Climate Science 5

“Hey, Curmudge, will this be the ‘last hurrah’ for our discussion of SINTEF report A24071?”

“That’s the plan, Julie.  We’ll touch upon a few conclusions and then move on to a couple of additional aspects of the global warming issue.”

Conclusions, Observations, and Comments

“The SINTEF report’s first conclusion was that Ms. Brundtland’s assertion that ‘doubt has been eliminated’ on anthropogenic global warming is plainly wrong.  Their second conclusion is that scientific debate may be considered healthy.  The report also mentioned multiple on-going scientific debates on such topics as ‘whether the greenhouse warming effect is a reality; if the warming after the Little Ice Age will continue; the significance of the sun on climate warming; if warming means better or worse conditions on earth; and the extent to which man contributes to the changing climate.  These may be continued as scientific—not quasi-religious—debates’ (hopefully following further research, which is clearly needed).”

“This observation—found in many sources—is sufficiently evident to be considered a conclusion: Emerging and growing nations will not forgo use of cheap fossil fuel energy if it will hinder their growth and keep millions of their people in poverty.”

“This observation is rather frightening: ‘Anthropogenic global warming has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.’ (Geraldo Luis Leno, SINTEF report, p. 59)”

“Listen, Julie, to these astute comments by Fred Singer: ‘The only thing we are concerned about is carbon dioxide levels becoming too low.  If they were to fall below one-half the present level, then plants would be in real trouble.  Without carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, plants would disappear.  So would animals.  And so would human beings.’  ‘High levels of carbon dioxide should not concern us.  They will make plants grow faster.’ “

“I presume, Curmudge, that you have your own observation to share.”

“Of course, Dear Student.  If the vitality of the world’s economy is sacrificed to reduce CO₂ emissions in order to mitigate a false anthropogenic global warming, future historians may view it as the greatest boondoggle in the history of mankind.”

“Here, Old Guy, is a neat quotation: ‘Whenever you hear (that) the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had…consensus is the business of politics.’ (Crichton, p.67)”

Other Priorities

“In the years just before ‘climategate’ blew up the case for anthropogenic global warming (in the minds of many), several scholars began to consider the relative merits of spending billions of dollars to reduce CO₂ emissions.  One such scholar is a Dane, Bjorn Lomborg, who wrote op-ed articles for the Wall Street Journal.  ‘A plan proposed by the G-8 nations would cost the world $40 trillion a year in lost economic growth by the year 2100.’  In contrast, Lomborg said that ‘$3 billion per year spent on mosquito nets, interior DDT sprays, and new therapies would cut malaria infections in half within 10 years.’ (Lomborg, WSJ, 12/15/09)”

“Curmudge, do our readers recall just how much a trillion is?  Here are two examples: If we counted backward for a trillion seconds, what would the date be?  Answer: 30,000 B.C.  Here’s another: If we lined up a trillion 6-inch bananas, they would reach from the earth to the sun.”

“Julie, a trillion dollars is mind-boggling to everyone except a politician.  Here are some facts that are shocking and that suggest better ways to spend money than for reducing CO₂ emissions: Somewhere in the world a child dies every 20 seconds from lack of clean water.  A billion people in the world do not have access to even an outhouse and might not know how to use it if they had one.  (Data from Rotary International and from Doc Mack’s observation in Afghanistan.)”

Energy from Other Sources

“Hey, Prof, my collection of clippings says that the government wants to cut CO₂ emissions 80% by 2050.  Lots of luck!  Their favorite replacements for fossil fuels are wind and solar.  But the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t shine at night.  So to keep the beer cool in my refrigerator, conventional power plants will need to stay on line to cycle up and down as needed.  Very inefficient.”

