Week in review – climate edition

by Judith Curry

A few things that caught my eye these past few weeks

This is important.  ‘Freshwater forcing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation revisited’ nature.com/articles/s4155 – ‘the AMOC may not be as sensitive to FW fluxes and Arctic freshening as is currently projected for the end of the twenty-first century’ 

Shifts in water availability due to global tree restoration [link]

International satellite to track impacts of small ocean currents [link]

The 60-year old scientific screwup that helped Covid kill [link]

Salt scourge: the dual threat of warming and rising salinity [link]

Marine Heatwaves Offshore Central and South Chile: Understanding Forcing Mechanisms During the Years 2016-2017: [link]

Saravanan: How to judge a model beauty contest? Model evaluation metrics and meritocracy [link] Note: this is the best new climate science blog i’ve seen in awhile.

Climate control of terrestrial carbon exchange across biomes and continents doi.org/10.1088/1748-9

The new CMIP6 ensemble of climate models has too many models with high climate sensitivities. End-users need to take that into account in impact studies, argues a new commentary. [link]

How well do we understand the land-ocean-atmosphere carbon cycle? [link]

Global decline in ocean memory over the 21st century [link]

The ocean is still sucking up carbon – maybe more than we think [link]

 ‘Natural Fluctuations’ Dominant Reason For Gulf Stream Changes climatechangedispatch.com/study-natural- the North Atlantic is cooling – a striking contrast to the majority of ocean regions. , natural fluctuations have been the primary reason for this cooling.

Transforming environmental research to avoid tragedy [link]

A lidar’s eye view of how forests are faring – supporting forest health, wildfire resilience, study wildlife habitats [link]

Did volcanoes accelerate the fall of Chinese Dynasties? [link]

first detection of groundwater beneath an Antarctic ice stream. scripps.ucsd.edu/news/groundwat

Predicting slowdowns in decadal climate warming trends with explainable neural networks [link]

How is the ocean anthropogenic carbon reservoir filled? [link]

Improving temperature reconstructions from ice-core water-isotope records. cp.copernicus.org/preprints/cp-2

A new clue to Antarctic ice shelf collapse [link]

A new way to assess global warming potential of short lived pollutants [link]

“Winter and spring climate explains a large portion of interannual variability and trend in western U.S. summer fire burned area” iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108

Climate change and future pandemics [link]

Greenland’s Vikings may have vanished because lack of water [link]

Global carbon budget 2021 [link]

surface warming, not the wind change, is the primary mechanism for ocean current change. [link]

Robust evidence for the reversal in aerosol effectiveness in reducing climate forcing trend [link]

How the 18.6 year lunar cycle can slightly affect the climate through the modulation of ocean tidal mixing (in a model) – egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022

California wildfire risk is… tricky. Lots of competing influences to untangle, as in this example projecting up to 30%+ rainfall increases by 2100.  agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20

Two degrees:  the history of climate change’s speed limit [link]

Global warming is speeding up ocean currents.  Here is why [link]

Observational determination of surface radiative forcing by CO2 [link]

Hot springs suggest how the Tibetan Plateau became the roof of the world [link]

linking astronomically-driven climate change to human evolution. [link]

The methane mystery [link]

Arctic was much warmer 6000 years ago 90% of glaciers smaller [link]

Technology and policy

Must read: The new geopolitics of energy [link]

The US has more clean energy projects planned than the grid can handle [link]

Is behavioral public policy a distraction from finding systemic solutions [link]

Vaclav Smil’s new book is a must read “How the World Really Works: The science Behind How We Got Here and Where We’re Going [link]
.
The world’s first electrochemical ocean CO2 removal plant is live [link]

About science and scientists

Smarter people are more likely to endorse freedom of speech. journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117

“It’ll take more than professorial op-eds… to get our nation back to a place where we can disagree without wanting to ruin the lives of people with whom we have… disagreements. [link]

Breaking the certainty trap [link]

On effective activism and intellectual honesty [link]

Dismantling the ivory tower’s knowledge boundaries [link]

Musk, twitter and moderation [link]

Elon Musk: “He’s made very consumerist products in a way that offends the sensibility of climate activists who think we need to be tightening our belts. He wants everyone to have a high-consumerist lifestyle and a low-carbon one, and it just creates so much friction”  [link]

Scientific conclusions need not be accurate, justified, or believed by their authors. philpapers.org/archive/DANSCN

Diverse viewpoints, one truth [link]

“The false equivalence of academic freedom and free speech” acme-journal.org/index.php/acme

The dangers of lying to ourselves about the future [link]

Dorian Shuyler Abbot: Science and Politics: Three Principles, Three Fables [link]

Daniel Kahneman shared his insights on how we make decisions, the “noise” that besets human judgments, and how organizations can improve decision-making. Read: ow.ly/j7SF50IMXob
.
Willingness to accept criticism is the key to learning [link]
.
Why the past decade has been uniquely stupid [link]
.
Leading by example: a quiet but effective form of activism [link]
.

402 responses to “Week in review – climate edition

  1. FYI: this wired.com article is May 13, 2021, a year old.

  2. Pingback: Review of the week - climate edition - News7g

  3. The “scientific screwup that helped Covid kill” was listening to “Doctor” Fauci instead of listening to this man. Lockdowns, social distancing, and the rest were endlessly destructive. Fauci killed millions with his medical malfeasance.

    w.
    https://brownstone.org/articles/the-public-health-prophet-we-did-not-heed/

      • Joe - the non epidemiologist

        The teeny tine scientific error that helped covid kill

        Armed with the new scientific knowledge of how a respiratory virus spreads, they devise mitigation protocols that the now know will not work!

        Lo and Behold – two years later – we have solid data that those mitigation protocols did not work – Duh!

    • Millions died by social distancing?

      Any evidence of that? What idiocy!

      • Clyde Spencer

        Similarly, even if masks were totally ineffective, which I find improbable, I don’t see how they could have contributed to increased deaths from using them while going about critical activities like buying food to eat.

      • Exactly. We might debate whether social distancing and masks were ineffective and unnecessary but I doubt many people died from wearing a mask or practicing social distancing.

      • Joe - the non epidemiologist

        A more accurate statement would be that Fauci saved no lives with his medical malfeasences

      • Similarly, even if masks were totally ineffective, which I find improbable

        * Danish controlled trial ( Wuhan era ) found no statistically significant difference between N-95 mask users and the unmasked.
        ( https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817 )

        * CDC case data on a county wide basis across the US ( omicron era ) indicates no difference in rates between mask mandate status or not.
        ( https://twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1513920816169299968 )

        * When mask mandates were lifted in US states, (omicron era) cases continued to decline and did not stall or increase.

        * UK Health Service COVID (omicron era) case rates were slightly higher for self reported unmasked, but very close ( 4.3% to 3.8% ? )

        More papers:
        https://covidreason.substack.com/p/your-mask-study-cheetsheet

        The aerosol story from Wired would have led one this conclusion.
        Aerosolized COVID can very easily enter and exit masks.

        If one can stand to wear a mask for a long period of time ( because it’s not sealed ) it’s probably not doing any good.

      • >Joe,

        The CDC was the worst by screwing up the early testing and having little or no national plan on day one.

        “For want of a nail the shoe was lost, For want of a shoe the horse was lost, For want of a horse the rider was lost, For want of a rider the battle was lost, For want of a battle the kingdom was lost, And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.”

        The NHI (Fauci) is where the money and intuitional power is. They decide who and what gets research dollars. The FDA & Dept. of Agriculture also dropped the ball a few times as well.
        I assumed the virus was airborne because of the cruise boat outbreak (the perfect petri dish) and started to mask up with N95 in Mar. of 2020. I’m still masking up till there is a durable vaccine available. That’s not looking good with the current mRNA protocol of boosters and the virus is still mutating. Novavax, a more traditional designed vaccine, maybe better but we don’t have much data on how safe or durable it is yet.

      • “If one can stand to wear a mask for a long period of time ( because it’s not sealed ) it’s probably not doing any good.”

        Exactly. For the general public, or even hospital staff, the wearing of a perfectly sealed N95 mask, tested to the point of not being able to detect odors, is not feasible for any length of time. Thus it would be ineffective other than to offer some protect to someone caring for an infected person.

        For children not to have gone to school or be masked was ridiculously anti-science and inhumane. It was known by the SARS lab researcher even before the outbreak that novel chimera corona viruses were harmful in direct relation to the age of the mice infected. It was known throughout the infectious disease community by March 2020 that children had less risk from Covid than from annual flu.

      • “For want of a nail…”

        This is the precise logic that forms the foundation of the claims of “existential threat” of climate change.

        But the logic is valid when it comes to taking small steps to impede an early virus replication rate. It is well understood now that exposure time and concentration are critical factors for overcoming a threshold of innate immunity to Covid (or any airborne virus.) The logic would further stand that other factors that boost the threshold would boost innate immunity, cutting the infection rate.

        The logic taken by Fauci was that any treatment not perfectly understood with controlled randomized trials should not be promoted for fear of possible mistake, even if harmless. But this applied only to medicines and supplements, not to masks or distancing. Strange.

        Vitamins, especially D and zinc were not promoted though it is known that vitamin D deficiencies are common and any type of deficiency will lower innate immunity. Hydroxychloroquine was banned with misinformation about its toxicity promoted by the CDC even though HCQ was effective in vitro against SARS1 and in vivo in small Covid studies.

        The RCT that were set up for HCQ lacked the accompaniment of zinc and were administered to patients that were fighting for their lives but past the viral ramping stage. We still do not know if HCQ, Ivermectin or Fluvoxamine were made available to people with the first sign of symptoms along with zinc and vitamins whether the mortality rate could have been mitigated. We only have the anecdotal results of those doctors that took this approach by using common logic.

      • Marko Okram

        People died due to murderous medical procedures mainly in hospitals and other facilities of this criminal mafia.

    • Willis gives himself too little credit.

      Had he not prescribed potentially lethal doses of cardiotoxic chloroquine as a covid panacea to readers of Judy & Watts

      https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2020/04/of-quinine-and-chloroquine-willis.html

      America’s death toll might still be short of the million mark.

    • New Danish research shows the world “chose” the wrong vaccines.
      Considering all cause mortality, not just covid, the adenovirus vaccines (AZ, JJ etc.) have big benefit, but mRNA vaccines no benefit at all:

      https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4072489

      https://youtu.be/o_nKoybyMGg

  4. Nothing gives modeling a bad name more than does climate science…

  5. A wonderful list of articles. Thanks.

    From the first article.

    “ Freshwater (FW) forcing is widely identified as the dominant mechanism causing reductions of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), a climate tipping point that led to past abrupt millennial-scale climate changes. However, the AMOC response to FW forcing has not been rigorously assessed due to the lack of long-term AMOC observations and uncertainties of sea-level rise and ice-sheet melt needed to infer past FW forcing.”

    “….due to lack of long term AMOC observations….”

    A decade doesn’t count. Although, some papers seem to think a decade of any trend is significant. The establishment has fallen into the trap that even a century is long term and thus sufficient to draw conclusions. What is needed more than anything is more long term observations that is rigorously assessed on every aspect of climate science.

  6. ‘India to reopen more than 100 coal mines as energy crisis worsens [link]’

    Modeling vs real world… much like, drinking margaritas on a patio in Cancun to solve a human caused global warming crisis vs heating a bottle of milk for the baby.

  7. This statement from the fascinating article on climate meritocracy had me howling with laughter:

    “With the increase in the number and complexity of climate models, the spread in their predictions has increased.”

    For forty years or so we have an increasing spread in predictions, and an increasing spread in estimates of ECS … and this is supposed to be a science?

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/knutti-ECS-estimates.png

    w.

    • Hmm … image didn’t display. Let me try again.

      w.

    • “With the increase in the number and complexity of climate models, the spread in their predictions has increased.”

      Manabe has spoken about this.

      Remarkably, he wrote most of the earliest GCMs by himself or with a single collaborator. Because computation was very limited, the parameterizations were necessarily simple, but with the advantage that he knew exactly what each was and was familiar with how they might interact.

      Recent models are hugely complex written by independent teams that may never meet face to face and no one knows what other parameterizations are or how they might interact.

      There may be more complexity but at the same time, less knowledge in the models.

      • Thomas Fuller

        Manabe also warned about using models to predict future climate. Of course, he also said that his warning would be ignored…

    • Rob, what part of ‘ heuristic’ don’t you understand?

      As surely as the BEST study left Watts and Eschenbach looking very silly indeed, the more climate model physics and atmospheric science empirically converge , and computational hydrodynamics increases in spatial and temporal resolution, the dumber it becomes to deny the progress that results. Which is how Willis, like Christopher Monckton, is trying to make a living .

      The authors of the critique of scenario hype just published in Nature are the climate modelers themselves, who have shown far more grit in arguing with their policy driven colleagues than any erstwhile climate skeptics or activists.

      If you re-read the Nature article with greater care you will discover an object lesson in how science can and does recover from attempts to deform it politically .

      There is no trace of such self correction at the Heartland Insititute

      • Clyde Spencer

        ” Which is how Willis, …, is trying to make a living .”

        Perhaps you are just taking literary license, but WE is retired. To the best of my knowledge, no one is paid for submissions published on WUWT. I never have been.

      • The output of climate models isn’t scientifically verifiable. Yet, we see that output being used in some of the latest hockey-stick papers, making them “not scientific.” The climate model output certainly should not be used to shape energy policy for nations. We can see how that’s working out for Europe and we need to get smart fast or we will be the next ones to have our economy wrecked.

      • Real scientists don’t read Nature. It is a preening science facade.

        What all the alarmists get wrong is that the entire global warming issue is an issue of centuries, not decades. Under even the more severe assumptions no challenging problems arise before about 2150. To spend time and money on that time frame is absurd.

      • Thomas Fuller

        I can also testify to the unpaid nature of contributions to WUWT. Also happy to serve as a character reference to WE.

        The latest batch of climate models ‘converging’ on ECS of 6C are not a great example of the point Russell is trying to make. We can hope it’s a case of 2 steps forward, 1 step back, but it kinda looks like the obverse.

      • Rob Starkey

        Russell

        I understand that you do not have a clue and offer word salad responses.

        A model that does not reasonably match observed conditions needs to be discarded from use until it has been corrected. Averaging the output of models with known wild defects with other much better models is bad model use.

        GCM developers can argue all they want that that a bad, inaccurate model has potential value. That is only true if that model is fixed, not for policy development.

      • Clyde Spencer

        Logically, there can only be one best model (unless there is a tie) from a collection of models. Averaging the results of the less-skilled models with the best one(s) will result in a prediction that is inferior to the best model. The mean values will be shifted and the variance increased, meaning that the output will have a wider range of probable values than the best model.

        Thus, what the modelers need to do is determine the best metrics for determining the skill of a GCM, identify the best model, and determine what makes it perform better than the others. The others then need to be modified to make them perform at least at the same level as the best one, with the goal being to improve them to be better than the current best one.

        It seems that is not being done. Although, there seems to be an informal opinion that the Russian model performs at a higher level of skill than the others.

      • Metrics? Run them all back 5000 years and see which one has the least deviation from the best historical recreation.

      • Clyde Spencer

        1. We don’t have actual measured temperatures or precipitation going back 5,000 years. At best, we have sparse proxies that are probably not very accurate.

        2. All the models are tuned to give close fits to the temperatures for the last ~100 years. That might be a reasonable metric: judging how close that are able to fit the good historical measurements without going off the rails, by measuring the correlation between the real data and the fitted data.

        However, the purpose of the models is NOT to see how well they can fit historical data. The goal is to predict the future. One approach might be to fit to historical data one year less than what is available, and to decrease the fitted history one additional year at a time and see how well the projections fit the unfitted data.

        Another approach might be to fit to only half the historical data, randomly selected, and compare that to the unused data, and compare projections from both sets of data.

        As I have suggested previously, another approach might be to see how the regional projections compare to the temperature and precipitation definitions of the Koppen-Geiger climate classifications.

        There are lots of more practical “metrics” than comparing the back-projections to poorly known values.

      • To build a model one must know all the critical factors of degree of physical effects. If we know that the global mean temperature dropped significantly from 1000AD to 1650AD and rose significantly from 1650AD to 1800AD (before fossil fuel), but we don’t know why, how can we model it? And if we can’t model the GSM without CO2 change how can we validate a model it with it?

      • I meant GMT but GSM (grand solar minimum) is also something that a GCM (climate model) needs to replicate.

  8. ‘Why the past decade has been uniquely stupid [link]’

    The Left’s hatred of Americanism has turned industrialization into a paralyzing Tower of Babel and English into a liars language. The success of capitalism also sustains a trusting, rusting, random hapless and rank helpless group of 47%’rs that has become a charlatans’ mark that Leftist activists, plaintiff’s lawyers, government opportunists and bureaucrats rush to exploit to their personal advantage at the expense of the productive. The result has been the emergence of a contentious class of professional government gadflies that has attached itself to the body of the republic with the sole purpose of increasing job-killing burdens on manufacturers and providers of services.

    • Jonathan Haidt is an extremely brilliant and clear-thinking scholar, but I wonder if he did not omit one important factor. The new US president in 2009 embarked on a program of division, in which he was abetted by the media. Seeing as the majority of social media posts are links to the professional media, the president’s campaign soon succeeded. We are now at a point where control of the media is the kingpin of politics.

  9. The 60-year old scientific screwup that helped Covid kill [link]

    A good read along with take-ways:

    The science is never settled no matter who tells you what.

    Old news, based upon expert opinion is hard to dislodge.

    Academics as well as politicians perpetuate their expertise with their assuredness of presentation, all the time blathering like fools. This has public and policy consequences as the aerosol/droplet dichotomy charade has had on recommendation by CDC and WHO.

    A bit off topic: the same academic/politician hubris is found with obesity & BMI; climate change and others like stomach ulcers.

    It is difficult to educated someone as powerful people’s egos are on the line.

    • Old news, based upon expert opinion is hard to dislodge.”

      This probably stands to reason.

      Anything that’s simplified enough for public consumption is probably wrong or at least incomplete.

      I recently read Propaganda which included slogans as a key tool.

      So my new rule of thumb:
      Question anything that sounds like a Rule of Thumb!

      • Turbulent Eddie

        “So my new rule of thumb:
        Question anything that sounds like a Rule of Thumb!”

        I am not claiming expert status therefore my “rules of thumb” stand! will stand; should stand; might stand; more likely than not stand; might be disregarded altogether. The again, I am not claiming expert status.

      • A parabole about self righteousness with a rule of thumb about driving in traffic.

        https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1521865473280954368
        When there is traffic, merging early extends the congestion back further interfering with more traffic.

        *(A rule of thumb that I use is to merge early if traffic is free-flowing. If merging requires braking from anyone, wait until the merge point.)

  10. Vaclav Smil’s new book is absolutely a must read!

    I have read several of Smil’s books and his latest could be considered an executive summary of much of his earlier work. It is fairly short (not quite 250 pages of text), and he addresses the following areas: energy; food production; the material world (concentrating on ammonia, steel, plastic and cement); globalization; risks; the environment; and the future.

    The take away is that fundamentally changing the way we energize the global economy is going to be a good deal more difficult and take much longer than many realize. But perhaps the ‘net zero at 50’ crowd really don’t believe their own hype?

    This book is a quick study and well worth the time it takes to read.

  11. Clyde Spencer

    I particularly liked the blog article by Saravanan on models.

    If the intent is to simulate reality with climate models, shouldn’t we also be concerned about global variance as well as the mean? That is, a mean with variance much greater than reality suggests compensating for errors. Focusing on a single number is a poor way of evaluating a population. Similarly, a variance much smaller suggests a problem of clamping that doesn’t allow the model to work as the laws of physics predict.

    Another suggestion I have is to subset the predictions by The Köppen climate classification regions and see if the predictions reasonably agree with the definitions of the regions. If they don’t, it is prima facie evidence that the claimed ‘physics-based’ models are not performing as advertised. It would also be of interest to see if some regions are changing more than others, or in opposite directions. That would provide more insight on what is driving the changes.

    • “Perhaps you are just taking literary license, but WE is retired. ”

      Would that he were, but the Heartland Institute continue to list him as a fellow.

      • Russ

        There are retired fellows all over the world. Everyone in my golf group is a retired fellow. Poor golfers, but retired fellows.

      • Ckid
        Looking at russels profile I would guess he is also retired or just about to.

        If he is reading this his work on micro bubbles looks interesting. If he has a link to a short readable paper on the subject perhaps he could link to it

        Tonyb

      • Clyde Spencer

        “… the Heartland Institute continue to list him as a fellow.”

        I specifically looked to see who is listed as “Senior Fellows.” While Fred Singer (deceased) is listed among those, Willis Eschenbach is not. (Which raises an interesting point. If someone is listed as a senior fellow who is deceased, is it a paid position, or an honorary one?) In fact, doing a search with all “Roles” checked also fails to produce a hit for Eschenbach.

        What have I missed? Are you providing unverified, second-hand information?

      • Many institutions list dead fellows along with Senior ones , Clyde, witness the sidebars at WUWT and elsewhere.

        But those that denigrate climate policy as a global concern are far ahead of the curve in extending equal employment opportunity to the brain dead as well.

      • Clyde Spencer

        You haven’t answered two fundamental questions I have asked: What evidence do you have that Willis E is a Heartland fellow and that he is being paid?

      • “You haven’t answered two fundamental questions I have asked: What evidence do you have that Willis E is a Heartland fellow and that he is being paid?”

        Clyde, I never said he was worth paying, but just as he continues to credit himself as a “Heartland Fellow ” in his WUWT postings, you can find him credited as such on the Heartland website.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “…, I never said he was worth paying, …”

        You are being disingenuous! You specifically said, “Which is how Willis, …, is trying to make a living .”

        I also told you that I made a reasonable attempt to verify your claim that Willis was a “fellow” of Heartland and could not find it. It is your claim and thus the onus is on you to provide the evidence, which you haven’t done. You have one more chance to provide the proof. If you don’t, I’ll write you off as a liar and ignore any future postings.

      • Clyde,

        Apart from noting Willis’s Credentials as :

        California Massage Certificate, Aames School of Massage, Oakland, CA. (1974).

        B.A., Psychology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA(1975)

        and reporting that he has never published any science.

        https://www.desmog.com/willis-eschenbach/

        tells us that:

        Eschenbach was a speaker on “Panel 19” at the Heartland Institute’s Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC9

        Eschenbach was a speaker at the Heartland Institute‘s Seventh International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7).

        Eschenbach was a speaker at the Heartland Institute‘s Fourth International Conference on Climate Change(ICCC 4)

        As was his editor, heartland fellow Anthony Watts

        His work speaks for itself :

        https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2021/11/covid-authority-blames-sea-level-rise.html

      • Clyde Spencer

        All that you have provided is a list of Red Herrings. You specifically said that he was earning money as a Fellow at Heartland. You have provided no evidence to support your accusation, despite being given opportunity to support what was intended as an ad hominen attack. You have not demonstrated any evidence to support what appears to be an outright lie intended to smear Willis’ reputation. You cannot bring yourself to admit you lied and owe Willis an apology. You have demonstrated that that you have no scruples and anything that you say cannot be trusted. I and others have our issues with Willis, but we don’t stoop to lying to impugn him with falsehoods. Think about the parable of the Boy Who Cried Wolf.
        Sayonara!

