Week in review – climate edition

by Judith Curry

A few things that caught my eye these past weeks

Despite gradual sea level rise, many atoll islands — which are often considered the most at risk of disappearing — are actually growing in land area. [link]

Overall risk of heat-related mortality decreased in the United States 1975-2018, even though extreme heat events increased Sheridan et al. 2021 https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-20-0083.1

Air pollution takes more than two years off global average life expectancy, the Air Quality Life Index found — making breathing more dangerous globally than smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol. [link]

“‘Attribution science’ is a newly created so-called ‘science’ that appears to be just a rubber stamping of the climate crisis narratives as their analyses never fully account for all the contributing factors as good science must, https://perhapsallnatural.blogspot.com/2022_02_07_archive.html

strong control of Atlantic SSTs on NE Mexico rainfall over the last millennium. [link]

Exploring the tropical Pacific manifold  in models and observations [link]

Summarizing Relationships Among Landfalling Atmospheric Rivers, Integrated Water Vapor Transport, and California Watershed Precipitation 1982–2019″ For a summary of this paper visit: https://cw3e.ucsd.edu/cw3e-publication-notice-summarizing-relationships-among-landfalling-atmospheric-rivers-integrated-water-vapor-transport-and-california-watershed-precipitation-1982-2019/

We need to be fully aware of uncertainties in our estimates, before using them for decision making. [link]

Sinking Paradise? Climate change vulnerability and Pacific Island extinction narratives [link]

Understanding Australia’s rainfall [link]

Integrating the evidence for a terrestrial carbon sink caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.16866…

Over the past 50 years, the U.S. has been hit by a decreasing percentage of hurricanes AND major hurricanes (Cat3+). There is variability, but the trend in both is downward. See Vecchi et al (2021) for an expanded and more robust look at this topic: https://nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24268-5

There’s only been “limited retreat” of SE Greenland glaciers since the 1600s-1800s maximum. The same region was “ice free” during the Early Holocene. Iceberg rafting (due to warmer temps, glacier melt) and low sea ice are also less common now. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/09596836221080758…

Great Salt Lake dries up [link]

Effect of ocean salinity on climate. [link]

A study in northern Sweden found that melting permafrost released one tenth as much methane as expected. The findings suggest that emissions from thawing Arctic tundra could be much less than previously feared. 
: https://bit.ly/3wNnnCd

Methane persistence and hydroxyl radical availability [link]

Beyond carbon storage: other ways forests keep us cool [link]

How climate change may have doomed a historic Tibetan kingdom [link]

Physical processes and feedbacks obscuring the future of Antarctic ice sheet [link]

Positive trend in the Antarctic Sea Ice Cover and associated changes in sea surface temperature. [link]

Research on incorporating social, political, and technological feedbacks into climate models suggests that climate policy implementation over the coming decades could accelerate to bring the Paris targets within reach. [link]

Climate inertia [link]

A new study on regenerative grazing complicates climate optimism https://buff.ly/38gT0ZS

New papers by Koutsoyiannis on Causality https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2021.0835

A new analysis of misinformation judgments (N = 3794) finds that our partisan cognition model is more accurate than both motivated and classic reasoning models. The cool thing about this paper is that is uses formal models for each theoretical framework [link]…

Jet stream: is climate change causing more ‘blocking’ weather events? [link]

Climatic change and ancient civilizations [link]

Policy and technology

Shellenberger: Why Biden’s attacks on energy are absolutely insane [link]

Economic freedom is better at reducing poverty than sending aid or technocrats to help design government programs. [link]

Inspired by palm trees, scientists develop hurricane-resilient wind turbines [link]

Related: Low solar and wind output blamed for suspension of Australian electricity market as prices soar https://mol.im/a/10918309

Solution or bandaid? Carbon capture projects are moving ahead [link]

Breatkthrough: Climate change need not be a harbinger of global famine [link]

Synthetic abundance [link]

Green upheaval: the new geopolitics of energy [link]

“Increasing Crop Diversity Mitigates Weather Variations and Improves Yield Stability” [link]

Modular reactors produce high levels of nuclear waste [link]

Why America can’t build quickly anymore [link]

Scientists are working on ‘solar technology’ that can generate power at night:[link]

Once Reviled, Nuclear Power Is Now Looking Good to Environmentalists https://observer.com/2022/04/once-reviled-nuclear-power-is-now-looking-good-to-environmentalists/…

Wind and solar will have to wait [link]

Time for an energy independence moonshot [link]

How much does climate change actually affect GDP? [link]

Russia’s war is the end of climate policy as we know it [link]

The climate club.  How to fix a failing global effort [link]

Policymakers need to connect climate, biodiversity and society when making decisions for transformative change to stop biodiversity loss and stabilise the climate. https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/biosci/biac031/6593160?redirectedFrom=fulltext…

Lasers reveal ancient urban sprawl hidden in the Amazon [link]

Africa’s diesel generation boom [link]

Mining plastic: harvesting stored energy in a re-use revolution [link]

Why China is set to significantly overachieve its 2030 climate goals [link]

Don’t write off coal. We need it to ensure power grid reliability [link]

The fairy tale of Paris [link]

Entrenching poverty by limiting fossil fuel investment won’t solve climate change [link]

Bullshit in the sustainability and transitions literature: A provocation [link]

Countries must also quickly reduce emissions of “short-lived climate pollutants” to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. [link]

ew article in which we explore what one can learn from history to understand the today’s challenges in implementation of ‘sponge city’ solutions, on the interface of #floodriskmanagement and #spatialplanning to tackle climate change impacts. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103702

This paper is probably the best overview of grid stability that I’ve seen. technical but not too technical https://osti.gov/servlets/purl/1660134

About science and scientists

Suicides indicate wave of doomerism over escalating climate crisis [link]

Eco-anxiety is overwhelming kids [link]

Has the ‘great resignation’ hit academia? [link]

Science is political – and that’s a bad thing [link]

With all due respect to the experts [link]

We aren’t raising adults. We are raising very excellent sheep [link]

“Those who lament the death of truth should instead acknowledge the end of a monopoly system.” The New Atlantis: Reformation in the Church of Science https://thenewatlantis.com/publications/reformation-in-the-church-of-science…

263 responses to “Week in review – climate edition

  1. Air pollution takes more than two years off global average life expectancy, the Air Quality Life Index found — making breathing more dangerous globally than smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol.

    I foresee some really idiotic public policies flowing from this, though Kentucky might see a big economic upside if more people flock to whisky and tobacco.

    • Joe the non climate scientist

      Bell McDermott study of 95 US cities and premature mortality due to increases in ground level ozone is considered the gold standard in attribution studies. The EPA uses very similar methodology in their studies.

      The bell McDermott is also a prime example of serious flaws throughout the study.

      The point is that study many similar flaws

    • Joe - the non climate scientist

      “Air pollution takes more than two years off global average life expectancy, the Air Quality Life Index found — making breathing more dangerous globally than smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol.”

      George – sorry if I wasnt clear in my response. I was citing the Bell McDermott study as an example of a study considered the gold standard inspite of the numerous flaws that should be obvious to everyone. The air pollution study you cited has many of the same structural flaws and likewise should not be taken as an accurate reflection of good science.

      Similar issues with many of the covid studies

  2. UK-Weather Lass

    “It would be a global emergency if Martians came to Earth and sprayed a substance that caused the average person on the planet to lose more than 2 years of life expectancy,” Michael Greenstone, director of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute, said …

    Are these people serious? Hasn’t obesity at all ages just been highlighted as harmful in both reactions to COVID-19 infections and adverse vaccination responses (including fatality) in the recent research of a very large cohort conducted in Israel across all age groups? How many years does obesity take off life expectancy for other infections, diseases and medical conditions? How many of our children’s lives will be foreshortened or lost via reduced exposure of our immune systems because of school closures and lockdowns?

    The list of mistakes we are making just gets larger and larger and larger. What on earth are we paying these people for?

    • Sadly obesity, while harmful in some ways, mostly emotional, is often quoted as reducing mortality in a population, a completely counter intuitive impression.

      The fact of the matter is that obesity is a leading indicator of increased life expectancy overall.

      The problem arises,
      Using a blinkered approach statistically of comparing in one population only, instead of comparing the effects on and in populations in general.

      Hence we see that populations with more obese people, as a percentage of that population, generally have worse health outcomes.
      The populations with more obese people however live much longer than those with less obese people
      Hence the life expectancy of an obese person is greatly increased by living in a population with more obese people and a correspondingly greater life expectancy.

      Obesity is a marker of increased life expectancy in every population for both the obese and normal people.

  3. ‘Despite gradual sea level rise, many atoll islands — which are often considered the most at risk of disappearing — are actually growing in land area. [link]’

    Unfortunately, the outcome of reality vs fake MSM is more a matter of political science than natural science.

    • Instead of 2-3/10ths of a degree warming per decade we got zero tenths warming in the first decade of the new millennia.

    • Surface temps have a drought artifact – satellite temps do not. About half the warming in the past 40 years was natural (Kravtsov et al 2018).

      https://chaac.meteo.plus/en/climate/global-temperature-rss.png

    • Look at the Leap Second Data.

      http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/grp50/leapsecond.cfm

      This is from that link:

      Leap Seconds
      Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) is based on International Atomic Time (TAI), but it is adjusted by leap seconds to account for the difference between the definition of the second and the rotation of Earth. This correction keeps UTC in conjunction with the apparent position of the Sun and the stars, and it is the standard used for all general timekeeping applications.

      The current difference between UTC and TAI is 34 seconds. (TAI is ahead of UTC by this amount)

      The first leap second was inserted into the UTC time scale on June 30, 1972. Leap seconds are used to keep the difference between UT1 and UTC to within ±0.9 s. The table below lists all leap seconds that have already occurred, or are scheduled to occur.
      All leap seconds listed in the table are positive leap seconds, which means an extra second is inserted into the UTC time scale. The sequence of events is:
      23h 59m 59s – 23h 59m 60s – 00h 00m 00s
      NOTE: No leap second will be added at the end of December, 2011.

      Leap Seconds Inserted into the UTC Time Scale
      Date MJD Date MJD Date MJD Date MJD
      2008-12-31 54831 1998-12-31 51178 1989-12-31 47891 1979-12-31 44238
      2005-12-31 53735 1997-06-30 50629 1987-12-31 47160 1978-12-31 43873
      1995-12-31 50082 1985-06-30 46246 1977-12-31 43508
      1994-06-30 49533 1983-06-30 45515 1976-12-31 43143
      1993-06-30 49168 1982-06-30 45150 1975-12-31 42777
      1992-06-30 48803 1981-06-30 44785 1974-12-31 42412
      1990-12-31 48256 1973-12-31 42047
      1972-12-31 41682
      1972-06-30 41498

      Leap Seconds are now being added less frequently. This does show that the earth is rotating faster. This means the inertia of earth has decreased due the massive snows that we have had during the past decade and more which moved water from the low latitude oceans to ice on high latitudes. This means that the ice volume at the poles and northern latitudes has increased and that means that albedo has increased and it means the oceans are dropping and not rising. The warming cycle of the past three hundred years is over, and we are in a several hundred year warm period while the Arctic is thawed and evaporation and snowfall with IR out is rebuilding the sequestered ice that will advance and cause the next cooling phase. The glaciers are still retreating because it is still warm, but they are being replenished at their source at a faster rate. Greenland and the Antarctic Continent are being replenished on top at a faster rate than they are losing from the sides. The leap seconds changes do show that.

      This is proof that sea level, overall, is lower than it was in 1972 when the Atomic Clock was put into service measuring time most accurately.

      I made this update on June 19, 2022 There have been three more leap seconds added since I wrote the information above in 2011, and none since December 2016, that is five and a half more years with no added leap second and none expected. Overall sea level is steady for now, the sequestered ice that is thawing and entering the oceans is balanced by the oceans that are evaporating and the snowfall that is being sequestered near the spin axis of the earth.

      Date MJD Date MJD Date MJD Date MJD
      2016-12-31 57753 1998-12-31 51178 1989-12-31 47891 1979-12-31 44238
      2015-06-30 57203 1997-06-30 50629 1987-12-31 47160 1978-12-31 43873
      2012-06-30 56108 1995-12-31 50082 1985-06-30 46246 1977-12-31 43508
      2008-12-31 54831 1994-06-30 49533 1983-06-30 45515 1976-12-31 43143
      2005-12-31 53735 1993-06-30 49168 1982-06-30 45150 1975-12-31 42777
      1992-06-30 48803 1981-06-30 44785 1974-12-31 42412
      1990-12-31 48256 1973-12-31 42047
      1972-12-31 41682
      1972-06-30 41498

      • This update based on current data.

