The Great Global Warming Swindle!!!

Marcus's picture
Submitted by Marcus on Sat, 2007-03-10 19:12

Surprise, surprise.

You can watch the entire thing now - for free - already on Google Video.
Watch it while you can, here is the link below.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle.

This astounding documentary was aired last Thursday night (8th of March) in the UK.
What it illustrates both clearly and definitively is that global warming through human activity is the most contrived pseudo-science of the last 30 years. The scale of the swindle is both frightening. As the film narrator boldly states:

“Everywhere you are told that man-made climate change is proved beyond doubt, but you are being told lies. Each day the news reports grow more fantastically apocalyptic. Politicians no longer dare to express any doubt about climate change.
This is the story of how a theory about climate turned into a political ideology.
It is the story of the distortion of a whole area of science. It is the story of how a political campaign turned into a bureaucratic band-wagon. This is a story of censorship and intimidation. It is a story about westerners invoking the threat of climatic disaster to hinder vital industrial progress in the developing world. The global warming story is a cautionary tale of how a media scare became the defining idea of a generation.”

This film proceeds to completely strip away the emperor clothes of the theory of global warming caused by man-made CO2. It’s main points against the theory are that:

1) “We are told that the earth’s climate is changing, but the earth’s climate is always changing. In earth’s history there have been countless periods when it was much warmer and much cooler that it is today. When much of the world was covered by tropical forests or else vast ice sheets. The climate has always changed, and changed without any help from us humans.”

“The polar bears obviously survived that period, they are with us today, they are very adaptable and these warm periods in the past posed no problem for them.” Says Professor John Clark – Dept of Earth Sciences – University of Ottawa.

2) If you take the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere of all gases, it is 0.054%. The proportions that human are adding is even smaller, the main source in fact coming from the world’s oceans. CO2 is a relatively minor greenhouse gas. The geological records show that in fact CO2 does not precede warming, but lags behind it by some 300 years. So as Gore rightly says in his film “An Inconvenient Truth” that there is a correlation between CO2 and temperature. However it is not a positive one, but a negative one, in fact often an inverse correlation.

3) The atmosphere is made up of a multitude of gases and a small percentage of them are the greenhouse gases. And of that small percentage, 95% of it is water vapour, and that is by far the most important greenhouse gas often in the form of clouds. Further, solar activity is the most accurate way of predicting climate changes on earth. The interplay between water vapour and solar activity being the main determinants of earth’s climate and human beings have almost no influence upon.

4) If greenhouse warming were presently occurring you would get more warming in the troposphere, because greenhouse gases trap heat from escaping the atmosphere in the troposphere. However, that is just not the case. The data collected from satellites and weather balloons show that the earth is in fact warmer than the atmosphere. This evidence damns the theory of greenhouse effect upon climate through CO2.

Surprising is the origins of this political scandal. Apparently it originated from a desire of Margaret Thatcher in the eighties to discredit fossil fuels in favour of nuclear power.

Even more shocking is that the entire present global warming lobby, hijacked from Thatcher by neo-Marxists and Environmentalists, has become in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats an evil “gravy train” of the millions of tax dollars pocketed in this disgusting “global warming” industry which is based upon a lie.

“Fact of the matter is that tens of thousands of jobs depend on Global Warming right now. It’s a big business.” Says Professor Patrick Michaels – Dept of Environmental Sciences – University of Virginia.

“Climate scientists need there to be a problem in order to get funding.” Says Dr Roy Spencer – Weather Satellite Team Leader – NASA.

As the film spells out for us:

Man-made global warming is no ordinary theory. It is presented in the media as having the stamp of authority of an impressive international organisation. The UN’s intergovernmental panel on climate change or IPCC.

“The IPCC like any UN body is political. The final conclusions are politically driven. It’s become a great industry in itself and if the whole global warming farrago collapsed, there would an awful lot of people out of jobs and looking for work.” Says Professor Philip Scott – Dept of Biogeography – University of London.

“This claim that the IPCC is the worlds top 1500 or 2500 scientists: you look at the bibliographies of the people and it is simply not true. There are quite a number of non-scientists. Those people that are specialists but don’t agree with the polemic and resign, and there are a number of them I know of, they are simply put on the author list and become part of this “2500 of the worlds top scientists”. We have a vested interest in causing panic, because then, money will flow to climate science.” Says Professor Paul Reiter – IPCC and Pasteur Institute of Paris.

“And to build up the number to 2500 they have to start taking reviewers and Government people and so on, anyone who has been close to them. And none of these people are asked if they agree, many of them disagree. People have decided that you have to convince other people that since no scientist disagrees - you shouldn’t disagree either. But whenever you hear that in science you know that it is pure propaganda.” Says Professor Richard Lindzen – IPCC and M.I.T.

Unfortunately as the Times notes, the whole Global Warming bandwagon has evolved into “less an issue and more a doom-laden religion demanding sacrifice to Gaia for our wicked fossil fuel-driven ways.”

“There is such intolerance. This is most politically incorrect thing possible to doubt this climate change orthodoxy.” Says Lord Lawson of Blaby (In 2005 a House of Lords enquiry was set up to examine the scientific evidence of man-made cause of Global Warming and Lord Lawson was a member of it.) He goes on to comment - "We had a very thorough enquiry and took evidence from a whole lot of people expert in this area and we produced a report. What surprised me was to discover how weak and uncertain the science was. In fact there are more and more thoughtful people, some of them a little bit frightened to come out in the open. But who quietly privately and some of them publicly are saying ‘hang on, wait a moment, this simply just does not add up’."

“I often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue and that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well I am one scientist and there are many that simply think that is not true.” Says Professor John Christy – Lead Author IPCC

And finally the definitive comment of the documentary must belong to Nigel Calder – the Former Editor of the New Scientist.

“I have seen and heard their spitting fury at anybody that might disagree with them, which is not the scientific way. The whole global warming business has become like a religion and people who disagree are called heretics. I am a heretic. The makers of this programme are all heretics.”

After this documentary and more publicity, hopefully not heretics for much longer!!!


( categories: )

BILL SEEKS TO PROHIBIT U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO CLIMATE CHANGE

Marcus's picture

LUETKEMEYER BILL SEEKS TO PROHIBIT U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO UN CLIMATE CHANGE PANEL

States News Service
February 11, 2011

The following information was released by the office of Missouri Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer:

U.S. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-9) today reintroduced legislation that would save taxpayers millions of dollars by prohibiting the United States from contributing to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an organization fraught with waste and engaged in dubious science.

The IPCC advises governments around the world on climate change, and supporters of cap-and-tax legislation have used questionable findings by the IPCC as reason to support onerous legislation and regulations for small businesses and farmers, Luetkemeyer said. Criticism of this science intensified over the last two years when emails publicly released from a university in England showed that leading global scientists intentionally manipulated climate data and suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals. Researchers were asked to delete and destroy emails so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.

