By Paul
Over the next 6 weeks, we’ll be travelling up the eastern seaboard of Australia, campaigning hard to get the federal government to acknowledge that renewables can do the job and that the time is up for fossil fuels. So stay tuned – The Energy [R]evolution tour has begun!
Greenpeace Australia Pacific: ‘Greenpeace Esperanza begins Energy [R]evolution tour’
Andrew Bolt: Fueled by the fuel they condemn
By jennifer
The Australian Government Green Paper completely ignores the main question – should Canberra try to control the weather, or is it better to foster a strong Australia able to cope with whatever climate change brings us?
The Government also justifies the need for action on completely worthless long term forecasts of Australia’s weather.
Not even the IPCC claims an ability to forecast the weather beyond a few days, but the CSIRO has sullied its reputation by pretending they can project temperature and rainfall 30 years into the future. Why have they not revealed the calculations for these predictions? In the corporate world, anyone making such wild unsubstantiated claims would be quickly disciplined by the regulators. Public figures who repeat and embellish these scaremongering prophecies lack common sense and should also be called to account.
The only credible weather forecast for such a long period is “It will Fluctuate”.
Minister Wong obviously believes that if we give her enough powers to tax and regulate, she can change the world’s weather.
This belief is as silly as the CSIRO weather forecasts out to 2040. Man has never been able to control the weather and there is no credible evidence that his activities have caused unusual weather. In fact, despite all the hot air about carbon emissions, the world has not warmed since 1998 and has been cooling for the last 6 years. Moreover, we have had extreme droughts, floods, ice ages and global warming long before man started using coal and oil.
Minister Wong should make sure Australia has the industrial ability and economic strength to cope with any adverse weather that occurs, be it floods, fires, droughts, snow, heat, cyclones or tsunamis.
Poor people cannot cope with Climate Change and the Rudd/Garnaut/Wong carbon taxes will make every Australian poorer.
This Deep Green Paper should be recycled and replaced by an enlightened White Paper outlining how to make Australia strong and prosperous. This will provide the best insurance for our children against any climate change.
Viv Forbes
Chairman
The Carbon Sense Coalition
By Paul
KEVIN Rudd is about to bank his leadership on a variation of Pascal’s wager, appropriate during the Pope’s visit but reflecting a new and risky calculus in Australian politics.
His independent expert Ross Garnaut has done the same, as he explained by reference to 17th-century French scientist Blaise Pascal: “If there were no God and one believed,” pondered Pascal, “what is the loss? But if there were a God and he rewards belief or denial in heaven and hell, the absence of belief is catastrophic. It is rational to act as if there were a God.”
Pascal’s argument was that smart non-believers should live their lives as though there were a God because they had little to lose and much to gain. Garnaut’s argument is that it is smart to act on the assumption that climate change is real because betting on its denial involves a high risk of catastrophic consequences.
Paul Kelly Blog – The Australian: Caught in carbon crunch
Thanks to Luke for lighting the blue touch-paper on this one!
By jennifer
The Australian Government today released proposals for a new plan to tackle climate change by
reducing carbon pollution. The associated media release entitled, GREEN PAPER ON CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME RELEASED’ states that:
“Releasing the Government’s Green Paper on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, Minister for
Climate Change and Water, Senator Penny Wong, said the time for action on climate change was
now.
“We confront a daunting reality: we cannot continue to pour carbon pollution into the atmosphere
as if there is no cost,” Senator Wong told the National Press Club in Canberra.
“The 12 hottest years in history have all been in the last 13 years.
“As one of the hottest and driest continents on earth, Australia’s economy and environment will be
one of the hardest and fastest hit by climate change if we don’t act now.
“Climate change threatens our food production, agriculture, and water supplies, as well as icons
like the Great Barrier Reef, the Kakadu wetlands and the multi billion dollar tourism industries they
support.
“The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is a response to climate change that is economically
responsible, supports families and prepares Australia for our future challenges.”
Senator Wong said the Green Paper sets out options and identifies the Government’s disposition
and preferred positions on emissions trading and the support proposed to help households and
businesses adjust to this economic transformation.
“At the heart of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is emissions trading, in which the
Government sets a limit on how much carbon pollution industry can produce, and then the
Government sells permits up to that limit, creating an incentive to look for cleaner energy options.
“Companies can buy and sell permits from each other depending on how much they value them,
thereby enabling the market to find the most efficient ways to reduce carbon pollution.”
Senator Wong said this was the most efficient, lowest cost and most economically responsible way
to reduce carbon pollution, but any move to tackle climate change was not without costs.
“The Government will ensure that every cent raised from the selling of permits will be used to help
households and business as they make the move to a clean energy future.”
Senator Wong said the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, that the Government intends to
implement in 2010, is a whole of economy reform on par with past economic reforms such as the
reduction in tariffs or deregulation of the financial system.
“Placing a limit and a price on pollution will change the things we produce, the way we produce
them, and the things we buy. It will open new doors to a cleaner energy future.”
“In this Green Paper, the Government has sought to strike the right balance, on the basis of
economically responsible policy in the national interest.”
Senator Wong said the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme will cover stationary energy, transport,
fugitive emissions, industrial processes, waste and forestry sectors, and all six greenhouse gases
counted under the Kyoto Protocol from the time the scheme begins.
“To offset the initial price impact on fuel associated with the introduction of the Carbon Pollution
Reduction Scheme, the Government will cut fuel taxes on a cent for cent basis.
“We will periodically assess the adequacy of this adjustment measure for three years and adjust this
offset accordingly. At the end of the three year period the measure will be reviewed.”