      • Joe - the non climate scientist

        I am not going to praise or condemn Willis E’s credentials –

        Only noting that is quite a bit of hypocrisy to condemn someone based on an article from Desmog . – kinda like basing climate knowledge from what you read at skeptical science
        complete lack of self awareness

  12. The claim:

    Scientists devised an ingenious low-cost system that pulls water from the air, allowing crop development in arid regions around the world:

    The headline:

    Remarkable solar-driven system allows for agriculture in the desert by drawing in water from the air

    Talk about burying the lede … it turns out that it produces one liter of water per square meter of solar panel per week.

    Not per hour.

    Not per day.

    Per week.

    w.

  13. A very long list. So here is another:
    https://www.cfact.org/2022/05/10/consider-signing-the-world-climate-declaration-1/

    Many commenters here qualify for signing the WCD.

  14. The Wired article is better than the nonsense that was put out by the CDC until April 2021, but it misrepresents the state of the science when the pandemic began. The NAS issued a report in April 2020 that acknowledged the possibility of aerosol spread. It took 50 years to accept measles and TB were transmitted via aerosols and that was accepted about 50 years ago. IMO there can be no pandemic without aerosol spread.

  15. Global warming is net beneficial, not harmful. It is beneficial for:
    • ecosystems
    • agriculture
    • forestry
    • energy
    • health
    • and probably for storms and fresh water availability

    It is slightly negative for sea level rise. But sea level rise over the next 100 years will probably be only slightly higher than last century, i.e. probably 150 mm to 300 mm. This is negligible and the economic impacts will be trivial.

    Therefore, there is no valid justification for policies to attempt to reduce global warming.

    • Peter,
      It’s not global warming that is the biggest problem.
      I don’t think the global ecosystem is very healthy. Over 80% of all species are under stress. It’s particularly notable with flying species like birds, bats and insects. Vast dead zones surround our continents where oxygen levels can’t support life.
      We are currently producing 350,000 types of chemicals (over 70 billion tons/yr) and yet less than 1% of the chemicals registered for commercial use in the United States have undergone toxicity characterization, whether they are used for medicinal purposes or for fracking. We will easily double than number to over 500,000 chemicals in the next couple of decades.
      https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-022-00481-9

      RE Nuclear power: China (who has led the world in patents for the last 5 years) just announced 6 new nuclear power plants to be completed by 2025.
      Anyone check to see how much fuel grade uranium is located in the US and how long will it last?

      • Yes, Jack. E O Wilson had the right idea – saving species and their unique DNA – is the most important ecological problem we are facing. We don’t even have an order of magnitude idea of how many species there are on Earth. We have derived so many medications and other useful compounds from natural species, yet each time one goes extinct we lose that information, honed over millions of years of evolution, for all time.

        https://eowilsonfoundation.org/living-on-earth-a-plan-to-save-more-than-80-percent-of-earths-species/

      • That must be some oddball definition of “toxicity characterization.” Show one commercial chemical that doesn’t have a MSDS or SDS that show biological evaluations. I won’t hold my breath. This, like just about everything else you wrote, is a fact-free rant.

      • jacksmith4tx “I don’t think the global ecosystem is very healthy. Over 80% of all species are under stress”

        Evolutionary theory suggests every species is always under stress, nothing new here, just an understatement. The system is always as healthy as it can be.

        We are currently producing 350,000 types of chemicals (over 70 billion tons/yr) and yet less than 1% of the chemicals registered for commercial use in the United States have undergone toxicity characterization, whether they are used for medicinal purposes or for fracking. We will easily double than number to over 500,000 chemicals in the next couple of decades.

        We are made up of thousands of different types of chemicals and nature is made up of millions. Toxicity?
        Everything is potentially toxic to something else eg witches and water or flying houses.
        What emerges for life to survive is the ability to resist, or adapt to toxicity or to become toxic to survive.
        The more we produce the better we can respond.

      • angech,
        Better not to worry about it anyway. They say free will is just an illusion.

        Jack Smith
        Apex Predator.

      • They say free will is just an illusion.

        Agent Smith?

    • Lang and Gregory (2019) ‘Economic Impact of Energy Consumption Change Caused by Global Warming’
      https://doi.org/10.3390/en12183575

  16. Nuclear power is the way to go, not renewables

    1.1 Renewables are expensive, unreliable, short life

    Renewables (solar, wind, hydro, biomass, etc.) are hugely expensive, unreliable and have short operating lives (e.g. 15 to 30 years). And they require huge energy storage capacity.

    The disposal costs for solar panels and wind turbines will be very high, adding to the cost of the electricity they generate.

    The transmission costs are huge because the transmission line to each renewable plant must be sized to carry the full output of each plant but, on average, transmit only 15% to 35% of the output capacity of solar and wind plants.

    Also, the transmission lines must be very long because the renewable plants are widely dispersed in country areas away from where the power is used. The transmission lines need to run to energy storage sites (pumped hydro and batteries) and from the energy storage sites to the areas where the power is required.

    The transmission system will become increasingly vulnerable to disruption by foreign powers. The economic cost of disruption can be huge as it disrupts manufacturing and transport.

    1.2 Nuclear power is safest and cheapest

    Nuclear power is the safest and can become the cheapest way to supply power as:

    • The enormous regulatory impediments that are making them so costly to build are removed;

    • Small modular reactors (SMR) are built in factories, shipped to site and installed rapidly;

    • Their costs come down as more and more are built on production lines in factories, and they are improved and their production and construction costs come down;

    • They can operate for up to 60 to 80 years, thus greatly reducing the cost of replacements;

    • Transmission costs can be greatly reduced over time as smaller reactors replace large ones and they are installed close to demand centres; and, eventually, as micro reactors replace SMRs. Micro reactors can be sized for industrial estates, commercial properties, shopping centres, apartment complexes, and eventually for individual residential properties, thus greatly reducing the size of and, eventually, the need for an electricity grid.

    • The bulk of the SMR costs are the civil works to house and protect the reactors. Building reactor components in factories is not new.
      I seriously doubt SMR’s will be built in vast quantifies; mass production significantly reducing costs is essentially a myth. Further, the regulatory related costs are immense and those excessive costs wash through design, manufacture, construction , and operation of the plant. The NUSCALE reactor required over 1/2 billion dollars just to get part of a license. The build cost remains uncertain.

      At the risk of bursting a lot of bubbles, small reactors are unlikely to be commercially viable and will be wards of the state (I.e. heavily subsidized by the taxpayer).

      • Beta Blocker

        NuScale’s SMR design, now slated to go operational in eastern Idaho in late 2029, is well ahead of the pack in the NRC regulatory approval process.

        It will be a 6 unit 462 Mw plant. IIRC, the targeted range of capital cost is between $4,500 / kw and $5,000 / Kw for the very first plant, and $3,600 / Kw or less for subsequent plants.

        A major investor and partner in NuScale is Fluor, which has a solid track record as an EPC in delivering major industrial construction projects on time and on budget. Fluor will be the EPC for the Idaho plant.

        The launch customer for the first NuScale plant is Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) which is under the legislative gun to reduce its carbon emissions while being thoroughly realistic about maintaining service reliability.

        The operator for the Idaho plant will be Energy Northwest which has thirty-five years of experience in operating a nuclear power plant.

        The NuScale project team is now in the process of creating a manufacturing infrastructure for their SMR design, one that will be fully compliant with the NRC’s quality assurance requirements.

        The task of proving that a nuclear power plant can be constructed on cost and on schedule here in the US now rests squarely on the shoulders of the NuScale project team.

        If the NuScale team delivers, new build nuclear will have a chance for success. But if they don’t, then it will be twenty years or more before another serious attempt is made at building a utility-scale nuclear power plant here in the US.

  17. Read: Lang (2017), “Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone”
    https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/2169/htm

  18. I read the Wired story on aerosol definition almost a year ago. Great detective story, and it speaks volumes about how much “knowledge” we take for granted and how hard it can be to get (closer to) the truth.

    • Joe - the non epidemiologist

      I also read the wired story when it came out. In hindsight, it does point to the futility of most of the mitigation protocols, such as the masks, the “washing your hands”, etc. The only viable mitigation strategy to reduce the spread was hard or near hard lockdowns,

      However, the only long term solution, which unfortunately few seem to be able to come to grips with is that we need to develop immunity through out the population, preferably with naturally acquired immunity.

      • Rob Starkey

        Hard lock downs did Not stop the spread of covid. The lock downs only delayed the inevitable spread of an highly transmissible virus.

      • Joe - the non epidemiologist

        Rob Starkey – we certainly agree on the broader point – Its a respiratory virus, everyone is going to catch it, covid aint going away and the only solution is immunity throughout the population

        As kevin roche at healthy skeptic stated – “When are scientists going to wake up and accept that nothing is going to stop infections. The lack of common sense and the resistance to the obvious is startling. ”

        Scientists seem to forget history – pandemic history – the 1918 flu is still with us – yet we got immunity, so it no longer kills. Same thing is going to happen with covid. (note that third major wave ended in february 2022 which will likely be the last major wave in the US and Europe.

      • Rob Starkey

        Joe

        We do generally agree. I would not go as far as you write in

        “we need to develop immunity through out the population, preferably with naturally acquired immunity.”

        I do not have a preference on what type of immunity and imo vaccine immunity saved lots of lives.

        I tend to believe that lockdowns early in the pandemic (pre vaccine) did more harm than good and we would have been better off isolating the vulnerable until vaccines were available.

      • Joe - the non epidemiologist

        Rob – I was quite excited about the vaccines in the early stages – I thought they were a game changer.

        However with the effectiveness dropping below 50% after 6 or so months and even shorter effectiveness with the boosters, I have become less sold on vaccines.

        the consensus is that a vaxed person will have much less serious infection when they do catch covid than an unvaxed person. The data that I am seeing indicates to me that reduced severity of covid illness is absolutely true for 10% maybe upwards of 20% of vaxed individuals. For the other 80%, having the vax has little to no effect on the severity.

        I am basing that statement on two factors A) personally knowing approx 70 individuals who caught covid with about a 50/50 mix vaxed and unvaxed. With the exception of one individual, the severity was very similar. B) I think there is some intentional bad data classification. In several jurisdictions, the reported per capita death rates and the per capita hospitalization rates of the unvaxed have increased 3x-6x from the height the Dec 2020 wave and the height of the dec 2021 wave. Increases of the death rates and hospitalization rates of that magnitude are simply implausible.

        See data reported at healthy skeptic dot com

      • Rob – I was quite excited about the vaccines in the early stages – I thought they were a game changer.

        However with the effectiveness dropping below 50% after 6 or so months and even shorter effectiveness with the boosters, I have become less sold on vaccines.

        I’m so angry at myself for similarly being excited at the prospect of the vaccines. Who can blame us for this emotion? A pro-active step which we thought would end the lockdowns and collective social misery.

        But this emotion blinded us all to many questions we did not ask.

        I am also not an epidemiologist, vaccinologist, nor evolutionary biologist.

        I had not heard the term ‘antigenic sin’ nor ‘antibody dependent enhancement’ nor was I aware of the adverse effects of incomplete vaccine antibodies on the function of the innate immune response. Nor had I considered evolution of variants of the virus especially to those being infected while getting partial vaccinal effects. Nor was I aware that RNA viruses are much more mutable than DNA viruses and that single stranded viruses are more mutable than double stranded ( COVID is a single stranded RNA and is predictably highly mutable ).

        There will not be a counter-factual, but there is a compelling case to be made that the vaccine campaign, particularly in the environment of widespread infections was a grave mistake. Those of us now vaccinated have locked in our antibody response to just the spike proteins of the original Wuhan strain which is now irrelevant. But because of this, we are increasingly vulnerable to new strains because our immune response will be increasingly ineffective and the antibodies can even lead to enhanced infection. Antibody enhancement can occur from natural infection as well as from vaccines, and is thought to be the reason for the deadly follow on waves of the 1918 flu.

        We will never know what would have happened had we not vaccinated, but natural infection has the benefit of ‘learning’ about all the proteins of the virus, not just the spike proteins. So step-wise mutations are less likely to fool the naturally immune.

        Geert has been correct so far in predicting increasingly transmissable and break-through variants. Unfortunately, he now predicts increasing death and virulence, particularly among the vaccinated, based on evolutionary principles.

        He says he hopes he’s wrong and I hope he’s wrong, but if he’s not, the worst is yet to come.

      • Lockdowns. Shutting down businesses didn’t really do anything. Asking people not to travel during the pandemic could have. We did the opposite: we claimed we “locked down” because the NYC restaurants were closed, but ignored the fact that the NYC residents fled. Studies showed traveling New Yorkers were the source of Covid infections everywhere east of the Rockies.
        The only lockdown that would have worked would have been keeping NYC residents in their city until it burned out. I don’t think we could have done that or even tried. I’m just pointing out that “lockdown” has two definitions- 1. don’t go out with friends to a bar and 2. don’t go to Florida.

  19. The article about too many renewables projects and the grid can be summed up as “we want others to pay for grid upgrades otherwise are project is uneconomic”. That is it. They can hide it behind flowery words and ecobabble but if a power station is to be built a long way from the market, then the developer builds the grid connection and upgrades to market… Otherwise, why ship coal from Wyoming across the country?. Easier to burn it next to the mine.

  20. IPCC AR6 WGII final draft chapter 9 claims: “By 2030, about 250 million people may experience high water stress in Africa,with up to 700 million people displaced as a result.”

    I tried to trace back how these estimates were produced by following citations and phrasings. They apparently originate from a 2004 modelling study (250m), and a 2007 Christian Aid pamphlet estimating the global number of people displaced by development/construction projects by 2050. Along the way the numbers are miscited, exaggerated and conflated, like “broken telephone”.

    https://ilmastotiede.wordpress.com/2022/05/05/escalation-of-displacement-estimates-in-climate-change-literature/

    • François Riverin

      Thank you for your work. I am really grateful to people like you who spent time and energy to look for truth. I blame all of UN for disinformation.

    • In the media world, how a single story generates many plagiaristic offspring which in time come to be regarded as established truth is called “churnalism.”

  21. Quote “Did volcanoes accelerate the fall of Chinese Dynasties?”

    The date 1644 is a precise point in the Eddy cycle; a root. These points indicate the collapse of many civilisations in the past – at 980yr cycle period. Has been so for the earlier 8 cycles, circa 6200bce.

  22. “To get off Russian fossil gas, Germany is going big on deploying electric and hybrid heat pumps.”

    That’s all fine and dandy, but it is not clear exactly how Germany is going to get the energy required for the industrial task of generating heat pumps for every house, since their response to getting of Russian oil is going to be mass de-industrialization and belated implementation of the Morgenthau plan, i.e. becoming an impoverished third world country.

    • Don’t forget that they commanded their auto manufacturers to switch all the cars to electricity. That would be the electricity they can no longer make unless they spend money they no longer have, which would only cause inflation they can no longer sustain.
      Western governments have a real crisis in competence. Unfortunately, “Science!(TM)” is currently less competent.

  23. I am in a liberated mood at the moment.
    Sussmann trial is due to start

    “On effective activism and intellectual honesty [link]“

    Lovely topic.
    I did my part a few weeks back calling for a push or putsch against Putin.
    No response so far.

    Re global warming the only way out is for the world to cool back down on the systems and criteria we use though this usually takes time.
    Of interest the current decreased heat input.
    , ? Clouds or diminished sun output is showing up in a large number of areas.
    Arctic Sea ice 14th lowest and trending to midline (take note Jim Hunt)
    Antarctic sea ice only just below average.
    La Niña threatening to ramp up.
    Global surface temperatures now 8th lowest for the year (attention Nick Stokes).
    A true fall must be accompanied by a diminution in CO2 levels ( is this happening, angech?)

    Intellectual honesty and effective activism are poles apart.
    Willard and Mosher and Hot whopper and Willis E ,
    Real Climate, ATTP, WUWT and Open mind all offer intellectual honesty but ineffectual activism.

    Intellectual honesty, honestly?
    Since the first thing we must admit, honestly, is that we do not know everything the only honest attitude that can be adopted, intellectually, is skepticism of those claiming to be honest brokers or honest used car salesmen.
    JC is to be applauded for her attitude of explaining that we cannot know everything and must be prepared to investigate and learn.

    CAGW may be real, that is the hard part for an antagonist to accept.
    It may be real.
    On the other hand it might all be Fake news, that is the hard part for protagonist to understand.
    It may be fake.

    Committed activists have no such concerns,
    They are intellectually honest in their own minds.
    Not in the pay of big oil or in it for the money.

    They are there to save their version of humanity and make it ours.

  24. William F. Schilling, Sc.D. MIT

    Thank you Dr. Curry, I wait for the day when true scientific debate can be reestablished sans political interference. Above all, sciences such as ones dealing with climate are very far from “settled.

  25. Michael Cunningham aka Faustino aka Genghis Cunn

    “A few things that caught my eye …” Judith, if that’s your definition of “a few,” I’d hate to see your version of “many things.” :-)

  26. UK-Weather Lass

    Thank you, Dr Curry.

    The blog item by R. Saravanan, ‘Model Beauty Contest’, is an excellent read even if it does struggle to truly lead the IPCC out of climate model mediocrity.

    I was also impressed by the Nature paper discussing an astronomically lead movement and development of human beings especially in the NH. This seems a really rich area for discovery of how often our species was driven to move on and why. What would our ancestors have learned from the recent eclipse and ‘Blood Moon’ and how would they have responded? I have a feeling it would have been much more sensible than anything the IPCC would advocate.

  27. The Planet Mean Surface Temperature New equation.
    Here it is the planet 1LOT energy balance analysis related New equation:
    Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (K)

    The New equation is based both, on precise radiative “energy in” estimation and on the “Planet Rotational Warming Phenomenon“.
    We are capable now for the THEORETICAL ESTIMATION of the planetary mean surface temperatures.
    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  28. To those who wish the US was “managed” like China – it ain’t all it’s cracked up to be.

    China’s economy is paying the price for the nation’s Covid Zero policy, with industrial output and consumer spending sliding to the worst levels since the pandemic began and analysts warning of no quick recovery.

    Industrial output unexpectedly fell 2.9% in April from a year ago, while retail sales contracted 11.1% in the period, weaker than a projected 6.6% drop. The unemployment rate climbed to 6.1% and the youth jobless rate hit a record. Investors responded by selling everything from Chinese shares to US index futures and oil.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-16/china-s-economy-contracts-sharply-as-covid-zero-curbs-output?srnd=premium

  29. Bill Fabrizio

    “We Created the Pandemicene”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/04/how-climate-change-impacts-pandemics/629699/

    Well … that ties the narrative knot. Anyone have a sword handy?

    • It is difficult to reject ‘cancel culture’ without becoming part of it.

      But this kind of biased article led me to cancel my decades long subscription long ago.

      I’m not going to pay to filter through such nonsense.

    • Hey Bill, I got your ‘sword’ right here. We just need to fix human behavior.
      https://news.gsu.edu/2022/05/13/georgia-state-researchers-find-crispr-cas9-gene-editing-approaches-can-alter-the-social-behavior-of-animals/

      “[using] CRISPR-Cas9 technology to eliminate the actions of a neurochemical signaling pathway that plays a critical role in regulating social behaviors in mammals. Vasopressin and the receptor that it acts on called Avpr1a regulates social phenomena ranging from pair bonding, cooperation, and social communication to dominance and aggression. The new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), finds that knocking out the Avpr1a receptor in hamsters, and thus effectively eliminating vasopressin’s action on it, dramatically altered the expression of social behavior in unexpected ways.

      “We were really surprised at the results,” Albers said. “We anticipated that if we eliminated vasopressin activity, we would reduce both aggression and social communication. But the opposite happened.”

      Instead, the hamsters without the receptor showed much higher levels of social communication behavior than did their counterparts with intact receptors. Even more interesting, the typical sex differences observed in aggressiveness were eliminated with both male and female hamsters displaying high levels of aggression towards other same-sex individuals.

      “This suggests a startling conclusion,” Albers said. “Even though we know that vasopressin increases social behaviors by acting within a number of brain regions, it is possible that the more global effects of the Avpr1a receptor are inhibitory.”

      Aldous Huxley was a prophet.

      • Bill Fabrizio

        LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        > Aldous Huxley was a prophet.

        True.

  30. The author of the salt scourge does what many authors do. In writing about effects of AGW that also have other factors in play, invariably the other factors are downplayed and the thrust of the article is global warming. Salt intrusion into the waters of the Mekong Delta, the rivers of Bangladesh and the Indus River of Pakistan is partially a result of SLR certainly, but subsidence, alteration of the river channels in the upper reaches of the watershed, tectonics and thousands of years of natural forces are at play as well.

    When discussing the Flint drinking water crisis, he mentions the salty Flint River, as a cause, while ignoring the muckups by politicians and bureaucrats that led to the use of Flint River water, polluted by decades of road salting.

    One of the links has this in reference to the increased salinity of the Rio Grande River.

    “ Anthropogenic salinization of rivers and lakes is increasingly recognized as an emerging threat to freshwater resources, biodiversity and ecosystem functions [1]. The ‘salinization syndrome’ [2] is the result of the combined effects of anthropogenic salt inputs, accelerated geological weathering and weathering of construction materials (i.e. concrete and cement). Humans release salts in the form of a variety of ions (calcium, magnesium, sodium, bicarbonate, sulfate, chloride, etc.) via diverse activities such as industry, agriculture, resource extraction and transportation [3]. In addition to accelerating weathering by releasing strong acids, humans also now move more geological material than natural processes by an order of magnitude [4,5], speeding up weathering by exposing more rock. The problem of increased inputs is further compounded by increased evaporative concentration of salts resulting from human activities. Damming of rivers has been linked to increasing evaporative concentration, causing 12% of the salinization along the Colorado River [6].”

    Much like other articles about the scourge of AGW, if you scratch the surface you will find nuggets of what else is causing the problem.

  31. Planet Mars black-body temperature (effective temperature) Te misfortunate coincidence.

    We have calculated the Corrected Effective Temperature for Mars Te.correct.mars = 174 K

    But let’s see what happened when the Effective Temperature of Mars was not yet corrected. Te.mars = 209,8 K (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/marsfact.html)

    Tsat. mean.mars = 210 K (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars)

    We have here planet Mars mean temperature measured by satellites:
    Tsat.mean.mars = 210 K
    We have the Mars black-body temperature
    Te = 209,8 K

    These temperatures the Tsat.mean.mars = 210 K and the black-body temperature Te.mars = 209,8 K are almost identical.

    These two very important for planet Mars temperatures are almost identical, but it is a coincident.
    It is a coincident, but with very important consequences.

