. He then became a senior broadcast journalist and the main reporter on the BBC’s Politics Show East.
In 2017 Lewis admitted to biased reporting whilst working for the BBC. At a Momentum rally he stated: “I was able to use bias in my reports by giving less time to one than the other. I reported on both but the angle and words and the language I used — I know the pictures I used — I was able to project my own particular political positions on things in a very subtle way.”…
On 12 January 2018, Lewis was reappointed to Labour’s Shadow front-bench as a shadow Treasury minister, responsible for Sustainable Economics…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Lewis_(politician)
20
3 Jan: ITV UK: Renewables rise to new record as overall electricity generation falls
A third of the UK’s electricity came from renewables in 2018 as overall power generation fell to its lowest levels since 1994, analysis shows.
Wind accounted for 17% of the total power generated last year, while solar contributed 4% and burning plant material or biomass for electricity produced 11%, the analysis by climate and energy website Carbon Brief reveals.
With nuclear power supplying just under a fifth of the total and renewables overall generating a record 33%, low carbon power sources accounted for more than half (53%) of UK electricity generation in 2018…
Despite fears of a rebound in burning coal for power in the face of high wholesale gas prices, the most polluting fossil fuel saw further declines in 2018, down to a record low of just 5% of the total.
Gas was also down, to 39%, as fossil fuels fell to their lowest ever share of the mix, according to the Carbon Brief analysis which is based on data from the Business Department, BM Reports and Sheffield Solar…
Overall electricity generation was an estimated 335 terrawatt hours, the lowest level since 1994 and down 16% from its peak in 2005…
The reduction in UK electricity generation is down to various factors, including more energy efficient appliances and lighting and a shift away from energy-intensive industry to high-value manufacturing and services…
The figures do not include electricity imports, which are at a similar level to what they were in the 1990s, but are higher than in the 2000s, Carbon Brief said…
Trade group Energy UK’s chief executive Lawrence Slade: “We need to maintain and accelerate this progress, so it is vital the cheapest forms of renewables like solar and onshore wind can contribute fully to our decarbonisation drive without further delay,” he said…
Energy minister Claire Perry: “We are investing more than £2.5 billion in low carbon innovation by 2021, helping this booming market to thrive, creating jobs, delivering clean energy and tackling climate change.”
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-01-03/renewables-rise-to-new-record-as-overall-electricity-generation-falls/
3 Jan: CarbonBrief: Analysis: UK electricity generation in 2018 falls to lowest level since 1994
by Simon Evans
Carbon Brief’s analysis of UK electricity generation in 2018 is based on figures from BM Reports, Sheffield Solar and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). See the notes at the end for more on how the analysis was conducted…
Most of the UK’s imported electricity comes from France, via the 2 gigawatt (GW) electricity interconnector between the two countries that opened in 1986…
The UK also has a 1GW link to the Netherlands and a 0.5GW cable to Ireland. A 1GW link to Belgium is to open early this year…
After accounting for imports, the amount of electricity supplied in the UK in 2018 is about the same as that seen in 1995. UK electricity demand has fallen significantly since 2005, though the 47TWh reduction is slightly lower than the 65TWh fall in generation. This is because of increased imports.
A large number of new interconnectors (LINK) are being developed and government projections (LINK) suggest imported electricity could supply as much as a quarter of UK power by the mid-2020s…
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-electricity-generation-2018-falls-to-lowest-since-1994
20
meanwhile, in China, electricity demand is expected to go up, up and away!
2 Jan: ClimateNewsNetwork: China’s cities face sobering cooling costs
by Tim Radford
LONDON, 2 January, 2019 – China’s cities now have a better idea of what global warming is going to cost. New research warns that for every rise of one degree Celsius in global average temperatures, average electricity demand will rise by 9%.
And that’s the average demand. For the same shift in the thermometer reading, peak electricity demand in the Yangtze Valley delta could go up by 36%.
And the global average rise of 1°C so far during the last century is just a start. By 2099, mean surface temperatures on planet Earth could be somewhere between 2°C and 5° hotter. That means that average household electricity use – assuming today’s consumption patterns don’t change – could rise by between 18% and 55%. And peak demand could rise by at least 72%…READ ALL
https://climatenewsnetwork.net/chinas-cities-face-sobering-cooling-costs/
10
2 Jan: WSJ: The World Is Getting Quietly, Relentlessly Better
If we can solve global poverty, we can solve other problems like climate change
by Greg Ip
If you spent 2018 mainlining misery about global warming, inequality, toxic politics or other anxieties, I’m here to break your addiction with some good news: The world got better last year, and it is going to get even better this year.