More than 700 international scientists have challenged the claims on man-made global warming promoted by the IPCC. The dissenting scientists come from nations all over the world, including Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, Canada, the Netherlands, and the United States, and are affiliated with some of the worlds premier scientific institutions including the U.S. Navy, U.S. Defense Department, U.S. Energy Department, U.S. Air Force, NASA, and the EPA.

This bill, first introduced in the 111th Congress, would have saved taxpayers $12.5 million in FY10 and millions more in the years to come by permanently ending the United States financial contributions to the IPCC.

When re-filing the legislation, Luetkemeyer cited Article I, Section 8, Clause I of the Constitution, from which Congress derives its authority to control taxation and spending, as the constitutional basis for this legislation...
..............................................................................................................

Republicans fight Barack Obama on climate change

Congressional Republicans vowed on Wednesday to prevent the Obama administration from reducing the pollution that contributes to global warming, proposing to cut the budget of the U.S. environmental agency.

09 Feb 2011

Republicans, who took control of the House of Representatives last month, are looking to block the Environmental Protection Agency from using a law known as the Clean Air Act to control heat-trapping pollution.

The administration began using the law to fight global warming after failing last year to win approval for new legislation.

Republicans contend the use of the law will raise electricity prices and penalise industries that otherwise could be creating new jobs. They have made the agency a central target of their anti-regulatory agenda.

The agency's administrator, Lisa Jackson, told the House subcommittee on energy and power, that a bill being considered by the panel "would eliminate portions of the landmark law that all American children and adults rely on to protect them from harmful air pollution."

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, a Republican co-author of the measure, denied that it would weaken the law or limit the federal government's ability to monitor and reduce health-damaging pollution.

At the same time, the Republican chairman of the panel overseeing spending, Harold Rogers, proposed a sweeping $1.9 billion cut – about 18 per cent – to the amount requested for agency this year by President Barack Obama. Mr Rogers' proposal would also shave millions from programs to boost energy efficiency in household appliances and to collect data on greenhouse gas emissions...

Himalayan glaciers not melting because of climate change, report

Marcus's picture

Himalayan glaciers not melting because of climate change, report finds

Himalayan glaciers are actually advancing rather than retreating, claims the first major study since a controversial UN report said they would be melted within quarter of a century.

By Dean Nelson, New Delhi and Richard Alleyne
27 Jan 2011

Researchers have discovered that contrary to popular belief half of the ice flows in the Karakoram range of the mountains are actually growing rather than shrinking.

The discovery adds a new twist to the row over whether global warming is causing the world's highest mountain range to lose its ice cover.

It further challenges claims made in a 2007 report by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the glaciers would be gone by 2035.

Although the head of the panel Dr Rajendra Pachauri later admitted the claim was an error gleaned from unchecked research, he maintained that global warming was melting the glaciers at "a rapid rate", threatening floods throughout north India.

The new study by scientists at the Universities of California and Potsdam has found that half of the glaciers in the Karakoram range, in the northwestern Himlaya, are in fact advancing and that global warming is not the deciding factor in whether a glacier survives or melts...
.........................................................................................................................

Greenland ice sheet is safer than scientists previously thought

New study overturns fears that increased melting could lubricate the ice sheet, causing it to sink ever faster into the sea

Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 26 January 2011

The threat of the Greenland ice sheet slipping ever faster into the sea because of warmer summers has been ruled out by a scientific study.

Until now, it was thought that increased melting could lubricate the ice sheet, causing it to sink ever faster into the sea. The issue was a key unknown in the landmark 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which pinned the blame for climate change firmly on greenhouse gas emissions from human activities.

However, the impact of rising sea temperatures on melting ice sheets is still uncertain, meaning it remains difficult to put an upper limit on potential sea level rises. Understanding the risk is crucial because about 70% of the world's population live in coastal regions, which host many of the world's biggest cities, such as London, New York and Bangkok.

"The Greenland ice sheet is safer than we thought," said Professor Andrew Shepherd of the University of Leeds, who led the research published tomorrow in Nature...

MPS SLAM ‘SECRETIVE’ CLIMATEGATE PROBES

Marcus's picture

MPS SLAM ‘SECRETIVE’ CLIMATEGATE PROBES

Tuesday January 25,2011
By John Ingham

TWO inquiries into claims that scientists manipulated data about global warming were yesterday condemned by MPs as ineffective and too secretive.

The row, which became known as Climategate, erupted in 2009 over allegations that researchers had deliberately strengthened evidence suggesting human activity was to blame for rising temperatures.

MPs on the Science and Technology Committee have now concluded that both probes into the scandal had failed to “fully investigate” claims that scientists had deleted embarrassing emails.

The investigations were set up after around 4,000 leaked emails and documents appeared to show that scientists at East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit had manipulated data to strengthen the case for man-made global warming.

UEA’s Independent Climate Change Emails Review was led by Sir Muir Russell, while the Scientific Appraisal Panel was led by Lord Oxburgh.

But the MPs said they had “reservations” about both inquiries.

They criticised the brevity of the appraisal panel report, at “a mere five pages”, and said both investigations should have been more open to the public.

The committee also said the emails review “did not fully investigate the serious allegation” relating to the deletion of emails and instead relied on a verbal reassurance that the messages still exist...
.......................................................................................................

The BBC became a propaganda machine for climate change zealots, says Peter Sissons... and I was treated as a lunatic for daring to dissent

By Peter Sissons
25th January 2011

Institutionally biased to the Left, politically correct and with a rudderless leadership. This is Peter Sissons’ highly critical view of the BBC in his new memoirs, in which he describes his fascinating career over four decades as a television journalist. Here, in the latest part of our serialisation, he reveals how it was heresy at the BBC to question claims about climate change . . .

My time as a news and ­current affairs anchor at the BBC was characterised by weak leadership and poor ­direction from the top, but hand in hand with this went the steady growth of political correctness.

Indeed, it was almost certainly the ­Corporation’s unchallengeable PC culture that made strong leadership impossible.

Leadership — one person being in charge, trusting his or her own judgment, taking a decision and telling others what to do— was shied away from in favour of endless meetings of a dozen or more ­people trying to arrive at some sort of consensus...

For me, though, the most worrying aspect of political correctness was over the story that recurred with increasing frequency during my last ten years at the BBC — global warming (or ‘climate change’, as it became known when temperatures appeared to level off or fall slightly after 1998).

From the beginning I was unhappy at how one-sided the BBC’s coverage of the issue was, and how much more complicated the climate system was than the over-simplified two-minute reports that were the stock-in-trade of the BBC’s environment correspondents.