    Let’s explain:
    Tsat.mean.mars = 210 K measured by satellites is almost equal with Te.mars = 209,8 K
    When measuring by satellites the Tsat.mean.mars = 210 K and calculating Mars black-body temperature Te.mars. = 209,8 K scientist were led to mistaken conclusions.

    First they concluded that the planet’s effective and planet’s without-atmosphere mean temperatures should normally be equal, which is wrong.
    Secondly they concluded that Earth without atmosphere should have an average surface temperature equal to the black-body temperature (effective temperature), Te.earth = 255 K (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html)

    Then they compared the Te.earth = 255 K with the measured by satellites Tsat.mean.earth = 288 K (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/)

    The difference of 288 K – 255 K = Δ33 oC was then attributed to the Earth’s atmosphere greenhouse warming effect.

    Now we have the Mars Corrected Effective Temperature
    Te.correct.mars = 174 K.

    The fact that the Corrected Effective Temperature of Mars is Te.correct.mars = 174 K, which is not even close to the satellite measured Tsat.mean.mars = 210 K debunks the above syllogism that the planet the calculated black-body temperature Te (effective temperature) is equal to the planet without atmosphere mean surface temperature Tmean.

    The above wrong syllogism happened because of the wrongly estimated Mars black-body temperature.
    It was calculated assuming planet absorbing incoming solar energy as a disk. We know now that planet absorbs the incoming solar energy as a sphere, and not as a disk.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Clyde Spencer

      “We know now that planet absorbs the incoming solar energy as a sphere, and not as a disk.”

      And not uniformly on the surface of the sphere because 71% of the surface is water and reflects specularly instead of with approximately Lambertian diffuse reflectance. The specular reflectance off water varies from a minimum of about 2% at local noon, for water, up to 100% at the terminator (and even rough solid objects at glancing angles). One can observe the high reflectance when the sun is near the horizon even in the dirt and stubble of a harvested corn field.

      • Clyde:

        “And not uniformly on the surface of the sphere because 71% of the surface is water and reflects specularly instead of with approximately Lambertian diffuse reflectance. The specular reflectance off water varies from a minimum of about 2% at local noon, for water, up to 100% at the terminator (and even rough solid objects at glancing angles). One can observe the high reflectance when the sun is near the horizon even in the dirt and stubble of a harvested corn field.”

        “…and reflects specularly instead of with approximately Lambertian diffuse reflectance.”

        Yes, yes, and yes!!!

  32. “Saravanan: How to judge a model beauty contest?”

    I suggest looking into each of the following.

    The Model is comprised of:

    1. Specifications for the target response functions for each application domain

    2. Specifications for the success criteria and success metrics for the target response functions

    3. Local Instantaneous continuous fundamental equations for each subsystem

    4. Modified fundamental continuous equations that set a tractable, well-posed mathematical problem

    5. Solution methods, generally discrete numerical approximations, for the modified fundamental continuous equations

    6. Consistency, stability, and thus convergence of the numerical solution methods

    7. Specifications for the many aspects of the overall structure of the coding for all the software

    8. Coding of the numerical approximations, and all other aspects of code for all the software pieces parts

    9. Verification of all the coding against all the specifications

    10. Mathematical Verification of all numerical methods

    11. Determination of the application order of the solutions of the discrete approximations for each application domain

    12. Application procedures and processes for each application domain

    13. User qualifications for each application domain.Users are a part of The Model.

    14. Validation of The Model for all application domains. See Step 1 and Step 2

    Copious documentation is required at each step, and specifications for the documentation must be met

    It’s an iterative process, and return to previous steps can happen at any step

    Each step in the process represents tons o’ work.

    • Curious George

      Where do you fit the requirement “Get the physics right”?
      To quote ‘Gavin’, “What the appropriate form for L [the specific heat of water vaporization] is depends on what the total energy function is in the atmosphere. If the specific heats of condensate and vapour is assumed to be zero (which is a pretty good assumption given the small ratio of water to air, and one often made in atmospheric models) then the appropriate L is constant (=L0). (Note that all models correctly track the latent heat of condensate).” … “Eventually, all the models will do this properly (some do already), but it is not trivial – but neither is it hugely important.”

      If we build on the “pretty good assumption”, how beautiful will the model be? Ten years later, the CESM models still use it. Three percent here, three percent there .. who cares?
      https://judithcurry.com/2012/08/30/activate-your-science/#comment-234131

      • Dan Hughes

        Where do you fit the requirement “Get the physics right”?

        1 through 4 and then Validation at 14. Validation is the process of ensuring that the whole ball of wax has “the right physics”, where “the right physics”, for each response function is determined by the specifications.

        Considerations like run-time requirements sometimes enter the specifications, for example. Some target response functions might not require “exactly correct physics”. Also, it costs just as much to maintain unnecessary Lines of Code as it does to maintain necessary Lines of Code. Pathological situations sometimes arise, in which unnecessary Lines of Code could unknowingly nuke extensions to additional application domains and response functions. A truly sad, sad situation.

        The question, “How good is good enough”, is frequently more important than exactitude in physics.

      • Curious George

        Dan, thanks. You write on a plane that’s too lofty for me. Target response functions etc.. I never ask the question, How good is good enough? I only ask, Is this good enough?

  33. This graph shows the percentage of LA homeless suffering from mental illness and substance abuse. When I noted the great variance in findings by the 3 studies, it made me think of the Kahneman article.

    While these findings don’t exactly match up with the intent of Kahneman’s book and research, it raises issues about how supposed experts can come up with such disparate conclusions. Another area providing an opportunity to tell whatever story you want to tell and have experts to back you up.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FTDjoOKVsAASC5F?format=jpg&name=large

  34. The LIA was a long negative feedback response period.

    The Arctic sea ice has a warming and not a cooling effect on the Global Energy Balance.

    It is true that the sea ice has a higher reflecting ability. It happens because ice and snow have higher albedo.
    But at very high latitudes, where the sea ice covers the ocean there is a very poor insolation absorption.

    Thus the sea ice’s higher reflecting ability doesn’t cool significantly the Earth’s surface.
    On the other hand there is a physical phenomenon which has a strong influence in the cooling of Earth’s surface.

    This phenomenon is the differences in emissivity.
    The open sea waters have emissivity ε = 0,95.
    The ice has emissivity ε = 0,97.

    On the other hand, the snow has a much lower emissivity ε = 0,8.
    And the sea ice is a snow covered sea ice with emissivity ε = 0,8.
    https://www.thermoworks.com/emissivity-table

    Also we should have under consideration the physical phenomenon of the sea waters freezing-melting behavior.
    Sea waters freeze at – 2,3 oC.
    Sea ice melts at 0 oC.

    The difference between the melting and the freezing temperatures creates a seasonal time delay in covering the arctic waters with ice sheets.

    When formatting the sea ice gets thicker from the colder water’s side.
    When melting the sea ice gets thinner from the warmer atmosphere’s side.

    This time delay enhances the arctic waters IR emissivity and heat losses towards the space because of the open waters’ higher emissivity ε = 0,95, compared with the snow covered ice ε = 0,8.

    Needs to be mentioned that Earth’s surface emits IR radiation 24/7 all year around.
    And the Arctic region insolation absorption is very poor even in the summer.

    That is why Arctic sea ice has a warming and not a cooling effect on the Global Energy Balance.
    On the other hand it is the open Arctic sea waters that have the cooling effect on the Global Energy Balance.

    Feedback refers to the modification of a process by changes resulting from the process itself. Positive feedbacks accelerate the process, while negative feedbacks slow it down.

    The Arctic sea ice has a warming and not a cooling effect on the Global Energy Balance. It is a negative feedback.
    The melting Arctic sea ice, by opening the waters, slows down the Global Warming trend.
    This process appears to be a negative feedback.

    The LIA was a long negative feedback response period.
    The general trend was then and is now a continuous orbital forced global warming.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Clyde Spencer

      “It is true that the sea ice has a higher reflecting ability. It happens because ice and snow have higher albedo.”

      There is a band of about 3 deg latitude where specular reflectance off the Arctic ocean is equal to or greater than the diffuse reflectance of snow.

      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/12/why-albedo-is-the-wrong-measure-of-reflectivity-for-modeling-climate/

      During the N Hemisphere Winter, the Arctic receives no direct sunlight, so the difference in reflectivity is unimportant. At the Equinoxes, the far side of the Earth is not illuminated, so there is only a 50% ‘duty cycle’ of illumination. However, during the the Arctic Summer, that band of 3 deg specular reflectance becomes important because the southerly bounds of the Arctic that might be ice free actually have a higher reflectance than snow.

      • Clyde:

        “The total reflectivity of Earth is important in energy budget calculations and in Global Circulation Models used to predict climate. If the value used is too low, it will contribute to models predicting more warming than is correct. ”

        Unfortunately… the value used is too low!

  35. Nothing would do more to reduce inflation and pressure Russia to end the war in Ukraine than an AntiFragile Enegy policy.

    Whenever people start talking about OPEC, like to point out this Paul Krugman paper from 2001, http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/opec.html. When people say that the US cannot affect the price of oil, I like to point out several things: 1.) That’s a good thing because every bit we produce goes to our GDP. 2.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import adds to our GDP. 3.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import reduces our trade deficit. 4.) That’s a good thing because it means lots of tax revenue (see and 2). 5.) Don’t be so sure about that, a little competition could spur production in lots of other places. Many producers produce inefficiently (and messily) because they believe price rises will keep them wealthy. E.g. Venezuela, Russia in the 1990s… They don’t keep their equipment maintained and they waste/spill a lot. US hoarding sends a signal to oil producing nations with two implications: 1). Alternative Energy is nowhere near ready, otherwise the US would be extracting its oil before prices fall; the US likely doesn’t expect alternatives to ever be better than fossil fuels (I’d like to get into this, but I’ll save it for another time). 2). Current producers can make money by keeping production low. If the US told the world it believes alternative energy R&D would pay off within the next 50 it would mean nothing, unless they back it up with extraction for the medium term. I believe that if the US said that there was no future in oil, and backed it up by pumping full- tilt to take advantage of the current high prices, we’d see both alternative research take off as well as exploration, extraction, and productivity throughout the world. Reagan wasn’t the Great Communicator because of how he talked. Actions speak far louder than words.

    In the meantime, nothing would do more to reduce fuel consumption & traffic than to get people to accelerate faster, pay attention & avoid using brakes. After that, replace speed limits with adjustable Target Speeds. And get rid of unnecessary stop signs.

    🧵

    https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1524490112746283016

  36. “ Less than 20% of the world’s population has managed to stockpile more than half of the globe’s maize and other grains, leading to steep price increases across the planet and dropping more countries into famine.

    The hoarding is taking place in China.……

    According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, China is expected to have 69% of the globe’s maize reserves in the first half of crop year 2022, 60% of its rice and 51% of its wheat.“

    https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Datawatch/China-hoards-over-half-the-world-s-grain-pushing-up-global-prices

  37. Total US Federal Debt is ~$30 Trillion. Of that amount ~$6 Trillion the Federal Government owes to itself. That is mostly owed to the Social Security Trust Fund.

    The balance is known as the Publicly Held Debt and is ~$24 Trillion.

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYGFDPUN

    Of the ~$24 Trillion, the Federal Reserve holds ~$6 Trillion on its balance sheet. The ~$6 Trillion owed to the Social Security Trust Fund and the ~$6 Trillion on the Federal Reserve balance sheet are the same amount just by coincidence.

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FDHBFRBN

    In addition to the general public and Federal Reserve, foreign and international parties hold some of the Publicly Held Debt in the amount of nearly $8 Trillion.

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FDHBFIN

    The Federal Reserve has said that they will be reducing their balance sheet holdings of the Publicly Held Debt. The interesting unknown is how will global capital markets react to the additional debt from increased annual deficits and the unwinding of the Federal Reserve balance sheet.

  38. 1. Earth’s Without-Atmosphere Mean Surface Temperature calculation
    Tmean.earth

    So = 1.361 W/m² (So is the Solar constant)
    S (W/m²) is the planet’s solar flux. For Earth S = So
    Earth’s albedo: aearth = 0,306

    Earth is a smooth rocky planet, Earth’s surface solar irradiation accepting factor Φearth = 0,47
    (Accepted by a Smooth Hemisphere with radius r sunlight is S*Φ*π*r²(1-a), where Φ = 0,47)

    β = 150 days*gr*oC/rotation*cal – is a Rotating Planet Surface Solar Irradiation INTERACTING-Emitting Universal Law constant
    N = 1 rotation /per day, is Earth’s axial spin
    cp.earth = 1 cal/gr*oC, it is because Earth has a vast ocean. Generally speaking almost the whole Earth’s surface is wet. We can call Earth a Planet Ocean.

    σ = 5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴, the Stefan-Boltzmann constant

    Earth’s Without-Atmosphere Mean Surface Temperature Equation Tmean.earth is:
    Tmean.earth= [ Φ (1-a) So (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (K)

    Τmean.earth = [ 0,47(1-0,306)1.361 W/m²(150 days*gr*oC/rotation*cal *1rotations/day*1 cal/gr*oC)¹∕ ⁴ /4*5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴ ]¹∕ ⁴ =
    Τmean.earth = [ 0,47(1-0,306)1.361 W/m²(150*1*1)¹∕ ⁴ /4*5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴ ]¹∕ ⁴ =
    Τmean.earth = ( 6.854.905.906,50 )¹∕ ⁴ = 287,74 K
    Tmean.earth = 287,74 Κ

    And we compare it with the
    Tsat.mean.earth = 288 K, measured by satellites.
    These two temperatures, the calculated one, and the measured by satellites are almost identical.

    Conclusions:
    The planet mean surface temperature equation
    Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (K)
    produces remarkable results.
    The calculated planets temperatures are almost identical with the measured by satellites.
    Planet…….Tmean….Tsat.mean
    Mercury…..325,83 K…..340 K
    Earth……….287,74 K…..288 K
    Moon………223,35 Κ…..220 Κ
    Mars………..213,21 K…..210 K

    The 288 K – 255 K = 33 oC difference does not exist in the real world.
    There are only traces of greenhouse gasses.
    The Earth’s atmosphere is very thin. There is not any measurable Greenhouse Gasses Warming effect on the Earth’s surface.

    There is NO +33°C greenhouse enhancement on the Earth’s mean surface temperature.
    Both the calculated by equation and the satellite measured Earth’s mean surface temperatures are almost identical:
    Tmean.earth = 287,74K = 288 K

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  39. Climate models do not produce a unique solution trajectory regardless of how well trained they are. They produce a family of divergent solutions that evolve from small differences in feasible initial conditions. The solution trajectories are treated as probabilistic with broad uncertainty expanding over the simulation period. Where the means of the family of solutions runs too hot – it seems more likely that models don’t quite get the physics right. That doesn’t mean that other CMIP models get the physics exactly right.

    e.g. – https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL086705https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0044-6

    While the interest is in the temperature projection models have other and more interesting uses.

    CERES instruments – btw – are accurate despite specious speculation on specular and diffuse reflection. What matters with reflected SW measured at TOA is the colour of the surface and not its roughness.

    Nuclear costs are competitive now – despite a few misadventures in the US and Europe. Cost overruns largely unrelated to safety regulations.

    ‘The rising costs of nuclear plants are often assumed to be associated with increasing stringency of safety regulations (e.g., MacKerron and Komanoff49,86). Here, we estimate that prescriptive safety requirements can be associated with approximately one-third of the direct containment cost increase between 1976 and 2017.’
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254243512030458X?dgcid=author

    Small modular reactors both reduce upfront capital risk and allow for automated production of multiple units. Small fast neutron gas cooled reactors take it to another level.

    https://www.ga.com/nuclear-fission/advanced-reactors#:~:text=General%20Atomics%20Electromagnetic%20Systems%20(GA,efficiency%2C%20safety%2C%20and%20economics.

    General Atomics and Framatome are working on a 50MWe plug and play version.

    https://www.ga.com/general-atomics-and-framatome-collaborate-to-develop-a-fast-modular-reactor

    The hydrogel experiment decried by Willis produced 3.4 L of water from a 0.6×0.3 m solar cell over the 30 day period of the trial. As well as increasing electricity generation by some 10%. It involves a hydrophilic gel and diurnal change in temperature and humidity. It is a perfectly adequate bench scale proof of concept. Meanwhile solar cell costs are set to decline further with perovskite cells coming onto the market.

    e.g. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220210005747/en/Global-Perovskite-Solar-Cells-Market-to-2027—Featuring-Alfa-Aesar-BASF-and-Fujifilm-Among-Others—ResearchAndMarkets.com

    And finally – from the best climate blog Judith has seen in a while.

    ‘Another reason to talk about potential tipping points is that it can help underscore the urgency for mitigating action. But it would be better to discuss tipping points in general terms, without implying that there are precise global warming thresholds or mitigation time intervals. Numbers associated with tipping points typically come with many caveats about the uncertainties. If the caveats are lost in translation to the public, the numbers can end up feeding into doomist narratives predicated on faux certainty.

    Dystopian headlines about doomsday glaciers and methane bombs attract attention and may perhaps spur more climate activism in some people. Casual talk of climate tipping points as if they were imminent can push other people past real emotional tipping points. This can result in debilitating climate anxiety and passive sharing of “doomer memes”, rather than activism.’ https://metamodel.blog/posts/predict-tipping-points/

    My thinking is that the uncertainties of tipping points are the most compelling reason to transition as quickly as possible to low carbon energy.

    • What constitutes “quickly”? Is cost irrelevant? Is widespread environmental damage from massive green energy projects also irrelevant?

      My point is a middle-of-the-road-approach that emphasizes cost effectiveness is a superior approach while recognizing that rationally applied technology invariably reduces costs, with the happy byproduct of reduced pollution.

      The history of power generation demonstrates that innovation driven by competitiveness invariably finds good solutions. That includes advanced reactors, but the government bureaucrats really need to stop trying to pick winners and losers.

      Ultimately, policy driven by hysteria only serves to enrich the elite.

      • We are in the era of hyper-technological innovation. Entrepreneurs deliver – the rest is ideological cr@p

      • Elision, as usual, you resort to personnel attacks.

      • Governments need to reduce spending – and I now post COVID include Australia in this. That’s what fuels inflation – along with keeping interest rates too low for too long. But a few billion for R&D on FOAK technology in private/public partnerships is the price of democracy.

        If you can’t get the slice of that very small pie that you wanted because you don’t have the dollars to put your money where your mouth is – is not my problem. That you then complain about it is sour grapes.

        I am so over people here imagining that they are fiscally purer than I am and spouting the same motivated cr@p endlessly. And if you imagine that calling it ideologically motivated cr@p is a personal attack – you’re a snowflake.

    • Clyde Spencer

      “CERES instruments – btw – are accurate despite specious speculation on specular and diffuse reflection. What matters with reflected SW measured at TOA is the colour of the surface and not its roughness.”

      Accurate compared to what? What do you mean by “colour?” Solid materials typically have complex spectra consisting of regions of absorption and often have reflectance features on the order of wavelengths of microns. Humans will perceive the same color with differently shaped spectra.

      “Specious” is in your vocabulary, but I don’t think that you know much about the physics of light.

      • The amount of light absorbed or reflected from a surface relates only to its colour. Why do you imagine that grass looks green?

        As for CERES instruments on various platform – there is s great deal of information available with which you should get across before making more of an a$$ of yourself.

        e.g. https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/instruments/

      • Clyde Spencer

        “The amount of light absorbed or reflected from a surface relates only to its colour. Why do you imagine that grass looks green?”

        Grass looks green because red and blue light are absorbed to be utilized for photosynthesis; green light is reflected. The color of something isn’t determined by the AMOUNT of light, but rather by the relative amount of light across the visible spectrum. You can have something with a low reflectance appear to have the same hue as another material with high reflectance. Plants are also generally more reflective in the Near-IR than they are in green, but humans don’t perceive IR, therefore it doesn’t affect our perception of color.

        As I said, you know little about the physics of light and how it interacts with solid materials. Please don’t continue to share your ignorance unless you are trying to demonstrate the Kruger-Dunning effect.

      • Grass is green because it absorbs blue and red light and reflects green. This is elementary optics and not worth discussing further. Especially with the likes of you.

        The point was that surface roughness makes no difference to power flux measured by CERES instruments from Earth orbits. Reflectance is a surface property independent of surface roughness.

      • Clyde Spencer

        You don’t even have a clue to how wrong you are! See here:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations

        The Readers Digest version is that polished or naturally-smooth surfaces such as wax coatings on leaves, standing water, or crystal faces, reflect specularly as defined by Fresnel’s equation. The amount of reflection is determined by the angle of incidence of a light ray and the complex refractive index of the material at every wavelength of the incident light; the reflected light leaves the surface at the same angle as it impinges, and is confined to a flat sheaf for sunlight. If the surface is rough, with many micro-facets, or point reflectors such as suspended water droplets in a cloud, the incident light is scattered in all directions normal to the surfaces of the micro-facets. To obtain the total reflectance, one has to integrate the flux over a hemisphere.

        It isn’t just about color!

      • Light is reflected or absorbed – independent of surface roughness. Whether it is specular or diffuse reflection doesn’t matter in this context.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “Light is reflected or absorbed – independent of surface roughness.”

        How much light is absorbed is determined largely by the extinction coefficient component of the complex refractive index. That is why if a mineral with a metallic luster is powdered finely, it will change from a silver color to black. Surface texture can and does impact the apparent reflectivity, both as measured in the laboratory with an optical reflectometer (or what you probably are familiar with as a ‘light meter’) or measured in the field. That is why polished metal appears brighter than metal with a rough surface.

        Trees add a shadow component to the apparent reflectivity of satellite remote sensing imagery, which isn’t resolved in imagery with a resolution coarser than the tree and shadow combined. Thus, one sees an area that looks darker than the bark or leaves of the trees.

        If you have a rough surface with many protuberances, for large angles of incidence, there will be shadows behind the projections. At the micro-scale, light will be reflected off the projections towards the source. As seen from above, the light reflected back towards the source won’t be observed or measured, and the shadows will contribute little to the vertical reflectance. That is why it is necessary to obtain the bi-directional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) of an object and integrate over a hemisphere to obtain the total reflectance.

        Years ago, Scientific American had an article in the Amateur Scientist section showing how to make an effective Black Body by stacking double-edge razor blades together to trap light between the individual blades. It is the net surface roughness that allows multiple reflections to trap the light, due to the high extinction coefficient of the metal blades.

        There is so much that you obviously don’t know! Yet, you think that you are knowledgeable. You are only fooling yourself.

      • What is being measured is the electromagnetic radiation integrated over the planet. Whatever light ‘trapping’ mechanisms Clyde imagines – what is measured is the energy not trapped.

      • Clyde Spencer

        What you don’t seem to understand is that the measurements are a lower-bound on the energy leaving because NASA is mostly measuring the retroreflectance of albedo.

      • The ‘retroreflectance of albedo’ is meaningless gobbledegook. There are two sophisticated. purpose designed observing systems that are consistent.