Poverty around the world is plummeting; half the world is now middle class; and illiteracy, disease and deadly violence are receding. These things don’t make headlines because they are gradual, relentless and unsurprising. That is why they are worth highlighting.The problems the world faces are far smaller than those it has already overcome and can be solved the same way: not by betting on miracles but by patiently applying knowledge and tools we already possess…
Mr. Roser is the founder of Our World in Data (LINK), a website that tracks the evolution of human welfare over the last few centuries. Scroll through the charts, articles and data sets, and you will be stunned by how much better life has become in just the last few decades…
Perhaps it also feels irresponsible to celebrate the many ways the world is quietly getting better because it distracts from the fight against things that are loudly getting worse: polarized and authoritarian politics, deadly opioids, nuclear proliferation, ***and most of all, a warming climate — a consequence of all those new middle-class entrants burning fossil fuels…
Take global warming: Public concern over climate change is rising in the wake of wildfires and floods. Some media reports last year made much of a federal assessment that a warming climate could leave the U.S. economy 10% smaller by 2100.
First, note that if growth continues at 2%, gross domestic product would be 350% bigger by 2100, as opposed to 400%. Second, only one study is that dire: The consensus is more like a 5% hit, not 10%…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-world-is-getting-quietly-relentlessly-better-11546430400
a tip. if you want to read it all, put the url into outline.com for the full article.
00
and the taxes will go up, and up…
3 Jan: UK Times: Taxpayer set for windfall from higher carbon taxes
by Niamh Lyons, Ireland Political Editor
Leo Varadkar said that while there would be no increase in the levy this year, he was seeking cross-party agreement by the end of February on a scheme that would pay a dividend to taxpayers. By returning extra revenue, the government aims to motivate consumers to cut their carbon footprint.
The tax on fossil fuels such as oil, petrol, diesel, gas, coal and peat would be progressively increased, but the revenue would be paid back to the public at the end of each year. The taoiseach said that the government was considering either doing this via direct payment or via increases in tax credits or welfare. The proposal of a dividend has already found favour with Mary Lou McDonald, the Sinn Féin leader, who told The Times that her party accepted the need for a higher carbon tax…
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/taxpayer-set-for-windfall-from-higher-carbon-taxes-vv22prz33
10
pat:
Innovation? Tax more but give a small bit back to the taxpayers? Hardly a windfall.
40
2 Jan: Toronto Sun: Lorrie Goldstein: Elizabeth May tells the truth on climate change
The Green Party’s Elizabeth May is the only mainstream federal leader who’s a straight talker on climate change.
Unlike the Liberals and Conservatives, she has a consistent position that makes sense if you believe, as she does, that man-made climate change is the most important issue facing voters in the Oct. 21 election, because it’s the most important issue facing humanity.
“The other parties are immersed in conventional wisdom that wants to come up with election slogans that have to do with lying to people as effectively as possible,” May said in a speech last year, cited by the Toronto Star’s Susan Delacourt in a recent column. (Hat tip to former Canadian diplomat Norman Spector for pointing it out on Twitter.)
She’s right…
Unique among the mainstream party leaders, May says, honestly, that meeting Canada’s current emission reduction targets — much less the steeper ones advocated by the Greens — would require significant sacrifices from Canadians.
She compares it to the evacuation of Dunkirk during the Second World War…
***May and the Greens have said they would increase Canada’s carbon price to $50 per tonne immediately, rising to $200 per tonne by 2030, to meet their emission reduction targets…
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-elizabeth-may-tells-the-truth-on-climate-change
10
simplest explanation? not really. lengthy, tho, and with a cute ***ending:
2 Jan: Forbes: The Simplest Explanation Of Global Warming Ever
by Ethan Siegel (astrophysicist, author, and science communicator; I have won numerous awards for science writing since 2008 for my blog, Starts With A Bang, including the award for best science blog by the Institute of Physics)
***It cannot be proven that human activity is the cause of global warming, of course. That conclusion we drew is still a scientific inference. But based on what we know about planetary science, Earth’s atmosphere, human activity and the warming we’re observing, it seems like a very good one. When we quantify the other effects, it’s unlikely that anything else could be the cause. Not the Sun, not volcanoes, not any natural phenomenon that we know of.
