Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Paul

Whaling News from the North Atlantic – A Note from Ann Novek

By

1) News from the Icelandic Minke Whaler’s Association, 15.4.2008.
Minke whaling boat Njordur KO, will leave port in the middle of May, to start minke whale hunting that will continue to the summer.

The vessels Dröfn RE and Halldor Sigurdsson IS, will join the hunt during the summer. According to the plan, whale meat be available in the stores in the shift of May/ June, and the meat will be prepared as the previous years.

Whale meat processor Esja, will take care of the marketing and preparation of the whale meat. The minke whale hunters hope this change will increase the sales of whale meat, which they since the year 2004 , have taken care of by themselves.

2) In the Norwegian hunt, so far 5 minke whales have been killed ( Friday).

3) I haven’t mentioned this previously, but Libby Eyre was on Swedish TV, swimming with her humpbacks in Tonga. Another contributor to the blog, George McCallum, had his whale pictures featured in a Swedish traveller’s magazine on Norway “ Nordland Naturligtvis” ( Northland Naturally). A story on whale’s safaris in Norway.

4) Our old friend Rune, is now a Director for the whale meat processing plant, Lofothval, that gets Govt’s support financially.

5)Another traveller’s magazine on the Faroe Islands states: “Funky Faroes — Whale and Gay bashing is out.”

Ann Novek
Sweden

Climate Realist Elected Mayor of London

By

The UK Conservative Party’s Boris Johnson, climate realist and member of Benny Peiser’s scholarly electronic network CCNet, has been elected Mayor of London, defeating ‘Red Ken’ Livingstone.

There are a hundred reasons why Boris Johnson should not be Mayor of London. But his dinosaur views on the environment alone are enough to show what a disaster he would be for our city. The man who backed Bush against the Kyoto treaty and who doesn’t believe there’s a risk from passive smoking cannot be trusted with our future – or even, really, with his own. He’s a 19th century man in a 21st century city
–Sian Berry, Green Party, 25 April 2008

Under a climate change denier like Boris Johnson, we would have to fear for our futures, and for the jobs of all the hundreds who work for us. We would also have to fear for the physical security of the city itself, under the assault of unmitigated global warming, were others to follow Johnson’s ‘lead’ on climate change.
–Jeremy Leggett, SolarCentury, 25 April 2008

The prospect of Boris as Mayor of London is just so scary. The prospect of Boris taking over London’s Climate Change Action Plan is even scarier. He may have learnt not to reveal his full contrarian bigotry on climate change, but he really doesn’t get it, and would rapidly scale back or completely get rid off the ambitious targets in the Action Plan. And that would be a massive set back. I just hope all the environmental NGOs can rally the troops in London in a pro-Ken campaign, even if they can’t come out and explicitly endorse him.
–Jonathon Porritt, Sustainable Development Commission, March 2008

Boris Johnson claimed a remarkable victory in the London mayoral contest on Friday night to cap a disastrous series of results for Gordon Brown in his first electoral test as Prime Minister. Mr Johnson’s landmark victory, a result that would have been almost unthinkable six months ago, was the most symbolic blow to Mr Brown’s authority on a day that left the Prime Minister facing the gravest crisis of his leadership.
–Andrew Porter and Robert Winnett, The Daily Telegraph, 3 May 2008

[The defeated] Mr Livingstone made clear he views 1 May as a referendum on his policies to tackle climate change and protect the health of Londoners. Aides claimed it would be the first election in British history to be decided largely on environmental issues.
–The London Evening Standard, 25 March 2008

Londoners now face a stark choice. Boris Johnson is an environmental vandal, whose main contribution to environmental policy was as a cheerleader for George W Bush’s disastrous decision to oppose the Kyoto climate treaty. The election is neck and neck and everyone who cares about the environment needs to vote with the first and second preferences for myself and Sian Berry if we are to stop Boris Johnson wrecking London’s environment.
–Ken Livingstone, 25 April 2008

The hypocrisy of the Europeans over Kyoto is staggering. They attack America in hysterical terms, and yet the 15 EU countries have never come close to meeting their own eight per cent target for cuts in carbon dioxide emissions. They have not even agreed which countries should cut the most. If America were to meet its Kyoto targets now, it would require a cut of 30 per cent in emissions, and how, exactly, is that supposed to work in the current economic downturn? It would exacerbate the recession, and when Bush says no, he is doing what is right not just for America but for the world
–Boris Johnson, The Daily Telegraph, April 2001

Follow The Money

By

TEN years ago, scientists specialising in climate change counted themselves lucky to find a job.