These, without exception, accepted the UN’s assurance that ‘the science is settled’ and that human emissions of carbon dioxide threatened the world with catastrophic climate change. Environmental pressure groups could be guaranteed that their press releases, usually beginning with the words ‘scientists say . . . ’ would get on air unchallenged.

On one occasion, after the inauguration of Barack Obama as president in 2009, the science correspondent of Newsnight actually informed viewers ‘scientists calculate that he has just four years to save the world’. What she didn’t tell viewers was that only one alarmist scientist, NASA’s James Hansen, had said that.

My interest in climate change grew out of my concern for the failings of BBC journalism in reporting it. In my early and formative days at ITN, I learned that we have an obligation to report both sides of a story. It is not journalism if you don’t. It is close to propaganda.

The BBC’s editorial policy on ­climate change, however, was spelled out in a report by the BBC Trust — whose job is to oversee the workings of the BBC in the interests of the public — in 2007. This disclosed that the BBC had held ‘a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus’.

The error here, of course, was that the BBC never at any stage gave equal space to the opponents of the consensus.

But the Trust continued its ­pretence that climate change ­dissenters had been, and still would be, heard on its airwaves. ‘Impartiality,’ it said, ‘always requires a breadth of view, for as long as minority ­opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space.’

In reality, the ‘appropriate space’ given to minority views on climate change was practically zero.

Moreover, we were allowed to know practically nothing about that top-level seminar mentioned by the BBC Trust at which such momentous conclusions were reached. Despite a Freedom of Information request, they wouldn’t even make the guest list public...

At the end of November 2007 I was on duty on News 24 when the UN panel on climate change produced a report which later turned out to contain ­significant inaccuracies, many stemming from its reliance on non-peer reviewed sources and best-guesses by environmental activists.

But the way the BBC’s reporter treated the story was as if it was beyond a vestige of doubt, the last word on the catastrophe awaiting mankind. The most challenging questions addressed to a succession of UN employees and climate ­activists were ‘How urgent is it?’ and ‘How much danger are we in?’

Back in the studio I suggested that we line up one or two sceptics to react to the report, but received a totally negative response, as if I was some kind of lunatic. I went home and wrote a note to myself: ‘What happened to the journalism? The BBC has ­completely lost it.’

Yes Lord Monckton...

Marcus's picture

...but Australians will have a warm fuzzy feeling of moral superiority.

That's what makes being a progressive so great Smiling

Lord Moncton does the maths for Australia

HWH's picture

Cap and tax is as pointless as it is cruel. Australia accounts for 1.5 per cent of global carbon emissions. So if it cut its emissions, the warming forestalled would be infinitesimal.

It's worth explaining exactly why. Suppose the Australian committee's aim is to cut emissions by 20 per cent by 2050. Anything more ambitious would shut Australia down, especially while the Greens insist on not letting the country use its own zero-carbon-emitting uranium as fuel.

A 20 per cent cut by 2050 is an average 10 per cent cut from now until then. Carbon dioxide concentration by 2050 probably won't exceed 506 parts per million by volume, from which we deduct today's concentration of 390 ppmv. So humankind might add 116 ppmv from now until then.

The CO2 concentration increase forestalled by 40 years of cap-and-tax in Australia would be 10 per cent of 1.5 per cent of that 116 ppmv, or just 0.174 ppmv. So in 2050 CO2 concentration would be - tell it not in Gath and Ashkelon - 505.826 ppmv, not 506.

Thus what we maths wonks call the proportionate change in CO2 concentration if the committee got its way would be 505.826 divided by 506, or 0.9997. The UN says warming or cooling, in Celsius degrees, is 3.7 to 5.7 times the logarithm of the proportionate change.

It expects only 57 per cent of manmade warming to occur by 2100: the rest would happen slowly and harmlessly across 1000-3000 years.

To be charitable to the committee, let us take the UN's high-end estimate. The warming forestalled by cutting Australia's emissions would be very unlikely to exceed 57 per cent of 5.7 times the logarithm of 0.9997: that is - wait for it - a dizzying one-thousandth of a degree by 2050

more here

microfilm scanner

Wartime posters to fight climate change

Marcus's picture

Wartime posters to fight climate change

Wartime-style posters are to be used in a new campaign against climate change following a hard-hitting report that compares the current environmental crisis to World War II.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
21 Jan 2011

Caroline Lucas, the leader of the Green Party, said global warming will cause food shortages, high fuel costs and social upheaval, just as the threat of Nazi invasion forced the country to make cuts in the 1930s and 40s.

She said the country needs to start preparing immediately, not only to reduce emissions so that global temperature rise is limited but to prepare for a world in which people have to live on more limited resources.

The New Home Front Initiative will look to the war time generation for inspiration and advice on how to stop waste and make resources go further. For example by teaching grandchildren how to grow vegetables or repair clothes.

Artists and even the public are being asked to design a poster inspired by wartime propaganda, such as the campaign to reduce petrol use with the slogan ‘Don’t be Fuelish’.

British institutions that led the war effort, such as the Women’s Institute, are already part of the push by teaching women how to cook with leftovers and make preserves...
....................................................................................................................

Climate change study had 'significant error': experts

Thursday, 20 January 2011

A climate change study that projected a 2.4 degree Celsius increase in temperature and massive worldwide food shortages in the next decade was seriously flawed, scientists said Wednesday.

The study was posted on the website of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and was written about by numerous international news agencies, including AFP.

But AAAS later retracted the study as experts cited numerous errors in its approach.

"A reporter with The Guardian alerted us yesterday to concerns about the news release submitted by Hoffman & Hoffman public relations," said AAAS spokeswoman Ginger Pinholster in an email to AFP.

"We immediately contacted a climate change expert, who confirmed that the information raised many questions in his mind, too. We swiftly removed the news release from our Web site and contacted the submitting organization."

Climate scientist Rey Weymann told AFP that the "study contains a significant error in that it confuses 'equilibrium' temperature rise with 'transient temperature rise.'"

He also noted that study author Liliana Hisas of the Universal Ecological Fund (UEF), a non-profit group headquartered in Argentina, was told of the problems in advance of the report's release.

"The author of the study was told by several of us about this error but she said it was too late to change it," said Weymann...
........................................................................................................................

Met Office: 2010 was second warmest year on record

UK data shows last year was the second warmest after 1998 – while US agencies record it as the joint warmest

Sylvia Rowley
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 20 January 2011

Last year was the second warmest on record after 1998, the Met Office announced today.

With a mean temperature of 14.5C, 2010 was 0.5C warmer than the global average from 1961-1990, according to data from the Met Office and the University of East Anglia.

These figures follow two similar announcements last week from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which suggested that 2010 was the joint warmest year on their respective records.

Adam Scaife, head of long-range forecasting at the Met Office, said the studies painted a relatively coherent picture. "The three leading global temperature datasets show that 2010 is clearly warmer than 2009," he said. "They also show that 2010 is the warmest or second warmest year on record."