      • Clyde Spencer

        By consistent, I’m assuming that you mean that they both miss the same thing.

      • Wherever we look the world is warming. – with noise that is definitively not random.

        https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_May_2021_v6.jpg

        If Clyde could get past his nonsense – there is a much more interesting discussion of mechanisms to be had.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “… with noise that is definitively not random.”

        You said in a previous message that the white noise would cancel. The only time that noise can cancel is when it is random. Which is it, is it random or isn’t it?

      • Random noise sums to zero. Real word geophysical series reveal something else.

        e.g. https://watertechbyrie.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/nilometer.png

      • Clyde Spencer

        “If Clyde could get past his nonsense – there is a much more interesting discussion of mechanisms to be had.”

        Yes, by all means! “Ready, fire, aim.”

        One has to be sure that the fundamentals are right to make progress.

      • So the world isn’t warming?

      • Clyde Spencer

        The world is warming. What is at issue is how much and why?

      • In the past 40 years it is a mixture of low frequency spatiotemporal chaotic climate variability – with a positive cloud feedback – over the eastern Pacific mostly – and AGW. About 50/50.

        e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0044-6

      • Robert:
        “The point was that surface roughness makes no difference to power flux measured by CERES instruments from Earth orbits. Reflectance is a surface property independent of surface roughness.”

        The city of New York area reflectance is much less than the nearby rural area’s. Incident solar energy gets captured in the city’s deep streets’ canyons.
        When we say “surface roughness” in relation to the incoming solar energy reflection, it is not on the microscopical level.

        The power flux measured by CERES instruments from Earth orbits measures the planet’s diffuse reflection only.
        The power flux measured by CERES instruments from Earth orbits completely ignores planet’s specular reflection, because planet’s specular reflection never reaches the CERES instruments’ measuring sensors.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Clyde
        “The Readers Digest version is that polished or naturally-smooth surfaces such as wax coatings on leaves, standing water, or crystal faces, reflect specularly as defined by Fresnel’s equation. The amount of reflection is determined by the angle of incidence of a light ray and the complex refractive index of the material at every wavelength of the incident light; the reflected light leaves the surface at the same angle as it impinges, and is confined to a flat sheaf for sunlight. If the surface is rough, with many micro-facets, or point reflectors such as suspended water droplets in a cloud, the incident light is scattered in all directions normal to the surfaces of the micro-facets. To obtain the total reflectance, one has to integrate the flux over a hemisphere.”

        “To obtain the total reflectance, one has to integrate the flux over a hemisphere.”

        That’s right!
        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Clyde Spencer

        Ellison is unbelievably ignorant and thinks that just because he says something everyone should believe him. It is beginning to look like religious dogma from one of the faithful.

      • Christos and Clyde are the founts of all knowledge? Seems unlikely.

      • Clyde Spencer

        At least twice as likely as you being the fount of all knowledge.

        Did you even bother to read the article on Fresnel’s equation, or is that beyond you?

    • CERES instruments – btw – are accurate despite specious speculation on specular and diffuse reflection. What matters with reflected SW measured at TOA is the colour of the surface and not its roughness.

      There’s not a counterfactual observation against which to evaluate CERES.

      Reflection of shortwave radiation is an-isotropic, particularly with respect to the clouds which cover most of earth.

      Satellites represent a single moving point of observation.

      Such a single angle of observation suffers from failing to capture directional variation which might occur in the full field of view of incident incoming solar.

      Does the limited observation angle of CERES capture most of the significant trend? Answering this would be answering out of ignorance.

      I do find the CERES trends interesting, and if these trends are accurate, much of recent warming has been from absorbed solar and not greenhouse forcing, but we shouldn’t lose sight of the uncertainty.

      • CERES data is consistent with ocean heat uptake.

        e.g. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL093047

      • Clyde Spencer

        You assert that “CERES data is consistent with ocean heat uptake.”

        From the link you provided:

        “We show that independent satellite and in situ observations each yield statistically indistinguishable decadal increases in EEI from mid-2005 to mid-2019 of 0.50 ± 0.47 W m−2 decade−1 (5%–95% confidence interval).”

        If the measurement were presented properly, showing no more significant figures in the nominal value than the position in the uncertainty estimate with the largest value, it would be expressed as 0.5 ± 0.5 W m−2 decade−1. In other words, 0.5 ± 100% W m−2 decade−1. It is “consistent,” but of so low precision as to be almost useless. All we can conclude is that there is a 95% probability that the increase in thermal energy over the decade was between 0.0 and 1.0; that is, it is probably positive and small.

        And, none of it has anything to do with the color of water or grass.

      • Yo have confused EEI with ocean heat.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “Yo [sic] have confused EEI with ocean heat”

        From the abstract in your link:
        “Most of EEI warms the ocean; the remainder heats the land, melts ice, and warms the atmosphere.”

        Do you even understand the things you read?

      • Clyde Spencer

        I recognize the graph. It is from the paper that had a 100% uncertainty in the decadal energy measurements. Yes, numbers DO matter.

        If you find me tedious, go away. You are supporting Jr. High School science as taught by a music major.

      • It is a comparison between two different data sources – ocean and space – both saying the same thing. The uncertainties you imagine negate the data are 2 sigma limits taking into account noise. You would do better to focus on the most likely value and the trend. White noise sums to zero over time. You are claiming systematic error – but are far from supporting it with anything but narratives based on Wikipedia and Readers Digest.

      • Clyde Spencer

        Quantum physics works in the domain of 6-sigma uncertainty and beyond. A mere 2-sigma uncertainty that amounts to 100% of the nominal value tells one that there so much noise that the results are highly questionable. The quoted uncertainty really says that there is about a 43% chance that the nominal value could be as small as zero.

        Any sample of 2 or more points that are not horizontal or vertical will have a “trend.” What is really important is the correlation coefficient squared, which tells one the percentage of variance that is explained or predicted by the independent variable. With such a large standard deviation, one can expect to have a small r^2 value.

        Apparently you don’t understand that the “Readers Digest version” is an idiom for something succinct. I wrote it.

        While I realize that Wikipedia has a poor reputation, it has been my experience the problem is with bias on political topics. Physics and math’ (and most other sciences) seem to be well done and objective. If you really believe that it is not a reliable reference, why don’t you point out the errors in it? Perhaps you don’t approve of the article on Fresnel’s equation because you don’t understand it. As a reminder, it was you who said that “numbers matter.” Fresnel’s equation allows one to put numbers to your claim that reflectance is determined by color. I’m telling you that total reflectance is determined by the complex refractive index, across the wavelengths under consideration, for liquids and smooth solid objects. Furthermore, specular reflectance is away from the source illumination, and diffuse reflectance tends to concentrate back towards the source, which is why I referred to it as retro-reflectance.

      • The 2-sigma estimate – assuming a Gaussian distribution – give 5-95% confidence limits. It is stock standard statistics. With CERES the small changes are of a similar magnitude to the accuracy practically achievable. With Argo the confidence limits are much tighter.

        https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/styles/node_key_figures_display/public/key_figures_134?itok=K-1IkmHq

        Diffuse reflection – btw – goes in many directions depending on the orientation of the surface.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “Diffuse reflection – btw – goes in many directions depending on the orientation of the surface.”

        Very perceptive of you to associate the definition of “diffuse” with the behavior of the reflections.

        diffuse
        dĭ-fyoo͞z′
        intransitive verb

        1. To cause to spread out freely.
        2. To make known to or cause to be used by large numbers of people; disseminate.
        3. To make less brilliant; soften.

        The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

      • Clyde Spencer

        You aren’t happy with my imitation of Reader’s Digest, how about something more detailed, such as this:

        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/12/why-albedo-is-the-wrong-measure-of-reflectivity-for-modeling-climate/

      • lmao – I certainly don’t read WUWT nonsense. It’s likely worse than Readers Digest.

      • Clyde Spencer

        Ignorance is often a conscious choice.

        I’m the author. If you are willing to read and respond to my comments here, how do you rationalize refusing to read something because of where it was published?

      • I read authoritative sources.

      • Clyde Spencer

        Once again, you are contradicting yourself. I think that you are getting in over your head.

      • If you think I am contradicting myself – you are again mistaken.

      • CERES was designed to achieve 1% accuracy in SW and 0.5% in IR. It consists of both scanning and non-scanning modes.

        ‘Users of CERES data should be aware that the CERES instrument has three primary scan modes. The Crosstrack scan mode is the same as that used in ERBE. The Rotating Azimuth Plane (RAP or biaxial) scan mode is used by CERES to provide angular coverage for Angular Distribution Models construction.’ .

      • Clyde Spencer

        CERES probably is very accurate for what it actually measures, which is diffuse reflectance or albedo. However, it was not designed to measure high-angle of incidence specular reflectance.

      • The system was designed to measure outgoing radiation.

      • Clyde
        “CERES probably is very accurate for what it actually measures, which is diffuse reflectance or albedo. However, it was not designed to measure high-angle of incidence specular reflectance.”

        Yes, CERES is very accurate for what it actually measures, which is diffuse reflectance or albedo.
        Yes, it was not designed to measure high-angle of incidence specular reflectance.

        https://www.cristos-vournas

      • Clyde Spencer

        The frustrating thing is how to convince someone like Ellison that they have the level of understanding of a 6-year old when they are convinced that they know more than anyone else.

      • The system was designed to measure SW to within 1% and IR to 0.5%. Large in relation to Earth energy imbalances but it reveals interesting facts about white clouds and ice over darker surfaces.

      • Different surface colours absorb and reflect different wavelengths of light – differing surface roughness have different mix of specular and diffuse reflection.

        https://watertechbyrie.files.wordpress.com/2022/05/green-surface.png

        That satellites miss specular reflection is yet another crude and eccentric Christos myth. Clyde has followed him down the rabbit hole.

      • Clyde Spencer

        “That satellites miss specular reflection is yet another crude and eccentric Christos myth. Clyde has followed him down the rabbit hole.”

        You are a real piece of work! A few messages back you claimed that surface roughness has no impact on reflectance, now you are showing a diagram of how it scatters light. It is a poor representation of reality because it shows mostly forward scattering, which is strictly true of specular reflection, but not diffuse reflection.

        What you obviously don’t understand is that specular reflection requires that the sensor be looking towards the sun and have a downward view that is the same as the angle of incidence of the sunlight. If the sensor were located at the bottom of your diagram, it would not see the specular reflection — only some of the diffuse reflection.

        I’m beginning to suspect that your problem is more than just ignorance.

        As to whether or not I’m following Christos “down the rabbit hole,” the analysis of the physics and geometry, which you refuse to read because of where it was published, was written by me in 2016.

      • Your narratives are inconsistent with NASA documentation.

        https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/

        I’m not sure why you bother. What is your fundamental point?

      • Clyde Spencer

        My fundamental point is that you erroneously stated that the distinction between specular and diffuse reflectance is unimportant and that the color of an object determines its reflectance.

      • The colour of a surface determines absorption and reflection. Roughness determines the direction of reflected rays. My point is that CERES measures both specular and diffuse rays. Too hard for you?

      • Clyde Spencer

        “The colour of a surface determines absorption and reflection. Roughness determines the direction of reflected rays. My point is that CERES measures both specular and diffuse rays. Too hard for you?”

        CERES largely misses the specular reflections because it isn’t pointing properly to observe them. It probably contributes to the problem of all the GCMs running warm.

        The absorption is determined by the extinction coefficient at a particular wavelength(s), and the complex refractive index determines the specular reflectance at every wavelength. How all the varying values of the complex refractive index integrate over the spectrum determine the total reflectance for the object. Had you taken the time to read the Wiki’ article, you might have understood that.

        Speaking of which, your refusal to read my WUWT article because of where it was published is an ad hominem attack. You are saying, not so subtly, that you will not consider reading something if you personally do not approve of the author or publisher. The way science is supposed to work is that the argument’s facts and logic are open to examination, but attacking the author or publisher is simply politics. It is clear that you are not a practicing scientist, whether you are degreed or not.

        I have offered you an opportunity to educate yourself, but you have chosen to ignore everything that does not agree with your preconceptions. Therefore, you are wasting my time. I’m one of the world’s experts on the optical constants of opaque minerals. I also have considerable experience with multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing, and imaging polarimetry. Therefore I know of what I speak. You are just a political hack with an inflated view of how knowledgeable you are.

        This will be my last response to you on this thread.

      • Refection from planetary surfaces is diffuse at any rate. What you are expert at is obsessive repetition of jargon rich nonsense.

        The extinction coefficient is related to absorption at a wavelength – which is related to colour. NASA claims a 1% accuracy for CERES in SW – your unquantified blogoscience doesn’t challenge that.

      • Clyde doesn’t understand the system he professes to critique – and ignores the consilient evidence on ocean heat.

        ‘Each CERES instrument can scan in threeprincipal modes: fixed azimuth plane (FAP or crosstrack), rotating azimuth plane (RAP), andprogrammable azimuth plane (PAP).

        In crosstrack mode, CERES scans from limb-to-limb perpendicular to the groundtrack. This mode provides global coverage daily. In RAP mode, CERES scans in elevation as it rotates in azimuth. RAP data are used to develop empirical angular models used in CERES processing. In PAP mode, the CERES instrument is sent commands from Earth to align its scan plane with that of other instruments (including CERES instruments on different platforms) so that different instruments can be compared.’

      • Robert
        “That satellites miss specular reflection is yet another crude and eccentric Christos myth.”

        Yes, satellites “see” planetary surface as a flat object. Satellites measure reflected light zillion times – each time from a tiny flat spot on the sphere.
        What satellites cannot “see” is the sphere’s specular reflection.

        We know that planets are spheres. Satellites do not know that.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Clyde Spencer

        And more critically, nadir-viewing satellites completely miss the specular reflections, which vary with the angle of incidence, except near solar noon, which is a minimum reflectance.

        CERES bins the high angle measurements, which is where the specular reflectance is changing most rapidly, and is unable to look directly into the sun because of physical restraints out of concern for damaging the sensor. Furthermore, because the polar orbit is inclined, it has to be able to look not just cross-track, but to track the sun on the horizon to obtain the high angle specular reflections. I believe that the varying azimuth cross-track measurements are fixed increments and I don’t know if any of them are intended to look directly at the sun when near the limb, but I doubt it. Descending Equator crossing times are usually about 10:00 AM, for polar-orbit satellites, so the CERES instruments are not measuring the specular reflectance at the limbs. Ascending orbit measurements might coincide with limb illumination, but again I would expect the operators would be concerned about blinding the sensor were it to look at the limb. So, in almost all instances I expect that what is being measured is diffuse retro-reflections instead of forward specular reflections.

      • Clyde
        “…So, in almost all instances I expect that what is being measured is diffuse retro-reflections instead of forward specular reflections.”

        Yes!

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Compare/contrast CERES absorbed solar with that of ERA5 and various NASA GISS Model E runs in Figure 2 here:

        https://climateobs.substack.com/p/earth-radiance-trends

        One of them may be accurate.
        Also, none of them may be accurate.

      • Unquantified blogoscience purporting to show that CERES does not measure outgoing shortwave to within 1% of the true value as NASA claims.

      • CERES is a purpose designed Earth radiation budget monitoring system. It is the only project of its type on the planet. As 90% of warming and cooling is in oceans – the best comparison is with ocean heat. As I have said more than once.

        https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/66fc7cde-9556-48e4-b224-1d827f4e9805/grl62546-fig-0001-m.png
        https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL093047

      • Unquantified blogoscience purporting to show that CERES does not measure outgoing shortwave to within 1% of the true value as NASA claims.

        Care to venture why the reanlysis is so much different?
        (If I’m not mistaken, the reanalyses even use CERES as one of many inputs ).

      • Nothing to say about the comparison of CERES to an independent ocean heat series? And no notion of how accurate reanalysis models are at reproducing CERES TOA data?

      • And no notion of how accurate reanalysis models are at reproducing CERES TOA data?

        You’re evidently not seeing the same data that I plotted.

  40. This Federal Reserve chart indicates that recent inflation is even higher than the 1970s-1980s, which is surprising to me.

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/COREFLEXCPIM159SFRBATL

    It’s the “ Flexible Price Consumer Price Index less Food and Energy”, but for anyone who has lost a sizable fraction of their net worth in the last few months, it’s probably of little interest.

    • I wonder how many of people in the University of Michigan consumer inflation expectations survey are holding crypto?
      It seems to me the most volatile metric is which party in in power.
      https://data.sca.isr.umich.edu/fetchdoc.php?docid=69959

      • The most volatile metric is progressives, Dimowits, BLM, (not) AntiFa, and their people running wild committing crimes in the streets.

      • Jim2, I think you may have discovered the way to cut inflation!
        Let’s put all those progressives & leftist in prison.
        As of July 2021, the United States had the highest number of incarcerated individuals worldwide, with almost 2.1 million people in prison. At least 60% of prisoners are working for private companies who pay an average around 63 cents per hour.
        President Donald Trump expressed approval of a concentration camp for Uighur Muslims in China during a private meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, according to former national security adviser John Bolton.

        Land of the free, home of the brave.

      • Nice try, but it’s more like 0.6%. We can put away more of the real criminal. The ironic thing is the BLM and (not) Antifa rioters in many cases were burning down Black-owned businesses. One guy in Kenosha was able to prevent more crimes from 3 rioters, but it will take a lot more than one guy to handle this Dimowit endorsed crime wave.

  41. In other news Stephen McIntrye of ClimateAudit.org just published a bombshell of an article in The Federalist with Hans Mahncke on the FBI’s lying to the DOJ revealed by the FBI notes declassified this week.

    The kicker is at the conclusion that Durham has no apparent authority to prosecute government authorities since it is now apparent that he was holding back evidence criminally implicating officials, past and present, only releasing the evidence days after the 5-year statue of limitations ran out on them. Only a Clinton lawyer and the ex-Brookings Institute Russian analyst (who fabricated the Trump dossier for Steele) have been charged to date.

    This effectively makes Barr and Durham accessories to the coverup. The prosecution of the lowly foot soldiers is essentially a “limited hang out” to close the matter of the greatest known government conspiracy to overthrow an elected US president ever known to us.

    https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/19/handwritten-notes-from-2017-show-fbi-agents-mislead-doj-on-the-trump-russia-investigation/

    • Interesting. If Durham’s ‘authority was limited’ then whomever put that limit on the investigation was obstructing justice, not Barr and Durham as you allege.

      • Bill Fabrizio

        Yes, it is interesting. Barr appointed Durham as Special Prosecutor. If Barr had appointed Durham as an Independent Counsel we might have had a different result. Barr kept it limited.

    • Barr, even today can only emotionally accept a limited level of conspiracy. It’s understandable that he’s in denial that a once flawless institution he worked in disintegrated, rotting from the head, to becoming a cesspool.

    • The purpose of the entire charade was to build the media narrative. A handful of people muttering nonsense is not a news story. To get a story, someone has to bully and bluff the DOJ until someone says “okay, okay, you can look into this.” Now you can leak to the press that “the FBI is investigating serious allegations of…” even though you know it’s all BS and going nowhere.
      Once that happens, every reporter can roll with it without fear of libel (official investigation!) and the target is stuck trying to prove a negative. It doesn’t matter if they clear themselves after a trial, because the damage is done. Performed correctly, they don’t ever want a trial (hence the only charges were unrelated to the fairy tale).
      In short- Clinton campaign brought the FBI a fairy tale in hopes the FBI could help them create a fake but damaging media narrative. Partisans in the FBI decided to help. The FBI doesn’t like this story because it shows their agents are motivated by something other than law, DOJ doesn’t like it because high government officials got played like weak rookies.
      Durham and Barr’s mistake is that they actually seem to believe the DOJ, FBI, and press have enough integrity to be ashamed when this hits the light of day. They don’t.
      Statute of limitations? People were interviewed about all this, including under oath, well after 2017. If they want to charge, they can. They don’t want to.

  42. Peter Zeihan on:

    1. Why “renewables” are not going to work globally.

    -and-

    2. Why CO2 emissions may accelerate because cut off nations around the world will resort to coal.

    I’m not sure he grasps climate or climate change and what I believe are the limited extents of adverse climate, but he does intimate understanding that the models are poo.

    • We are moving toward sustainability. From LED light bulbs to engine fuel efficiency, we have lowered personal energy consumption greatly since the 1970s. Think. Electric hybrids and EVs are upon us and taking hold. With smart and practical leaders we can expand nuclear with modular reactors to bridge the gap until fusion reactors are mastered. Then limitless power to do environmental mitigation and have a closed loop economy.

      Humanity’s true greatest threat is from the midlife crises of aging dictators.

      Ironically, the Marxist ideology that uses climate as a justification for centralizing global power may be an end to us.

      • Well, the US has large areas where wind and solar are viable, but the world as a whole, does not.

        And exacerbating both fossil fuel and [sic] green energy is Russian war.

        The chart on the beginning of this presentation is informative:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKFsn8xwQSw

        Destruction, sanctions and loss of production from soon to be frozen oil wells will take 5 to 6 million barrels a day of production away. Destruction will take huge amounts of natural gas away. Prices will “necessarily skyrocket”.

        Zeihan says US production could make US immune, but only if exports cease. They haven’t yet and that’s why “West Texas Intermediate” prices now exceed “Brent Sea” prices.

        So a green victory?

        No, trouble there, too.

        Prices for wind/solar/electric vehicles will also skyrocket, because Russian disruption will limit the resources necssary.

        Good to remain skeptical and question catastrophe, but why can’t the civilization we’re tied to behave?

      • Nothing would do more to reduce inflation and pressure Russia to end the war than an #AntiFragileEnergy policy.

        In the meantime, Nothing would do more to reduce fuel consumption & traffic than to get people to accelerate faster, pay attention & avoid using brakes. After that, replace speed limits with adjustable Target Speeds. And, get rid of unnecessary stop signs. https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1524490112746283016

        Whenever people start talking about OPEC, like to point out this Paul Krugman paper from 2001, http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/opec.html. When people say that the US cannot affect the price of oil, I like to point out several things: 1.) That’s a good thing because every bit we produce goes to our GDP. 2.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import adds to our GDP. 3.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import reduces our trade deficit. 4.) That’s a good thing because it means lots of tax revenue (see and 2). 5.) Don’t be so sure about that, a little competition could spur production in lots of other places. Many producers produce inefficiently (and messily) because they believe price rises will keep them wealthy. E.g. Venezuela, Russia in the 1990s… They don’t keep their equipment maintained and they waste/spill a lot. US hoarding sends a signal to oil producing nations with two implications: 1). Alternative Energy is nowhere near ready, otherwise the US would be extracting its oil before prices fall; the US likely doesn’t expect alternatives to ever be better than fossil fuels (I’d like to get into this, but I’ll save it for another time). 2). Current producers can make money by keeping production low. If the US told the world it believes alternative energy R&D would pay off within the next 50 it would mean nothing, unless they back it up with extraction for the medium term. I believe that if the US said that there was no future in oil, and backed it up by pumping full- tilt to take advantage of the current high prices, we’d see both alternative research take off as well as exploration, extraction, and productivity throughout the world. Reagan wasn’t the Great Communicator because of how he talked. Actions speak far louder than words.