The Earth is warming, and humans are the cause. The next steps — of what to do about it — are 100% up to us.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/01/02/the-simplest-explanation-of-global-warming-ever/
10
“***It cannot be proven that human activity is the cause of global warming,”
“, it’s unlikely that anything else could be the cause.”
Absurd statements in same paragraph totally contradictory.
We cant prove..then..we know humans are to blame..So couldnt there be anything else of course, humans are just BAD for the planet of course.
1. Mr scientist (questionable) THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING.
2. Your accusations of humans are totally ridiculous.
30
once the voice of British unionism, now a prog left outlet, The Irish Times is as CAGW obsessive as The Guardian:
3 Jan: Irish Times: How not to introduce a carbon tax: The Australian experience
With 0.3% of the world’s population, Australia produces 1.8% of the world’s greenhouse gases
by Pádraig Collins in Sydney
After one of the most divisive elections in Australian history, in which the opposition Liberal-National coalition campaigned to “axe the tax”, they did just that when elected and the carbon price was repealed on July 17th, 2014.
The experience has been cited since as a textbook example of how not to introduce a carbon tax, with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar telling the Dáil in November the Government was conscious of what happened in Australia which he said had set that country back 20 years.
Australia’s Labor government under prime minister Julia Gillard had brought in the tax in the first place because the country has one of the highest per capita carbon emissions in the world…
According to Dr Ian McGregor of the University of Technology, Sydney, who was part of the Afghan government delegation at the Paris climate talks, Ireland and other countries will have a smoother path with carbon taxes if they have something Australia does not – bipartisan political support. “In most of western Europe there is no real opposition to having a carbon tax,” he said…READ ON
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/how-not-to-introduce-a-carbon-tax-the-australian-experience-1.3746214
3 Jan: Irish Times: Varadkar seeks to avoid Macron’s mistakes on carbon tax
Government edging towards model that would see everyone get a cheque in the post
by Kevin O’Sullivan
The gilets jaunes protests in France, sparked by a hike in carbon tax, “probably sent a shiver down the spine of politicos in Ireland”. That is how analyst Joseph Curtin, who specialises in economics of climate change, reads it…
On a per-capita basis, Irish people generate 13.7 tonnes of carbon a year, compared with an EU average of 8.7 tonnes…
At the height of the protests, economist Thomas Piketty tweeted: “If he wants to be president of the 2020s, Macron must reinstate the wealth tax and allocate the revenue to compensate those who are the most affected by the rises in carbon tax, which must continue.”…
The current reality, as chairman of the Climate Change Advisory Council Prof John FitzGerald has said, is that carbon is traded at too low a price…ETC
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/varadkar-seeks-to-avoid-macron-s-mistakes-on-carbon-tax-1.3746209
00
“I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don’t have as many people who believe it.” — George Carlin
Think about it. Then compare it to the pronouncements of “The science is settled.”
Bottom line: It is easy to speak authoritatively but very difficult to prove that which is said is actually true.
50
Poland showing massive global leadership.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/03/polish-government-wind-turbines-will-be-scrapped-within-17-years/
40
.
How to NOT find a slowdown.
=========================
The slowdown/pause/hiatus, would probably be only a dim memory, if Alarmists didn’t keep digging up the imaginary corpse, in order to show that it really is dead.
The website called “The Conversation”, recently featured an article called “Global warming ‘hiatus’ is the climate change myth that refuses to die”, by Stephan Lewandowsky and Kevin Cowtan.
It was dated “December 20, 2018”, and the web address is:
https://theconversation.com/global-warming-hiatus-is-the-climate-change-myth-that-refuses-to-die-108524
Both of the authors have also recently co-authored 2 scientific papers, with a large number of other well-known Alarmists (they now write scientific papers in “gangs”, to show how tough they are). The 2 scientific papers claim to “demonstrate convincingly that the slowdown/pause/hiatus wasn’t a real phenomenon”.
It is rare to find a “scientific” article, which features so much “woolly-headed” thinking. And so much misdirection.
It starts badly. Just reading the first 2 paragraphs made me annoyed. They used the word “denier” in the first sentence, and the phrase “science-denying” in the second paragraph.
When did the word “denier”, become a scientific term? What do these arrogant Alarmist jerks, think they are doing. I took a deep breath, and continued reading the article.
The third paragraph really made me sit up, and take notice.
They repeated a common Alarmist lie, about the slowdown, which I talked about in a recent article.
They said, “But, more importantly, these claims use the same kind of misdirection as was used a few years ago about a supposed “pause” in warming lasting from roughly 1998 to 2013.”