        The current difference between UTC and TAI is 37 seconds. (TAI is ahead of UTC by this amount)

      • Great minds of woke academia in its religious zeal to save the planet from America and capitalism prefer to continue addressing non-problems and are deceiving the public about an impending climate doomsday if America outproduces its anti-democratic, anti-western competitors.

      • George Turner

        To me, the Earth’s spin rate is the gold standard for sea level measurements because it’s truly global and can’t be fudged. If it showed even the slightest surge in sea levels, press releases from hundreds of astronomer would be splashed all over science magazines showing that their data proved even worse global warming is occurring. Yet that has never happened.

  4. Finally, a sound way to assess the storage needed to make solar and wind reliable.

    Breakthrough in U.S. grid storage estimating
    By David Wojick

    https://www.cfact.org/2022/06/16/breakthrough-in-u-s-grid-storage-estimating/

    The beginning: “Regular readers know I have been writing about the astronomical cost of energy storage required to make solar and wind (SAW) power reliable. I have published some simple engineering analyses showing that short term intermittency, a few cloudy or low wind days, requires a huge amount of storage.

    Now we have a wonderful analysis of the long term storage requirements for making solar and wind reliable. As expected the numbers are enormous. They are also precise.

    The study is “The Cost of Net Zero Electrification of the U.S.A.” by engineer Ken Gregory. See https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2021/12/21/the-cost-of-net-zero-electrification-of-the-u-s-a/amp/.

    As the title says, Gregory’s study focuses on net zero electrification, which is not my focus here. His very first step is to analyze what storage would be required to simply meet today’s electric power needs using SAW instead of fossil fuels. This simple analysis is the big breakthru.”

    Lots more explanation in the article. His baseline figure for US storage is around 250,000,000 MWh. Truly astronomical!

  5. Regarding: “This paper is probably the best overview of grid stability that I’ve seen. technical but not too technical https://osti.gov/servlets/purl/1660134

    It does look good but it only deals with instability due to increasing grid penetration of the DC to AC inverters used with renewables, as these replace the high inertia (spinning multi-ton magnet) thermal AC generators.

    There are lots of other forms of instability, some also sensitive to renewables.

    • PE made a point of rotating inertia. We are at 60 hertz. Not just whatever. The grid needs stability. SAW skims the cream off. Dumping its junk electricity onto the grid while counting on fossil fuels to maintain frequency. Not me. I am the cheapest. When conversing with SAW advocates, I call fossil fuels Big Boy power generation. The children should have their own table.

      • Rob Starkey

        Long term-nuclear is the answer

      • David Wojick

        What is the question that nuclear is the answer to, Rob? Since CO2 is harmless, nuclear has to compete with coal. Not easy.

  6. The New Atlantis: Reformation in the Church of Science
    https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/reformation-in-the-church-of-science

    Science publishing is in serious need of reform. It is concentrated in a few hands that held an oligopoly, peer review has not resulted in an improvement of published science quality, science publishers take a big share of the money dedicated to science without providing much service, and they delay publication so much as to be a restrain to science advancement.

    I’ve given up on academic publishing. My book on climate should come out late summer or early spring.

    The academic publishing industry has a large financial turnover. Its worldwide sales amount to more than USD 19 billion, which positions it between the music industry and the film industry (4). The market is largely dominated by five large publishing houses: Elsevier, Black & Wiley, Taylor & Francis, Springer Nature and SAGE, which control more than 50 % of the market between them. Elsevier is the largest, with approximately 16 % of the total market and more than 3000 academic journals. As an industry, these publishing houses are unique in terms of their profitability, generating large net profits. Elsevier has a profit margin approaching 40 %, which is higher than that of companies such as Microsoft, Google and Coca Cola, and the curve is pointing upwards (4–6).
    https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2020/08/kronikk/money-behind-academic-publishing

  7. This is renewables time to shine. Have you seen the price of natural gas? Renewables didn’t show up. They can’t. No they were not born and bread to do this. To take over in our time of need. Nope. The adults will have to take care of things. The children convinced our government that they could do this. They were wrong.

  8. This may be of interest for less technical readers, those new to climate malfeasance.

    https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/free-ebook-the-climate

  9. A new analysis of misinformation judgments …

    I knew before even reading the paper that the selection of “fake news” would be the problematic part. Sure enough, the fake news was garnered from “fact checking” sites. These sites are know to be wrong in many cases, and specifically tend to classify beliefs of conservatives as fake.

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

  11. All the energy a person needs in a lifetime in contained in a volume of nuclear waste the size of a Rubik’s cube. Small, fast neutron reactors give access to all that energy as opposed to the 0.5% burn in conventional reactors.

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

    ‘Fast reactors can convert U-238 into fissile material at rates faster than it is consumed making it
    economically feasible to utilize ores with very low uranium concentrations and potentially even uranium
    found in the oceans.1–3 A suitable technology has already been proven on a small scale.4 Used fuel from thermal reactors and the depleted uranium from the enrichment process can be utilized in fast reactors, and that energy alone would be sufficient to supply
    the nation’s needs for several hundred years. Fast reactors in conjunction with fuel recycling can diminish the cost and duration of storing and managing reactor waste with an offsetting increase in the fuel cycle cost due to reprocessing and fuel refabrication. Virtually all long-lived heavy elements are eliminated during fast reactor operation, leaving a small amount of fission product waste that requires assured isolation from the
    environment for less than 500 years.4 Although fast reactors do not eliminate the need for international
    proliferation safeguards, they make the task easier by segregating and consuming the plutonium as it is created. The use of onsite reprocessing makes illicit diversion from within the process highly impractical. The combination of fast reactors and reprocessing is
    a promising option for reasons of safety, resource utilization, and proliferation resistance. 5’ https://ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps74.pdf

    A sensible transition away from fossil fuels is required within decades – as much because they are running out as climate change.

    • Fast reactors as a group have a large number of technical, operational, safety, and economic problems. Those previously attempted were multi-billion dollar abject commercial failures.
      In general, the fast reactor promise of making more fuel than used is largely a mirage due to practical reality considerations. Simply put, the fuel reprocessing required makes a radioactive mess. Makes more sense to concentrate on efficiently using the fuel in the first place and then put the used fuel safely underground.
      Nuclear reactors can be useful, but they are expensive to build, operate, and maintain while requiring constant attention to detail. That premium cost should not be overlooked when considering using nuclear energy. However, the extra cost may acceptable for strategic reasons – like not having to kowtow to foreign aggressors.

      • ‘SAN DIEGO, (Oct. 13, 2020) – General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (GA-EMS) announced today that it is collaborating with Framatome Inc. to develop a new helium-cooled 50-Megawatt electric (MWe) Fast Modular Reactor (FMR) concept that will produce safe, carbon-free electricity and can be factory built and assembled on-site, which will reduce costs and enable incremental capacity additions. The GA-EMS led team will be able to demonstrate the FMR design as early as 2030 and anticipates it being ready for commercial use by the mid-2030s.’ https://www.ga.com/general-atomics-and-framatome-collaborate-to-develop-a-fast-modular-reactor

        This is just a nuclear reactor – with some 400 years of operational experience with the fast neutron technology. They intend using the dry AIROX process to remove lightweight fission products – 3% of the waste volume – from heavier actinides and then add fertile material and recycle the fuel through further burn cycles.

      • Curious George

        “ANEEL fuel technology uses a combination of thorium and high assay low-enriched uranium for a much-improved fuel performance in CANDU reactors.”
        https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newsfirst-aneel-thorium-based-advanced-nuclear-fuel-pellets-manufactured-9134786

      • I wish the GA folks good luck, but history is not on their side. Also, They and all advanced US reactors share a common nemesis – the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The proposed advanced reactor regulations are massive and fiendishly complex. That translates directly into stunningly huge costs to design, manufacture, build, and operate the facilities.

        The NUSCALE folks spent around 1/2 billion dollars just to partially license their passively safe small modular reactor. The final cost to deploy their technology is more or less unknown.

  12. Intensive rotational grazing takes up 2.5 times more land than cattle feedlots? Feedlots use valuable cropping land to grow fodder. Grazing uses marginal lands to produce valuable resources. Rotational grazing uses marginal land more productively than continuous grazing.

    https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.544984/full

  13. Geoff Sherrington

    Re the Stanford article claiming modular reactors will produce more radwaste.
    One has to be doubtful about articles that repeat green slogans as if they were established science. Just a few lines in, the article mentions wastes “that must be isolated from the environment for hundreds of thousands of years”.
    The claim about hundreds of thousands of years was based on a multiple of a factor of 10 X the half life of Plutonium 239 (24,100 years). This calculation excludes other radioactive products and it excludes quantitative analysis like that based on the quantity of an isotope.
    A more realistic, simple analysis compares the radioactivity of used fuel rods with the radioactivity of the natural uranium ores used to make the fuel. Depending on main assumptions like dilution into glass before storage, the usual outcome gives 100 to 1000 years before decay reduces the fuel radioactivity to levels like the natural uranium ores had.
    Hundreds of thousands of years is ignorant propaganda.
    Note that we now have decades of mining data of uranium ores with insignificant harm to miners. No propaganda is required when numbers speak truth. Geoff S.

    • It is more scientific to go to the paper than parrot press releases. Sherrington’s ‘numbers’ are always suspect – his sources are never cited. I think that 100-1000 years is not even close – but I would need to see the science.

      https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2111833119

      According to this very unalarming page – actinides decay to background levels after some 10,000 to 100,000 years.

      • The GA design is based on the use of a high-temperature helium gas turbine driving a generator. From a turbo- machinery and reactor standpoint, the high temperatures create a number of challenges. Materials must be able to handle the high temperatures and the piping and components must be able to handle the expansions/contractions associated with very large temperature changes. Then there is the matter of being able to service the turbo-machinery. These are all very difficult challenges that remain not fully solved.

        From a broader perspective, the temperatures the helium turbines face are significantly less than those faced by combustion turbines. In theory, should be able to come up with a workable helium turbine design, but success remains elusive.

        On paper, the GA design is around 50% efficient when using a helium turbine. In practice, may not be achievable.

      • Carbon dioxide cooled nuclear reactors have been a mainstay of UK nuclear energy since the 1980’s. The use a direct drive Brayton cycle turbine. Framatome – GA’s partner in this – own and run 7 of them in the UK currently. This is far from theoretical. The virtue of helium is that it is nonreactive.

      • Geoff Sherrington

        RIE,
        Why quote references when, with experience, you can work it out from first principles. Nothing at all rubbery, not like the “hundreds of thousands of years” for which no references are needed because it is not scientifically relevant. Geoff S

      • Sherrington insight is that ionizing radiation from nuclear waste decays to levels of the original ore in 00 to 1000. I’d judge that to be complete nonsense.

      • The British gas reactors employ steam turbines and steam generators. That mean they employ a Rankine cycle, not a Brayton cycle. However, the hot CO2 allows the gas reactor to produce much hotter steam than a conventional water reactor. As I recall, the British gas reactors are somewhere around 40% efficient, versus around 34% efficient for a water reactor.
        Interesting factoid: 1st commercial nuclear power plant was the British CO2 gas reactor.

      • Yes – you are right – those UK gas cooled reactors do generate steam. I assume as high pressure supercritical steam. At temperatures in the order of those found in supercritical or ultracritical coal fired plants. The direct drive Brayton cycle is of course more efficient.

        I’d say that history is on the side of GA and Framatome. Both hugely experienced players with origins at the beginning of the nuclear industry -spending vast amounts of their own money. It’s a game changer if they can pull it off.

      • Geoff Sherrington

        RIE,
        The top of the uranium 235 decay chain is U-235 itself, with a half life of about 7 x 10^8 years. One of its reactor products is plutonium 239 with a half life of about 24,000 years. Ore deposits contain U-235 and decay in that sequence is slow. Used fuel rods contain Pu-239, whose decay rate is far faster. Over time, the Pu-235 starts off the “more” radioactive in terms of alarmist understanding but after a time between 100 and 1000 years, the bulk radioactivity of the original ores equals and then proceeds to pass that of the Pu-239. It is not possible to narrow that range of 100-1000 years because it depends on a number of variables like the type of reactor management and the grade of the original ores. And the comparison has to include more than just Pu-239.
        It is a pretty simple concept. Why do you argue about it?
        Geoff S

      • Uranium-238 is the most common radioactive isotope in nature. Total radioactivity of high level nuclear waste decays to that level of ionizing radiation in some million years. Can you not read a graph?

        https://blogs.egu.eu/network/geosphere/files/2014/12/Untitled.png

      • Geoff Sherrington

        RIE askes ‘Can you not read a graph?’, then gives a link to a paper with content about which I do not disagree.
        A paper relevant to the discussion here needs to include the concept of dose, keeping in mind the Paracelsus wisdom that the poison is in the dose. You cannot solve the problem of harm merely by well-known decay constants of radioisotopes. Geoff S

      • The criteria specified was decay to background. Background being activity of U-238. With ionizing radiation the problem is small effects over large populations. I have extensively reviewed the literature. There are doubts that any study o date has the statistical power to draw conclusions either way.