The UN's World Meteorological Organisation, which bases its reports on all three sets of data, said today that 2010 was the joint warmest year on record, tied with 1998 and 2005. "The 2010 data confirm the Earth's significant long-term warming trend," said the secretary-general, Michel Jarraud. "The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998."

2010 saw a number of extreme weather events, including a summer heatwave in Russia, floods in Pakistan, Australia and China and heavy snowfall in northern Europe.

The UK recorded its coldest year since 1986 and its coldest December in 100 years, according to the Met Office. However, very few parts of the world were significantly colder than normal during 2010. The northern hemisphere experienced its warmest year with a mean temperature of 0.69C above the long-term average.

Climate records kept by the Met Office, NOAA and Nasa are based on data from land-based weather and climate stations, ships, buoys and satellites...

CLIMATE CHANGE? THE YOUNG DON’T CARE

Marcus's picture

CLIMATE CHANGE? THE YOUNG DON’T CARE

Saturday January 15,2011
By Tom Morgan

YOUNG people worry about money, street violence and their body image. But they don’t care much about climate change, according to a survey out yesterday.

Researchers visited schools, colleges, universities and youth groups in December when students were protesting against increasing tuition fees.

Perhaps predictably, the fees came out as the most important issue among the 3,000 questioned. But the survey, commissioned by the Public Service Broadcasting Trust, revealed young people were least concerned about climate change.

Only 12 per cent believed they had been “adversely affected” by climate change in 2010. But nearly a quarter said they had been adversely affected by their body image...
......................................................................................................

Climate change may be responsible for the rise and fall of Roman empire, scientists find

By Victoria Ward
16 Jan 2011

Ours is not the first civilisation to be threatened by climate change, scientists have established. It could also have been responsible for bringing down the Roman Empire.

Researchers who used tree growth rings to study the impact of unstable climate patterns found that they could be linked to historical events that have had devastating consequences.

Researchers who used tree growth rings to study climate patterns found that they could be matched to historical events that had devastating consequences.

Scientists discovered that periods of warm, wet weather coincided with prosperity while dry or varying conditions occurred at times of political turmoil, such as the fall of the Roman Empire and the Thirty Years' War.

The researchers reconstructed the history of European summer climate for the last 2,500 years using 9,000 wooden artefacts.

Their results are based on measurements of tree-rings from the sub-fossil, archaeological, historical and living tree samples from Germany, France, Italy and Austria.

During good seasons, when water and nutrients were in plentiful supply, they found that trees formed broad rings.

But in less favourable growing conditions, the rings grew in much tighter formation.

The team of archaeologists, climatologists, geographers and historians then identified a link with prosperity levels in past societies.

“Wet and warm summers occurred during periods of Roman and medieval prosperity,” they wrote on the Science journal website.

“Increased climate variability from 250-600AD coincided with the demise of the western Roman empire and the turmoil of the migration period...
.............................................................................................................

Titter ye not, it's an Inconvenient Sooth

By Richard Littlejohn
18th January 2011

We go over now to ancient ­Londinium, where Lurcio, played by Frankie ­Howerd, is addressing the Forum.

Friends, ­Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears. Blimey, this toga’s chafing like mad. For Juno’s sake, stop tittering at the back. Peasants.

It must be, what, XV years since I was last in Londinium. Doesn’t ­tempus fugit?

I have been sent here from ­Pompeii with my master, Silvius Berlusconus, who is attending a Symposium on climatus changus — what we used to call in Rome ‘the weather’.

It has been convened by the pro-consul of Britannicus, Callus Davus. You know, tall bloke with the prominent proboscis Romanus, married to the lovely Samanthus. Yes, I bet you would, sir.

Anyway, we had to get out of ­Pompeii sharpish, owing to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, which covered the city in volcanic ash and grounded every ox-cart from here to Icelandus. Typical, isn’t it? One ­volcano and the whole of the Roman Empire comes to a standstill.

We would have been here months ago, but for the record snowfalls in Gaul and the thick ice on the ­English Channel. So much for globus ­warmus. My toga wasn’t the only thing which froze solid, I can tell you. Talk about brass monkeys.

Now then, where was I? Oh, yes. Much water has passed over the aqueduct since I was last here.

It seems Callus Davus has been consulting the Gods and come to the conclusion that the barbarians are the least of our problems.

The empire is at grave risk, so he says, not because of trouble in ­Germanicus, or the uprising in Northern Gaul, but because of the threat from the heavens.

In Rome, the mercury hit XL degrees Celsius this year. It was so hot they had to cancel the annual orgy. I did try to point out that it gets hot every summer, but no one wanted to listen.

The Senate had just been to see a new play at the Colosseum, An Inconvenient Sooth, by Senator Al Gorus, which ended with a polar bear being sacrificed on a block of ice.

Normally they sacrifice a few ­vestal virgins, but my master ­Silvius ­Berlusconus said he had a better use for them. No, listen. ­Titter ye not!

Anyway, all Rome is now in a blind panic. They shut the Roman baths and switched off the Trevi Fountain to conserve water. You wouldn’t believe the pong. Like a Greek wrestler’s jockstrap, I can tell you. No, you’ll just have to take my word for it, missus.

So we have come to Londinium to study the methods of your mayor, Borus, in combating climatus changus.

In order to curb harmful emissions from horse-drawn conveyances, a congestion charging zone has been ­established between Ermine Street in the east and Watling Street in the west.

All carts and carriages entering Londinium must pay a tribute in coin to the mayor. I don’t know what he’s doing with the money, mind. Not spending it on the roads, that’s for sure. I’ve never seen so many potholes.

And we’ve already got record hay prices, not that it’s done much to cut down the, er, exhaust droppings in Bishopsgate. Gets right in between your open-toed sandals.

As for this hole in the ozone layer, whatever that is, who cares? If you ask me, it’s no bad thing, this globus warmus. I’ve just had a cheeky little wine from a vineyard next to ­Hadrian’s Wall. It used to be so freezing up there, they couldn’t grow a thing.

Don’t tell my master, but I reckon this climatus changus racket is just another excuse for putting up taxes and pushing the populus around. They’re even throwing people to the lions for putting their vegetable scraps in the wrong urn.

Woe, woe and thrice woe!

So I said to myself: Francis, it’ll end in tears, mark my words. People won’t put up with it. The Earth will be around a lot longer than the Roman Empire.

Anyway, must dash. Here comes my master now, with a couple of ­vestal virgins in tow. He’ll be off to the Temple of Viagra. At his age, too. He kids himself those laurels hide his bald patch.

I’ve got an appointment with a seamstress in Savilus Row. This toga’s on its last legs. I’m getting one made in that new fabric: Gore-tex.