They talk about “deniers using misdirection”, and then THEY misdirect people to a false weak slowdown (1998 to 2013). This is part of an Alarmist myth, which claims that the recent slowdown only exists because of the 1998 super El Nino.
In my article, I said:
– The strongest slowdown (the one with the lowest warming rate), went from 2002 to 2012. It had a warming rate of +0.14 degrees Celsius per century. Because it went from 2002 to 2012, it had nothing to do with the 1998 super El Nino.
– The average warming rate from 1970 to 2018, is about +1.8 degrees Celsius per century. So the slowdown from 2002 to 2012, had a warming rate that was less than 8% of the average warming rate.
– If the average warming rate was a car travelling at 100 km/h, then the slowdown was a car that was travelling at less the 8 km/h. Doesn’t that sound like a slowdown?
– The strongest slowdown WHICH INCLUDED THE YEAR 1998 (the one with the lowest warming rate), went from 1998 to 2013. It had a warming rate of +0.96 degrees Celsius per century.
[this is the slowdown interval that Lewandowsky and Cowtan used]
– So the false Alarmist slowdown (1998 to 2013), had a warming rate which was 6.9 times greater than the warming rate of the real slowdown (2002 to 2012).
-If the real slowdown (2002 to 2012) was a car that was traveling at 100 km/h, then the false Alarmist slowdown (1998 to 2013), would be a car that was traveling at 690 km/h.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why Alarmists don’t believe that there was a slowdown. They are not even looking at the real slowdown.
====================
Lewandowsky and Cowtan seem to be under the impression that, because “the past two years were two of the three hottest on record”, that there could NOT have been a slowdown. Have they never noticed, that when a person takes their foot off the accelerator in a car, the car keeps moving forward (but at a slower rate, i.e. a slowdown)? So the car is still setting records, becoming further from where it started, even though it has slowed down.
This “everyday” observation (about a person taking their foot off the accelerator of a car), appears to be too complicated for them to grasp. Perhaps they are chauffeur driven, everywhere.
====================
Lewandowsky and Cowtan say, “In a nutshell, if you select data based on them being unusual in the first place, then any statistical tests that seemingly confirm their unusual nature give the wrong answer.”
There is a well-known saying, “If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably IS a duck”.
We could rephrase that as, “If it looks like a slowdown, and the warming rate is lower than normal, and the statistical test says that it COULD be a slowdown, then it probably IS a slowdown”.
But Lewandowsky and Cowtan want you to believe that, “If it looks like a slowdown, and the warming rate is lower than normal, and the statistical test says that it COULD be a slowdown, then it DEFINITELY IS NOT A SLOWDOWN”.
Lewandowsky and Cowtan don’t want skeptics to look for slowdowns in places that look like slowdowns. They want skeptics to only look for slowdowns in places that DON’T look like slowdowns.
I would like to suggest that skeptics start looking for slowdowns, on the moon. There isn’t much chance of finding one, but if you do find one, it is almost certainly real.
====================
I am amazed at how Lewandowsky and Cowtan don’t seem to be able to understand simple logic. They give an example, “If someone claims the world hasn’t warmed since 1998 or 2016, ask them why those specific years – why not 1997 or 2014?”
If somebody got run over by a truck in 1998, would you ask them, “Why 1998, why didn’t you get run over by a truck in 1997 or 1999”? If something happens in a particular year, or over a particular interval, then that is a fact. There is little point in questioning why it didn’t happen at a different time.
The reason that Lewandowsky and Cowtan ask, “Why those specific years – why not 1997 or 2014?”, is because they CAN’T PROVE that there wasn’t a slowdown since 1998, and they want to misdirect people, with a stupid question.
====================
Lewandowsky and Cowtan are concerned that skeptics will cherry-pick intervals which “look like” a slowdown, but are not really a slowdown.
I developed a method to analyse date ranges, for slowdowns and speedups, which does NOT cherry-pick date ranges. It does this, by giving equal weight to EVERY possible date range. So when I analyse 1970 to 2018, I calculate about 150,000 linear regressions (one for every possible date range). Then I look at which date ranges have a low warming rate. To make it easier, I colour code all of the results from the 150,000 linear regressions, and plot them on a single graph. I call this graph, a “Global Warming Contour Map”.
If I find that 2002 to 2012 has a low warming rate, then that means that it had a low warming rate, compared to the thousands and thousands of other date ranges that I checked. Every date range has an equal chance of being a slowdown or a speedup, based on its warming rate. The warming rate is an objective measurement, based on a temperature series.