      • LNT has lost:

        Reprinted by permission from Int. J. Low Radiation © Inderscience Publishers

        Int. J. Low Radiation, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2005
        https://radiationeffects.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Sponsler-Cameron-2005_NSWS_IJLR-permission.pdf

        https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2020/06/Calabrese-Paunio-2020.pdf

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021003007

        Highlights
        Wildlife remained in areas evacuated by humans after the Fukushima nuclear accident.

        Wild boar and snakes were studied in Japan’s most radioactively contaminated areas.

        Biomarkers of DNA damage (dicentrics) and stress (telomeres, cortisol) were studied.

        Comprehensive dosimetry was conducted for chronically exposed free-ranging animals.

        No harmful effects were detected from the low dose, low dose rate exposures.

        Abstract

        The health effects associated with chronic low-dose, low-dose rate (LD-LDR) exposures to environmental radiation are uncertain. All dose-effect studies conducted outside controlled laboratory conditions are challenged by inherent complexities of ecological systems and difficulties quantifying dose to free-ranging organisms in natural environments. Consequently, the effects of chronic LD-LDR radiation exposures on wildlife health remain poorly understood and much debated. Here, samples from wild boar (Sus scrofa leucomystax) and rat snakes (Elaphe spp.) were collected between 2016 and 2018 across a gradient of radiation exposures in Fukushima, Japan. In vivo biomarkers of DNA damage and stress were evaluated as a function of multiple measurements of radiation dose. Specifically, we assessed frequencies of dicentric chromosomes (Telomere-Centromere Fluorescence in situ Hybridization: TC-FISH), telomere length (Telo-FISH, qPCR), and cortisol hormone levels (Enzyme Immunoassay: EIA) in wild boar, and telomere length (qPCR) in snakes. These biological parameters were then correlated to robust calculations of radiation dose rate at the time of capture and plausible upper bound lifetime dose, both of which incorporated internal and external dose. No significant relationships were observed between dicentric chromosome frequencies or telomere length and dose rate at capture or lifetime dose (p value range: 0.20–0.97). Radiation exposure significantly associated only with cortisol, where lower concentrations were associated with higher dose rates (r2 = 0.58; p < 0.0001), a relationship that was likely due to other (unmeasured) factors. Our results suggest that wild boar and snakes chronically exposed to LD-LDR radiation sufficient to prohibit human occupancy were not experiencing significant adverse health effects as assessed by biomarkers of DNA damage and stress.

      • There remains the question of sample size and statistical power.

        e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3967863/

    • Molten salt thorium reactors can “burn” waste from conventional fission reactors, especially the actinides.

      Nuclear fission produces radioactive fission products which can have half-lives from days to greater than 200,000 years. According to some toxicity studies,[16] the thorium cycle can fully recycle actinide wastes and only emit fission product wastes, and after a few hundred years, the waste from a thorium reactor can be less toxic than the uranium ore that would have been used to produce low enriched uranium fuel for a light water reactor of the same power.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle

      • Seaborg wants to mass produce molten salt reactors on barges in South Korean shipyards.

        https://www.seaborg.com/

      • Dietrich Hoecht

        The Seaborg MSR scheme of small modular production in Korean shipyards is following the much further advanced project by Thorcon and the Indonesian government. This Thorium fuel concept is building on the 1960’s reactor at Oak Ridge, which ran continuously for 20,000 hours.

    • Small reactor like the NUSCALE design design do, in fact, produce more waste than their larger cousins, on a normalized basis. They also need more uranium fuel. Very roughly, we are talking about 25% more fuel and waste.

      The reason is straightforward, small natural circulation water reactors are less efficient because they operate a lower temperatures (more accurately, steam temperatures). The natural circulation heat removal is not as good as forced (i.e. pumped flow) that also means the fuel burn-up is less, which also means more uranium is required on a normalized basis.

      • Yes most SMR are less efficient at heat conversion to electricity than light water reactors – LWR are some 34% efficient. The GA high temperature concept increases conversion efficiency to some 50%.

      • Curious George

        RIE, I don’t always share your optimism. To quote you @11:40pm, “This is just a nuclear reactor – with some 400 years of operational experience with the fast neutron technology.” And zero seconds of an actual deployment. Somehow I don’t believe that they have been running a fast neutron technology since 1622.

      • I believe the Russian alpha class submarines used fast reactors. The boats were quite fast but the coolant had a tendency to turn into a solid if cooled off too much. Also, the sodium coolant performed poorly when exposed to air (burns) and water (steam explosions). The Russians ultimately decided fast reactors were a bad idea for submarines that need really reliable power plants,

        The Russians also operate several lead-bismuth fast reactors. Not sure about the reliability and safety of those machines as the Russians tend to operate closer to the edge than Western designs – e.g Chernobyl.

      • LOL – 400 years is of course the sum of operational experience over a large number of different reactors.

        I am a technological realist. There is a need for new energy sources – lots of potential alternatives. There are technical problems to be solved always. But they ae not solved by armchair quarterbacks with niggardly complaints.

        There are decades left to effect a transition to other energy sources. How long do you think that will take?

      • dougbadgero

        The Nuscale SMR operates at similar temperatures and efficiencies to existing large LWRs. The claim is that the smaller core size results in higher neutron leakage and lower fuel efficiency. That is, less fuel can be burned. Without knowing the actual design parameters, this is plausibly correct.

      • dougbadgero

        The Nuscale design operates at similar temperatures to existing LWRs. The claimed impact on fuel utilization is from increased neutron leakage due the smaller core size. Without access to actual design data this is plausible and consistent with nuclear design principles.

      • Mike Keller at https://judithcurry.com/2022/06/19/week-in-review-climate-edition-3/#comment-977342

        I think Rickover had Bettis and KAPL examine metal machines before going with water.

        Chernobyl went past the edge and up the mountain of rapid growth. One of the neutron coefficients was positive; temperature, I vaguely recall.

      • dougbadgero

        In a western LWR water is both the moderator and the coolant. Chernobyl was graphite moderated and water cooled. Consequently, it had a positive void coefficient. As water flashed to steam reactor power went up rapidly resulting in a steam explosion.

  14. Pingback: Ehdotus ilmastomallien siivoamiseksi? | Roskasaitti

  15. When there are assertions about the impact of global warming it is best to first see if there is evidence of natural variability causing those impacts. This article indicates that atoll islands were being affected by the ocean nearly 200 years ago.

    https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-02-26052109_shadow.jpg

    In addition to the papers referenced in the atoll link above, there are these studies finding no extensive degradation of the islands, and in fact growth.

    https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcc.557

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921818110001013

  16. Thanks for this always interesting post. Re ancient climate change, i remain fascinated by Erik the Red’s promotion of Greenland for colonization which was followed a few generations later by starvation as the return of cooler weather replaced pastures with ice and snow.

  17. Europe listened to the Green Energy Extremists and built out wind and solar whilst demeaning petroleum and natural gas. They cleverly thought they would just outsource their carbon whilst claiming a virtuously high share of wind and solar generated electricity. Their foolhardiness has now come to the fore. Now they are forced to burn coal! We in the US need to take this object lesson and vote out any politician of any stripe who wants to strangle fossil fuels in the US.

    Germany is stepping up efforts to respond to a cut in Russian gas supplies by reviving coal plants and providing financing to secure gas for the winter, an effort that would cost about 15 billion euros ($15.8 billion) at current prices.

    The package of measures was announced days after Moscow slashed deliveries on its main gas link to Europe, hitting supplies to Germany and creating a knock-on effect for France, Austria and the Czech Republic. Austria responded to reduced flows by reviving a dormant coal power station.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-19/germany-taking-steps-on-serious-gas-situation-habeck-says

    • Who couldn’t see this coming? Idealism doesn’t heat homes.

    • Maybe the Germans should not have shut down all their nuclear and coal plants. Hard to have much sympathy for the pinheads. California is mindlessly following the same path, as are a number of democratically controlled states, like New York. In both cases, electricity is becoming a luxury item. Let’s go Brandon!

      Merkel, one of the architects of German green energy, must have been on Putin’s payroll.

  18. I am SO relieved that we are transitioning to “green” energy. Soon these trucks will ride again with solar PVs mounted to the truck!

    On top of the soaring fuel prices hitting the bottom line of some owner-operators and small fleets, diesel might account for the latest shortage impacting the U.S. economy. Outlets of major truck stop chains across the country have in spots started limiting the number of gallons a hauler can purchase in a single transaction.

    Tim Klaus, an owner-op since 1984, recently sent Overdrive the picture of the sign above, from a Petro stop in Kingman, Arizona. The sign trumpeted a “national diesel shortage” while limiting fuel buyers to a 60-gallon maximum.

    https://www.overdriveonline.com/business/article/15281174/diesel-fuel-shortage-hits-truck-stops-across-america

    • Curious George

      We need also wind-powered trucks, and solar-powered ships. There will be a renaissance for really big sailing ships. How to get them through the Panama canal – who knows?

    • One thing that engineering teaches us is that there is always a way.

      • I think, more accurately, human ingenuity and innovation usually find a way in spite of bureaucrats and politicians do their best to gum up the works.

      • The costs of developing new nuclear reactors are enormous. Governments all over the world are pumping many billions into nuclear. It’s the least they can do.

      • Geoff Sherrington

        Engineering teaches that there is always a way.
        And as Peter Lang has often pointed out on these pages, competent engineering can often find a cheaper, better way. The nuclear reactor cost increase over the decades has been not merely obscene, it should by now be the subject of analysis and the placing of blame on those whose hostile actions contributed. Cost recover should not be excluded.
        Some decades ago a much-discussed defamation case concerned the payment of an actor to put the tail of a rat on a meat pie being served in a famous Melbourne pie shop, with the aim of reduction of business. IIRC, it worked, the guy was found guilty an a legal precedent either established or confirmed. Geoff S

      • melitamegalithic

        The above is somehow of interest in that it is opposite to my experience. A couple of comments below, fwiw.

        RIE “One thing that engineering teaches us is that there is always a way.” Engineering teaches there is a limit to everything. It is why it needs to be studied in depth. whether its thermodynamics or metallurgy or a myriad other issues, there are limits. Even more pitfalls.

        Mike Keller “— in spite of bureaucrats and politicians do their best to gum up the works.” Worse, they are the ones who do not realise there are technical limits.

        Geoff Sherrington “Engineering teaches that there is always a way.” Necessity is the mother of invention. Engineering is just one tool. Perhaps an honest one. Lies, a frequent dishonest one, with sales people, and especially in QA documents.

      • UK-Weather Lass

        “Necessity is the mother of invention. Engineering is just one tool. Perhaps an honest one. Lies, a frequent dishonest one, with sales people, and especially in QA documents.” – melitamegalithic

        Within this comment there is much profundity of the human condition. If someone had engineered a motion machine very close to being 100% efficient or a battery very close to being everlasting would they have ever seen the light of day since, say, the darker days of the 20th C?

        Doesn’t current UN political interference promote even more distrust in free sciences, free debate, free decision making, and free allocation of funding? Is mistrust now at levels even more intrusive than, say, seventy years ago when each nation was fighting its own corner with the necessity to recover from a world war fought to keep us all free to do the necessary stuff?

      • melitamegalithic

        UK-Weather Lass asks a question with (in my view) interesting implications: ” If someone had engineered a motion machine very close to being 100% efficient,–?” The second law of thermodynamics has been a millstone around the neck of engineering, limiting the efficiency one can squeeze out of a parcel of energy. Many routes have been explored to extend by possible single digits the efficiency, most times below 50%, and others way below.

        As someone already mentioned above, it’s how close to the edge one sails with the limits in design and implementation. A ten degree rise in temperature can reduce a ten year life of plant to ten minutes. In my experience a +/- 10degree variation was a rule with operators. Even a control system was not better, a designer fault, since the there was no appreciation of such limit. The main problem is always the human element. But don’t expect to be told any of that by a vendor, even if they knew it. A decent safety margin is needed; traded against profit.

        I have no faith there are miracles to be made. I read of one from prehistory; of the guy who went to Aesculapius with an empty eye socket and came out with a brand knew functioning eye. We know its all a lie. No different from some of the things I hear occasionally in engineering.

  19. Back in 2018 I emailed Kerry Emanual about the increase in hurricanes in the atlantic from 1980s-2000, here is the exchange:

    Very interesting.  Thank you.