Gore-tex, missus. Geddit? Oh, well, please yourselves.
.......................................................................................

Greenpeace warning to Israel turns to shite

HWH's picture

This was Greenpeace's oh-so-predictable response to Israel's horrific Carmel Fires

Greenpeace wishes to emphasize that this fire is a direct expression of the effects of climate change and global warming which threaten us all. Climate change is already here and it is taking a heavy human toll!

Israel must take this warning sign seriously and take immediate measures in order to eradicate the effects of climate change. Israel must cancel its plans to construct another coal plant, reduce use of fossil fuels, and realize that we are dealing with an international struggle.

Yet, so far no retraction since Israels fire service discovered that it was caused by a Greenpeace activists in the most ironic manner.

As the Jerusalem Post reported:

The cause of this particular fire was, sadly enough, the good intentions of a participant in the Rainbow Festival that was being held at the site. For ecological reasons, she burned toilet paper she had used so as not to leave it in nature, and in normal circumstances, that would have been the thing to do. However, due to the strong winds and the unseasonable hot air, the dry grasses caught on fire immediately, and the fire spread in four different directions simultaneously

More here

dermoscopy

MSN.co.NZ front page

gregster's picture

 

 

 

 

Exam board accused of 'brainwashing' pupils

Marcus's picture

Exam board accused of 'brainwashing' pupils with inaccurate climate graph

Britain’s largest exam board has been accused of “brainwashing” pupils by forcing them to use an inaccurate temperature graph that exaggerates the scale of global warming.

"Climate experts have accused AQA of “scientific illiteracy” and “propaganda” after a graph in its most recent Geography GCSE exam paper contained a series of inaccuracies which magnified the rise in global temperatures.

The graph wrongly presented the current warm period as the hottest on record and pinpointed the world’s current average temperature at 59.5 degrees Fahrenheit (15.3C), when it has in fact never risen above 58.1F (14.52C).

The exam board also overlooked the last ice age, which peaked around 20,000 years ago, instead marking the “previous glacial period” at around 180,000 BC."

Monbiot Jumps The Shark

gregster's picture

"Shearman has penned several books on global warming, such as ‘Climate Change as a Crisis in World Civilization: Why We Must Totally Transform How We Live ‘ and ‘The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy‘. His argument is that overpopulation and industrialization are causing an ecological disaster which requires a total change of lifestyle for everyone on the planet. As democracy isn’t up to the challenge, an authoritarian government must (obviously) be imposed to save us from ourselves.

In a 2007 publication called The Climate Change Challenge And The Failure Of Democracy, he and his co-author Joseph Wayne Smith, can be found advocating the creation of an eco-fascist one world government.

“Government in the future will be based upon . . . a supreme office of the biosphere. The office will comprise specially trained philosopher/ecologists. These guardians will either rule themselves or advise an authoritarian government of policies based on their ecological training and philosophical sensitivities. These guardians will be specially trained for the task.”

And who will guarantee the efficiency of such a regime? Why , of course, an elect cadre of eco warriors drawn from a “natural elite” described here: “Chapter 9 will describe in more detail how we might begin the process of constructing such real universities to train the ecowarriors to do battle against the enemies of life. We must accomplish this education with the same dedication used to train its warriors. As in Sparta, these natural elites will be especially trained from childhood to meet the challenging problems of our times.”

If that sounds like a scary vision of the future, look at what is already happening in – where else? – Germany. As blogger P Gosselin at No Tricks Zone has noticed, late last year the German administration managed to pass, almost without anyone noticing, a tyrannical new law in which Power and energy companies will be required to collect consumption data on each and every citizen and provide the means to meet energy efficiency targets. This, Gosselin argues, will pave the way for enforced energy rationing for those citizens who fail to meet the government’s energy savings targets.

If that sounds extreme, then what do you make of policy discussions like this: Technological innovation and political regulation can only be effective if “the people” participate in their various roles as polluters, producers and consumers of goods, citizens and voters. Democratic regimes are not well prepared for the level of participation that is required: Can free democratic societies cope with the effects of grave changes in the global climate, or might authoritarian regimes possibly be better placed to enforce the necessary measures?

It was on the agenda of a conference held in Germany in 2009 called The Great Transformation: Climate Change As Cultural Change, with speakers including professors from numerous European universities, among them our old friend Prof Ottmar Edenhofer. Edenhofer, you’ll recall, is the senior IPCC official and economist who has admitted that “Climate Change” has much more to do with global Marxist wealth redistribution than it does with the environment:

First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

And for my final witness, I call the splendid George Monbiot. I call him splendid because over the last few months he has been doing a far, far better job than I ever could of showing just how controlling, misanthropic and fascistic the instincts of the modern environmental movement really are. His piece the other day – spotted by Ed West: damn you, Ed, I’m so jealous I didn’t get there first – in which he urged government intervention to solve the housing crisis by forcing rich home owners to take in lodgers was a classic. It was, indeed, the moment when he finally jumped the shark!

Thank you, George! Thank you! You are the gift that goes on giving!"

James Delingpole
The Telegraph [fixed - that'll teach me, for posting from the phone]

The man who repeatedly beats the Met Office at its own game

Marcus's picture

Pathetic weather forecasting by alarmists grounds my sleigh!!!
..........................................................................

The man who repeatedly beats the Met Office at its own game

Piers Corbyn not only predicted the current weather, but he believes things are going to get much worse, says Boris Johnson.

By Boris Johnson
19 Dec 2010

Well, folks, it's tea-time on Sunday and for anyone involved in keeping people moving it has been a hell of a weekend. Thousands have had their journeys wrecked, tens of thousands have been delayed getting away for Christmas; and for those Londoners who feel aggrieved by the performance of any part of our transport services, I can only say that we are doing our level best.

Almost the entire Tube system was running yesterday and we would have done even better if it had not been for a suicide on the Northern Line, and the temporary stoppage that these tragedies entail. Of London's 700 bus services, only 50 were on diversion, mainly in the hillier areas. On Saturday, we managed to keep the West End plentifully supplied with customers, and retailers reported excellent takings on what is one of the busiest shopping days of the year.

We have kept the Transport for London road network open throughout all this. We have about 90,000 tons of grit in stock, and the gritters were out all night to deal with this morning's rush. And yet we have to face the reality of the position across the country.

It is no use my saying that London Underground and bus networks are performing relatively well – touch wood – when Heathrow, our major international airport, is still effectively closed two days after the last heavy snowfall; when substantial parts of our national rail network are still struggling; when there are abandoned cars to be seen on hard shoulders all over the country; and when yet more snow is expected today, especially in the north...

Allow me to introduce readers to Piers Corbyn, meteorologist and brother of my old chum, bearded leftie MP Jeremy. Piers Corbyn works in an undistinguished office in Borough High Street. He has no telescope or supercomputer. Armed only with a laptop, huge quantities of publicly available data and a first-class degree in astrophysics, he gets it right again and again.