“You’ve got it, Julie.  Here’s another interesting tidbit: ‘In 2011 the world had 240,000 megawatts of wind–generation capacity.  To keep up with the growth in global electricity demand—while not displacing any of the existing need for coal, oil, or natural gas—would require the countries of the world to install as much wind-generation capacity as now exists and do it every year.  That would cover 48,000 square miles of land with wind turbines, an area about the size of North Carolina.’ (Bryce, WSJ, 12/17/12)”

“I’ve read the same article, Old Guy, and the forecast for solar energy is also dismal.  ‘Germany has more installed solar-energy capacity than any other country.  Last year (2011) Germany produced 19 tera-watt-hours of electricity from solar.  Just to keep pace with the growth in global electricity demand, the world would have to install about 23 times as much solar-energy capacity as now exists in Germany and do it year after year.’ “

“Despite the common irrational, intractable fear of radiation, nuclear power remains the best alternative to the use of fossil fuels.  We discussed radiation at length in our series of postings titled Unconventional Wisdom starting on 2/28/13, and included nuclear power in the series finale on 4/24/13.  Authoritative discussions of nuclear power, breeder reactors, and radioactive waste are available on Wikipedia and in Chapters 21 and 22 of Hiserodt’s book referenced in our 2/28/13 posting.   Breeder reactors have been used for power generation in France and Russia and are being constructed in China and India.  Robinson et al. have contended that, ‘Current nuclear technology can produce abundant inexpensive energy if it is not politically suppressed.’ “

“Curmudge, I sense that you’d love to write more about nuclear power and breeder reactors, but a discussion of nuclear chemistry would definitely reduce the readership of our blog.  However, the issue of anthropogenic global warming isn’t going away.  So when the urge to say more on that subject becomes irresistible, we’ll be back.  Right, Old Guy?”

“Right as usual, Julie.”

Kaizen Curmudgeon

Link to posting from blog archives: Patient Safety—Overview 12/30/08

http://kaizencurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/12/patient-safety-overview_30.html

     

Climate Science 4

“As you promised, Curmudge, today we’ll talk about the findings and conclusions of the anthropogenic global warming skeptics.”

Contrarian Perspectives

“Please remember, Julie, that they are termed ‘contrarians’ in SINTEF report A24071.  Within this broad classification are people who disagree with minor elements of the IPCC reports as well as those ‘who do not accept that (a) human actions are influencing the climate to produce global warming, or that (b) this possible influence does not amount to a threat that needs extra particular resolve or attention.’  ‘A common position here is that climate change is the normal condition on earth.’ (p. 11 in SINTEF A24071)”

“Listen up, Retired Scientist.  This quotation should help members of the public understand what’s been going on.  ‘The fact that the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature of a few tenths of a degree will astound future generations.  Such hysteria simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth, and the exploitation of these weaknesses by politicians, environmental promoters…and many others as well.’ (Lindzen, p. 41)”

“Despite its being essential for life (plants require carbon dioxide, and animals require plants), CO₂ has been designated a pollutant and the principal villain in the global warming debate.  Many of the accusations against it were refuted in the report by Robinson et al. discussed in our Climate Science 2 posting.  Here are some more pertinent quotes: ‘Atmospheric CO₂ variations generally follow changes in temperature and other climatic variables rather than preceding them.’ (Soon, p. 45)  ‘440 Myr [M = million?] ago atmospheric CO₂ was ~16 times higher than today.  However, this enhanced level of atmospheric CO₂ does not seem to have been accompanied by unusually warm temperatures.’ (Yapp & Poths, p. 45)  ‘The available scientific data, and proven relationships, do not justify the belief that carbon dioxide emission controls can be used as a means of managing or stopping future climate change.’ (Carter, p. 45-46)”

“Curmudge, these quotations go on and on.  I hope we have room for a few more.  ‘Cosmic ray intensity data show that solar activity was related to both the LIA (Little Ice Age) and its recovery.’ (Akasofu, p. 48)  ‘The new religion of global warming …contains a grain of truth and a mountain of nonsense.  And that nonsense could be very damaging indeed.  We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting.  It is from this, above all, that we really need to save the planet.’ (Lawson, p. 50)  ‘Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself…Climate is beyond our power to control…Earth doesn’t care about governments or their legislation…Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth does routinely on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.’ (Laughlin, p. 58)”

Kaizen Curmudgeon

Link to posting from blog archives: Patient Safety Requires a Reporting Culture 12/11/08

http://kaizencurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/12/patient-safety-requires-reporting.html

Climate Science 3

“As I promised last time, Julie, our discussion will be based on SINTEF A24071, Consensus and Controversy.  This report provides an overview of the anthropogenic global warming issue as of April 2013.  In our discussion we will cite page numbers in the report which will guide interested readers to the report’s references to the original literature.”