    Aaron

    From: Kerry Emanuel [redacted]
    Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 12:06 PM
    [redacted]
    Subject: Re: Hurricanes

    Dear Mr. [redacted]:  Yes, the slight correlation remains, but we now
    believe that much of the changes that took place (both positive and
    negative) during the period of reasonable good records after 1950 was owing
    to sulfur emissions rather than greenhouse gases. Spefically, increasing
    sulfate aerosols from around 1950 to about 1980, by reducing sunlight,
    cooled the tropical Atlantic and caused a decrease in hurricane activity;
    thereafter, decreasing sulfate aerosols as a result of clean air
    legislation, increased sunlight, ocean temperature, and hurricanes. Of
    course, there is a good deal of natural variability on top of that.

    Yours,  Kerry Emanuel

    Kerry A. Emanuel                Professor of Atmospheric Science
     [redacted]
    Web:  Caution-https://emanuel.mit.edu

    On 8/13/2018 10:27 PM, Aaron [redacted] wrote:
    Dr.  Emanuel,

    I remember from your Econtalk interview that there was a slight
    correlation of increasing Atlantic  hurricane strength with global average
    temperatures up to the mid or late 2000s.  I was wondering if that
    relationship has held up.

    Thanks for any help you can provide,

    Aaron

  20. Matthew R Marler

    ‘Attribution science’

    Better to start with Causality, second edition, by Judea Pearl.

  21. via michael shellenberger

    People think solar panels & lithium battery-powered electric cars became cheap because of tech innovation, but it’s now clear that it was overwhelmingly the result of China’s use of coerced labor, coal, and government subsidies.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/20/business/economy/forced-labor-china-supply-chain.html

  22. Pingback: CCS-uutisia | Roskasaitti

  23. Bill Fabrizio

    Thank you, Judith, for another great selection.

    McGuirk’s piece, Mining Plastic: Harvesting Stored Energy in a Re-use Revolution is another good attempt to focus on the ever growing waste problem. Tomorrow is trash day and, once again, my recycling bin has more bulk than my household waste bin. I guess we should be thanking the Green Revolution for using less land so we can have more available for landfills. But then again, we can always dump it in the ocean. Lot’s of room there.

  24. The newly elected Socialists/Communists in Australia are wasting no time applying the time tested remedies. Specifically, make it less profitable for companies to supply critical products, in this case electricity.

    The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) has issued an update on the recent electricity market challenges, saying it will fulfil a government request to investigate the energy market.

    ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said federal treasurer Jim Chalmers, alongside state and territory energy ministers, have written to the agency on how to address the energy crisis.

    “Under direction from the federal government, we will use our full information-gathering powers to provide greater transparency around the factors influencing electricity and gas prices, including profits and margins from a wide range of energy companies,” Cass-Gottlieb said.

    “In line with the treasurer’s request, we will also assess and bring to the government’s attention any need for regulatory change to ensure electricity and gas markets function properly for the benefit of all Australian consumers.”

    https://www.themandarin.com.au/192785-accc-to-probe-australia-energy-companies/

    • Curious George

      The Competition etc Commission is only interested in transparency, not in electricity generation. Australia will end with a full transparency and no power.

      • Not full transparency – never.

        As it stands, the coal-fired generators are slated for staged closures (“orderly” is the bureaucratic description). There is a published timetable with the biggest steps scheduled for 2030-32.

        As a consequence, maintenance of these >30yr old plants is minimal, as commercial loans are not available. Nor is insurance.

        Yet statutory regulations introduced fairly recently mandate that these plants must be kept working for the “duration”, with no definition as to when that stops.

        This is what in Australia is known as sovereign risk, wherein government simply pirates sunk capital. Very common here … I advise my clients to invest elsewhere because of this.

  25. Comment trapped in moderation.

  26. As Geoff Sherrington says – nuclear fission produces a plethora of radionuclides. The seas are littered with novel radionuclides – novel because short lived and so not found in nature in such abundance – from weapons testing and hundreds of nuclear power plant accidents. Cesium-137 in seawater confirms presence of much longer lived actinides from nuclear fission technology.

    The argument that we can and do eat radioactivity for breakfast – that bananas are radioactive – is superfluous at best. It doesn’t have to be that way. Not the bananas but the novel radionuclides. With modern materials and design mass production of helium cooled 50MWe plug and play FNR reactors in megafactories is entirely feasible. Close the fuel cycle and recover the energy equivalent 5 times global oil reserves from stockpiles of nuclear waste on US soil. There will be a prototype by the end of the decade. Then we will see if it works.

    • Actinides are introduced into the atmosphere via cosmic rays, also.

    • Geoff Sherrington

      Apart from my denial that I did not write or say anything like “nuclear fission produces a plethora or radionuclides”, I wonder why you have such a strong interest in such a trivial subject.
      Nowhere in the world are hospitals inhabited by patients with radiation harm to their health. It is not a past problem (apart from a few cigarette smokers in early underground uranium mines in USA). Induced fears of radon poisoning in buildings is now passe as it also failed to show in hospital admissions.
      As for anthropogenic radioactive materials into the oceans, we find it hard to put concentrations and doses and cases with human health effects because the amounts are trivially small.
      Years ago when I was involved with setting safe radiation standards in Australia for uranium mining (BTW, also involving Th in the natural mineral monazite, which we mined with subsidiary Rutile and Zircon Mines) there was concern among the hard scientists that the linear extrapolation to zero dose was becoming popular; and also that demonstrated effects like hormesis were being hushed up by the health industry reps. We conceded some ground on safe dose levels for the reason of uncertainty, but we were left with limits that were wrong. Because limits were set too low, as more people became involved the limits got lower until finally they were unrepresentative and disproportionate. In this type of surrounding, it is easy to scare the public by propaganda involving minute doses, by talk of dangers of X-rays and so on.
      But I repeat. Globally, hospitals are devoid of patients with any significant radiation effect on health.
      Robert, you are wasting your time attempting to drum up fear when the problem is trivial and absent.
      Thank you, Dan Hughes, for | June 22, 2022 at 8:02 am |
      LNT has lost: Geoff S

      • Here’s another one:

        Elroei David, Marina Wolfson, and Vadim E. Fraifeld (2021), Background radiation impacts human longevity and cancer mortality: reconsidering the linear no-threshold paradigm, Biogerontology Vol. 22, pp. 189–195
        https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10522-020-09909-4

        Whatever the case, it seems that Kondo was indeed correct when stated that ‘‘The collected data strongly suggest that low-level radiation is not harmful, and is, in fact, frequently ‘apparently beneficial’ for human health.’’ (Kondo 1993).

        Kondo S (1993) Health effects of low-level radiation. Kinki University Press, Osaka Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI, USA

      • It is relevant – however – to decay rates.

        All of the planet wards are full of people with cancers from a plethora of causes. Are we at thresholds yet? How would we know? What do added sources of ionizing radiation mean?

        But your concerns are superfluous as I said. There is not need for such large releases as we have seen from accidents and weapons tests. .

        And it seems you were utterly ineffective in influencing Australian radiation standards. For good reason the exposure criteria globally on the LNT model and the exposure standard is as low as reasonably practical.

  27. A real shame that the Koutsoyiannis papers are paywalled.

    And shame on the Royal Society for charging ludicrously high prices for regular citizens to access single papers. The very opposite of open science – from an organization that depends on the public purse.

  28. Here is a “tool” that purports to tell us, day to day, what impact global warming has on our weather. I’m interested to hear Dr. C.’s take on this or anyone who has the expertise to analyze the methods used.

    https://www.climatecentral.org/realtime-fingerprints

  29. I compared bandwise ERA5 reanlysis for P-E with those of Held and Soden, Byrne and O’Gorman, and of CMIP6.

    https://climateobs.substack.com/p/more-wet-get-wetter

    Byrne and O’Gorman describe The Response of Precipitation Minus Evapotranspiration to Climate Warming: Why the “Wet-Get-Wetter, Dry-Get-Drier” Scaling Does Not Hold over Land.

    It appears as if ERA5, for 1979 through 2021, supports this idea.

  30. Dutch farmers protest having to cut use of nitrogen oxide and ammonia. Citizens of the Netherlands are being told “Let them eat cake”, as long as it doesn’t involve flour.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/22/thousands-of-dutch-farmers-protest-against-emissions-targets

    • And it’s not just nitrogen, either. Potassium and phosphorous shortages also.

      A real tragedy appears to be unfolding.

      It’s not clear we humans would have been able to avoid this,
      but certainly the wasteful diversion of worrying about “climate change” didn’t help.

  31. News from Australia tells us transitioning difficulties may not be transitory at all.

    “ Electric cars could increase demand on the power grid during the evening peak by at least 30 per cent unless households adopt smart charging, a new trial shows.”…..

    “ At the moment our electricity grid is not coping at all,” …..

    “If we were to add another 30 per cent of peak load to the grid during those periods of high prices and constraints on the network, this would require significant investment to increase capacity.”…..

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-23/power-prices-grid-electric-car-increase-demand-origin-arena/101156686

    • Curious George

      Electric cars should be charged during the day, with an abundant solar electricity. Used only at night.

  32. Several years ago, German and Green Energy Extremist “architects” “designed” Germany’s energy future. (If they design a house for you, your best course of action is to run away!) Now Germany reaps the benefits of this design for the future.

    Germany warned that Russia’s moves to slash Europe’s natural gas supplies risked sparking a collapse in energy markets, drawing a parallel to the role of Lehman Brothers in triggering the financial crisis.

    With energy suppliers piling up losses by being forced to cover volumes at high prices, there’s a danger of a spillover effect for local utilities and their customers, including consumers and businesses, Economy Minister Robert Habeck said Thursday after raising the country’s gas risk level to the second-highest “alarm” phase.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-23/germany-to-trigger-phase-two-of-three-stage-emergency-gas-plan

  33. A comment today trapped in moderation.

  34. No king, no parliament, no president, no legislature can repeal the law of unintended consequence. Russia’s war with Ukraine, and the cut-off of oil and natural gas to Western Europe, have brought coal back to power plant furnaces across Europe. This week, the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria all moved to reignite coal power. Gone are environmental regulations and restrictions. For example, the Netherlands had previously limited coal to only one-third of its full capacity.

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/gregbyrnes/2022/06/22/greens-retreat-as-coal-power-makes-european-comeback-n1607131

    • No one is omniscient, but this was in Peter Zeihan’s book:
      https://www.amazon.com/End-World-Just-Beginning-Globalization-ebook/dp/B09C65JNPF

      I’ve been on about demographics with respect to CO2 emissions for some time, but this is kind of a flip. Falling populations mean fewer emitters, but falling economic production means resource competition and coal seems to be the most widespread fallback resource.

      It will be interesting to see how global CO2 emissions respond in the years ahead. China and India were already high coal, and the US will continue to transition to domestic natural gas and that’s about half of global emissions that probably won’t change much. Coal fallback countries will have increased CO2 per energy, but also economic malaise and falling working age populations.

      • Globally, coal usage was increasing even before the Ukraine war. China and India love it. Australia and the US burn tons of it every day. Green energy, if you call it green, is a Unicorn Fairy Tale.

  35. ‘Attribution science’

    The biggest heatwaves would not occur without their discrete solar forcing. They are easy to hindcast and predict centuries ahead, as are extreme cold events. The hottest events in 1540, 1757, 1936, and 2006 were during one type of Jovian T-square, and the more frequent 1934, 1949, 1976, 2003 and 2018 heat events were during another type of Jovian T-square.

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQemMt_PNwwBKNOS7GSP7gbWDmcDBJ80UJzkqDIQ75_Sctjn89VoM5MIYHQWHkpn88cMQXkKjXznM-u/pub

  36. “Historical weather records suggest that blocking hasn’t changed significantly over the past few decades. However, this is somewhat dependent on the method used to define blocking events.”

    One possible exception is over Greenland, Woollings notes, which has seen an increase in summer blocks since the 1990s. However, it is not yet clear whether this is down to natural variability or not”

    It’s down to negative North Atlantic Oscillation conditions, the circulation models predict increasingly positive NAO conditions with rising CO2 forcing, so it should be clear as day,

    • Only if you accept the models. Since “rising CO2 forcing” has had no effect on temperature it is unlikely to affect NAO.

      • David Wojick

        Also, as Happer and van W have pointed out, CO2 is so saturated that the increased forcing is basically negligible on a decade low scale.

      • I accept the sign of the majority of the models even if the scale of the effects is exaggerated. Rising CO2 forcing should not drive an increase in negative NAO conditions.
        The same circulation models have also failed for UK summers, which have become on average wetter rather than drier since 1995.

  37. “Russia Could Cut Off Gas Supply to Europe, IEA Warns”..

    “ The International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned that Russia could cut gas supplies to Europe entirely in order to boost its leverage against the West following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Russia has severely restricted gas flows to Europe in recent days. The Kremlin blames a delay in servicing equipment caused by European Union sanctions, while Europe accuses the Kremlin of playing geopolitics.