For heavy vehicle road users, who transport goods across the country, fuel taxes will be cut on a
cent-for-cent basis to offset the initial price impact on fuel associated with the impact of the Carbon
Pollution Reduction Scheme. The Government will review this measure after one year.
To assist rural and regional areas, the Government will provide a rebate equivalent to the excise cut
for businesses in the agricultural and fishing industries for three years.
“The Government will increase payments, above automatic indexation, to people in receipt of
pensioner, carer, senior and allowance benefits and to provide other assistance to meet the overall
increase in the cost of living flowing from the scheme,” Senator Wong said.
“We will also increase assistance to other low-income households through the tax and payment
system to meet the overall increase in the cost of living flowing from the scheme.
“Middle-income households will also get assistance to help them meet any overall increase in the
cost of living flowing from the scheme.”
The Government will establish the Climate Change Action Fund (CCAF) to help business
transition to a cleaner economy, by providing in partnership funding for a range of activities,
including:
• Capital investment in innovative new low emissions processes
• Industrial energy efficiency projects with long payback periods
• Dissemination of best and innovative practice among small to medium sized enterprises.
The Government will provide transitional assistance in the form of a share of free permits to the
most emissions intensive trade exposed activities.
The Government also proposes to provide a limited amount of direct assistance to existing coalfired
electricity generators.
“After so many years of inaction, it is impossible for Australia to be in front of the rest of the world
in tackling climate change,” Senator Wong said.
“A greater risk is being left behind a world of emerging economic opportunities.”
———–
You can read the full report
CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME
Green Paper
July 2008
here: http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/greenpaper/report/index.html
By Paul
Roger Pielke Sr has highlighted three research findings that are in the peer reviewed literature, but have been completely ignored by the IPCC and CCSP climate assessment communities, nor have they been refuted in the literature. These are just three examples of the level to which the scientific method has sunk to in climate science.
Observations of the spatial distribution of aerosols in the atmosphere in the lower latitudes, shows that the aerosol effect on atmospheric circulations, as a result of their alteration in the heating of regions of the atmosphere, is 60 times greater than due to the heating effect of the human addition of well-mixed greenhouse gases [from Matsui and Pielke, 2006];
A conservative estimate of the warm bias in the construction of a global average surface temperature trend resulting from measuring the air temperature near the ground is around 0.21°C per decade (with the nighttime minimum temperature contributing a large part of this bias). Since land covers about 29% of the Earth’s surface, the warm bias due to this influence explains about 30% of the IPCC estimate of global warming. In other words, consideration of the bias in temperature would reduce the IPCC trend to about 0.14°C per decade; still a warming, but not as large as indicated [based on Lin et al 2007];
The radiative temperature of the Earth is used by the IPCC and CCSP to represent the portion of the radiation emitted at the top of the atmosphere which originates at the Earth’s surface. However, the outgoing long wave radiation is proportional to the fourth power of T [T4], from Stefan-Boltzman’s Law, not temperature by itself. A 1C increase in the polar latitudes in the winter, for example, would have much less of an effect on the change of long wave emission than a 1C increase in the tropics. The spatial distribution matters, but this important distinction has been ignored. A more appropriate measure of radiatively significant surface changes would be to evaluate the change of the global average of T4 with time. [Pielke et al 2007].
Until, and unless the climate science community returns to the proper scientific method of examining the climate system, policymakers will continue to be fed erroneous information. Only poor policy decisions can result due to this failure.
Recent Ignored Research Findings In Climate Science – An Illustration Of A Broken Scientific Method
By Paul
Dr. Roy Spencer from The University of Alabama at Huntsville will be presenting a special seminar at CU Boulder in the CIRES Auditorium on Thursday, July 17th, based on the Journal of Climate paper (in press):
Spencer, R.W., and W.D. Braswell, 2008: Feedback vs. Chaotic Radiative Forcing: “Smoking Gun” Evidence for an Insensitive Climate System?
Abstract
“A simple model and satellite observations are used to demonstrate that previous diagnoses of climate feedbacks from the satellite record have a strong bias in the direction of high climate sensitivity (positive feedback). The source of the bias is chaotic radiative forcing generated within the climate system, most likely due to low clouds. Through analysis of frequency histograms of local regression slopes computed throughout the low-pass filtered time series of temperature and total (reflected shortwave SW and emitted longwave LW) radiative fluxes, the radiative forcing signal is shown to have a unique signature separate from the feedback signature. The global oceanic averages of satellite CERES data during 2000 through 2005 reveal a net (SW+LW) feedback parameter of around 8 W m-2 K-1. This strong negative feedback signal exists independent of the low-pass filter time scale, from 10 day to 2 years. In stark contrast, IPCC AR4 models analyzed with the same method all exhibit positive feedbacks of various strengths. It is suggested that the unrealistically high sensitivity of the climate models is the result of a misinterpretation of the co-variability of clouds and temperature when specifying cloud parameterizations. Since only radiative feedback has been assumed in feedback analysis of natural variability (clouds being forced by temperature), the presence of chaotic radiative forcing of temperature by clouds causes the false appearance of positive feedback. In short, cause and effect have been confused. Finally, if such a strong negative feedback has indeed been operating on multi-decadal time scales, this means that the radiative forcing from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions is not nearly strong enough to explain the 1°C warming in the last century.”
The pdf of the ms powerpoint presentation is here.
Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group News: Special Guest Seminar at CU by Roy Spencer, July 17, 2008:Global Warming: Recent Evidence for Reduced Climate Sensitivity
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.
Read more