“It was interesting, Curmudge, that this report introduced the rather benign terms, ’consensus’ and ‘contrarian,’ to characterize the two sides of the global warming debate.  Formerly (and perhaps currently) the consensus people had called the people on the other side ‘deniers’ in a syntactical effort to include them with those who ‘denied’ the Holocaust.”

“The animosity of the opponents continues to shock me, Jaded Julie.  It clearly represents more than just a disagreement between scientists over the significance of their findings.  Global warming has become the newest apocalypse of eco-theology, and it includes such visual imagery as the calving of ice from the Greenland ice sheet.  As noted in the SINTEF report, the concept of apocalypse ‘instigates a sense of both fear and urgency to the discourse of climate change, and sparks political efforts and/or slogans to reduce emissions and save the climate.‘ (p. 8-9)”

“That helps me understand things, Old Guy.  Shall we now share some of what the SINTEF report says about the ‘consensus’ story?  Because this has been so widely publicized, there’s not a lot for us to say.”

Consensus Perspectives

“ ‘The consensus camp includes all positions that voice some sort of alarm (from conservative and sober to more liberal and apocalyptic) and also those more focused on finding solutions to the perceived threat from man-made global warming.’ (p. 10)  Reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have consistently stated that ‘the consensus of scientific opinion is that the Earth’s climate is being affected by human activities.’  This was supported by large numbers of scientific papers and numerous surveys of earth scientists.  In a notable study by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, land was warmed by 1.5 C over the past 250 years and ‘humans are most likely the cause.’ (p. 21)  A ‘definitive’ conclusion was provided by Gro Harlem Brundtland speaking before a U.N. commission, ‘What is new is that doubt has been eliminated…It is irresponsible, reckless, and deeply immoral to question the seriousness of the situation .  The time for diagnosis is over.  Now it is time to act.’ (p. 6) “

“Wow, Curmudge!  Man the barricades; wave the flag.  Don’t just stand there; do something.”

“Calm your fervor, Madame Miserables.  Although Ms. Brundtland spoke after ‘The Hockey Stick’ had been published, ‘Climategate’ had not yet been exposed.  We discussed both of these last week.  In addition, papers and books criticizing the consensus studies began to appear in 2008-2011.  A book by Bell, ‘Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax’ was published in 2011.  Roy Spencer stated, ’I would wager that (none of) the 928 articles stacked on my desk demonstrate that our current global warming is not due to natural causes.’ (p. 22)  ‘Scientific merit does not derive from the number, productivity, or prominence of those holding a certain view—truth by majority rule or oligarchical fiat.’ (p. 24)”

“ Here’s an interesting paper, Curmudge.  Recall that the original ‘hockey stick’ downplayed the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age; some say they were hidden to exaggerate the man-made character of the current warm period. (p. 33)  A paper by Ljungqvist published in 2010 shows a reconstruction of a ‘distinct Roman Warm Period c. 1-300, reaching up to the 1961-1990 mean temperature level, followed by the Dark Age Cold Period c. AD 300-800.  The Medieval Warm Period is seen c. AD 800-1300 and the Little Ice Age is clearly visible c. 1300-1900, followed by a rapid temperature increase in the 20^th century.’  ‘Decadal mean temperatures seem to have reached or exceeded the 1961-1990 mean temperature level during substantial parts of the Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period.’  ‘The “hockey stick” graph is in considerable disagreement with most more recent temperature reconstructions.’ (p. 31)  ‘Moreover, it is relatively uncontroversial that the temperature curves during the last decade or so have stopped increasing and seem rather to be flattening out and decreasing.’ (p. 33)”

“Julie, the SINTEF report is unusual in that they discuss the social science of ‘climategate.’  Grundman stated that, ‘climategate revealed problematic practices of climate scientists which are only partly recognized.’  ‘What the emails reveal are practices of leading climate researchers acting as zealous gatekeepers in a scientific and political project.’  As an example, he mentions ‘the trick of omitting inconvenient data from the time series in the hockey stick.’ (p. 39)  ‘I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple.’ (Austin, p. 57)”

“Old Man, your zeal for digging into this sad tale exceeds my interest in discussing it further today.  Let’s put the hockey stick in the penalty box and talk about the contrarian perspectives next week.”

Kaizen Curmudgeon

Link to posting from blog archives: Implementing a Culture of Safety 12/04/08

http://kaizencurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/12/implementing-culture-of-safety.html