Now employers are beating paths to their doors. From the federal Government down, Australia’s corporations and institutions, public and private, are falling over themselves to appoint people with the knowledge and skills to advise on what is becoming a central public policy debate.

Read more in The Australian: Rush to climate science

Reaction to Another 10 Years of Global Non-Warming

By

Following are some comments on the last 10 years of global non-warming.

Roger Pielke Jr comments:

“For a while now I’ve been asking climate scientists to tell me what could be observed in the real world that would be inconsistent with forecasts (predictions, projections, etc.) of climate models, such as those that are used by the IPCC. I’ve long suspected that the answer is “nothing” and the public silence from those in the outspoken climate science community would seem to back this up. Now a paper in Nature today (PDF) suggests that cooling in the world’s oceans could, according to Richard Woods who comments on the paper in the same issue, “temporarily offset the longer-term warming trend from increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere”, and this would not be inconsistent with predictions of longer-term global warming.

“I am sure that this is an excellent paper by world class scientists. But when I look at the broader significance of the paper what I see is that there is in fact nothing that can be observed in the climate system that would be inconsistent with climate model predictions. If global cooling over the next few decades is consistent with model predictions, then so too is pretty much anything and everything under the sun.

“This means that from a practical standpoint climate models are of no practical use beyond providing some intellectual authority in the promotional battle over global climate policy. I am sure that some model somewhere has foretold how the next 20 years will evolve (and please ask me in 20 years which one!). And if none get it right, it won’t mean that any were actually wrong. If there is no future over the next few decades that models rule out, then anything is possible. And of course, no one needed a model to know that.

“Don’t get me wrong, models are great tools for probing our understanding and exploring various assumptions about how nature works. But scientists think they know with certainty that carbon dioxide leads to bad outcomes for the planet, so future modeling will only refine that fact. I am focused on the predictive value of the models, which appears to be nil. So models have plenty of scientific value left in them, but tools to use in planning or policy? Forget about it.

Those who might object to my assertion that models are of no practical use beyond political promotion, can start by returning to my original question: What can be observed in the climate over the next few decade that would be inconsistent with climate model projections? If you have no answer for this question then I’ll stick with my views.”

According to Richard A. Kerr in Science 2 May 2008:

“So if you’re a climate- change activist pointing to year after year of mounting climate crises, you might want to rethink your approach.”

Roger Pielke Sr has commented at his blog on a New York Times article entitled, Decade Break In Global Warming:

According to the Nature.com blog website The New York Times wraps up a piece by Andrew Revkin entitled‘In a New Climate Model, Short-Term Cooling in a Warmer World’ with a useful quote from Kevin Trenberth, of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research:

“Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year. It does not happen that way.’”

This is wrong. Global warming theory does require a more-or-less monotonic increase in warming (in the absence of a major volcanic eruption) according to all multi-decadal global model runs (e.g. see the Figure in this post on Climate Science ; and see Figure 1 in Barnett et al, 2001). This essentially monotonic report is even emphasized in the 2007 IPCC Summary for Policymakers (see Figure SPM.4)! Climate Science published a proposed test of the multi-decadal global model predictions (see A Litmus Test For Global Warming – A Much Overdue Requirement).

Clearly, the models are failing to predict the rate, and even the sign for the most recent years,of global warming.

Truth in Tree Rings – A Note from Gavin

By

How old was our eucalypt when it died in 2008?

P1010286.JPG

Although frequently promoting trees as evidence of current climate change, it’s been my view for a while that the science of “dating” any specimen’s history via its growth rings, must account for extended droughts and abrupt climate disturbances such as flash flooding.

P1010287.JPG

This example from yesterday’s street saga is no exception given the ACT region’s recent rainfall patterns.

I reckon our study in harsh climates also depends on the performance of particular roots over time.

Gavin.