    “Considering this recent behavior, I wouldn’t rule out Russia continuing to find different issues here and there and continuing to find excuses to further reduce gas deliveries to Europe and maybe even cut it off completely,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said in a statement to the Reuters news agency. “This is the reason Europe needs contingency plans.”

    https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-could-cut-off-gas-supply-to-europe-iea-warns-/6630008.html

  38. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/06/24/npr-climate-change-science-environment-global-warming-study-report
    Factual climate change reporting can influence Americans positively, but not for long

    • From the conclusion of NPR article [with skeptical questions added]: “The amount of Arctic Sea ice has decreased 13 percent every decade since 1971 [What was Antarctica’s change? Was is near zero? Why is global CO2 affecting only one pole? What is the Arctic’s historical oscillation pattern?], the sea level has risen 4 inches since 1993 [That’s 4 inches in 3 decades. How many inches per 3 decades is the historical baseline rate? Is it 3 to 4 by chance?.] and ocean temperatures are at the highest they’ve been in 20 years — [Why did they go down and come back up if the planet is constantly warming?] which can cause coral bleaching, [Yet there has been conflicting evidence since this claim started being made.] negative changes to the ocean’s biochemistry [Is the acidification from additional dissolved CO2 dangerous or geologically unprecedented? Is there study needed?] and more intense hurricanes, according to NASA [Is there any debate about this claim? Why is this claim invisible in the historical statistics?] .”

      The government funded scientist makes a slew of misleading claims but blames the public for being unsure about believing government scientists.

  39. This is interesting in many aspects. I guess the application to climate science is the government-grant-as-a-job aspect.

    Why is This a Problem?

    The problem with this government-funded research is that it rarely results in new products for people to buy. Products are often engineered to a high level of efficiency, complexity, and cost, that makes them impossible to produce and sell commercially.

    Take the company Sunpower of Athens, Ohio for example.

    They’ve developed lots of interesting products over the years, but try to find any of them on the market today. You really can’t.
    The Customer is the Next Government Research Grant

    Sunpower has spent so many years creating interesting products that never reached the market, that my only assumption can be that they really didn’t intend to bring products to the market.

    Instead, they created these products in order to get the next round of government research money.

    There isn’t anything necessarily wrong with that, just remember that government grants rarely result in new products.

    If you are interested in why research projects, often don’t result in new products, read my page on why Stirling engines are not more popular.
    Investment Scams

    Lots of Stirling engine companies have come and gone over the years. Both the technology and the markets are difficult, so I suppose some of that should be expected.

    But there is a special type of company that has come and gone that seems to never have had any intention of doing anything other than raising money from investors and paying high salaries to the directors.

    They always have beautiful websites and beautiful offices. Often they even have a prototype that they bought from a developer.

    But there seems to have been no real attempt to bring Stirling engines to market with some of these scammers/companies.
    How They Make it Look Real

    The prototype will usually be purchased from an engineer who spent a huge amount of time developing it.

    He sells it to the scammers on the story that they are going to bring his product to market with their superior marketing expertise.

    They take pictures of it, build a beautiful website, publish glossy brochures, raise a lot of money from investors, and fade in the history.
    The Scam and Vanish Cycle Seems to Repeat Itself

    This has happened so many times that I just get depressed every time I see a new one.

    So, scammers, please find a different technology center your scams around.

    There obviously is a need for new investor money to do the right type of Stirling engine development, but companies with a history of having good marketing staff and no engineering staff are probably not the ones to bring new Stirling engine products to market.

    https://www.stirlingengine.com/modern-uses/

  40. Turns out offshore wind towers are not safe against hurricanes, while we are gearing up to build huge numbers along the US East Coast which is hurricane alley. Bad plan that.

    https://www.cfact.org/2022/06/24/hurricane-risk-is-real-for-offshore-wind/

    Biden and the East Coast Governors just formed an offshore wind support group. Guess they have not read the research.
    https://apnews.com/article/climate-biden-and-environment-government-politics-13e5d01c3f43c899e39f337d478c1179

    • Dietrich Hoecht

      The big wind power facility off Martha’s Vineyard will be built by a Danish company. So much for those much touted Green Energy jobs for the US. Then, it is located smack within the path of the primary seabird migration route. Chop chop.

  41. Air pollution takes more than two years off global average life expectancy, the Air Quality Life Index found — making breathing more dangerous globally than smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol. [link]

    “..Air Quality Life Index found that particulate air pollution — a mixture of contaminants such as smoke, fumes, dust and pollen — has remained high..”

    Several issues: the WHO changed the particulate count they ascribe to being dangerous from 10 micrograms/m3 to 5 mics/m3. This was done without science and presumably to be able to label the US and Europe as having air pollution lowering life expectancy. Otherwise, at 10 mics/m3 their declaration wouldn’t include the US and Europe.

    The global nature of air particulates is really regional, like Southeast Asia including India, Central and Western Africa, and the desert Middle East. Wherever people cook and heat with animal dung, even the high reaches of Tibet have high, particularly indoor air pollution although smoke does accumulate in the valleys especially during air inversions.

    The designation of CO2 as air pollution befuddles these discussions and leads to agenda driven efforts to abandon fossil fuel use altogether when the need is for smokestack and tailpipe particulate abatement along with fossil fuel cooking and heating vented outside of homes. CO2 arguments literally muddy the waters.

    As for the desert sands causing air pollution? well, good luck with that. Eliminating goat herding or cattle raising in the Sahal, would allow areas that once were fertile and lush to regenerate but that would take much time and disruption of a cultural economy.

  42. Dimitris Koutsoyiannis is a scholar is the classic sense. Urbane, erudite and a fount of surprising philosophical observations and mathematical derivations. Demetris has announced his retirement. I wish him many full and productive years to come.

    I have been known to cheer in a maths lecture at reduction to row echelon – but this statistical rule for causation in open ended systems made me to laugh at loud. The first paper linked below is the original Climate and CO2 hen or egg quandary the second theory and the third on applications. The latter two can be found in full on social networking site ResearchGate.

    https://www.mdpi.com/2413-4155/2/4/83

    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2021.0835
    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2021.0836

    Modern era – since the industrial revolution – anthropogenic emissions add to CO2 in the atmosphere causing warming and feedbacks. Recent warming – the last 40 years – is coincident with exponential emissions growth and warm Pacific Ocean states in shifting spatiotemporal patterns of ocean and atmospheric flows and feedbacks. Two causes of recent warming.

    https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_May_2022_v6.jpg

    I expect a decline in intensity and frequency of warm Pacific states from its modern era millennial high point. And for greenhouse gas emissions to continue to increase while there is no practical alternative to fossil fuels at the scale required.

  43. It was 13 months ago that Judith posted the “Collapse of the fake consensus on Covid-19 origins.” While some denizens here agreed that the lab origin hypothesis deserved at least equal standing as the natural zoonotic spill over theory, many here were highly skeptical. It was just too hard to believe that all the world’s virologists who voiced a public opinion had been wrong in their dismissal of lab origin possibility. But that’s exactly what happened.

    Dr Curry wrote: “What is concerning about this episode is not so much that a consensus has been overturned, but that a fake consensus was so easily enforced for year.”

    Matthew R Marler observed that although the fake consensus had collapsed a new consensus was still yet to form. https://judithcurry.com/2021/05/23/collapse-of-the-fake-consensus-on-covid-19-origins/#comment-951325

    This week two of the most prominent world health establishment authorities cemented a new consensus here.

    World Health Organization (WHO) Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus reportedly admitted to a senior European politician that the virus that causes COVID-19 most likely came out of a Wuhan lab. The Daily Mail reports that Tedros made the admission citing a catastrophic lab accident.

    I chaired a Commission for the Lancet for two years on COVID. I’m pretty convinced it came out of U.S. lab biotechnology, not out of nature…

    -Jeffrey Sachs

    • Jeffrey Sachs, leader of the Lancet Commission on COVID-19, is correct to point the finger at the US.

      Not only did the US share its biotechnology and tax dollars with the CCP, it successfully led the subversion of an entire scientific field, corralling its scientists into a fake consensus within a matter of days of learning of its culpability in the Wuhan lab leak.

      The US is no less influential in the other fields of science, including climate science. Until there are major political reforms in the US no country should hesitate to question a US led scientific consensus, whether it be in climate or medicine. It pains me to say this residing in the US, a born and bred American.

      • Curious George

        Business as usual for the world elites. Time to sharpen pitchforks.

      • “Time to sharpen pitchforks.”

        Pitchforks never seem to ever solve things for long. What we need is to add etch the following assumptions into modern culture:

        1) Power is naturally strived for and attained.

        2) Power by definition leads and tends to control public narratives.

        3) Power is gained competitively, and thus often by some level of deceit.

        4) Authoritative public narratives should always be met with the highest scrutiny and by an adversarial press and adversarial scientific community.

        5) Government is necessary for organizing nations’ economies and security but that power of organization should never be allowed to control or influence, industry, the free press, science and education.

        6) Such influences should be seen as corruption per se, regardless of any claims of benevolence or convenience or emergency measure.

  44. The EU and especially Germany listened to the Green Energy Extremists and began to shut down coal and nuclear power plants and shut down local fossil fuel development. Russia promised to be a faithful supplier of energy, and Europe swallowed that hook, line, and sinker. Now reality comes to bear …

    The European manufacturing sector is crumbling under the weight of sustained high electricity and natural gas prices. With little prospect of relief, another wave of curtailments and closures looms.

    And that’s before any rationing of natural gas, potentially later this year, in Germany in the event Russia reduces supply even further. In that scenario, many companies will have no choice but to shut down.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-06-27/factory-closures-from-aluminum-to-chicken-farming-are-going-to-become-common?srnd=premium

    • You might want to consider, this is war a about energy. All the unicorn green energy just sits there like Joe Biden trying to talk. We elected a corrupt, senile source of energy.

  45. North Atlantic
    4670 year cycle noted in Bond et al
    seeking historical publications and links:
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/suggestions-46/comment-page-1/#comment-178125
    not interested (at all) in discussion
    just want to carefully inspect links and past publications
    no harassment please

  46. Enso tends to shoot up rapidly in July.
    Will it do it for a third year in a row?
    Chaos if it does so unlikely

  47. Planets cannot be considered as black bodies. It is a huge scientific mistake!

    https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • Earth “absorbs” 28% less solar energy than Moon (Albedo Earth a =0,306; Albedo Moon a =0,11).
      And yet
      The measured Earth’s average surface temperature Tearth=288K.
      The measured Moon’s average surface temperature. Tmoon=220K.
      ……………..
      Mars orbits sun at 53 AU
      The solar flux at Mars’ orbit is 2,32 times weaker than on Moon.
      And yet
      The measured Mars’ average surface temperature Tmars=210K
      It can be shown, for the same Albedo Mars and Moon would have the same average surface temperature.
      ……………..
      These obvious discrepancies can be explained only by the Planet Rotational Warming Phenomenon.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • “Planets cannot be considered as black bodies”

      Several problems.
      One other people will not accept your orders.
      Two nearly everything can be considered when put into thought.

      Considered has the underlying implication of meaning as imagined.
      It is a what if operation.

      Compared to may be another way of trying to put it but again suffers from the same meaning conundrum as Considered.
      You are dealing with imaginary concepts and thus cannot be negated.

      It is interesting for you to say the formula is incomplete and then put up your own version which in effect says
      While planets cannot be considered as black bodies [x,y,z] they can be considered as modified CV black bodies by adding special ingredients to the discredited black body formula to give an overall surface radiating temperature, just like a black body.

      • Thank you, angech, for your respond.

        “It is interesting for you to say the formula is incomplete and then put up your own version which in effect says
        While planets cannot be considered as black bodies [x,y,z] they can be considered as modified CV black bodies by adding special ingredients to the discredited black body formula to give an overall surface radiating temperature, just like a black body.”

        The planet blackbody formula gives planet uniform surface temperature Te (the planet effective temperature).

        The New equation gives the planet actual mean surface temperature (the planet average surface temperature).

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • We ended up to the following remarkable results:

        Comparison of results the planet’s Te calculated by the Incomplete Equation (the Planet Effective Temperature Te):

        Te = [ (1-a) S / 4 σ ]¹∕ ⁴

        with the planet’s mean surface temperature Tmean calculated by the Planet’s Without-Atmosphere Mean Surface Temperature New Equation:

        Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (1)

        and the planet’s Tsat.mean measured by satellites:

        To be honest with you, at the beginning, I got by surprise myself with these results. You see, I was searching for a mathematical approach…

        We have collected the results now:
        Te.incompl Tmean Tsat.mean
        Mercury 439,6 K 325,83 K 340 Κ
        Earth 255 K 287,74 K 288 K
        Moon 270,4 Κ 223,35 Κ 220 Κ
        Mars 209,91 K 213,21 K 210 K

        the calculated with Planet’s Without-Atmosphere Mean Surface Temperature Equation and the measured by satellites are almost the same, very much alike.

        It is a situation that happens once in a lifetime in science.