      • If we were properly focused on energy security, greenhouse gas emissions would be a moot point. #AntiFragileEnergy #GreenNUCLEARDeal #HighlyFlexibleNaturalGas #IncineratePlasticPollution #WasteToEnergy

      • It’s funny, here in the US people believe Moscow got Trump elected over the candidate who pledged to stop frac’ing and vastly expand wind power. And never considered that Moscow was probably promoting the Dakota Pipeline, Keystone, and anti-frac’ing protests they supported.
        9:57 PM · Sep 29, 2018·Twitter Web Client

        The Russians were far more involved with Women’s marches, BLM, antifa, pipeline and frac’ing protests than 2016 election. #blm #antifa #BidenIsAChineseAsset #ClintonIsARussianAsset
        10:11 AM · Nov 12, 2020

        https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1046217358182879233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1046217358182879233%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com%2Fembed%2Fcomments%2F%3Fbase%3Ddefaultf%3Dpj-instapunditt_i%3D1-521325t_u%3Dhttps3A2F2Finstapundit.com2F5213252Ft_e%3DBLACK20LIVES20MATTER20KILLS20BLACK20PEOPLE20EN20MASSE3A2020Anti-cop20pols20yawn20as20slay20spike20hits20black20AmericaE280A6t_d%3DInstapundit20C2BB20Blog20Archive20C2BB20BLACK20LIVES20MATTER20KILLS20BLACK20PEOPLE20EN20MASSE3A20Anti-cop20pols20yawn20as20slay20spike20hits20black20AmericaE280A6t_t%3DBLACK20LIVES20MATTER20KILLS20BLACK20PEOPLE20EN20MASSE3A2020Anti-cop20pols20yawn20as20slay20spike20hits20black20AmericaE280A6s_o%3Ddefaultl%3Dversion%3D9db7f31f906666f4d56c3f4488ea0e6c

      • From Aaron’s Krugman column:
        “1). Alternative Energy is nowhere near ready, otherwise the US would be extracting its oil before prices fall; the US likely doesn’t expect alternatives to ever be better than fossil fuels (I’d like to get into this, but I’ll save it for another time). ”

        And then…. the “climate president” Obama doubled US gas and oil production and the “climate chancellor” coughed up billions of Euros to fund a Russian gas pipeline to Europe.
        Why? Because they learned renewable alternative energy will never be anywhere near as good as fossil fuels and their partisans don’t like nuclear alternative energy.
        Natural gas = “30 year alternative energy debate pause to get your head out of the sand on nuclear.”

  43. The investigation of the probable lab origin of SARS2 is now being pushed to by the single most influential public health activist in the world, Jeffrey Sachs.

    A year after it was leaked that Eco Health Alliance proposed inserting a furin cleavage site into novel coronaviruses in the Wuhan Inst of Virology Sachs says this looks suspicious because Covid has this unique feature, which allowed it to be super infectious, he noted. This is like the NYT admitting that the laptop from hell really was Hunter Biden’s.

  44. The Green Energy Extremists talked Europe into abandoning oil and gas development and build instead intermittent and unreliable windmills and solar panels. Now they have to come begging for fossil fuels because they have no local source. Hope the Europeans wake to the Green Energy scam before they freeze to death.

    Less than two years ago, Engie SA scrapped plans to buy US liquefied natural gas, handing a victory to environmentalists that urged the French energy giant to drop the purchase on pollution concerns.

    Fast forward to 2022 and that deal has been signed, alongside agreements with Bulgaria to Poland to bring in American fracked gas to European shores.

  45. The age of steam is over because we are running out of steam. Unless we can harvest the hot air on green extremists – its time for other technology to provide cheaper and much more abundant energy. Getting from here to there is the problem. These are fossil fuel reserves at current production rates.

    https://watertechbyrie.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/years-of-fossil-fuel-reserves-left-1.png

    There is a video above on the coming energy wars. Three years he said and we are doomed. Nuts. All because there are neither the materials nor the wind and sunshine to replace fossil fuels. The materials he lists – metals mostly – are needed for any advanced technology. And some old ones. The world is tooling up to provide enough of them.

  46. Ireneusz Palmowski

    Severe Colorado snowstorm.
    Snow and sub-zero temperatures in the Dakotas.

  47. The hypocritical Green Energy Extremist Dimowits cause high gasoline and diesel prices then have the nerve to blame it on the companies they are trying to eliminate. These people do not deserve to be anything other than maybe the garbage collector. Even at that, they would probably screw it up.

    Many Democrats blame price-gouging companies for the worst surge in Americans’ cost of living in more than a generation. But economists, including several who are left-leaning, disagree.

    Desperate to avoid a wipeout in November congressional elections, House Democrats passed a bill Thursday they present as a centerpiece of their response to record high gas prices. It would confer power to bar the sale of consumer fuels at “unconscionably excessive” prices.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-19/-greedflation-pits-democrats-against-like-minded-economists

    • Nothing would do more to reduce inflation and pressure Russia to end the war than an #AntiFragileEnergy policy.

      In the meantime, Nothing would do more to reduce fuel consumption & traffic than to get people to accelerate faster, pay attention & avoid using brakes. After that, replace speed limits with adjustable Target Speeds. And, get rid of unnecessary stop signs. https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1524490112746283016

      Whenever people start talking about OPEC, like to point out this Paul Krugman paper from 2001, http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/opec.html. When people say that the US cannot affect the price of oil, I like to point out several things: 1.) That’s a good thing because every bit we produce goes to our GDP. 2.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import adds to our GDP. 3.) That’s a good thing because every bit we don’t import reduces our trade deficit. 4.) That’s a good thing because it means lots of tax revenue (see and 2). 5.) Don’t be so sure about that, a little competition could spur production in lots of other places.

      Many producers produce inefficiently (and messily) because they believe price rises will keep them wealthy. E.g. Venezuela, Russia in the 1990s… They don’t keep their equipment maintained and they waste/spill a lot. US hoarding sends a signal to oil producing nations with two implications: 1). Alternative Energy is nowhere near ready, otherwise the US would be extracting its oil before prices fall; the US likely doesn’t expect alternatives to ever be better than fossil fuels 2). Current producers can make money by keeping production low.

      If the US told the world it believes alternative energy R&D would pay off within the next 50 it would mean nothing, unless they back it up with extraction for the medium term. I believe that if the US said that there was no future in oil, and backed it up by pumping full- tilt to take advantage of the current high prices, we’d see both alternative research take off as well as exploration, extraction, and productivity throughout the world. Reagan wasn’t the Great Communicator because of how he talked. Actions speak far louder than words.

  48. For the past six years I have been concerned about global warming. As an engineer, I could not accept that such a small proportion of the atmosphere (CO2 0.04 %) of greenhouse gas should have the enormous importance for the climate attributed to it.
    This finding, namely that carbon dioxide is in too small a quantity so as not to cause any effect on the climate, has been concluded by thousands of thinking scientists, but also non-scientists.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Robert David Clark

      The average surface temperature is kept relatively constant around 63 degrees Faren height. It does this by adjusting the surface area of the earth covered by water as explained below. I call it GLOBAL ICE MAKING and GLOBAL ICE MELTING
      .
      There are three methods of heat transfer. They are conduction, convection, and radiant heat. Heat transfer to or from the earth can only be done by radiant. All material contains heat and is radiating it to cooler surfaces or absorbing it from warmer surfaces. The difference is the heat gain or loss of the material.

      The earth gains heat radiated from the sun and losses heat it radiates to outer space, called black sky radiation. Outer space is considered absolute zero.

      The amount of radiant heat hitting the earth from the sun daily is relatively constant. The radiant heat lost daily by the earth thru black sky radiation is relatively constant since absolute zero is constant. A 1 to 2 degree rise in 522 degrees is relatively constant. The amount of heat gained by the earth’s surface depends on the surface area of the earth covered by water relative to that covered by land. Land area absorbs a larger percent of the radiant heat relative to the water area since the surface of the water reflects a percentage of the radiant heat back to outer space. The daily access heat, or loss of heat, is transferred to the oceans thru conduction and convection where it works its way to the poles and it freezes water adding to the polar ice caps or melts the polar ice caps thus keeping the surface temperature of the oceans, thus the earth, relatively constant. As the polar ice caps grow or melt, the surface area of the earth covered by land relative to that covered by water changes. This is the definition of global warming. I call it Global Ice making and Global Ice Melting.

      That radiant heat absorbed by oceans and land masses is transferred to the atmosphere thru conduction and convection. When it is winter in one hemisphere it is summer in the other and the same with spring and fall. I would think the average temperature of the lower 5,000 feet of the atmosphere changes about 10’F to20’F each day. This takes more heat than man has added to the earth in the last 50 years. That heat man adds to the atmosphere each day is radiated to the black sky and the infinitesimal amount left helps melt the ice during global warming, should be called Global Ice Melting.

      Absolute zero is -459.68’F and the average surface temperature of the sun is between 7,300’F and 10,000’F. If we could go back in time 18,000 years, the end of the last ice age, we would probable see that the average daily temperature of the earth was in the mid 60’F as it is today. You must understand the amount of heat gained every 24 hours is almost equal to that lost during the same 24 hours. Angle of the earth’s axis is 23.5’. Radiant heat striking the earth surface every day is larger than that radiated from the surface to the black sky. That retained by the surface is dependent by the surface area of the earth covered by water.

      The average surface temperature of the earth surface is about 63.5’f. The difference between the earth’s average surface temperature and absolute zero is 522’F. The heat loss to black sky radiation every 24 hours is constant. The average radiant heat striking the surface of the earth is constant. Because the sun is an active star the average surface temperature will change over centuries. As the surface area of the earth covered by water increases, the more radiant heat is reflected to the black sky increases. When the daily radiant heat gained by the earth from the sun in 24 hours became less than that lost by black sky radiation, we began the making of ice, thus the new ice age. Looking at the ice core from the Antarctic we can see that the earth began the new Ice Age about 18,000 years ago.

      The Vostok Ice core shows 4 Ice Ages in the last 4 hundred thousand years. I will assume that during that time the CO2 emitted by the actions of nature is constant. The lowest CO2 level is about 190ppm and frozen during the Ice Making somewhere in the middle of the Ice Making cycle, but the actual end of the Ice Making cycle is much later. The beginning of the rise in CO2 is the beginning of the next Ice Making cycle.

      The last Ice Age, from lowest ocean level to lowest ocean level, was about 120,000 years.

      The first 8,000 years taking ice from the continents and putting the water in the oceans. RAISING THE LEVEL OF THE OCEANS.

      The next about 8,000 years, taking water from the oceans, freezing it, dropping the ice on the frozen parts of the continents. The ocean levels begin to drop. The radiant heat radiated to the black sky is equal to that retained by the earth from the sun.

      When the ocean levels began to rise, as it got to the new ice blocks the 28-degree salt water began melting the underside of the ice blocks. WHEN THE HEAT MELTING THE ICE BREAKING OFF THE ICE BLOCKS EQUALED THE HEAT LOST TO THE BLACK SKY THE OCEANS STOPPED GOING DOWN.

      THAT IS WHERE WE ARE NOW.

      IN ABOUT ANOTHER 100,000 YEARS THE ICE BLOCKS WILL BE COMPLETELY GONE, THE OCEAN WILL DROP FOR ABOUT ANOTHER 8,000 YEARS. AS THE ICE IS PUT BACK ON THE CONTINENTS.

      • Robert David Clark

        There are two rules of water that control the world.

        We all know that fresh water expands as it cools from 39 degrees farenheight to 32 degrees farenheight.

        The other is salt water is saturated at 28 degrees farenheight. As nature tries to cool it below that the salt drops out and it is less Dence. As the 28degree touches the bottom edge of the ice block it eats its way under the ice block as the 32degree farenheight hugs the bottom of the ice block on its way out. This causes the overhang.

    • For your own elucidation, calculate how many CO2 molecules in a cubic centimeter of air at stp.

  49. The folly of organic farming?

    https://archive.ph/UfqFe

    What we take from soils must be replaced whether it is organic farming or not. What we need in the 21st century is state of the art agricultural methods and not social influencers playing to the peanut gallery.

    https://www.arc2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/24-action-sn-blog-organic-vs-conventional.jpg
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293014068_Organic_agriculture_in_the_twenty-first_century

    ‘Compared to conventional agriculture, organic agriculture generally has a positive effect on a range of environmental factors, including above and belowground biodiversity8,29,30,31, soil carbon stocks32 and soil quality10. Moreover, organic farming can reduce soil erosion33 and has a reduced global warming potential34. However, higher productivity and increased relative stability in conventional agriculture are strengths compared to organic agriculture. Thus, in order to benefit from the strengths of organic farming (e.g., reduced environmental impact and enhanced biodiversity) a multifaceted strategy is necessary to improve its yield and relative yield stability. Such a strategy should focus on enhanced plant nutrition (see above), breeding, weed and disease control, and consider the use of state of the art technologies including precision farming, remote sensing (e.g., through drones or satellites) to detect disease or nutrient deficiency, and robotics (e.g., for weed control)35. Moreover, measures such as the inclusion of cover crops (see above) or active stimulation of soil life through soil ecological engineering are especially promising for lower intensity systems such as organic agriculture, and this can further help to reduce the yield gap and the yield stability gap between organic and conventional systems11,28. Further studies also need to assess how environmental stresses, such as drought or the negative effects of climate change, influence yield stability in organic and conventional production systems. Finally, when comparing organic and conventional agriculture, it is important to provide an ‘output and input footprint’ and assess the overall impact of organic and conventional farming practices, including yield, yield stability, energy use, pesticide use, fertiliser use, and overall environmental performance.’ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293014068_Organic_agriculture_in_the_twenty-first_century

    Just as with fossil fuels – traditional farming is running on empty. In both cases – science and technology is the future.

  50. Why we eat and breathe
    By David Wojick

    https://www.cfact.org/2022/05/22/why-we-eat-and-breathe/

    The beginning: “Spring and summer is the time of growth, with blossoms everywhere we look. Leaves and fruit on the trees, grass in the yard and pastures, vegetables in the garden, crops in the field. Did you know that all of this lush abundance is almost entirely composed of just two things? These are carbon dioxide and water. There are tiny bits of other stuff but basically it is all carbon dioxide and water. This is the true miracle of life. Every living thing we see is made from air and water. So are we.

    Have you ever wondered why we eat and breathe? Here is how it works, the miracle of life. We eat and breathe because the cells that make up our body eat and breathe. All cells eat and breathe. Yes, plants inhale and exhale just as we do. They also consume food and water. Our breathing and eating actually go together. We are part of what is called the carbon cycle, which is the cycle of life. Plants come first, then us.”

    Lots more in the article, the latest in my education series for Range magazine. I have actually seen a popular carbon cycle lesson plan that did not mention carbon dioxide. Made it sound like plants got their food through their roots, a pure lie.

    Please share this factual article.

  51. May 20-05-22: “HSBC’s Stuart Kirk tells FT investors need not worry about climate risk”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfNamRmje-s&t=1s
    Heresy!
    May 23-05-22: “HSBC suspends banker over ‘nut job’ climate comments, say reports”
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-61519111

  52. UK-Weather Lass

    Nice piece about the pandemic by Steve Waterson on COVID-19 from an Australian perspective but absolutely relevant to all of us not just about the virus but about how we handle perceived dangers generally e.g. climate.

    “So how do we avoid a repeat of this man-made destruction next time a pandemic or other crisis comes to town? First, let’s find out what went wrong, why the poor decisions were made, who were responsible for them, and what they should have done. Let politicians and bureaucrats explain every incremental step in their shameful assault on our liberty.”

    https://dailysceptic.org/2022/05/23/australians-stubbornly-refuse-to-learn-from-history-and-are-therefore-doomed-to-repeat-it/

  53. What factor is NOT part of the effective temperature formula that so dramatically affects the actual temperature of the moon?

    Why is the actual mean temperature of the moon so much lower than the effective temperature?

    NASA lists the effective temperature of the moon at 270.6 kelvin. The mean temperature of the moon at the equator is 220 kelvin.

    With no atmospheric effects, why is the surface temperature so much lower than the effective temperature predicts?

    What factor is NOT part of the effective temperature formula that so dramatically affects the actual temperature of the moon?

    I’ll tell you what it is:
    It is the Φ -the planet solar irradiation accepting factor. For smooth surface Moon Φ= 0,47.

    Te.correct.moon = [ Φ (1-a) So /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴

    Te.correct.moon = [ 0,47 (1-0,11) 1.362 W/m² /4*5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴ ]¹∕ ⁴ =
    Te.correct.moon = [ 0,47 (0,89) 1.362 W/m² /4*5,67*10⁻⁸ W/m²K⁴ ]¹∕ ⁴ =
    Te.correct.moon = [ 2.510.168.871,25 ]¹∕ ⁴ =

    Te.correct.moon = 223,83 Κ

    This simple example clearly demonstrates the CORRECTNESS of the Φ -the planet solar irradiation accepting factor.

    For smooth surface planets, like Moon, Φ= 0,47.

    Conclusion:

    From now on, for every smooth surface planet and moon, we should take in consideration instead of the planet blackbody effective temperature Te , the corrected VALUES of the planet blackbody effective temperature – the Te.corrected.

    Table of results for Te and Te.corrected compared to Tsat and to Rotations/day for smooth surface planets and moons with Φ=0,47

    Planet…….. Te…. Te.corrected…..Tsat…Rot/day
    Mercury…..440 K…….364 K……340 K…0,00568
    Moon……….270 K…….224 K……220 K.…0,0339
    Earth………255 K…….210 K……288 K..….1
    Mars……….210 K…….174 K…..210 K..…0,9747
    Europa…….95,2 K……78,8 K….102 K…0,2816
    Ganymede..107,1 K…..88,6 K…110 K….0,1398

    Notice:
    The number 0,47 for smooth surface in a parallel fluid flow is taken from the well measured and long ago known Drag Coefficient Data, where Cd =0,47 is for sphere. It is the portion of incident on sphere energy which should be resisted by sphere to remain in balance.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  54. No coal plants. No natural gas plants. No oil. No gasoline. No diesel. No nuclear plants – the Green Energy Extremists have no concern about the survival of you or your family. And now, the Stoop Id I Tee continues …

    After decades of negotiation, the largest dam-removal project in U.S. history is expected to begin in California far north next year. The first of four aging dams on the Klamath River, the 250-mile waterway that originates in southern Oregon\u2019s towering Cascades and empties along the rugged Northern California coast, is on track to come down in fall 2023. Two others nearby and one across the state line will follow. The nearly half-billion dollars needed for the joint state, tribal and corporate undertaking has been secured. The demolition plans are drafted. The contractor is in place. Final approval could come by December.

    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/California-dam-removal-17187703.php

  55. It was nice for a while, but now Ellison’s back carpet bombing the blog. Get a hobby already!

  56. I have lots of hobbies. Investing – I am gritting my teeth and still buying. I have a few miners still in green – along with north Australian beef. Meat and Livestock Australia have unilaterally pledged red meat industry carbon neutrality by 2030. I think they can do it with increased productivity and profit. With such a lucrative market on the horizon it just makes economic sense. Daisy just bought the perfect car to head north a bit. A 2nd hand Ford Territory 2.7L turbo diesel AWD that she has already scratched. Her last car was a pretty little, turquoise Suzuki Vitara 1.5L turbo diesel Allgrip. It was amazing. I cold punch it to 170 km/hr to pass a b-double on a country road without a flutter. It was totalled while parked when some guy hit it at speed. Right rear end folded up like a soda can leaving the monocoque uncompromised. Watch out for Allgrip. I tore up a rear tyre on Day 1 and couldn’t get the same tyre so went with something close – 16,000 km later and the tyre was unserviceable. Two new tyres and 700 of my buck later – it was my fault after all – she was on the road again only to be written off a week later. Where’s the justice?

    I saw a girl at a polling booth on Saturday last. Well she must have been a big girl to be able to vote. She was pushing her knees together and shifting from foot to foot like children do when they want to wee. It was so adorably cute I had to laugh. She stopped with a rue smile. It got me thinking about the aesthetics of the human form. Beyond the day to day there is a sublime beauty. We should cling to some of our innocence. Here is where I live on the coast in Central Queensland. The Yeppoon ‘Kraken’ is usually home to camera shy water nymphs.

    In the election the Labor Party (progressive socialists) have 73 seats – with a possibility of the three more needed to form a majority government. The Liberal (in the European liberal tradition – a party of democracy and free enterprise) and National Party (agrarian socialists) coalition lost 10 seats to the new ‘teal independents’ – zealous women campaigning on climate change. 🤣 Yeah watch out. Financed by a guy whose father was a north Australian beef Baron. They are innately conservative, socially liberal, environmentally conscious, economic unknowns. I am writing a road map to a sustainable Australia. Just had a thought. Might drop them a line.

    Arguing with contrarian zealots with their own take on true science keeps me learning and thinking. Claims of ignorance and idolatry flung at me are merely risible. I do much better at it by myself. I used to claim to be a dilettante – but over the decades I might have learned a thigh or two. Take this specular/diffuse controversy. The claim is that CERES doesn’t measure light leaving the planet at acute angles. Both specular and diffuse reflection can leave at acute angles. So perhaps it is not strictly a specular/diffuse distinction – more the angle of reflection. NASA accounts for angularity with bi-axial scanning I’ve read. I am a great fan of Norman Loeb – head of NASA’s CERES program. I’ll email him and ask – I’m pretty sure he won’t mind.

    • I commend doing research instead of having to tat for every tit. It will make for less noise on the blog.

    • https://cdn.simplesite.com/i/2d/39/285978583434475821/i285978589400487356._szw1280h1280_.jpg

      The Planet Radiative Energy Budget

      The Budget considers the planet’s energy balance in Total, and not in average as the Greenhouse warming theory very mistakenly does. The Planet Radiative Energy Budget can be applied to all planets and to all moons.

      We have Φ for different planets’ and moon’s surfaces varying
      0,47 ≤ Φ ≤ 1

      And we have surface average Albedo “a” for different planets’ and moon’s varying
      0 ≤ a ≤ 1

      Notice:
      Φ is never less than 0,47 for planets and moons (spherical shape).
      Also, the coefficient Φ is “bounded” in a product with (1 – a) term, forming the Φ(1 – a) product cooperating term.

      So the Φ and Albedo are always bounded together.
      The Φ(1 – a) term is a coupled physical term.
      Link:
      https://www.cristos-vournas.com/448704125

      • Then there is an incessant drone of absurd blogoscience. Nice infographic Christos. You should mask lit clear that 0.47 is a number borrowed from hydraulics to make your unphysical calculations work.

      • The Φ = 0,47 is not what you think, Robert!

        The Φ = 0,47 is not an arbitrary number, as you might think, Robert!

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • It is everything I think it is.