Back in November, when the Met Office was still doing its "mild winter" schtick, Corbyn said it would be the coldest for 100 years. Indeed, it was back in May that he first predicted a snowy December, and he put his own money on a white Christmas about a month before the Met Office made any such forecast. He said that the Met Office would be wrong about last year's mythical "barbecue summer", and he was vindicated. He was closer to the truth about last winter, too.

He seems to get it right about 85 per cent of the time and serious business people – notably in farming – are starting to invest in his forecasts. In the eyes of many punters, he puts the taxpayer-funded Met Office to shame. How on earth does he do it? He studies the Sun...

Ho, ho, ho...Merry Christmas!

Marcus's picture

Ohio lighthouse turned into ice by cold weather

Snow and ice have created an alien landscape around Lake Erie.

16 Dec 2010

A lighthouse near Cleveland, Ohio, has been turned into an ice sculpture as spray off of Lake Erie has frozen.

The eastern side of the United States has experienced unusually cold weather with temperatures well below normal.

Heavy snow off the Great Lakes has fallen on northern Ohio, western Pennsylvania and western New York, and forecasters are predicting the big chill will continue for much of the week.
.............................................................................................

The climate bugaboo is the strangest intellectual aberration of our age

Christopher Monckton says that perspective was sorely missing at the Cancun climate conference.


Campaigners argue that cold weather is proof of global warming

By Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
17 Dec 2010

"But don’t you realise," said the bearded, staring enviro-zomb with the regrettable T-shirt, “that global cooling is what we must expect because of global warming?”

"Don’t you realise," I replied, "how silly that sounds? The lowest temperatures ever recorded here in Cancun six days in a row; four extreme winters on the trot in the Northern hemisphere; more people dying in one three-day cold snap in little England in 2002 than Oxfam pretends died of ‘global warming’ worldwide throughout 2010; where’s your perspective, man?"

Perspective, the Olympian capacity to see events as they affect not just us and our mates but everyone, and not just in the excitement of the present but sub specie aeternitatis, in the long, calm, kindly shadow of eternity: this has gone from what passes for education in the West.

The climate bugaboo, the strangest intellectual aberration of our age, rampages because in the me and now we have cast aside three once-universal forms of learning that gave us perspective: a Classical education, to remind us that in reason and logic there is a difference between true and false; a scientific education, to show us which is which; and a religious education, to teach us why the distinction matters.

With perspective, no one would waste a single second of his own time or a red cent of other people’s money trying, Canute-like, to make “global warming” go away...

1.64 deg C?

Frediano's picture

New NASA model: Doubled CO2 means just 1.64°C warming

No matter what the new model models, when they report it to a precision of 0.01C, the implication is that their modeling is significant to 0.01C.

As if.

In truth, given the uncertainty they are demonstrating in their model, it should be reported as "+/- 10 deg C".

As in:

It might get warmer.
It might get colder
It might not change at all.

...because our models are 100% uncalibrated and uncalibratable.

Activists guilty in Ratcliffe power station 'plot'

Marcus's picture

Activists guilty in Ratcliffe power station 'plot'

14 December 2010

Activists who planned to shut down the UK's second largest power station have been found guilty of conspiring to commit aggravated trespass.

The 20 climate change protesters intended to invade the coal-fired station at Ratcliffe-on-Soar in Nottinghamshire, their trial was told.

They were among more than 100 people arrested during a night-time raid at Iona School in Sneinton in April 2009.

Nottingham Crown Court heard they planned to climb the plant's chimneys.

Police raided Iona School - which is about 10 miles from the power station - shortly after midnight on 13 April, arresting 114 people and seizing equipment including bolt cutters.

At the time, staff said it was unclear how the protesters had gained access, but stressed the privately-run school had "nothing to do with the protesters".

During the trial, the jury was told the protesters aimed to disrupt the power station's supply to the national grid by shutting it down for a week.

Prosecutor Felicity Gerry said they could have used more democratic means, but that it was "more fun" to invade Ratcliffe-on-Soar...

The defendants called expert witnesses, including a Nasa scientist [James Hansen - I wonder why they don't want to mention his name? Usually they can't wait to applaud the man.], to argue their actions were necessary in the fight against climate change.

Defence counsel Edward Rees QC insisted the plan was no "jolly" and said: "This was a serious attempt to stop this particular power station, the second largest in the country, to stop it producing in that week 150,000 tonnes of carbon."

But the jury unanimously found the 14 men and six women guilty.

Supt Adrian Pearson, who led Nottinghamshire Police's investigation, said: "Today's verdict clearly shows that these individuals were determined to commit offences that would result in them not only trespassing on private land, but also damaging property and potentially endangering the lives of others.

"These actions would have had a major impact on people living not only in Nottinghamshire, but across the East Midlands."

One of the defendants, Claire Whitney, said outside court: "Taking action on climate change is not an act of moral righteousness but one of self defence".

The activists will be sentenced on Friday but the judge said he was not considering custodial sentences.
.........................................................................................................................................

Why did Ratcliffe defence fail where Kingsnorth Six succeeded?

Two separate trials of environmental activists that both targeted coal-fired power stations produced different results.

Lawyer Mike Schwarz examines the reasons why

Mike Schwarz
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 16 December 2010

CO2 released by coal-fired power stations is the single most damaging contributor to climate change. So it is perhaps little wonder that concerned citizens have sought to close them down. However, the juries delivering their verdicts on their actions have come to conflicting conclusions.

This week 20 environmentalists were convicted at Nottingham crown court for planning to close down Ratcliffe power station. In autumn 2008, six Greenpeace campaigners were acquitted at Maidstone crown court for actually occupying Kingsnorth power station.

Why the disparity?...

Among those who testified was James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists who, in evidence to the US Congress in the 1980s, first drew attention to man-made climate change.

However, in both cases the jury had to consider one simple proposition: did the defendants believe their action was imperative, urgent and reasonable – in the light, among other things, of politicians' inactivity and nature's "tipping points" (the points of no return when runaway climate change will be beyond our control).

Given the inviolability of the jury's deliberations, we can only speculate on their decision making. The Nottingham jury may have been influenced by the crown's argument that instead of taking "direct action", the defendants should have spent their money paying a celebrity to front a campaign – or should have installed a biodegradable toilet in their homes, as the prosecutor confided she had. They might have derived some advantage – not immediately obvious to others in court – from the calculator they asked to take with them to assist their deliberations on the defendants' guilt or innocence.