        The Planet Effective Temperature Equation
        Te = [ (1-a) S / 4 σ ]¹∕ ⁴
        is incomplete because it is based only on two parameters:

        1. On the average solar flux S W/m² on the top of a planet’s atmosphere and
        2. The planet’s average Albedo a.

        The planet’s without-atmosphere mean surface temperature equation has to include all the planet surface major properties and all the characteristic parameters.

        3. The planet’s axial spin N rotations/day.
        4. The thermal property of the surface (the average specific heat cp).
        5. The planet surface solar irradiation accepting factor Φ ( the spherical shape and the surface roughness coefficient).

        Altogether these parameters are combined in the Planet’s Without-Atmosphere Mean Surface Temperature New Equation:
        Tmean = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (1)

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • The same above Table here more conveniently written :

        Planet…..Te.incompl….Tmean….Tsat.mean
        Mercury…..439,6 K…..325,83 K…..340 K
        Earth……….255 K……….287,74 K…..288 K
        Moon……….270,4 K…….223,35 Κ…..220 Κ
        Mars……….209,91 K…..213,21 K…..210 K

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • angech:
        ” they can be considered as modified CV black bodies ”

        angech, when integrating the EM energy outgoing from the entire planetary surface the forth root of this integrated outgoing energy is inevitably corresponding to the planet’s actual average surface temperature (the mean surface temperature).

        angech:
        ” by adding special ingredients to the discredited black body formula to give an overall surface radiating temperature, just like a black body. ”
        I use the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law in the right way.
        The planet black body formula averages solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.
        The New equation doesn’t average solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.
        For the New equation the outgoing EM is a result of the incident on the planet surface solar energy INTERACTION process with the matter.

        Black body by definition transforms its calorimetric HEAT into its absolute temperature T forth power EM emission intensity.
        On the other hand, planet doesn’t emit EM energy supplied by a calorimetric source.
        The planet’s surface temperature is INDUCED by the incident on the planet solar EM flux.
        Only a small portion of the incident solar EM energy is transformed into HEAT.
        The vast majority of the incident solar energy is IR emitted at the same very moment of incidence and interaction with matter. This EM energy induces the planet surface temperature without being accumulated in the inner layers.

        It is entirely different physics when compared with the “quiet” blackbody calorimetric HEAT black body emission phenomenon.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • angech:
      ” they can be considered as modified CV black bodies ”

      angech, when integrating the EM energy outgoing from the entire planetary surface the forth root of this integrated outgoing energy is inevitably corresponding to the planet’s actual average surface temperature (the mean surface temperature).

      angech:
      ” by adding special ingredients to the discredited black body formula to give an overall surface radiating temperature, just like a black body. ”

      I use the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law in the right way.
      The planet black body formula averages solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.
      The New equation doesn’t average solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.
      For the New equation the outgoing EM is a result of the incident on the planet surface solar energy INTERACTION process with the matter.

      Black body by definition transforms its calorimetric HEAT into its absolute temperature T forth power EM emission intensity.
      On the other hand, planet doesn’t emit EM energy supplied by a calorimetric source.
      The planet’s surface temperature is INDUCED by the incident on the planet solar EM flux.
      Only a small portion of the incident solar EM energy is transformed into HEAT.
      The vast majority of the incident solar energy is IR emitted at the same very moment of incidence and interaction with matter. This EM energy induces the planet surface temperature without being accumulated in the inner layers.

      It is entirely different physics when compared with the “quiet” blackbody calorimetric HEAT black body emission phenomenon.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Consequently, the planet mean surface temperature Tmean is based on Stefan-Boltzmann emission law,

        and on precise by planet surface total emitted energy

        Φ (1-a) S

        and on the way the energy emission is distributed over the entire planetary surface – the Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • “I use the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law in the right way”

        “when integrating the EM energy outgoing from the entire planetary surface the forth root of this integrated outgoing energy is inevitably corresponding to the planet’s actual average surface temperature (the mean surface temperature)”
        “The planet black body formula averages solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.”
        “The planet blackbody formula gives planet uniform surface temperature Te (the planet effective temperature).”

        But then you say

        “The New equation doesn’t average solar flux over the entire planet area in form of HEAT.”
        “The New equation gives the planet actual mean surface temperature (the planet average surface temperature).”

        In this setting there is no difference between uniform and mean surface temperature.
        So you contradict yourself.

        Part of the misunderstanding arises due to your misuse of the term planet surface temperature.

        The black body temperature of the earth is not actually at the earth surface.
        The earth surface temperature you use is not a black body surface temperature but the actual averaged surface temperature.
        The two simply equate by calculating an actual earth surface temperature from the black body surface temperature.
        Any difference between the true figure and the actual surface temperature is explained by the GHG and atmosphere effect and a minor rotation component.
        Basically what you are doing is adding the known GHG effect into your SB black body equation

      • Thank you, angech, for your respond!

        Earth is a planet, like any other planet we know in solar system. Neither Stefan, no Boltzmann said anything about planets being ideal blackbodies.

        What I did in my research was to compare the satellite measured planetary temperatures for every known planet and moon in solar system, Earth included.

        When I wrote the New equation, yes I was expecting something, but the results were successful beyond any expectations.

        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) (1)

        The New equation is based both, on precise radiative
        “energy in = Φ (1-a) S” estimation and
        on the “Planet Rotational Warming Phenomenon“.

        We are capable now for the THEORETICAL ESTIMATION of the planetary mean surface temperatures.

        And, now, it should be considered proven – there is not any Greenhouse Warming Effect on the Earth’s surface temperature!
        ……………………….

        Also, the Incomplete Equation of the Planet Blackbody Effective Temperature (Link from Wikipedia: the Planet Effective Temperature Te
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_equilibrium_temperature )
        Another Link:
        Lecture 2: Effective temperature of the Earth
        https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4355860/mod_resource/content/1/temperatura%20efetiva%20da%20Terra%20-%20paoc.mit.edu.pdf

        the Incomplete Equation of the Planet Blackbody Effective Temperature
        Te = [ (1-a) S / 4 σ ]¹∕ ⁴ K
        should be abandoned, because it is very much wrong!

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • “I use the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law in the right way”

        “when integrating the EM energy outgoing from the entire planetary surface the forth root of this integrated outgoing energy is inevitably corresponding to the planet’s actual average surface temperature (the mean surface temperature)”

        In short…
        The Rotating Planet Spherical Surface Solar Irradiation Interacting-Emitting Universal Law

        Here it is the ENTIRE planet surface IR emittance Universal Law
        Jemit = 4πr²σΤmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W)

        The solar irradiated rotating sphere (planet) does not emit as a uniform temperature sphere in accordance to the classical Stefan-Boltzmann emission law.
        4πr²σΤmean⁴ (W)

        No, the solar irradiated rotating sphere (planet) emits as a rotating planet in accordance to both, the classical Stefan-Boltzmann emission law and the Newly discovered Planet Surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon.
        4πr²σΤmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W)

        Let’s continue…
        Planet Energy Budget:
        Jnot.reflected = Jemit
        πr²Φ*S*(1-a) = 4πr²σTmean⁴ /(β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ (W)
        Solving for Tmean we obtain the PLANET MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE EQUATION:
        Tmean.planet = [ Φ (1-a) S (β*N*cp)¹∕ ⁴ /4σ ]¹∕ ⁴ (K)

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • angech:
        “Any difference between the true figure and the actual surface temperature is explained by the GHG and atmosphere effect and a minor rotation component.”
        No, it is not explained.

        “Basically what you are doing is adding the known GHG effect into your SB black body equation.”
        No, I am not doing that.
        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • The planet mean surface temperature New equation is written for planets and moons WITHOUT atmosphere. The results of calculations are remarkably exact!
        When applied to Earth (Without Atmosphere) the New equation calculates Earth’s mean surface temperature very much close to the 288K.
        It happens so because Earth’s atmosphere is very thin and, therefore, doesn’t have any essential greenhouse effect on the Earth’s average surface temperature.

        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

      • Earth is warmer than Moon, because Earth rotates faster!
        https://www.cristos-vournas.com

  48. I doesn’t take a genius to see how dumb an idea is “wind power.” And yet we have country after country running over the green energy cliff. Those countries need to tar and feather the Green Energy Extremists who weaseled their way to power. The are the biggest id-eee-ots of our time.

    Little wind in Germany is worsening the energy crisis in Europe’s biggest economy and risking driving prices even higher.

    The nation has the region’s biggest wind power capacity, but calm weather forecast to last into the first week of July means that actual output will remain very low. The day-ahead power contract advanced more than 3% on Wednesday to near the highest level since March.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/dearth-of-wind-power-risks-exacerbating-germany-s-energy-crisis

  49. First comment on 06/29/22 trapped in moderation.

  50. The largest decision on climate for the USA was made by the Supreme Court by limiting the EPA’s authority (as well as other governmental agencies) to regulate actions when the US Congress has not granted them specific authority.

    It is a great day for limiting big government’s authority and a great day for reliable energy products. John Kerry must have apoplexies

    • Let him eat ketchup.

    • “as well as other governmental agencies”

      It’s called the “major questions doctrine” neither the EPA nor any other agency may adopt rules that are “transformational” to the economy — unless Congress has specifically authorized such a transformative rule to address a specific problem.

      The meaning of “transformative to the economy” is undefined.
      FDA, OSHA and basically every department in the executive branch will have to rely on congress to write all regulations down to the specific metrics, economic, social and environmental impacts.

      Harvard law professor Richard Lazarus; “By insisting that Congress must specifically authorize significant rules at a time when the justices know that Congress is effectively dysfunctional, the court threatens to upend the national government’s ability to safeguard the public health and welfare.”

      I am confident there is at least one branch of government that can ignore this ruling, the Treasury Department.

      • If any entity is dysfunctional it’s the Executive branch and its out-of-control agencies.

      • Rob Starkey

        Congree’s function is to pass legislation that represent their citizens.

        The judicial branch’s function not to CREATE legislation.

      • Agencies in the Executive branch can’t create legislation either. That’s what the Supreme Court re-affirmed.

      • Good idea jim2. No more just rubber stamping federal rules. You want to set the limit of PFAS chemicals in the water then state legislators need to step up and write their own rules (X50 states).
        Interstate commerce is going to get complicated.

      • Rob Starkey

        Jack writes–“Interstate commerce is going to get complicated.”

        How or why? Specifics please.

      • Rob,
        Don’t go looking to congress to fix this.
        Do a search on ‘why do some products say not for sale in california’. Without national metrics/standards if a state decides the level of some chemical is dangerous they can ban it. Walmart already has to deal with this.

      • If you read the MSDS for sand, it’s a carcinogen. I’m surprised Cali hasn’t cemented over all the beaches. Cali is extreme. Poor policy based on poor science.

      • https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/water/1207584/congress-is-fully-funding-epa39s-implementation-of-its-pfas-road-map-but-insisting-on-knowing-when-epa-will-get-to-its-pfas-destinations

        “Some of the new health advisory levels are so low that they can’t be reliably detected.”
        It took almost 40 years before we realized this is bad stuff.

        Monsanto just paid 10 billion to settle a Roundup weed killer lawsuit. The active ingredient is EPA legal and still in use.

        This isn’t just about the US. I’m sure it’s worse in China, Africa S. America and India.

      • Rob Starkey

        Jack
        With all due respect, CA passes many laws restricting the distribution of goods within their boarders. The is not a interstate commerce issue, but CA exercising its economic power.

        I think you worry about interstate commerce issues that don’t exist

      • Down with the deep state.
        I’m sure the people dealing with the current string of droughts out west will be watching this. Anybody want to guess who wins this one?

        “In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court will determine the proper test for ascertaining whether wetlands are “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act.”

        https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/sackett-v-epa/

      • Silicon Dioxide is one of those “forever” chemicals.

      • Low levels of PFASs don’t seem to be having any bad effect. The scientific evidence that Roundup causes cancer is suspect. But of course a lack of evidence never stops lawyers from making money.

      • Hey Jack Smith. I got curious about the PFAS “issue.” Those are measured in parts per trillion (ppt), typically.

        To have some sort of benchmark for a chemical that has an effect at low doses, let’s use LSD. A common dose is 100 micrograms (ug).

        So, the EPA limit for water is 70 ppt. If you drink one liter of water per day for 70 years, you would have ingested 50 ug of PFAS. And I suppose the body would eliminate some along the way, so I have to ask, what is the big deal?

        OK, a milk sample was measured by the EPA to have 4,000 ppt PFAS. If you drink one liter per day of milk for 70 years, the total ingested amount would be 460 ug. Again, I assume the body would eliminate some of that. So, I say again, what’s the big deal?

        There are no definitive studies I can find that show a deleterious effect of low levels of PFAS.

      • Sorry, the water example was for 2 liters per day, not one.