But wait. I don’t stop there. I check every temperature series that I can find. This includes GISTEMP, NOAA, UAH, RSS, BEST, CLIMDIV, RATPAC (weather ballon data), etc.
But wait. I don’t stop there. I check every type of measurement that I can find. Land and Ocean. Land only. Ocean only. Lower troposphere. Upper troposphere, Stratosphere.
But wait. I don’t stop there. I check every region that I can find. Northern hemisphere. Southern hemisphere. Tropical. Extratropical. Polar.
But wait. I don’t stop there. I check every latitude that I can find. 90N to 48N. 48N to 30N. 30N to 14N. 14N to Equator. Equator to 14S. 14S to 30S. 30S to 48S. 48S to 90S
When I say that there was a slowdown, that means that I have found evidence of a slowdown, in most of the major temperature series, types of measurements, regions, and latitudes.
I have made literally hundreds of global warming contour maps, for nearly every type of global warming data, that you can imagine. Each one, based on about 150,000 linear regressions.
I have probably done more linear regressions, than any other person in the world. I may have even done more linear regressions, than everybody in the world, put together.
And all of those linear regressions, tell me that there was a slowdown, sometime after the year 2001. It was strongest from 2002 to 2012. You can measure it in different ways, and get slightly different results. But there is overwhelming evidence for the slowdown.
I didn’t cherry-pick 2002 to 2012. This interval leapt out of my computer screen, slapped me on the face, and yelled, “I am a slowdown, stop ignoring me !!!”
Alarmists, are the real “Deniers”. They ignore the evidence that they can’t explain away. They insult the people who try to show the truth. They lie, when other methods don’t work.
It is time for Alarmists to admit the truth. There was a slowdown. It was not enormously long. It was temporary. It is now over. The fact that it existed, didn’t prove that global warming isn’t happening.
My personal belief, is that the slowdown was caused by ocean cycles, like the PDO and AMO. There are climate scientists, who believe the same thing. We need to acknowledge the slowdown, so that we can learn more about climate. Lying about the slowdown, won’t solve global warming. Understanding the slowdown, might help us to understand global warming.
If anybody would like to learn more about my method, and “Global Warming Contour Maps”, then there are lots of them, on my website. I wrote a special article, called “Robot-Train contour maps”, which explains how contour maps work, using simple “train trips”, as an analogy for global warming.
Here is a small selection of articles about slowdowns, and “global warming contour maps”.
– No, I am not obsessed with slowdowns.
– I didn’t choose slowdowns, they chose me.
– Being the “proud father” of “global warming contour maps”, I am always happy to answer questions, and show you pictures, of my clever baby.
[ this article shows how “global warming contour maps” work ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/robot-train-contour-maps
[ this article shows why Alarmist thinking on slowdowns, in one-dimensional ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/alarmist-thinking-on-the-slowdown
[ this article investigates the Alarmist myth, that the slowdown was caused by the 1998 super El Nino ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/was-the-slowdown-caused-by-1998
[ this article shows why the slowdown is so special (No, no, no, no, no! It only LOOKS special. It isn’t really special.) ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/how-special-was-the-recent-slowdown
[ A guide to the CORRECT way to look for slowdowns. Please try to stay quiet. Slowdown scare easily, and then they run away and hide. ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/how-to-look-for-slowdowns
[ this article investigates warming in the USA, using NOAA’s new ClimDiv temperature series ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/usa-warming
[ this article investigates regional warming, by dividing the earth into 8 equal sized areas, by latitude ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/new-regional-warming
[ this weather balloon article has global warming contour maps with very nice colours ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/weather-balloon-data-ratpac
[ this article uses global warming contour maps to compare GISTEMP and UAH ]
https://agree-to-disagree.com/gistemp-and-uah
12
There was a slowdown. It was not enormously long. It was temporary. It is now over.
Are we looking at the same graphs? Or by ‘over’ do you mean it has now been replaced by a global decline?
I have been looking at graphs published from University of Alabama, Huntsville, that clearly show the global temp has been dropping at about 0.2C a year since 2016.
Am I missing something in this argument?
31
Hi MudCrab,
I am talking about the slowdown from about 2002 to 2012.
The rapid warming in 2014, 2015, and 2016, terminated the slowdown.
I agree with you, that temperatures have been dropping, since the “high” in 2016.
I believe that this proves that most of the rapid rise in temperatures, from 2014 to 2016, was NOT global warming.
41