More seriously, one might speculate what has happened in the two years since the Maidstone verdict in 2008? In the science world, "climategate" has been exploited by "contrarians" to reduce the proportion of the population who are concerned about climate change, even as mean world temperatures rise. Internationally, the Copenhagen and Cancún summits have failed to provide legally binding and effective agreements to tackle climate change. In the UK, the focus is on the reduction of the deficit through pinching financial short-termism. In an austere new world, the public may be less receptive to arguments of morality and altruism which recognise our responsibility to the world community and future generations...

Agreed...

Marcus's picture

...if it is happening, and caused by humans, we do not require politicians and bureaucrats to meddle in our affairs.

However, the sad fact is that the science has become the slave of governments that wish to tax and regulate our lives more and corrupt companies that want hand-outs from us for nothing in return.

Let's Pretend

ChuhuaZhu's picture

Let's pretend that global warming is real, that humans do cause it and that it is harmful. Well, the only way to deal with that is to institute a free market and private arbitration, so that people can be liable for polluting and we will be able to best adapt ourselves to the changes that result from it. The Global Warming argument is irrelevant to the question of whether regulation is frickin' stupid and evil.

New NASA model: Doubled CO2 means just 1.64°C warming

Marcus's picture

New NASA model: Doubled CO2 means just 1.64°C warming

'Important to get these things right', says scientist

By Lewis Page
Posted in Environment, 8th December 2010

A group of top NASA boffins says that current climate models predicting global warming are far too gloomy, and have failed to properly account for an important cooling factor which will come into play as CO2 levels rise.

According to Lahouari Bounoua of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and other scientists from NASA and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), existing models fail to accurately include the effects of rising CO2 levels on green plants. As green plants breathe in CO2 in the process of photosynthesis – they also release oxygen, the only reason that there is any in the air for us to breathe – more carbon dioxide has important effects on them.

In particular, green plants can be expected to grow as they find it easier to harvest carbon from the air around them using energy from the sun: thus introducing a negative feedback into the warming/carbon process. Most current climate models don't account for this at all, according to Bounoua. Some do, but they fail to accurately simulate the effects – they don't allow for the fact that plants in a high-CO2 atmosphere will "down-regulate" and so use water more efficiently.

Bounoua and her colleagues write:

Increase in precipitation contributes primarily to increase evapotranspiration rather than surface runoff, consistent with observations, and results in an additional cooling effect not fully accounted for in previous simulations with elevated CO2.

The NASA and NOAA boffins used their more accurate science to model a world where CO2 levels have doubled to 780 parts per million (ppm) compared to today's 390-odd. They say that world would actually warm up by just 1.64°C overall, and the vegetation-cooling effect would be stronger over land to boot – thus temperatures on land would would be a further 0.3°C cooler compared to the present sims.

International diplomatic efforts under UN auspices are currently devoted to keeping global warming limited to 2°C or less, which under current climate models calls for holding CO2 to 450 ppm – or less in many analyses – a target widely regarded as unachievable. Doubled carbon levels are normally viewed in the current state of enviro play as a scenario that would lead to catastrophe; that is, to warming well beyond 2°C.

It now appears, however, that the previous/current state of climate science may simply have been wrong and that there's really no need to get in an immediate flap. If Bounoua and her colleagues are right, and CO2 levels keep on rising the way they have been lately (about 2 ppm each year), we can go a couple of centuries without any dangerous warming. There are lots of other factors in play, of course, but nonetheless the new analysis is very reassuring...
..................................................................................................................................

Dominic Lawson: A climate deal that flatters to deceive

There was no advance on the vapid pledges made in Copenhagen which were deemed to be retrograde

Tuesday, 14 December 2010

How's this for upbeat reporting? "The breakthrough – which Britain and the Prime Minister did much to bring about – came amid unprecedented scenes of enthusiasm and emotion in the early hours of Saturday morning, when tears flowed and thunderous ovations from almost all the representatives of the 194 nations gathered in the resort's sprawling Moon Palace hotel complex drowned out the last resistance."

Thus, in The Daily Telegraph, the doyen of environment correspondents, Geoffrey Lean, gave David Cameron star billing for negotiating the saving of the planet at the Cancun UN climate change summit. Amazing, really, considering that our Prime Minister, in common with almost every other head of government, chose to stay away from unseasonably cool Cancun. He obviously has a wonderful telephone manner.

Yet what is this deal that had the delegates, by Lean's on-the-spot account, shedding copious tears of happiness and relief? As far as I can tell, there was no advance on the vapid pledges made a year ago in Copenhagen, and which were deemed at the time to be retrograde and almost worthless. The UN member states agreed in Cancun that they "shall aim to complete" further commitments by developed nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions "as early as possible". The agreement dropped the earlier text that called on the world to cut emissions by 50 per cent and richer countries by over 80 per cent by 2050; in its place, all concerned agreed to "work towards identifying a global goal for substantially reduced global emissions by 2050". Yada, yada.

Oh, and the delegates repeated their Copenhagen commitment to set up a Green Climate Fund of $100bn to "address the needs of developing countries". We are given no clear idea of how this money is to be raised, delivered or allocated.

In short, every decision which would actually involve invigilated action by identifiable countries has been kicked down the road to Durban, the venue for the final UN climate summit to renew the Kyoto Protocol before it lapses in 2012. Strikingly, it was the country which hosted that agreement, Japan (generally seen as the good guy in these circles), which declared at the outset of the Cancun summit that it now had no intention of agreeing any further cuts in emissions, unless China and America agreed to be bound by the 1997 Kyoto targets – which neither of the two biggest emitters have shown any inclination to do in the intervening period.

That they have not, owes more to reason than those nation's critics are often prepared to allow. Even on the calculations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), full implementation of the Kyoto Accord would have cost hundreds of billions of dollars in lost economic growth, while helping to reduce global temperatures by less than one third of one degree Fahrenheit in 100 years. It is hardly any wonder that there are no serious economists to be found who think that the best way to relieve global poverty, in the developing world or anywhere else, is in fighting the good fight against carbon emissions.

Had the boom years of the late 1990s and early 2000s continued, then their arguments might have gained much less traction; but at a time of deep fiscal retrenchment and with a steep rise in families affected by fuel poverty (that is, those who need to spend over 10 per cent of their income on fuel) such critiques have become much more compelling. No wonder the developed nations were studiously unspecific in Cancun about the sources and method of collection of the $100bn Green Climate Fund for poorer countries. Just a cursory examination of the fiscal state of most Western European exchequers, not to mention the truly colossal budget deficit in the United States, and the inevitably harsh measures which will be imposed by those governments on their own citizenry, should be enough to make the poorer countries deeply cynical about their prospects of collecting said $100bn – as indeed they are...