      • jim2,
        You do know that PFAS is a chemical family with lots of derivative molecules. PFOS is the most studied. There are around 4,700 unique molecules in the PFAS family, and they all have two things in common: They’re all man-made. They contain linked chains of carbon and fluorine.
        90% of those chemicals have not been tested for long term effects on humans or the biosphere in general. We have to trust that the chemical industry is doing the research to make sure it’s safe.

      • There were billions of molecules in the world before man even set foot on the Earth. Yes, some are man made. And all man made ones and many non-man made ones are tested for toxicity.

      • Being a apex predator comes with some downsides. Toxins (natural and synthetic) tend to concentrate in the lower life forms and move up the food chain naturally.
        Speaking of man-made molecules, have you been watching how fast genetic engineering is advancing?
        https://singularityhub.com/2022/06/20/scientists-used-crispr-to-trace-every-human-gene-to-its-function/

        There are likely many genes that affect intelligence. Maybe someday I can get upgraded!

  51. The EU, having blown off its left foot with its “green” energy push, now aims the regulatory blunderbuss at its right …

    Lithium and battery producers warned the European Union that a proposal to classify the metal as a reproductive toxin could severely hurt Europe’s burgeoning electric-vehicle industry.

    The material is a key part of EV batteries and widely used in pharmaceuticals, industrial lubricants and specialty glasses. A proposal being considered by the European Commission this month would put some lithium chemicals in the highest category of reproductive and developmental toxins, based partly on human studies carried out in the 1980s and 1990s.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-04/battery-makers-warn-eu-that-lithium-proposal-may-hurt-ev-sector

  52. So, after their touted “green energy” push, Europe now decides that natural gas is “green” after all. It certainly appears the dedication to “green” energy is zealous until the electrons begin to run short.

    European Union lawmakers voted to allow natural gas and nuclear energy to be labeled as green investments, removing the last major barrier to potentially billions of euros of funding from environmental investors.

    Parliament fell short of the 353 votes needed to reject the inclusion of gas and nuclear technology in the EU’s so-called Taxonomy, a list of economic activities deemed in line with the bloc’s transition to climate neutrality. Barring an unlikely objection from member states, it now means the regulation will start at the beginning of next year.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-06/eu-lawmakers-remove-last-hurdle-for-gas-nuclear-as-green

    • They don’t mention coal, but that’s likely to see the largest boost, since nat gas is more difficult to transport.

      Global coal would seem likely to increase a lot, given its widespread distribution and shortages of everything else.

      Will the global forces of demographic decline and economic recession/depression outweigh the forces of reversion to a ready energy source as far as CO2 is concerned?

      This may still be a push.

      I’m of the camp that energy benefits humans far more than plausible climate scenarios would cause detriment. But precisely how much future forcing occurs would seem skewed toward higher outcomes with this likely resort to coal.

      • I hate to say it because I didn’t believe it for a long time and don’t want to sound paranoid … but …
        I’ve come to believe the “elites,” the rich and government grifters, want us to live ahole to elbow in s-infested, crowded, crime ridden cities; live in a rented abode; travel by public transport, foot, scooter or bicycle; eat insects and maybe some vegetables if they don’t require fertilizer; otherwise own nothing and generally live miserable and boring lives. All the while they will jet around the world, eat the best beef and other meats, swill champagne, eat caviar, and take marvelous vacations. Much of this, they have said outright.

      • This extract from the above has a different perspective, that in my view need greater consideration; ” that energy benefits humans far more than plausible climate scenarios would cause detriment”.

        Any detrimental climate scenarios would invoke greater requirement of ‘energy’ to counteract, adapt to, or whatever. Ignoring either of those two factors, and the strong link between them, is a major risk. Covid has been an eye-opener in that respect.

        As to Jim2’s elites,,, in the past humanity created its own gods for its own – most of the times- misery. The gods have now taken a different form, but by the looks of it, are no better. No different than the Roman or the Egyptian, who saw themselves as gods-to-be. They are our own creation.

        But that should not divert attention from the earlier point.

  53. The Green Energy Extremists have screwed Europe by persuading them to stop developing local sources of fossil fuels. Will we in the US allow it to happen here also?

    That’s because natural gas is the hottest commodity in the world right now. It’s a key driver of global inflation, posting price jumps that are extreme even by the standards of today’s turbulent markets — some 700% in Europe since the start of last year, pushing the continent to the brink of recession. It’s at the heart of a dawning era of confrontation between the great powers, one so intense that in capitals across the West, plans to fight climate change are getting relegated to the back-burner.

    In short, natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics. And there isn’t enough of it to go around.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/the-global-energy-crisis-just-got-even-worse-here-s-why

  54. Now the US is losing jobs due to high energy prices. We need to vote out any politician who is against developing US fossil fuels!

    Century Aluminum (NASDAQ:CENX) said on Wednesday it will closee its smelter in Hawesville, Kentucky, for 9-12 months as “a direct result of skyrocketing energy costs,” affecting more than 600 workers.

    The Hawesville facility is Century’s (CENX) largest smelter in the U.S. and the largest producer of military-grade aluminum in North America.

    The company said the power cost required to run the plant has “more than tripled the historical average in a very short period.”

    https://seekingalpha.com/news/3850966-century-aluminum-to-temporarily-idle-kentucky-plant-on-high-energy-prices

  55. Jim

    By how much do you believe that the US can raise natural gas production (from 2019 levels) in the next 5 years?

    How long do you believe the US can maintain that level of production?

    • I don’t believe they can raise natural gas production at all if President Puddin-head won’t let them explore and drill and he continues to try to kill the business. Why would you NOT want to raise natural gas production, Rob?

    • Your comment brings to mind Obama commenting on Trump improving the economy – he asked if Trump had a magic wand. Apparently, Trump DID have a magic wand. One segment of the wand was doing everything he could to encourage more oil and gas production. I have no doubt if the government got its nose out of the O&G business, they could produce more.

    • jim2,
      Don’t forget Obama canceled the oil export ban.
      “Congress voted in 2015 to repeal a 40-year ban on exporting U.S. crude oil. Since that year, crude exports have skyrocketed nearly 600% to 3.2 million barrels per day in 2020, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.Dec 9, 2021”

  56. Rob,
    I have owned a gas lease since 2008. Fracked wells start out great but fall off a cliff within 2-3 years. But starting about 2013 they re-fracked the well but it appears they added several more lateral lines from that same drilling pad. The production shot up again but had pretty much flat lined 4 years later. Just last Feb. they came back and re-fracked again but this time they have a onsite compressor setup running pretty much 24/7. From my limited research it might be possible to re-frack some wells over 10 times but I can’t believe they are getting the same boost in production each time.
    Looking forward to my next royalty check as the current nat gas price is at least 3X what I was getting.

  57. jack—unfortunately you didn’t answer my question

    • Rob,
      We should exceed 2019 levels this year and grow a few % a year till the 2030s I would guess. There is no shortage of carbon. If you are trying to figure out what the future looks like just watch China because it won’t be the US calling the shots in 10 years.
      For what it’s worth I do not like living near this well. This is a dense urban area.

  58. Just curious, I wonder how many of these people in Sri Lanka are going to a Drag Queen party today.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXNtSvUUsAEqq9_?format=jpg&name=900×900

  59. Woke ideology “begins by stipulating that the forces of justice and progress are in a war against backwardness and tyranny. . . . [P]ersuasion . . . is replaced with public shaming. Moral complexity is replaced with moral certainty. Facts are replaced with feelings. . . . Ideas are replaced with identity. Forgiveness is replaced with punishment. Debate is replaced with de-platforming. Diversity is replaced with homogeneity of thought. Inclusion, with exclusion.”
    ————————————
    Out of chaos emerges greatness. Bari Weiss wrote the above quote.
    ————————————
    You all still here? I can’t help noticing what’s going on in New Zealand. You can’t beat Covid by hiding from it. I read somewhere, Covid didn’t do a darn thing to us. Our governments did. The trainwreck that is our government did things far from well as it always does. It was just a grift.

    • Nothing surprising about NZ. They dropped most all their covid restrictions 3 months ago which coincides with the sharp uptick in infections.
      https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/new-zealand/
      They were doing great until they decided their tourism industry $$ were more important than their citizens health. “Apr 4, 2022 — international tourism’s overall contribution to New Zealand’s total exports of goods and services fell to 2.1% from 20.0%, a decrease of 17.9%.” Tourism is the country’s biggest export industry, making up about 20% of total exports.

      .
      The pandemic wasn’t a grift, it was a test. We FAILED and are still failing.
      Money, freedom or health? China chose the health of its citizens, and they are winning (so far). Leading indicator: For the sixth year in a row China leads the world in patents. They will own the future because they will define it. I do not want to see America decline but if we don’t fix our education system right now we will never recover.

      Side bet. With the overturning of Roe v Wade I predict the birth rate will decline even faster.
      Factoid: Since the start of the 21st century, the U.S. marriage rate has declined from more than eight marriages per 1,000 down to 5.1 per 1,000 people of the population by 2021.

      • You say we’re failing. You’re playing the wrong game. And people don’t want to play it anymore. The game we played was against the government. The game you played masked 6 year olds last school year in my town. Pushing vaccines for 1-6 year olds with about a 2% acceptance rate so far. It has boosters from here to kingdom come based on few RCTs. You’re game dragged down health science for at least a decade. The game is against the government. Not against us.

      • Curious George

        “tourism industry $$ were more important than their citizens health.”
        Now they can live, not just keep surviving.

      • NZ also made a bet that future variants would be less viral after Omicron. I would have made the same choice at the time provided they kept testing levels high. For what it’s worth there are still billions being spent to develop a true sterilizing vaccine for covid. This isn’t over.

      • jacksmith4tx:
        They also made the choice to not have much immunity obtained from prior exposure. Now their a test subject. Like some remote island. Here comes the white man with his germs. And they’ve been trained to be that.

      • China’s zero-covid policy comes with a very high economic price due to the lock-downs and lost production. And with Omicron, they are shooting themselves in the foot over what amounts to a head cold. It’s actually a very stupid thing to do.

  60. For more than two years we have lived through a pandemic that no one — no one who doesn’t fall for Communist Chinese propaganda anyway — doubts came from China.

    In fact, the consensus now is that COVID came from the Wuhan lab, something I wrote about in these pages at the outset of the outbreak. In recent months, many of those who had earlier parroted Beijing’s line about COVID coming from a bat cave, including China’s man at the World Health Organization, Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus, have come over to my point of view.

    At the same time, there is mounting evidence that the coronavirus was developed as part of China’s bioweapons program.

    But, leaving all this aside, there is no doubt on one key point. The Chinese Communist Party has a long history of covering up epidemics within China, and then carelessly — or deliberately — allowing them to spread around the world.

    https://nypost.com/2022/07/09/covid-wont-be-the-last-epidemic-china-helps-spread/

  61. (imperfectly.perfect)

    I was cured of herpes..his contact ___________hsv1.herpes@Gmail.com………

    It’s a crazy miracle product.👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

    (The best herbal remedyâ€)

    Arthritis
    Diabetes
    Hypertension
    The Opioid Epidemic
    Stroke
    Obesity
    Infertility/Impotency
    Cancer
    Eye Problem
    Fibroid Tumor
    Ulcer
    Prostate Problem
    Asthma
    Weight Management
    Gonorrhea/Staphylococcus
    Low sperm count
    Weak erection
    Quick ejaculation

  62. Europe’s Rush to Buy Africa’s Natural Gas Draws Cries of Hypocrisy

    The EU wants to import as much African gas as it can, but doesn’t want to fund projects that would allow the world’s poorest continent to burn more of the fuel at home.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-07-10/europe-s-africa-gas-imports-risk-climate-goals-leave-millions-without-power

  63. Speaking at a press conference in Canberra on Monday, Albanese said Australia “doesn’t respond to demands” when asked about a statement by China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who has listed four “actions” by which Australia could improve its relationship with Beijing.

    Among those were the need for Australia to view China as a “partner rather than a rival,” seeking common ground “while reserving differences” and not “being controlled by any third party.” Wang made his statement after he met with Australia’s Foreign Minister Penny Wong on Friday, the first such meeting between the two nations’ top diplomats since 2019.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-11/australian-pm-won-t-respond-to-beijing-s-demands-after-meeting

    https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202207/t20220710_10718115.html

  64. Comment of July 11, 2022 at 7:24 am trapped in moderation.

  65. Traffic here is way down, perhaps migrated to other media, perhaps attention drawn to all the other perils of this modern age.

    But among those calamities is the state of Sri Lanka.

    As is usually the case, multiple factors were at work, but a major problem was the banning of nitrogen fertilizer which led to collapse of Sri Lanka’s staple crop, rice, and its export crop, tea.

    So, even with this example, the Netherlands is pursuing the same policy?
    And Canada?