        ‘The number 0,47 for smooth surface in a parallel fluid flow is taken from the well measured and long ago known Drag Coefficient Data, where Cd =0,47 is for sphere. It is the portion of incident on sphere energy which should be resisted by sphere to remain in balance.’ Christos

      • Oh and that should be make it not mask lit…

      • What is wrong with that, Robert?

      • The Φ(1 -a)S is the not reflected portion of the incident on a solar lit hemisphere solar flux…

        Robert
        “Oh and that should be make it not mask lit…”

        Please, Robert, I don’t understand. What it is you want to say?

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Thank you, Robert!

        The Link:
        https://www.cristos-vournas.com/448704125

        Φ is never less than 0,47 for planets and moons (spherical shape).
        Also, the coefficient Φ is “bounded” in a product with (1 – a) term, forming the Φ(1 – a) product cooperating term.

        So the Φ and Albedo are always bounded together.
        The Φ(1 – a) term is a coupled physical term.

        Notice:
        A smooth surface planet with no Albedo. A planet with
        a = 0.
        That planet still reflects the 0,47S portion of the incident solar flux.

        An example close to that planet with no Albedo is the planet Mercury.
        Mercury is a smooth surface planet with a very low Albedo.
        a =0,068.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Correction:
        Instead of

        “Notice:
        A smooth surface planet with no Albedo. A planet with
        a = 0.
        That planet still reflects the 0,47S portion of the incident solar flux.”

        It should read:

        “Notice:
        A smooth surface planet with no Albedo. A planet with
        a = 0.
        That planet still reflects the (1 – Φ)S portion of the incident solar flux, or (1 – 0,47)S = 0,53S .”

        Sorry.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  57. The article about rising water levels in Kenya’s lakes was interesting because the issue was new to me. What was not new was the reaction by some observers to dismiss other causes in favor of the current whipping boy, AGW. Despite significant literature identifying geology, natural forces over the Holocene and as long as 20,000 years ago, centennial cycles and alterations to the landscape by humans, they instead blame it on global warming.
    The lakes in general have lost permeability and no longer drain, much like a backed up bathroom sink with a buildup of hair. Except in this case a cup of Drano won’t solve the problem. One study found as little as .4% changes in effective precipitation variability can affect lake levels.
    When reading articles like this one and before doing any research, it’s almost a given that non AGW factors are in play. The question is why the media invariably take the bait instead of spending time in actually reviewing the scientific literature. But then natural origins have never been good click bait.

  58. So now we have indisputable truth the “elites” don’t give a whit about our well-being. Fossil fuels mean we can heat or cool our homes, travel when our lives depend on it, and generally live a comfortable, content life. President Puddin-head laid out the truth for all to see:

    President Joe Biden took some heat on Monday for saying the quiet part of the energy transition out loud. At a press conference following a meeting in Japan with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the President seemed to frankly admit that high gasoline and diesel prices are just part of the overall plan for the transition to renewables.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2022/05/24/biden-says-the-quiet-part-about-the-energy-transition-out-loud/?sh=767f05415306

    We need to vote out any Dimowit or Republicon that thinks we immediately need to eliminate fossil fuels. Eliminate them instead!

    Contrast that with Germany, a county that did what Puddin-head wants to do, but now find it was a huge and deadly mistake.

    Germany plans to bring back coal- and oil-fired power plants should Russia cut off natural gas shipments to Europe’s largest economy.

    Economy Minister Robert Habeck will on Tuesday present an emergency decree enabling the government to bring back the facilities in case of gas shortages, according to the proposed legislation seen by Bloomberg.

    Germany is resorting to desperate measures to keep the lights on and its massive industrial parks running, turning to dirty fuels even if that means a surge in carbon emissions. The nation has almost six gigawatts of facilities that are currently part of a national reserve, many of which were supposed to be closed down as part of the coal phase-out plan.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-24/germany-to-reactivate-coal-oil-plants-if-russia-cuts-off-gas-l3jwyztk

    We in the US need to learn from Germany and fast! Elections are approaching. Get rid of the irrational Green Energy Extremists and their sock puppet politicians! NOW!

  59. The Green Energy Extremists’ energy policy is causing real pain and suffering, and will cause people to die. They just don’t care.

    The UK’s energy price cap is likely to soar to a record £2,800 in October, Ofgem Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Brearley told a panel of lawmakers on Tuesday. That will plunge about 12 million households into fuel poverty just as heating demand starts to pick up at the beginning of winter.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-24/uk-regulator-expects-energy-price-cap-to-jump-42-in-october

  60. The 2021 NOAA GHG estimates are out.

    The five year RF trend has decelerated to 3.9W/m^2 per century.

    So all ghg forcing is at an equivalent rate of about 2x CO2 per century.

    Anyone telling you that global warming is accelerating should confront the observation that radiative forcing is decelerating.

  61. Jim on his party political soapbox yet again. Posit an elite, green extremist other and peddle doom if the ‘dimowits’ are not stopped. Rhetorical dog whistles for a political advantage. The polity in modern democracies is decidedly more nuanced. Most are in favor of nuclear power – even elite,
    green extremists like Bill Gates or climate religion fanatics like Jim Hansen.

    • It matters not if Dimowit or Republicon – if they don’t care about our pain and suffering caused by their poor decisions with respect to fossil fuels, we should get rid of them ASAP.

      • ‘Americans take the environment and the transition to cleaner energy very seriously, and they want traditional energy companies to lead the way. In fact, over 80% want to see natural gas and oil companies developing and applying clean energy technologies. A majority of both conservative and liberal voters also indicated that they want to see Congress promote policies that stimulate U.S. energy production in a responsible way that minimizes harm to the environment.

        But these voters understand that promoting renewable resources and new energy technologies doesn’t mean that traditional energy sources are out of the picture, which is why they support all-of-the-above. Almost three-quarters (73%) believe natural gas and oil will still be a significant part of America’s energy needs 20 years from now. We can take this to mean that they support the transition to a lower carbon energy economy, but they also understand it will likely take much longer than some activists are promising. And in the meantime, they appreciate that natural gas and oil make our daily lives safer and healthier by providing the fuel, power, and products we need.’ https://www.conservamerica.org/latest-news/its-time-to-get-the-politics-out-of-energy-policy-as-new-polling-show-voters-overwhelmingly-support-all-of-the-above

      • “Almost three-quarters (73%) believe natural gas and oil will still be a significant part of America’s energy needs 20 years from now.”

        Hence 27% of the population has been brain-washed by the apocalyptic BS put out by the AGW crowd, you included. You should be working against the spreading such disinformation.

      • “In fact, over 80% want to see natural gas and oil companies developing and applying clean energy technologies. ”

        Why on earth would anyone want Exxon or pipeline engineers building nuclear plants and windmills? Drillers drill, leave the nukes to that profession.

    • Matthew R Marler

      Robert I Ellison; Posit an elite, green extremist other and peddle doom if the ‘dimowits’ are not stopped.

      Actually he referred to the speech by Pres. Joseph Biden. Biden’s actions have hampered US oil and gas production far more than they have promoted nuclear power development.

  62. “Almost three-quarters (73%) believe natural gas and oil will still be a significant part of America’s energy needs 20 years from now.”

    Hence, 27% are delusional idiots, brainwashed by the apocalyptic BS from the AGW crowd. You are partly to blame for spreading such misinformation.

  63. Ahhh, the good ol days. If we get this, I wonder if I could wear loud plaid pants, white belts and ultra wide ties.

    https://www.economist.com/img/b/1424/801/90/media-assets/image/20220528_EUP502.jpg

  64. This Bloomberg article blames lower shale output on supply chain issues and companies paying dividends to shareholders. Conveniently for the Dimowit fossil fuel haters, the article doesn’t mention the relentless efforts by them to eliminate the petroleum industry in the US. And that’s the REAL problem!

    The jump in oil and gasoline prices has helped drive US inflation to the highest levels in decades, and it’s becoming increasingly clear that shale is no longer the silver bullet to counter skyrocketing crude prices. President Joe Biden appears to have abandoned public calls to encourage US drillers to boost production, a key focus for his administration earlier in this year. He’s now considering a meeting with Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, according to people familiar with the matter.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-25/world-s-oil-growth-engine-is-about-to-slow-despite-100-crude

  65. Matthew R Marler

    It always takes me a while to read through a selection of these readings, but again I thank Judith Curry for posting them.

  66. A commentator on CO2 effect said recently elsewhere.
    “I have it on pretty good authority that the heat is clearly linked to the global level of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Something about physics and the greenhouse effect. And the evidence is overwhelming that the rise in these gases is related to the activities of our species. No reasonable person is questioning the greenhouse effect or how/why the greenhouse gas levels are rising.”

    My reply was

    Reasonable people include skeptics, that is the basis of reason.

    Your first point, heat linkage with GHG including CO2, is unquestioned by reasonable people.

    The second is not so clear.
    Rivers rise consequentially because of heavy rain, not turning on a tap and leaving it running.
    Either CO2 rise is putting temperatures up or rising temperatures are putting CO2 up.
    Physics demands it.
    In fact ATTP’s earlier links to ocean acidification and atmospheric CO2 clearly show why the effect is heat to CO2 and not vice versa.

  67. Ireneusz Palmowski

    The current circulation over North America could lead to flooding in the eastern US.
    https://i.ibb.co/SPsw9qT/mimictpw-namer-latest.gif

  68. Ireneusz Palmowski

    Alabama is at risk for flooding caused by thunderstorms from the south.
    https://i.ibb.co/DYD3pGw/mimictpw-namer-latest.gif

  69. Apparently, there is an answer to R. McKitirck´s article
    https://judithcurry.com/2021/08/18/the-ipccs-attribution-methodology-is-fundamentally-flawed/
    (I would have posted there, but it seems locked!?)
    https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.10508.pdf

    I would be very interested in a comment by Ross, maybe he can write another Climate ETC article also describing more recent developments?
    (I can dream, right!?)
    Either way, the first condition mentioned in there
    (i) the null simulation of the climate model is independent of the physical observations

    seems very much at odds to modeling reality to the uninitiated.. dont they rely heavily on real world data to point their models roughly in the right direction?

  70. We think of high farm productivity in terms of corn, wheat. rice and beans in large scale intensive cropping. Even there they are benefiting from no till, integrated pest control and minimising inputs with high tech precision farming. Big producers have the cash to tool up. Smaller, local farmers produce something out of nothing – including a social fabric – tooling up to do it cheaper and more profitably is one key need.

    ‘But, once things are running, the day-to-day costs become cheaper and cheaper because they completely eliminate the costs of synthetic inputs, a huge and rising cost, which 40% of farmers struggle to afford. On his 7,000-acre row crops, Rick Clark, a fifth-generation farmer in Warren County, Indiana, is saving $171 to $240 per acre on his soy crop, and $430 to $570 per acre on corn. For every 1,000 acres of corn he plants, he saves an average of $500,000—without a sacrifice of yields.’ https://www.fastcompany.com/90751285/how-family-farmers-are-working-to-get-federal-support-for-regenerative-agriculture?_kx=x2TAqqptFDT1F-7PwNNaV5kyXKB2udDaMqPZE3kacc8f9QpYptWeu8jk34YTWqI6.WKh32v

    • What sort of farming techniques to use must be left up to the person risking his assets: the farmer. It’s fine if you want to go teach farmers your favorite technique, but at the end of the day, it’s the farmer who will lose, so it’s his choice.

      • Acknowledging a job well done be be a start. Recognise it in some part of farm bill spending stronger, healthier communities, conserving environments and socking away CO2. In Australia we are paying A$16/tonne C.

  71. ESG has gone from a feel good, idealistic proposal taught in 1960s business classes to more mainstream and embraced by some of the largest investment funds. Interesting it has taken several decades to be challenged such as this Kentucky AG opinion.

    Kentucky is not the only place that pension programs are underfunded. Almost all states and local units of government face the same dilemma.

    https://junkscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Opinion-of-the-Attorney-General-22-05.pdf

  72. These two IR emission mechanisms cannot be compared, because they are different.

    Here is the discovered Rotating Planet Surface Solar irradiation Interaction-Emission New Equation:
    Jemit = 4πr²σΤmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W)

    And compare with the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:
    J = σΤe⁴ (W/m²)

    – When comparing with the Stefan-Boltzmann blackbody emission – it is obvious when planet emission is considered – it is a different mechanism of emission.

    Thus the equation describing IR emission from irradiated rotating planet surface is different.

    When averaged over the entire planet surface, in order to compare with the Stefan-Boltzmann blackbody emission:
    Jemit = σΤmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W/m²)

    And compare with the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:
    J = σΤe⁴ (W/m²)

    It is obvious these two IR emission mechanisms cannot be compared, because they are different.

    Thus, the planet effective temperature Te formula:
    Te = [ (1-a) S /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴

    Which results for Earth Te =255K
    cannot be compared with the planet measured average surface temperature Tmean = 288K.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Christos Vournas | May 27, 2022
      “These two IR emission mechanisms cannot be compared, because they are different.”

      Christos,
      You have just compared them.
      They can be compared.
      When you compare them they are not the same.
      Nor should they be.
      Pleases stop mangling logic.

      There is only 1 IR emission mechanism.
      There is no different mechanism of emission.

      when you claim two different results from the one process or argument in such a way you expose a problem with your logical thought process chain.

      The Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:J = σΤe⁴ (W/m²) is universal.
      When you add to it a couple of extra terms and mangle them
      i.e.add 2 coffee beans,

      You still end up with the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:

      J = σΤe⁴ (W/m²) + 2 coffee beans

      and the same fundamental emission mechanism.

      You are not arguing about 2 different emission mechanisms at all, sadly.

      You are promoting your own theory on what a planet effective temperature Te formula is.
      Which is uniquely designed to your own idea of whatever you mean a Te is, plus coffee beans.

      It would help the rest of us if you restrict yourself to say only one post per blog on your definition of Te, admirable as it is.

    • Thank you, angech, for your respond.

      Let’s discuss the two different IR emission processes.
      Because it is a different thing when an already warm body at temperature T emits IR energy
      And it is quite different when a solar irradiated body emits IR energy.

      The T = ( J /σ )¹∕ ⁴ is a mistake !

      Stefan-Boltzmann emission law doesn’t work vice-versa !

      The old convincement that the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law works vice-versa is based on assumption, that EM energy obeys the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (1LOT). That assumption was never verified, it was never been confirmed by experiment.

      Let’s see:
      The Stefan-Boltzmann emission law states:
      J = σ*Τ⁴ (W/m²) EM energy flux (1)

      The mathematical ability to obtain T, for a given J led to the misfortunate believe that the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law formula can be used vise-versa, or:
      T = ( J /σ ) ¹∕ ⁴ (K) (2) as the surface (vise-versa) radiative emission temperature “definition”.

      Well, this is theoretically right for a blackbody theoretical approach. Blackbody surface behavioral property is compared with a tiny hole in a stove. The incident in the hole radiative energy vanishes inside the stove… The hole is infinitesimally smaller than the stove’s inside walls area. Thus the incident in the hole EM energy cannot escape out of the stove.

      After multiple interactions with the stove’s walls, the incident in the hole the entire EM energy is transformed into heat and is, eventually, evenly dissipated and accumulated as HEAT in the stove’s inner walls…
      The EM energy emitted out of the stove’s hole is then only the inside stove uniform surface temperature T dependent function
      J = σ*Τ⁴ (W/m²).

      But the
      T = ( J /σ ) ¹∕ ⁴ (K) (2) as the irradiated surface (vise-versa) radiative emission temperature “definition”… is utterly unacceptable, because it has not a physical analogue in the real world.
      That is why we should consider planet effective temperature
      Te = [ (1-a) S /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (K)
      as a mathematical abstraction, which doesn’t describe the real world processes.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Let’s continue…

        A planet doesn’t emit SW radiative energy from its dark side (at night hours).
        But a planet emits SW radiative energy from its solar lit side. It is called the solar SW reflection.
        The planet solar SW reflection is a result of the incident on the planet surface the solar flux’s INTERACTION with the planet solar lit side.

        A planet emits IR radiative energy from its dark side.
        We deal here with the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:
        J = σΤ⁴ (W/m²)

        and we observe here the Stefan-Boltzmann fundamental emission mechanism.

        But a planet emits IR radiative energy from its solar lit side too. It is called the solar SW into IR transformation.
        The planet solar SW into IR transformation is a result of the incident on the planet surface the solar flux’s INTERACTION with the planet solar lit side.

        Now… the vast majority of the planet IR emission occurs at the solar lit hours (the daytime hours).
        Only a small portion of planet IR emission occurs at the planet dark side (the night time hours).

        Here is the discovered Rotating Planet Surface Solar irradiation Interaction-Emission New Equation:
        Jemit = 4πr²σΤmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W)

        And compare with the planet theoretical Stefan-Boltzmann emission law equation:
        J = σΤe⁴ (W/m²)

        – When comparing with the Stefan-Boltzmann blackbody emission – it is obvious, when planet IR emission is considered – it is a different mechanism of emission.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  73. The IPCC is mistaken, again.
    The carbon sinks that exist (some of them unknown to us) will be naturally adjusting to the gradual increases in CO2 that may continue (or not).

    As https://eos.org/articles/the-ocean-is-still-sucking-up-carbon-maybe-more-than-we-think says, the ocean sequesters carbon. Yes indeed. And it’s not only phytoplankton that consume CO2 and sink to the bottom. There’s algae, coccolithophores, shellfish, and the unknowns. CO2 has been much higher for many ages in the past. It’s unlikely we can improve the process.

    There is no evidence that CO2 at this time, at these levels, does any harm at all, and good evidence that it is very beneficial to plant life, on which our lives depend.
    These facts have never been refuted:
    CO2 at these levels is not in control of climate change and
    We are not in control of CO2

  74. As Americans start the summer driving season this Memorial Day weekend, they face gasoline prices that are memorable — for all the wrong reasons.

    A national-average gallon of regular gas cost $2.37 at President Joe Biden’s inauguration. This metric hit an all-time-high $4.60 Thursday, AAA reports — up 94%.

    Biden does not feel Americans’ pain. Indeed, the sadist in chief gleefully inflicts this torture. Saying the quiet part aloud, he expects thanks for this punishment.

    Visiting Tokyo Monday, Biden told journalists: “When it comes to the gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger, and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels.”

    Incredible!

    https://nypost.com/2022/05/27/bidens-petro-sadism-makes-us-drivers-scream-in-pain/

  75. I like this nuclear – renewables analogy:

    Perhaps the best way to explain this paradox is through an analogy: Imagine you run a large, 24-hour restaurant; let’s call it the “Atomic Diner.” Since you have a sizable mortgage—and need to keep workers on site at all hours—your fixed costs are high. But thanks partly to big breakfast and lunch crowds, your restaurant is profitable. Now imagine a fast-food stand opens up next door; call it “Solar Burger.” It’s usually closed; in fact, no one knows in advance which days it will be open. But when it is serving, the restaurant cranks out hundreds of burgers an hour. What’s more, thanks to special tax credits and low fixed costs, Solar Burger can sell its sandwiches for pennies. Sometimes it even pays customers to take them away.

    Imagine the state of your business now. Several days a week, Solar Burger happens to open during your lunch rush. Suddenly, your tables are empty while your customers scarf down the nearly free food next door. Even if Solar Burger opens only sporadically, that’s enough to wipe out your profit margin. The Atomic Diner soon flirts with bankruptcy.

    https://www.city-journal.org/biden-nuclear-bailout-a-messy-necessity

    • I like this too, but one problem is that, in the US anyway, the owner of the Atomic Cafe – let’s call her “Governor’s Friend Sally” – has been ordered by the state to build and operate the Solar Burger.
      Even though Solar Burger loses tons of money and makes life difficult for the folks at the Atomic Cafe, the governor’s office approves the 100% menu price hike for both places and shovels subsidies to GF Sally to make up the difference plus a 20% increase in her income. And orders everyone in town to eat at one of the two daily.
      GF Sally spends more time out of state at the beach in Florida because it’s a such a chore listening to the customers whining all the time about their high bills and food that’s poorly prepared (and sometimes doesn’t show up). And then you have all these employees moaning that their job doesn’t make any sense. Plus, it’s nicer in Florida- you can actually get a good meal and it’s cheaper.

      • The Atomic Cafe gets the vast majority of its fuel from foreign sources.
        According to the EIA, during 2021, 7% of the uranium used was U.S.-origin uranium and 93% was foreign-origin uranium. I would think being dependent on Russia, Kazakhstan & Uzbekistan would put us at the same disadvantage as Europe is today with oil and gas. Building more nuclear power plants will just make things worse unless we become self-sufficient.

      • Of course the US has uranium and Australia has a whole lot of it, so does Canada. The real problem in the US is Luddite Dimowits and some Republicons who stop citizens from mining our abundant resouces, especially oil and gas. It doesn’t matter what you have in reserve if id-eee-ot politicians won’t let you get to it. Green Energy Extremists are the problem, and that problem is all over the world. Citizens everywhere need to band together and vote out these id-eee-ots!

      • jim2 – it is amazing how many are brainwashed into the religion of green energy. As the other religions fade, I guess some belief in magical thinking just fills that void.

      • jim2,
        Did you ever notice I never mention how many tones of CO2 I avoid with my solar panels? I don’t because it’s all greenwash. Just my American diet has produced at least 3 times more than I offset. I never bring it up because to me it’s the tech that makes it economically a better option.

        Microgrids are the long term solution but that’s still years away.

      • jack – for most endeavors, it is cheaper to create centralized entities rather than disperse entities. Could you expound on how distributed micro-grids will be more cost effective than centralized power plants? I’m serious and curious, not goading you.

      • jim2,
        It’s not one size fits all. There are at least 3 types of microgrids.
        Commercial, community and the single home nanogrid.
        https://microgridknowledge.com/

        One of the main appeals of microgrids is avoiding centralized power = single point of failure. The UPS I use to backup/protect my home network trips at least twice a month, so reliability is important to me.
        My prediction is that wide adoption of EVs with standardized bi-directional charging (V2G) will be the tipping point. The new F-150 Lightning comes standard with V2G. Once EVs get to be over 40% of the market I think the utilities will make their move to capture the customer by subsidizing the conversion cost to preserve their monopolies. There will be some (maybe a lot) of new EV owners that add solar to offset their higher electricity use too. This is also why all the new start-ups like Charge-Point and EVGO are probably doomed and they will get bought out by the regional utilities. https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/save-energy-money/savings-programs/backup-power-transfer-meter.page

        Reminds me of a old sales pitch from my home town.
        “If you don’t have an oil well, get one! You’ll love doing business with Western.”
        https://western-companies.com/legacy

      • Well, Jack, it’s difficult to see better economics from your description than our centralized power plants, so I guess we’ll wait and see what the future actually holds.

      • If I was a utility I would be looking at ways to leverage this to my benefit. Every F-150 could be a micrgrid. Tesla just requested permission to launch a virtual power network in Texas (Bloomberg)

        How Ford’s Electric Pickup Can Power Your House for 10 Days
        5/31/2022
        https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ford-electric-pickup-power-house-090047230.html

  76. Huge news. MIT says one-day to seasonal battery technology does not exist! Only reasonably possible way to make wind and solar reliable. Cost is not an issue if the technology does not exist. Cost is literally incalculable.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/05/29/mit-weighs-in-on-energy-storage/

    Technically what they say is that today’s technology is far too expensive, which is what I have been saying. But the technology does exist in a way, just not useably.

    Their idea is to develop very low cost batteries using widely available cheap materials. We do not know this is possible so wind and solar deployment should wait and see.

    • David
      The link you posted is an “opinion piece” addressing Large Scale Energy Storage over a long-term basis and its ability to deal with long term supply outages of wind and/or solar.

      The basic point is that renewable power will require either fossil fuel or nuclear as a backup to meet long term reliability needs. Hardly a breakthrough thought.

      • Renewable power will require some genius with some power to figure out it simply ain’t viable and certainly not desirable along any dimension.

      • Rob Starkey

        Jim

        Renewable power IS viaable as a supplemental power source.

    • UK-Weather Lass

      If we can develop an ideal way of storing electricity safely and reliably it would impact on all our ‘normal’ baseload sources of energy (nuclear, gas, coal, hydro etc) by making the whole grid more responsive to changes in demand. By reducing all that seemingly wasted surplus energy.would also effectively reduce the need for intermittents to a minor role as a supplementary source in particular suitable situations. It would also reduce fossil fuel use by inching a little closer to 100% grid efficiency. That surely should be where we focus ‘battery’ research as a win-win for everybody without despoiling our environment with wind turbines and solar panel farms.

      The whole point of green policy should be to maintain all supply as closely to meet demand because the system can easily respond to change by using all that cleverly and safely stored power that we currently lose.

      We just need to stop putting the cart before the horse when thinking about and developing new technology…

  77. Two planets with the same mean surface temperature can emit dramatically different amounts of energy

    Moon’s average surface temperature is Tmoon = 220 K
    Mars’ average temperature is Tmars = 210 K

    Moon’s average surface Albedo a =0,11
    Mars’ average surface Albedo a =0,25

    It can be demonstrated that for the same Albedo Mars and Moon would have had the same average surface temperature.

    The solar flux on Moon is So =1361W/m²
    The solar flux on Mars is S =586W/m²

    It is obvious, that for the same average surface temperature, the emitted amounts of energy from Moon are dramatically higher than the emitted amounts of energy from Mars.

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Mars and Moon have two major differences which equate each other:

      The first major difference is the distance from the sun both Mars and Moon have.
      Mars has 2,32 times less solar irradiation intensity than Earth and Moon have.
      Consequently the solar flux on the Mars top is 2,32 times weaker than that on the Moon.

      The second major difference is the sidereal rotation period both Mars and Moon have.
      Moon performs 1 rotation every 29,531 earth days.
      Mars performs 1 rotation every 24,622 hours or 0,9747 rot /day.
      Consequently Mars rotates 29,531 *0,9747 = 28,783 times faster than Moon.

      So Mars is irradiated 2,32 times weaker, but Mars rotates 28,783 times faster.

      It is obvious now, the Mars’ 28,783 times faster rotation equates the Moon’s 2,32 times higher solar irradiation.
      That is why the 28,783 times faster rotating Mars has almost the same satellite measured mean surface temperature as the 2,32 times stronger solar irradiated Moon.

      Thus we are coming here again to the same conclusion:
      If Moon and Mars were the same distance from the sun, the faster rotating Mars would have been a warmer planet.

      Earth and Moon are at the same distance from the sun.
      The faster rotating Earth is warmer than Moon.
      This very important conclusion is based on satellite measured planets’ mean surface temperatures. It is based on the very reliable observations.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • In this example we have demonstrated that the Mars’ solar irradiation intensity deficit being 2,32 times less is compensated by Mars’ 28,783 times higher rotational spin’s fourth root

        (28,783)¹∕ ⁴ = 2,3162

        So what we have here is the “Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon” observed.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • The Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon states:
        Planets’ mean surface temperatures RELATE (everything else equals) as their (N*cp) products’ SIXTEENTH ROOT.

        ( N*cp ) ^1/16
        or
        [ (N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ ] ¹∕ ⁴
        This discovery has explained the origin of the formerly observed the planets’ average surface temperatures comparison discrepancies.

        Earth is warmer than Moon because Earth rotates faster than Moon and because Earth’s surface is covered with water.

        What we do in our research is to compare the satellite measured planetary temperatures.
        The Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon can be expressed now also QUANTITATIVELY . And it happens so to be a very POWERFUL the planet surface warming factor.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • The Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon states:

      Planets’ mean surface temperatures RELATE (everything else equals) as their (N*cp) products’ SIXTEENTH ROOT.

      ( N*cp ) ^1/16
      or
      [ (N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ ] ¹∕ ⁴

      This discovery has explained the origin of the formerly observed the planets’ average surface temperatures comparison discrepancies.
      Earth is warmer than Moon because Earth rotates faster than Moon and because Earth’s surface is covered with water.

      What we do in our research is to compare the satellite measured planetary temperatures.
      The Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon can be expressed now also QUANTITATIVELY . And it happens so to be a very POWERFUL the planet surface warming factor.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  78. To highlight the bias in the media, this Bloomberg article mentions supply chain issues and labor shortages, but says not a word about the spike in energy prices due to Green Energy Extremists energy policies that are strangling the fossil fuels industry. In fact, fossil fuels will be the biggest expense for people wanting to travel, and the poorest peoples will suffer the most.

    If you’re one of the 73% of Americans planning to travel this summer, brace yourself for a turbulent trip. Almost all facets of the industry—from airlines to rental cars, cruises to hotels—are facing global service disruptions, a result of the same supply chain and labor shortage issues upending all businesses. There are also price spikes aplenty and some record demand crunches, because so many people are desperately eager to be on the move after two years of pandemic confinement.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-27/as-travel-restrictions-lift-summer-vacation-looks-expensive

  79. It’s likely that the west’s irrational Luddite rejection of nuclear while forging ahead with a green energy transition in the deluded hope that a non-nuclear alternative to fossil fuel exists, have caused, directly and indirectly both the energy and food inflation crisis and the Ukraine war.

    Just how much are antinuclear Luddites willing to pay / get society to pay for the privilege of clinging to their antinuclear tribal allegiance?

  80. The ‘wet get wetter, dry get drier’ is difficult to assess because of the limits of observation on precipitation and of evaporation.

    There’s no guarantee that reanalyses are accurate, of course, but I took a brief look at how P,E,P-E varied for Land,Ocean over the ERA5 record:

    https://climateobs.substack.com/p/wet-get-wetter

    ERA5 appears to support the relatively recent paper The Response of Precipitation Minus Evapotranspiration to Climate Warming: Why the “Wet-Get-Wetter, Dry-Get-Drier” Scaling Does Not Hold over Land.

    The IPCC depicts the results from Held and Soden(2006) as well as Byrne and O’Gorman(2016). Over oceans, P-E for the CMIP projections, Held and Soden scaling, and Byrne and O’Gorman scaling mostly agree. Over land, models diverge and ERA5 appears to have little change.

    Bear in mind that the percentage of land cover is quite small at certain latitudes and that the observational coverage is quite poor at other latitudes.

  81. Ford’s new pickup may take a good while to penetrate the market in any meaningful way because it uses lithium batteries. That is true for all other EVs as well.

    Elon Musk wants to mine it, China is scouring Tibet for it, battery makers are crying out for it. Lithium, the wonder metal at the heart of the global shift to electric cars, is in a full-blown crisis. Demand has outstripped supply, pushing prices up almost 500% in a year and hindering the world’s most successful effort yet to halt global warming.

    The shortage of lithium is so acute that in China, which makes about 80% of the world’s lithium-ion batteries, the government corralled suppliers and manufacturers to demand “a rational return” to lower prices. Analysts at Macquarie Group Ltd. warned of a “a perpetual deficit,” while Citigroup Inc. nearly doubled its price forecast for 2022, saying an “extreme” rally could be coming.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-05-25/lithium-the-hunt-for-the-wonder-metal-fueling-evs?srnd=green

  82. Maybe some of you green energy zealots can put your retirement money to work and save a COP26 ETF. Looks like there is more virtue signalling than commitment to ESG BS.

    A climate ETF started by a group of major financial institutions is set to close after less than a year because none of the backers pitched in with anticipated funding.

    The Impact Shares MSCI Global Climate Select ETF (ticker NTZO) launched in November at the United Nations’ COP26 summit in Glasgow, and since then has accumulated only about $3 million of assets.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-01/a-97-million-shortfall-leaves-cop26-etf-on-brink-of-liquidation

  83. Don’t expect the eco-not-sees to give hydrogen a pass either …

    Once it escapes, much of the leaked hydrogen will be absorbed by microbes in the soil. Some of what’s left in the air will react with a substance that helps remove methane from the atmosphere. That’s a problem, because methane is itself a powerful greenhouse gas, with more than 80 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over 20 years. The reaction between hydrogen and that substance — known as the hydroxyl radical, or OH — leaves less of the OH available to react with methane. So methane entering the atmosphere will stick around longer and do more damage than it would have if the hydrogen hadn’t been there.

    Leaked hydrogen has other warming effects as well. In the troposphere, the atmospheric layer closest to the ground, it triggers a chain of chemical reactions that produce more ozone, another greenhouse gas and a key component of smog. Much higher up, in the stratosphere, the hydrogen leads to an increase in water vapor, which has the overall effect of trapping more thermal energy in the atmosphere.

    https://energynow.ca/2022/05/miracle-fuel-hydrogen-can-actually-make-climate-change-worse/

    • Add to list of why hydrogen is not green either:
      https://h2sciencecoalition.com/data-resources/

      > The greenhouse gas intensity of blue hydrogen can be up to 20% worse than burning natural gas for heat.

      > ‘grey’ hydrogen emits around the same emissions as the global aviation industry every year.

      > Blue hydrogen made from natural gas and CCS uses at least 40% more gas than boilers using natural gas outright, and so would increase the gas imports of many countries, undermining energy security.

      > Powering boilers with ‘green’ hydrogen uses x6 more renewable energy than the renewable energy used for heat pumps.

      > Heating all the buildings in the UK with green hydrogen needs the UK’s existing offshore wind generating capacity to increase by a factor of 40. Using heat pumps would only require the existing offshore wind generating capacity to increase by a factor of around 6.5.

      > Battery vehicles are around 3.2 times more energy efficient than hydrogen fuel cell cars.

      > 20% mixture of hydrogen with natural gas in a pipeline has only 86% of the energy efficiency of pure natural gas.

      Much more at the link above.
      Hydrogen = more greenwashing?

  84. Here’s a good example of why centralized control is a bad thing. It is extremely bad in some cases, and this is an economy crashing one. A bad economy can bring down a country – and in this case, it’s a good thing.

    After a bruising lockdown in Shanghai and severe curbs in Beijing were needed to halt the spread of Covid-19, China is doubling down on mass-testing in a move that’s dashing hopes for a shift away from its costly Covid Zero strategy.

    A network of tens of thousands of lab testing booths are being set up across the country’s largest and most economically vital cities, with the goal of having residents always just a 15 minute walk away from a swabbing point. The infrastructure will allow cities like Beijing, Shanghai, tech hub Shenzhen and e-commerce heartland Hangzhou to require tests as often as every 48 hours, with negative results needed to get on the subway or even enter a store.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-31/china-plans-for-years-of-covid-zero-with-tests-on-every-corner

  85. Biden, the Dimowits, some Republicons, and the Green Energy Extremists are laughing with joy at our pain.

    Regular Mid-Grade Premium Diesel E85
    Current Avg. $4.671 $5.033 $5.325 $5.538 $4.026

    https://gasprices.aaa.com/

    Time to vote them out!!! ALL of them!!!

    • Just hope we don’t lose the petrodollar – we depend on that financial tool.
      Would that lower prices? Might piss off Saudia Aribia, one of our largest weapons customers. If you didn’t notice, China is offering OPEC to buy in Yaun.

      • Rob Starkey

        Increased US oil production is a huge stimulus to the overall US economy. At the same time it helps to fight inflation pressure. The only real downside is that is not available to use in the future.

      • Rob – there is enough fossil fuels to get us to nuclear.

  86. Thank you, Judith Curry, for all your painstaking, serious work on this blog.
    A question came to me when reading the study about “Predicting slowdowns in decadal climate warming trends with explainable neural networks”.
    I quote the opening sentence of the Plain Language Summary:
    “Long-term observations reveal that Earth’s average temperature is rising due to human-caused climate change.”
    Do you, or any of your readers, know of such observations?
    Best wishes, Kevin Benn

  87. Amazing what the West could do: France went from 0 to 56 nuclear reactors in just 15 years

    https://joannenova.com.au/2022/06/amazing-what-the-west-could-do-france-went-from-0-to-56-nuclear-reactors-in-just-15-years/

  88. ESG virtue signalling gets too risky …

    This year’s weak performance by US stocks has forced many investors to recalibrate their portfolios. And they’re fleeing do-good strategies.

    After more than three years of inflows, investors are now pulling cash out of US equity exchange-traded funds with higher environmental, social and governance standards. May saw $2 billion of outflows from ESG equity funds, according to data from Bloomberg Intelligence — the biggest monthly cash pullback ever.

    “There’s no way to know for certain why the outflows were so extreme,” said Bloomberg Intelligence analyst James Seyffart, who noted that the funds had started from a high-asset base after years of inflows. “But also ESG ETFs may be finding that people care a lot more about them in bull markets.”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-01/esg-equity-funds-had-worst-month-of-outflows-on-record-in-may

  89. Just as Europe helps pay for the carnage in Ukraine, President Pudin-head now wants to sponsor terrorists in the Middle East. Anything but encourage US oil production, eh Dimowit? The Progressive/Socialist/Communist/Dimowit really hate America. Vote them out at every opportunity at every level.

    The US hailed OPEC+ for accelerating oil production increases and singled out Saudi Arabia, as President Joe Biden’s administration seeks to cool surging fuel prices.

    Washington “welcomes the important decision from OPEC+ today,” said White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. “We recognize the role of Saudi Arabia as the chair of OPEC+ and its largest producer in achieving this consensus amongst the group members. The United States will continue to use all tools at our disposal to address energy prices pressures.”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-02/us-praises-opec-and-saudi-arabia-for-accelerating-oil-hikes

    • 6/5/2022 – The commander in chief has just invoked the Defense Production Act to boost US solar panel production (I doubt Biden came up with this idea). The build out of the US production base was all supposed to happen 10 years ago under Obama LOL. China went all-in though and funneled billions into their industry. Currently the US produces about 20% of our domestic installations. Free market my ass. Fingers on the scales, picking winners and losers. The most recent US PV factory is being built in Miss. by the Korean company Hanwha Q CELLS. There are just a tiny hand full of US manufactures when you exclude First Solar (different PV tech). In fact almost none of the US listed companies have any profits even with huge tariffs on imported modules.
      Stocks going to pop on Monday. Now it’s up to Joe Manchin to block those billions in green tax breaks in the next spending bill.

      • Solar is OK for off-grid locations, but in the big picture, it’s a loser. The only problem is, the Dimowit/Socialist/Communist/Progressive/And a few Repulicons, are shoving it down our throats while they do everything they can to hobble the oil and gas industry. We need to hobble them come November!

      • You know this isn’t for the little guy. I know for a fact only a small percent of residential homes are suitable for solar anyway because of siting or zoning – I bet your house couldn’t put up enough panels to offset you peak daytime demand even if you wanted to.

  90. One day historians will look back at the period beginning with the COVID lockdowns of spring 2020 through the midterm elections of 2022 to understand how America for over two years lost its collective mind and turned into something unrecognizable and antithetical to its founding principles.

    “Sovietization” is perhaps the best diagnosis of the pathology. It refers to the subordination of policy, expression, popular culture, and even thought to ideological mandates. Ultimately such regimentation destroys a state since dogma wars with and defeats meritocracy, creativity, and freedom.
    The American Commissariat

    Experts become sycophantic. They mortgage their experience and talent to ideology—to the point where society itself regresses.

    The law is no longer blind and disinterested, but adjudicates indictment, prosecution, verdict, and punishment on the ideology of the accused. Eric Holder is held in contempt of Congress and smiles; Peter Navarro is held in contempt of Congress and is hauled off in cuffs and leg-irons. James Clapper and John Brennan lied under oath to Congress—and were rewarded with television contracts; Roger Stone did the same and a SWAT team showed up at his home. Andrew McCabe made false statements to federal investigators and was exempt. A set-up George Papadopoulos went to prison for a similar charge. So goes the new American commissariat.

    Examine California and ask a series of simple questions.

    https://amgreatness.com/2022/06/05/the-sovietization-of-american-life/

    • The pandemic was a test. The US failed.
      They say history is written by the victors. Since none of us can read or speak Mandurian I’m afraid it will just have to remain a mystery.

      • Sure Jack. We could have tanked our economy like the Chinese did in a failed effort to stop COVID. They are supposedly re-opening now and claiming victory over the virus. Considering it’s Omicron, I simply don’t believe it. I do believe their centralized control bit them on the backside because their GDP tanked big time.

  91. I have a question: We hear a lot about dramatic temperature rises in the Arctic. We hear a lot about the rise in global average temperature. But I don’t know what the average rise in temperature has been for each latitude band. Is there a place I can find that information? Thanks in advance.

  92. Trump had a better approval rating than President Puddin-head.

    https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/biden_administration/prez_track_jun03

    • Jim

      Trump had a low approval rating because the mainstream press lied about him constantly.

      Biden has a low approval rating because his policies are bad for the nation……….and I am not a Republican.

      • I appreciate your honesty. Hopefully, a lot of people have woken up to the same realization. There was a time when Democrats supported the Constitution and the well-being of US citizens over other concerns. That no longer appears to be the case. To me, this isn’t a political issue, it is a rights issue, a quality of life issue, and possibly even a survival issue.

      • Rob Starkey

        I wonder what ever happened to Joshua and how he thinks Biden has done.

      • It seems a few of the left-leaning and prolific commenters have disappeared. There also are not many riots currently. I’m thinking Dimowit central control may have told them to stand down so as not to alienate any more voters than they already have.

      • “Trump had a low approval rating because the mainstream press lied about him constantly.”
        That was part of it. More significant was his brusque, abrasive, vulgar style.
        Think about Obama. An empty suit with dark skin and some eloquence. He was wildly popular for those items, not for any policy. The press lied about him just as much (OK, in a different way!)

      • Better to have a vulgar freedom-loving President than a slick-talking Communist. JMO.

      • Amen, brother.

  93. Immigrants who have fled socialist countries are travelling to schools across the U.S. for free under a new program to teach students about the dangers of socialism.

    The Dissident Project launched Monday with speakers set to “travel to high schools across the U.S. to speak to students about authoritarian socialism” at no cost to the schools, Dissident Project founder and Venezuelan-born economist Daniel Di Martino told the Daily Caller.

    The speakers include activists from Venezuela, Cuba, Hong Kong and North Korea who have immigrated to the U.S. and are dedicated to speaking about how socialism has destroyed their countries. (RELATED: Immigrants From Communist And Socialist Countries Spell Out Why The GOP Is The Party Of Freedom)

    Grace Jo, a speaker from North Korea, came to the U.S. after almost starving “to death as a child” under the country’s socialist regime. Two of her brothers and her father died from starvation, according to the Dissident Project’s website.

    https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/06/exclusive-immigrants-dissident-project-schools-warning-socialism-deadly/

    • Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Most immigrants have come to the US for freedom and/or economic opportunity (those are often linked). We need more of these stories to be in the MSM as they once were, but the MSM is hiding them these days.

      • We need to be completely honest and verbose about immigrants; good, bad, or ugly.

  94. So while the “elites” fly around the world in their private jets, their solution to “global warming” is for us to walk, bicycle, or take an electric public buss (perhaps in the midst of a pandemic.) So chauffeured private transportation for them, and zero private transportation (and the freedom it brings) for us.

    Just swapping out the drivetrain isn’t the most efficient way to reach carbon neutrality by 2050. This year’s outlook report includes a reduced demand scenario looking at how governments can combat car dependency.

    Even a modest 10% reduction in miles traveled via car globally by 2050 yields major benefits and makes the journey to net zero much easier. This can be accomplished with modal shifts, primarily to active transport (cycling and walking) and public transport.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-07/electric-vehicle-outlook-is-even-brighter-if-the-world-bikes-and-takes-the-bus?srnd=premium

  95. I can’t recall if it showed up here, but Jamie Dimon and others voiced the idea that with restricted oil and gas, an energy hungry world will resort to coal.

    It appears that India has confirmed this:

    India Reopens 100 Coal Mines

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/06/08/india-reopens-100-coal-mines/

    RF rates were decelerating, but coal may boost them.
    Or, global depression may drag them down.

    • China, too. The winners will be those who have abundant and cheap power.

    • One of the warmist websites once posted a link to climate/energy documents from the 1980s. Not unexpectedly, they were heavily influenced by peak oil and population bomb enthusiasts.
      In their forecasts of the future, the expectation was that we would, today, be getting a significant percentage of our “gasoline” from coal- the assumption being natural gas or oil would be constantly declining.
      You cannot find it anymore, but it was once quite acceptable to admit that the whole “renewables” movement was originally a peak oil policy, not a climate policy.
      Wind and solar weren’t intended to replace existing energy, they were seen as a way to reduce the use of gas and coal in electricity production so that those could go into the fuel tanks of Mercedes.
      Seen in that light, it’s not at all surprising that – once it became clear peak oil was nonsense – Germany put out press releases about wind and built natural gas/oil pipelines.

  96. Just one more good reason President Puddin-head needs to promote oil and gas production in the US, instead of trying to kill it.

    India is buying up cheap sanctioned Russian oil, refining it, then selling it to the US and EU for huge profits, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.
    The US has reluctantly given India permission to buy Russian oil because India has threatened to ditch their alliance with America and ally with China if the US dares to sanction them.
    While Americans and Europeans are being forced to pay record prices for gas as “the cost of standing up for freedom,” the free nation of India is buying oil from Russia for a whopping $35 off a barrel and selling it back to us in a hilarious arbitrage scheme.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/06/08/india-is-buying-up-cheap-sanctioned-russian-oil-and-selling-it-to-the-u-s-and-e-u-at-huge-profits/

    • Jim

      I hope you realize that the US has very little additional oil refinery capacity in the event that production is increased.

      • It seems likely the ICE share of the market will be in long term decline due to technology advances in EV. Why should they build new stuff that lasts 20-30 years? Up until recently refining capacity was being decommissioned. That all stopped after the winter storm Uri wiped out huge chunks of their production in all kinds of refined product.
        Yesterday the whole world noticed when that a fire at a LNG plant took it off line for the next 2-3 weeks. I hope it was just human error and not malfeasance.

      • It would bring down the price of oil. That alone is worth it. It went up under Trump. I guess he did have a magic wand after all.

        As you have highlighted, we need to build some more refineries. And I’ll add to that nuclear plants.