    There is much evidence that climate change, while real, is not a significant problem. To see such measures take place under the guise of “tackling” the non-problem of climate change, while causing a real problem of societal collapse, strikes me as insane.

    • As to Sri Lanka, Buddhist religious ideology plays a big part. They banned cattle slaughter because they think they are sacred. Screws up their karma and reincarnation cycle.

      • Jack

        Buddhism has been around for over 2,000 years. The collapse is now.

        The current problem appears to be the culmination of a number of factors, some exacerbated by the Pandemic and Ukraine war. But this is not the only time brain dead green energy policies have been mentioned as a factor. “…without proper planning…” has been a common refrain recently in a lot of places.

        “ Then last April, Rajapaksa suddenly announced a ban in the import of chemical fertilizers in a push to promote organic farming, but without proper planning. It caught farmers by surprise, decimated rice crops and drove high the price of staple”

        https://apnews.com/article/business-asia-presidential-elections-south-sri-lanka-9447830745192bbf2786d8a98a2ab1c1

        When the Netherlands and Germany go down the drain, I hope Christianity is not the scapegoat.

      • There are so many things going on now suggesting an unraveling of the normal social order, it makes one wonder if we are approaching a perfect storm. It’s an eerie feeling.

        “Cities across Germany are planning to use sports arenas and exhibition halls as ‘warm up spaces’ this winter to help freezing citizens who are unable to afford skyrocketing energy costs.

        Bild newspaper reveals how the the nation’s Cities and Municipalities Association has urged local authorities to set aside public spaces to help vulnerable citizens in the colder months.

        Germany has already seen its gas supply from Russia significantly restricted as a result of its support for sanctions and the war in Ukraine.

        “We are currently preparing for all emergency scenarios for autumn and winter,” Jutta Steinruck, the city mayor of Ludwigshafen told Bild, where the Friedrich-Ebert-Halle arena is about to be converted into a warm up hall.

        “Nobody can say exactly how dramatic the developments will be,” said Gerd Landsberg, the head of the Cities and Municipalities Association.

        Landberg urged local municipalities to create “heat islands” and “warm rooms, where people can stay, even during a very cold winter.”

        https://summit.news/2022/07/11/germany-plans-warm-up-spaces-in-response-to-gas-shortages/

      • ‘For much of human history, most individuals have lacked economic freedom and opportunity, condemning them to poverty and deprivation.

        Today, we live in the most prosperous time in human history. Poverty, sicknesses, and ignorance are receding throughout the world, due in large part to the advance of economic freedom. In 2022, the principles of economic freedom that have fueled this monumental progress are once again measured in the Index of Economic Freedom, an annual guide published by The Heritage Foundation, Washington’s No. 1 think tank.’ https://www.heritage.org/index/about

        There are fundamental principles – freedom, democracy and the rule of law – to be defended. But with the right technology communities can be both prosperous and sustainable.

        And again I can only shake my head at Jacks odd notions.

  66. Claims about future global warming impacts are speculations and not evidence.

    Reducing pollution is far from a green dream. Successes over the past few decades gave been many and varied. Precision agriculture is a pollution solution that increases productivity and reduces costs.

    https://www.rand.org/randeurope/research/projects/impact-of-ammonia-emissions-on-biodiversity.html

    • Greens always claim their design to save the planet will cost less … until it’s implemented, that is. Look at Germany and their Green Extremist Dream. The dream is just that.

      • It is about being smarter.

      • I said PA was a way to reduce nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions from agriculture. Not that fertiliser should be banned. People have spent 10.000 years mining soils.
        Whatever is removed from soils must be replaced or else there is now no future. PA is a subset of regenerative agriculture.

    • Lower adoption of PA in smaller farms can be attributed to several reasons:

      High cost: PA technology generally requires a large upfront investment which is simply unaffordable for small and medium sized farms.

      Extensibility: Many existing PA solutions today focus on broad acre row crops (such as soy and corn), which have relatively consistent growing conditions. Growers of specialty crops in areas with variable micro-climates and soil conditions are unable to have the density of sensors to properly measure the nuances across their land.

      Specialized labor requirements: Numerous existing PA solutions require specific agronomic expertise to maximize their value, requiring an agronomist or consultant on staff, and putting them out of reach of small producers.

      Market fragmentation: smaller farms and specialty crops compose a fragmented market that is difficult for a PA company to enter.

      Connectivity issues: especially in developing nations and rural areas, connectivity problems and data costs to implement cloud computing have produced affordability challenges to PA adoption.

      https://www.harvestreturns.com/blog/precision-agriculture

    • So, Ellison. You claim a farmer would adapt “precision” ag for the ROI. Since you are the expert, show the calculations for ROI on a large corn farm. Show all the installation expenses, operating expenses including maintenance, and what additional profit such a system would produce.

    • Trimble’s 10K doesn’t break out ag from some other areas, so it’s difficult to see how this part of the business is doing. As a geek, lot’s of cool toys. But lot’s of expenses there also.

    • I can see the potential for precision ag. If the AI were executed by drones that are independent of centralized control, it might even work for smaller farmers. I’m thinking a drone that could recognize weeds by itself, or even with the assistance over wifi, it could work independently to kill weeds. Likewise, if the drone could recognize dehydrated plants or diseased plants, it could deal with those. Even if the drone couldn’t deal with all the issues, it could mark the plant on a digital map. I don’t see that GPS is really needed since there are other localized technologies that can map small areas. Anyway, I would have to hear from a real farmer who felt free to be honest.

    • I found some customer comments for Trimble ag. As expected, all is not well in the digital world. Software is complex. Farmers want to grow food, not become IT professionals.

      https://www.facebook.com/TrimbleAgriculture/reviews

      • Exactly. The growth of technology is exponential. But as happens in maths, the next step is a 180 degree phase change. So it is in real life.

        It happened in the past, and will happen again. The important point is to survive the change.

        There are now quite a few examples of such from the recent past. One is the use of specific software by people who then no longer understand the basic fundamental calculations/science/art, all leading to costly failures. Another is change in the metallurgy of electronic components leading to very short life cycle (low mean time before failure).

        Any of that will bankrupt a high-tech farmer.

        Then nature has its own arsenal. New diseases, imported pests, imported weeds that are difficult to eradicate – that any AI will not notice (I have seen all in the last 50years). The pesticides are deadly we now find, and the grubs themselves are toxic. Eating a fruit has become a hassle.

        Not high technology but more deep sensibility.

    • Of course, PA will no doubt be connected to the internet 24/7. This will make it susceptible to hackers. Also, susceptible to software upgrade and fixes gone wrong. The problem with internet connection required is a problem about which people have failed to learn.

    • A hugely credible site advertising a generator that costs $106 to build and costs nothing to run. It creates energy from nothing from ‘the spinning principle’. You do know how to pick them.

      • Could you supply a link to that generator? I’m not finding it. TIA.

        Even if it’s there, they have to get money to run the site, so there’s that.

      • Well, it did provide you another opportunity to assail a person/web site while ignoring the facts/evidence/salient points.

        The salient points being that the WEF policies were embraced by Sri Lanka, in part the cause of their crisis and are now being disavowed by WEF as evidenced by their digital docuemnt shred.

      • It’s classic – global cabals and a perpetual motion machine.

  67. Let’s introduce to the very POWERFUL the planet surface Rotational Warming Phenomenon.

    N – rotations/day, is the planet’s axial spin .
    cp – cal/gr*oC, is the planet’s average surface specific heat.

    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 importance of the Solar Irradiation Accepting Factor Φ.

      For smooth surface planets (like Earth) the Φ =0,47
      Thus the incident on Earth solar energy portion not reflected from the planetary cross-section disk is:

      960 W/m^2 *Φ = 960 W/m^2 *0,47 = 451,2 W/m^2

      This not reflected energy doesn’t get distributed over the hemisphere or over the sphere.
      The 451,2 W/m^2 is INTERACTING with planet’s surface matter on the very instant of incidence.

      https://www.cristos-vournas.com

    • 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

  68. These few years have been a very rapid development for online slot games in Indonesia. Therefore IDN Play launched an online slot game product called IDN Slot. In addition to releasing their own products, IDN Play also collaborates with other well-known online slot providers. Playing online slot gambling is very easy because it does not require special skills but the most important factor is fun. Unmitigated, you can win a jackpot that is doubled and has a very fantastic value.

  69. Virginia’s offshore wind proposal threatens endangered whales
    By David Wojick
    https://www.cfact.org/2022/07/13/virginias-offshore-wind-proposal-threatens-endangered-whales/
    A good NEPA case that could constrain OSW.

    The beginning: “The massive offshore wind (OSW) project proposed by Dominion Energy may pose a serious threat to the endangered North Atlantic Right Whale population. A comprehensive environmental impact assessment is required to determine the extent of this threat and the mitigation it might require. The same is true for the other proposed Mid-Atlantic OSW projects.

    The North Atlantic Right Whale is reported to be the world’s most endangered large whale, with an estimated population of just a few hundred critters. They winter off of Florida and Georgia, but summer off New England. So they migrate through the coastal waters off of Virginia twice a year, including that year’s baby whales. They can grow to over 50 feet in length and weigh more than 70 tons. Protecting them is a major challenge.

    For background see https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale

    Phase one of the huge proposed Virginia/Dominion OSW project looks to occupy something like 400 square miles. Phase two might bump that up to 800 or 1,000 square miles and the proposed federal lease area for OSW is even greater, much greater in fact.

    The obvious monster question is how will all this development affect the severely endangered Right Whale population? Answering this question must be central to the project’s required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under NEPA. This is Federal land.”

    Lots more follows.

    • Joe - the non climate scientist

      To add to Wojick post – one observation with the push to renewables and to have all energy generation on the form of electricity is extremely short sighted and contrary to the basic principle of not putting everything in one basket.

      Diversification reduces the risk of catastrophic failure.

      food sources – dont want to have the sole global source of wheat, corn , rice, potato etc to be one variety lest disease damages that one variety,

      Same with one source of energy – such as electricity, one grid failure and no one has power for anything.

      Just pure short term idiocy.

      • Rob Starkey

        In this case it is not putting everything into 1 basket just another source of electricity.

        How do windmills preciously hurt whales or fish?

      • joe - the non climate scientist

        Rob Starkey – My reference to putting everything into one basket is the attempt to:

        A) convert all power generation into electricity, ie eliminate fossil fuels for heating, transportation, electric generation – such that the only of power is from electricity,
        B) then further, convert as much electric power generation from renewables

        Effectively putting all your eggs into one basket – its a recipe not only for disaster but catastrophic disaster – there are lots of examples through human history.

        a recent example is the Texas 2021 freeze – no question there was a failure of natural gas electric generation. But electric generation from wind dropped close to zero, additionally approx 1/2 to 2/3 of texas homes are heated with Gas. any estimate if all electric generation was from wind and solar and all homes heated with gas and all electric vehicle fleets.

        That is my point of putting all your eggs in one basket – recipe for catastrophic failure

      • David Wojick

        Rob asks “How do windmills preciously hurt whales or fish?”

        That is precisely the question I am raising. My article suggests some possibilities, such as increasing the likelihood of ship strikes on severely endangered right whales, their leading cause of death.

    • Dietrich Hoecht

      there is also the tuna migration and the migration pattern of the Eastern Seabirds to be explored for impacts. That is, physical impacts and disturbances.

  70. “ Hungary has declared a “state of emergency” in response to supply disruptions and rising energy prices in Europe.

    The country’s government says it will now increase its domestic energy production capacities to ensure adequate supply.

    Gergely Gulyás, chief of staff for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, blamed the war in Ukraine and European Union sanctions on Russia for Europe’s “energy crisis”.

    There is “unlikely to be enough gas in Europe for the autumn and winter heating season,” he told a news conference in Budapest.

    “The prolonged war and the sanctions from Brussels have caused energy prices to rise dramatically across Europe, and in fact a major part of Europe is already in an energy crisis,” Gulyás added.

    https://www.euronews.com/2022/07/13/hungary-declares-state-of-emergency-over-threat-of-energy-shortages

    • Cultural marxists, no doubt, like those who invaded the Rajapaksa family:

      Prior to the election of the current Rajapaksa government that is being overturned, from 2015 to 2019, the country was run by a coalition of opposition parties that all opposed the Rajapaksa family rule. They could agree on their opposition to the Rajapaksa family, but not much else. This led to the government not doing much, running a rickety tax system struggling to generate enough revenue to maintain the government. This was worsened when the Rajapaksa family came back to power in 2019. They ran on a platform of cutting taxes by nearly 50%. Now, only 13% of Sri Lanka’s GDP comes from taxes, while similar developing countries see about 20% of their GDP from tax revenue.

      https://dysontribune.substack.com/p/why-did-sri-lankas-government-fall

Leave a Reply to Unbekoming Cancel reply