        Frequently, when these new builds are brought up, people point out it will take years as if that’s a good reason not to do it. People like that are the reason we don’t have those now.

      • Rob Starkey

        Jack/Jim

        It makes sense from a national security perspective to have additional refinery capacity. In the event that foreign refining (Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc.) is interrupted the US should have North American sources of supply.

        When Venezuela became unstable and unreliable alternatives should have been developed. Multiple US presidents blew it, but Biden is a complete bungler who is hurting people today because he wrongly thinks it will benefit people 100 years from now. His actions won’t change the long term CO2 curve by an amount that will impact the weather in the future, but it is hurting people today.

      • Jim/Rob,
        I would have liked to see a third nuclear plant added to the Comanche Peak power station in N. Texas but once the gas fracking ramped up they mothballed the plans.
        Speaking of adding new capacity to our energy markets what’s
        up with all the hype around hydrogen? Conversion efficiency is terrible, its hard to transport and store. Aside from a few very small niche applications that may be both economical & environmental beneficial its all just more greenwashing.
        https://h2sciencecoalition.com/

      • Personally, I don’t believe hydrogen can rise to the occasion.

    • It’s the warhawks, who suck at their job. We get the oil from Russia. And we pay more it. But the warhawks get to virtue signal. It’s not in our interest to get involved in the Ukraine.

  97. Not sure how this link will work, but look at the texas grid under the “regional electricity overview”. Set settings for 30 days. It’s getting hot and Texas is having to ramp coal plants up and down. That can’t be good for those plants.

    https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/electric_overview/regional/REG-TEX/GenerationByEnergySource-9/edit

  98. Two months ago, I believe for the first time ever, I spent $40 filling up my car with gas. What an experience. One month ago I spent $50. That felt so good. Last night it took $60. I’m wondering what kind of tingle I’ll get down my leg if it is $70 next month.

    And $80? Well, the titillation I got from Marilyn Monroe never approached what I am sure I would get from that magical number. The fantasies I’m having.

    • Quote of the day.

      A guest on a financial network was speaking of the effects on gas prices from ESG investment. She said “Some of these investors are understanding that working in an office without air conditioning is not much fun.”

      If you can’t appeal to people through their cognitive organs, then try to persuade them through the next best place….their sweat glands.

    • Look at the bright side. Your used car might be worth more than you paid for it. This morning’s inflation report said used car/truck prices were up 1.8% from April to May (Wall St. Journal).
      The FED needs to do an emergency 1.25% interest rate hike and reduce the balance sheet by 150 billion/mo ASAP.

      I just checked the price on my 2013 Chevy Volt with 37k miles on it and it’s worth $1,800 more than I paid for it in 2015! That’s never happened before either.

      • The entire balance sheet reduction issue is fascinating to me. I’ve seen negative interest rates in Europe, which I thought would never happen. I went through the 20% Fed Funds rate period. And now drawdown on the massive Fed balance sheet. I wonder if the yield curve inversion, which everyone is expecting, will be affected by the drawdown. Interesting times.

  99. Well, this is an interesting match-up. Buffet vs. Big Tech. Big Tech is worried Buffet’s pet wind farm will drive up electricity prices for them in Iowa!

    Google, Facebook and Microsoft Corp. — three of the world’s biggest corporate buyers of clean power — are sounding the alarm that a nearly $4 billion, Warren Buffett-backed renewable-energy project proposed in Iowa isn’t necessarily in the best interest of customers, including them.

    If approved, it would be the largest complex of wind farms in the entire country when it comes online by the end of 2024, producing enough electricity for more than 700,000 homes. MidAmerican Energy, a utility owned by Buffett conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc., has asked state regulators to approve terms including a guaranteed 11.25% rate of return before starting construction on a project it says will help in its efforts to trim carbon emissions by 75% compared to 2005 levels.

    But the big-name tech giants that operate data centers in the state warn the project, dubbed Wind Prime, could drive up electricity costs. MidAmerican, they say, should consider alternatives. “We have concerns that the current Wind Prime proposal is not in the energy customers’ best interest,” Corina Standiford, a spokeswoman for Alphabet Inc.’s Google, said in an email.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-10/it-s-warren-buffett-versus-big-tech-in-iowa-s-latest-wind-farm-debate

    • Iowa should let him build it and then seize it using eminent domain laws. Trump loved eminent domain for his businesses and later as president too.
      Not saying I approve but you know the old saying, never let a crisis go to waste.
      Speaking of Iowa, who wouldn’t love to be a big ag farmer in Iowa. Remember when the Chinese stopped buying our grains and the government stepped in and gave them billions to make up for their losses? The Chinese still haven’t fulfilled their part of the trade deal. Now big ag will get billions more for growing inedible GMO corn for ethanol and force the refiners (and consumers) to take it.

      • If you looked, you might well find the Chinese, along with Bill Gates, owns a ton of US farm land. I haven’t looked at the Chinese part, but Bill Gates for whatever reason has been buying it up. It’s a little scary to have some megalomania like Gates buying critical resources.

      • Rob Starkey

        Gates has purchased vast amounts of farmland because it is a good long term investment. Land is great place to have money especially when it was financed at low interest rates. Farms provide income and a means of paying for the investment while awaiting the inevitable price increase.

      • That makes sense, Rob. I hope that’s the only reason he has in mind.

    • Google, Facebook and Microsoft Corp telling us Green Energy is not good for them is B.S. They’ve been running around going Green. What do they want?

  100. President Pudin-head takes action to make our gasoline more expensive and our lives more miserable.

    “We support EPA’s commonsense decision to align the 2020 and 2021 standards with actual production volumes for those years in which COVID-19 lockdowns wreaked havoc on fuel demand. The 2022 standard, however, is bewildering and contrary to the Administration’s claims to be doing everything in their power to provide relief to consumers. Unachievable mandates will needlessly raise fuel production costs and further threaten the viability of U.S. small refineries, both at the expense of consumers. The Administration missed a prime opportunity to provide relief and will have no one to blame for this but themselves.”

    https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/news/refiners-bewildered-biden-administration-rfs-rule-will-increase-costs-refiners

  101. The Dimowits are lying about inflation being caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukrain. Under President Puddin-head, inflation had already reached 7.5% the month before the invasion.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi

  102. My 1957 Chevy was also a convertible but had a little more room. Another disadvantage, I’m not sure this car would be the best to watch movies at the drive in.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FU_RkfaXsAMCWUI?format=jpg&name=medium

  103. As usual CNN was on top of their game with this tweet

    “CNN Politics
    @CNNPolitics
    · Dec 8, 2021
    Gas prices will tumble below $3 a gallon soon, government forecasts https://cnn.it/31x4JDn”

  104. Europe smugly listens to the Green Energy Extremists. It still hasn’t caught on that locally sourced supplies of fossil fuels is the only sure way to secure reliable supplies.

    Europe’s natural gas prices jumped after a fire at a large export terminal in the US wiped out deliveries to a market that’s on high alert over tight Russian supplies.

    Benchmark futures traded in Amsterdam snapped a six-day falling streak, while UK prices soared as much as 39% before paring gains. The Freeport liquefied natural gas facility in Texas — which makes up about a fifth of all US exports of the fuel — will remain closed for a minimum of three weeks, resulting in at least 10 missed cargoes.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-09/us-lng-outage-sends-european-gas-soaring-as-supply-fears-revive

  105. Par for the course. Liberals provide their idea of a solution to a problem.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FU_1642WQAU0jnj?format=jpg&name=medium

  106. European countries listened to the Green Energy Extremists and “invested” in wind and solar whilst ignoring the development of local fossil fuel sources. Now it will cost them in farming, jobs, and even one more knife to the back of the economy.

    CF Industries Holdings Inc. will close one of its UK fertilizer plants permanently as it struggles with high energy costs.

    The company is proposing to shutdown the Ince facility as it restructures operations in Britain, it said Wednesday. The site, which hasn’t produced ammonia since September, was one of CF’s plants halted last year as soaring gas costs squeezed profitability. That prompted the government to step in to help keep some operations going.

    The move to close the factory highlights the challenge that expensive gas poses to European industries. The threat to fertilizer output has also been bad news for the food and drink sector, because the factories produce carbon dioxide as a byproduct. That gas is used to stun pigs and chickens for slaughter, extend the shelf life of fresh food and give beer and soda their fizz.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-08/high-gas-prices-force-uk-fertilizer-plant-to-close-for-good

  107. The Green Energy Extremists have done this to us and it’s high time we shun them. Vote out any politician, Dimowit or Republicon, who espouses more wind and solar plants or installations. They have caused the energy crisis and are driving us all poorer, all around the world. Vote instead for those who want to help the fossil fuel industry thrive.

    Wall Street may be abuzz with talk of recession next year, but it’s a different story in the energy market. Most traders, policy makers and analysts see oil demand growing through 2023 and supply struggling to keep pace.

    In private, Western officials worry Brent crude will reach $150 a barrel soon from about $120 now. Some fear it keeps going higher, with wild chatter about oil hitting $175 or even $180 by the end of 2022, driven by post-Covid pent-up demand and European sanctions against Russia. And the shock won’t end this year.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-06-13/the-oil-price-shock-will-reverberate-into-next-year

  108. The Green Energy Extremists have done this to us. Vote out any politician who wants more wind and solar.

    Just as the world was getting serious about a green-energy future, its dependence on fossil fuels struck home with a force not seen since the 1970s. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine combined with pressures unleashed by the pandemic to send the price of all forms of energy rocketing, with oil climbing more than 50% in the first half of 2022. That energy shock was at the heart of a surge in inflation that caused hardship and political headaches around the globe.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-13/how-the-energy-shock-has-upended-the-global-economy-quicktake

    • Jim

      You get it wrong about wind and solar. There is nothing wrong with more wind and solar. It is simply that you need to have a more reliable form of energy to protect the base load

      • Thanks for pointing out one of the major problems with wind and solar!

      • Wind and solar are fine as supplemental energy sources and reduce CO2 emissions as well as reduce the use of a non-renewable source of energy.

        The “green movement” simply went too far in trying to get wind and solar to be used exclusively.

  109. Europe listened to the Green Energy Extremists and failed to develop local sources of fossil fuels. They have no choice but to buy Russian gas. So they try to boycott Russian oil, and then this happens …

    Russia’s seaborne crude flows are taking on a new pattern as Moscow seeks to deal with impending European sanctions on its exports. India has moved from being an insignificant buyer of Russian crude to the second-biggest destination for shipments, behind only China.

    As China emerges as the only market for crude shipped from ports on Russia’s Pacific coast, India has rapidly become the largest purchaser of barrels loaded at ports on its western shores. Asian buyers, dominated by China and India, are now taking close to half of all the crude shipped from the country’s ports, with a steady stream of tankers heading around Europe and through the Suez Canal from the Baltic and Arctic Seas.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-13/russia-s-crude-flows-to-asia-take-hold-near-unprecedented-levels

  110. Australia beats its wife, then says the wife is to blame for being uppity. Furthermore, the beatings will continue until the morale of the wife improves!

    This is the attitude of the Green Energy Extremists in Australia. After pushing for wind and solar and hobbling fossil fuels there, the GEEs now blame everyone but themselves for electricity shortages and high electricity prices. In response to the high prices, the socialist GEEs apply the typical socialist “solution,” a price cap on producer electricity. Yesterday, electricity was dear, so the price triggered the cap. Some producers couldn’t make money at the capped price, so responded by shutting down. Of course the GEEs, blind to the fact this problem was created by themselves, blame the power producers. Now they are threatening to force those companies to supply power or get prosecuted.

    The problem is the US GEEs are going down the exact same road here. We need to vote out any politician, Dimowit or Republicon, who supports the GEEs. There are too many of them now.

    The day the fossil fuel industry lost all perspective, and threw away its social licence

    Giles Parkinson 14 June 2022 0

    The timing could hardly have been better. Or worse. In the very week that the fossil fuel industry will likely embrace a new push for a subsidy it insists is needed to keep the lights on, it demonstrates in the most brazen manner possible that it really couldn’t give a stuff whether the lights are kept on or not.

    The extraordinary scenes of brinkmanship witnessed on Monday and Tuesday – and likely to continue this week in Queensland and other states – have been triggered by an automatic price cap that is designed to protect consumers from surging wholesale prices, and to cool the market.

    It was implemented because wholesale prices had surged out of control – due to a heady mix of international and local factors. But far from being protected, the consumers are now being held to ransom by a group of big companies arguing that they are being “economically rational” by withdrawing their service.

    https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-day-the-fossil-fuel-industry-lost-all-perspective-and-threw-away-its-social-licence/

    • I am concerned that not enough of our politicians are calling out the renewable fuels industry and its radical supporters for causing the high price of gasoline in the US. Biden blames Putin and begs the Saudis (whom he recently disparaged) and the Venezuelans to pump more oil rather than merely taking the choker off our our domestic O&G industry. This guy is evil as are the GEEs.

    • Unreliable LNG plant goes off line for 90 days taking out 20% of our export capacity. Domestic Nat. Gas price plunges 15%. We are being played dude.

      “At approximately 11:40AM CT on June 8, 2022, an incident occurred at the Freeport LNG liquefaction plant on Quintana Island, Texas that resulted in the release of LNG, leading to the formation and ignition of a natural gas vapor cloud, and subsequent fire at the facility.

      At this time, completion of all necessary repairs and a return to full plant operations is not expected until late 2022. Given the relatively contained area of the facility physically impacted by the incident, a resumption of partial operations is targeted to be achieved in approximately 90 days, once the safety and security of doing so can be assured, and all regulatory clearances are obtained.”

      Russia sends its condolences.

      • Good for the US nat gas prices, bad for Europe who have already gone down the Green Energy Extremist rabbit hole.

  111. Living in a dream world versus being imprisoned in the real world.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FVMoQcracAEg8rl?format=png&name=small

  112. https://www.cfact.org/2022/06/14/news-of-nerc-is-not-good-for-reliability/

    Breaking the story on NERC and FERC’s deliberate negligence, ignoring the rapidly declining reliability of the American electric power system due to the reckless replacing of reliable coal fired power plants with unreliable renewables. Given the coming election the timing is excellent. We must restore reliability!

  113. Communist and Chief President Puddin-head shows the Dimowits’ true color: Red. Now he wants to steal the profits of refiners, just one more move to stymie the petroleum business. He is truly an id-eee-ot. As Ronald Regan said:

    “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

    Puddin-head sees the Socialists/Communists in Europe and Communists in China steal other peoples money by fiat and he’s jealous. Someone should take all his money and possessions to show him why it’s wrong.

    Also, Puddin-head is calling for an immediate increase in gasoline production. Dumb as a box of hammers, he is. He thinks gasoline comes out of a tap, like water. Again, such an id-eee-ot.

    To round out the stup-idd-i-ty, he wants to give more money to terrorists for oil. Such a genius he is.

    President Joe Biden told US oil refiners that unprecedented profit margins are unacceptable and called for “immediate action” to improve capacity as the soaring price of gasoline feeds record inflation and fears of a recession.

    “We’re going to make sure everyone knows Exxon’s profits,” Biden said Friday, calling on the firm to “start investing and start paying your taxes.”

    The president is also seeking to mend ties with Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman during a trip next month as he asks OPEC producers to boost output.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-15/biden-tells-us-oil-refiners-record-profits-are-not-acceptable

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-14/biden-ally-floats-21-surtax-on-oil-profits-to-blunt-inflation

    • By telling Exxon to pay their taxes, Biden fails in two ways. If they are illegally not paying their taxes, he should prosecute them. If they are paying taxes legally and he believes they should pay more he should be leading to change the law. If any corporation is paying taxes legally then under our system of laws he needs to STFU.

      • Exxon et al should put out ads saying:
        Exxon paid X billion in taxes in 2021
        Exxon fuel sales provided Y billion in funds for the US Treasury
        Exxon drilling leases paid Z billion to the US Treasury
        In total Exxon raised X+Y+Z billion dollars for the US in 2021.
        We believe that is more than our fair share.

        But oil companies stay silent. I don’t understand their reluctance to call out the lies from SloJo.

      • I own some Exxon Mobil. They’re woke. I think they want more regulation. They can use this excuse to drive out their competition. To use government to go after anything that threatens them. We know fossil fuels are safe for another 20 years.

  114. A bunch of id-eee-ots on Slashdot are praising Australia’s solar energy, blissfully ignorant of the fact that Australia is facing black-outs. Seems they would do a little research before spouting off.

    https://slashdot.org/story/22/06/15/100204/installing-rooftop-solar-can-be-a-breeze-just-look-at-australia

    https://joannenova.com.au/2022/06/blackout-risk-in-five-states-continues-wholesale-energy-market-suspended-australians-told-to-use-less-electricity/

  115. Europe gets even more comeuppance for listening to the Green Energy Extremists and failing to produce local fossil fuels.

    German energy giant Uniper SE said it had received 25% less gas than contracted from Russia after Moscow curbed supplies via its biggest pipeline to Europe.

    The Dusseldorf-based company said so far it’s been able to replace the missing volumes with natural gas from other sources, a Uniper spokesperson said by email on Wednesday.

    Russia stepped up the use of energy as a weapon by further cutting natural gas shipments via the Nord Stream pipeline, a move that prompted Germany to accuse the Kremlin of trying to drive up prices.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-15/russia-cuts-gas-deliveries-to-german-energy-giant-uniper-by-25

  116. Dumber than a box of rocks doesn’t even begin to describe these people. OF COURSE they need more fossil fuel plants!!!

    One of the reasons given for the National Electricity Market suspension on Wednesday was a lack of wind and solar power.

    The journalist asked: ‘Isn’t part of the supply problem the fact that you cannot direct wind into the market?

    ‘The only thing you can do is to keep the coal-fired generators going to their end of life and to fix the ones that you have got now and include them in the capacity market, isn’t that the short-term fix?’

    Minister Bowen said the solution is to rapidly invest in renewable energy and storage – not more unreliable coal power.

    ‘The problem is there is not enough investment in renewable energy. There hasn’t been enough investment in storage,’ he said.

    ‘Yes, you can say the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. The rain doesn’t always fall either but we can store the water and we can store renewable energy if we have the investment.

    ‘That investment has been lacking for the last decade. That is the problem.’

    Mr Bowen said the current crisis has ‘largely’ been caused by unexpected outages at coal-fired power stations which are nearing the end of their lifespans.

    Opposition leader Peter Dutton cautioned Labor against moving into renewables too quickly, risking further power shortages down the track.

    ‘Labor is rushing toward a new system when it’s not at a sensible pace,’ he told 2GB.

    ‘They went into the election promising electricity bills would be cheaper and that is not going to happen.’

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10921777/Energy-minister-Chris-Bowen-loses-journalist-energy-crisis.html

  117. Sorry for the OT, but I just read a tweet from a medical student who thanked an anonymous donor for paying tuition for his entire class. There is an occasional bright light in this gloomy period.

    Now back to the global central banks and the Dow and the energy crises.

  118. Attempting a second try …

    Dumber than a box of rocks doesn’t even begin to describe these people. OF COURSE they need more fossil fuel plants!!!

    One of the reasons given for the National Electricity Market suspension on Wednesday was a lack of wind and solar power.

    The journalist asked: ‘Isn’t part of the supply problem the fact that you cannot direct wind into the market?

    ‘The only thing you can do is to keep the coal-fired generators going to their end of life and to fix the ones that you have got now and include them in the capacity market, isn’t that the short-term fix?’

    Minister Bowen said the solution is to rapidly invest in renewable energy and storage – not more unreliable coal power.

    ‘The problem is there is not enough investment in renewable energy. There hasn’t been enough investment in storage,’ he said.

    ‘Yes, you can say the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. The rain doesn’t always fall either but we can store the water and we can store renewable energy if we have the investment.

    ‘That investment has been lacking for the last decade. That is the problem.’

    Mr Bowen said the current crisis has ‘largely’ been caused by unexpected outages at coal-fired power stations which are nearing the end of their lifespans.

    Opposition leader Peter Dutton cautioned Labor against moving into renewables too quickly, risking further power shortages down the track.

    ‘Labor is rushing toward a new system when it’s not at a sensible pace,’ he told 2GB.

    ‘They went into the election promising electricity bills would be cheaper and that is not going to happen.’

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10921777/Energy-minister-Chris-Bowen-loses-journalist-energy-crisis.html

  119. The only thing you can do is to keep the coal-fired generators going to their end of life and to fix the ones that you have got now and include them in the capacity market, isn’t that the short-term fix?’

    Minister Bowen said the solution is to rapidly invest in renewable energy and storage – not more unreliable coal power.

    ‘The problem is there is not enough investment in renewable energy. There hasn’t been enough investment in storage,’ he said.

    ‘Yes, you can say the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. The rain doesn’t always fall either but we can store the water and we can store renewable energy if we have the investment.

    ‘That investment has been lacking for the last decade. That is the problem.’

    Mr Bowen said the current crisis has ‘largely’ been caused by unexpected outages at coal-fired power stations which are nearing the end of their lifespans.

    Opposition leader Peter Dutton cautioned Labor against moving into renewables too quickly, risking further power shortages down the track.

    ‘Labor is rushing toward a new system when it’s not at a sensible pace,’ he told 2GB.

    ‘They went into the election promising electricity bills would be cheaper and that is not going to happen.’

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10921777/Energy-minister-Chris-Bowen-loses-journalist-energy-crisis.html

  120. Moderation is trapping my comments and I’m not sure why.

  121. It’s not about record cold snaps, it’s more of a long run of below average days. In a sign of how not-warm it is in Australia the sheer number of megawatts being used on the East Coast was the highest ever recorded for May, and WattClarity noted that the first week of June was already in the top four years. Demand on June 7th this year was 32,000 Megawatts — the highest winter day since 2008. It’s not as high as our highest summer records which are just under 36,000 MW. Nonetheless, it wasn’t supposed to happen much was it?

    https://joannenova.com.au/2022/06/in-perfect-hell-for-grid-managers-global-warming-causes-coldest-start-to-winter-in-south-east-australia-since-wwii/

  122. Maybe I can get a snippet to post:

    The journalist asked: ‘Isn’t part of the supply problem the fact that you cannot direct wind into the market?

    ‘The only thing you can do is to keep the coal-fired generators going to their end of life and to fix the ones that you have got now and include them in the capacity market, isn’t that the short-term fix?’

    Minister Bowen said the solution is to rapidly invest in renewable energy and storage – not more unreliable coal power.

  123. Global warming is speeding up ocean currents.
    They’re warmer. It’s more stratified because it’s warmer. Since less by depth is moving, that moves faster. Moves to where? Someplace else. From the equator it moves poleward to some extent on average. If other ocean currents are moving towards the equator, they’re moving faster. Warm to cold. Cold to warm. They hydralogical cycle speeds up. The game is functioning as intended.

  124. A link that was lost in moderation for a few days …

    https://judithcurry.com/2022/05/14/week-in-review-climate-edition-2/#comment-977201

Leave a Reply to CKid Cancel reply