The climate change circus rolls on

Marcus's picture

Leading article: The climate change circus rolls on

Sunday, 12 December 2010

In assessing the importance of the climate change agreement made in Cancun yesterday, we should not confuse relief with genuine cause for celebration. The talks did not break down in acrimonious failure, which would have been bad for the prospects of humankind's sustainable stewardship of the planet. But the hailing of the deal at Cancun as a "breakthrough" is premature and excessively enthusiastic. The essence of the deal was that all countries (apart from Bolivia and Cuba) agreed not to call it a failure. Yet discussion of all the difficult issues was postponed for resolution at a later date....

So the caravan rumbles on; the show stays on the road; the bicycle stays upright. All the staple metaphors of UN climate-change negotiation commentary remain in play. We are all still aboard the train; the travelling circus is still in business. This time next year it is Durban (mind you, type Cancun and South Africa into Google and the first site that comes up offers cheap flights from one to the other). It has become an annual event, with an Olympics or World-Cup-style competition to stage the next one. Qatar, appropriately enough, is in the running to provide the venue for the summit in 2012.

However, simply keeping a vast itinerant bureaucracy in being is not the point of the exercise. The ultimate question is how much the governments of the world succeed in reducing the carbon intensity of economic activity, and so far little has been achieved beyond the vagaries of switching energy sources and the steady march of technological efficiency. The key drivers of greenhouse gas output remain population growth and the economic cycle. At each conference, the participants agree a form of words and express the shining hope that the binding details can be nailed down by the time of the next one...

Keeping the travelling circus on the road is critical to confidence, and it is only if people and businesses worldwide believe that carbon-based energy will become more expensive in future that deep long-term changes will happen.

The Cancun agreement is better than nothing, but it is not enough.

.........................................................................................

Cancún climate summit: Yet another opportunity lost

Any significance of the decisions taken vanishes when matched against the scale of things to come

Editorial
The Guardian, Monday 13 December 2010

On Saturday, David Cameron hailed the decisions of the world climate conference in Cancún, Mexico, as a "significant" step. The prime minister did not say a big step, or even a small step. Nations agreed once again that world average temperatures should be allowed to rise by no more than 2C but once again declined to commit collectively to real and binding targets for emissions cuts by which performance could be measured. They agreed on a green climate fund to share new technology, help conserve forests and ease the stresses on the poorest countries – the ones that emit the lowest per-capita share of greenhouse gas emissions – but not on how exactly to deliver the money. After the missed opportunities of the Copenhagen meeting in 2009 nobody expected anything at all from the Cancún encounter, so any agreement represents a significant step.

But this significance vanishes when matched against the scale of things to come. This year is already likely to be one of the warmest on record, in the warmest decade on record. The icy extremes that have gripped Britain in recent weeks were balanced by truly terrible extremes of heat in Russia in July: temperatures soared more than 7.6C above average; forest fires blazed and grain crops were destroyed. Associated catastrophic floods killed 1,500 and displaced 20 million people in Pakistan. In Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the thermometer reached 52C; in Morocco it tipped 47.7C. Much milder extremes during the European heatwave of 2003 are estimated to have claimed up to 70,000 lives. More and worse could be on the way. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will next year report formally on the connection between the frequency of extreme weather events and climate change....
......................................................................................................................

Harrabin's Notes: No crash for climate bus

13 December 2010

In his regular column, BBC environment analyst Roger Harrabin looks at what has been achieved at the Cancun climate summit and the goals which remain out of reach.

...Of course, my perspective on this issue may be biased by location - I am writing from the Houston Energy Corridor overlooking an 18-lane highway buzzing with SUVs.

On the other side is a Chevvy showroom and a QuickLube dealer. I'm here to report on the rise of shale gas which is giving the US energy independence and sapping investment from renewables.

I'm reading in the papers about the rise of the climate sceptic Tea Party. And the words of Jonathan Pershing are ringing in my ears.

He's the chief US negotiator, and he told me at the Tianjin climate conference a few months ago that he didn't expect climate or energy laws through the US Congress for maybe four years (assuming that President Obama wins a second term, which is questionable). And that was before Republicans seized control of the House.

Dr Pershing said he believed the US would be able to meet its Copenhagen Accord commitment of a few percent cut off 1990 CO2 levels by 2020.

But senior commentators here doubt that is possible without legislation. And, anyway, it is far distant from what developing countries want, bearing in mind that rich nations have noted that establishment science expects them to cut 25-40% by 2020.

The Americans, blamed by some for undermining talks behind the scenes at Cancun, were eventually cheered when they supported the final Cancun text - but that's only because no one's really counting on them for support.

The fact that the US declared itself out of the Kyoto Protocol so long ago has allowed others to emerge as Kyoto villains.

Japan and Russia, both unwilling to commit to legally binding agreements when the US won't do so and when the current boom in emissions is from emerging nations which are challenging their industries on the world stage....

Climate change: the warmist demands heat up

Marcus's picture

Climate change: the warmist demands heat up as 'green’ costs soar

Even the freezing weather failed to bring cold reality home to the global warming posse in Cancun, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
11 Dec 2010

It is probably fair to say that, in the real world, the need to fight runaway global warming was not at the top of most people’s agenda last week. The Central England Temperature record, the oldest in the world, showed the fortnight covering the end of November and start of December as the coldest ever since the daily record began in 1772. North of the border, Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond, had to call in the Army as much of his country ground to a halt in up to three feet of snow.

None of this, however, remotely concerned the warmists, who were in fuller cry than ever. In the Mexican resort of Cancun (where, for six days running, local temperatures also fell to their lowest, for the date, since records began 100 years ago) Lord Stern, that high priest of the international warmist establishment, proposed that Britain should raise an extra £15 billion a year in “green taxes”, on petrol, flights and domestic energy, to punish people with a “high-emission lifestyle” for the damage they do to the environment. Ten per cent of this, said Lord Stern, could go to the new Green Climate Fund (agreed late on Friday, to a standing ovation) to help poorer countries develop “low carbon economies” by building wind turbines and solar panels, while the rest could be kept by the British Government as an “incentive”.

Back in Britain we had the latest report of the Climate Change Committee, set up under the Climate Change Act, chaired by Lord (Adair) Turner. This bunch of academics now proposes that Britain should lead the world by cutting its carbon emissions by 60 per cent in the next 20 years. One of the chief ways to do this, says Lord Turner, will be to ensure that there are 11 million electric cars on Britain’s roads by 2030. Quite how 11 million motorists will be persuaded to pay more than £20,000 a time for these vehicles when, for little more than half that, they could buy a Ford Focus, Lord Turner does not say – nor why they should opt for a car that will drive for barely 100 miles before its batteries have to be recharged for several hours. As for who will provide the millions of charging points necessary, Lord Turner suggests that electricity companies could be forced to do this as a licensing condition. But he overlooks the fact that almost all the electricity they need would come from fossil fuels, which with transmission losses, would largely if not wholly negate any supposed savings in CO2.

No sight was more poignant in Britain last week, however, than that of Mr Salmond, whose self-styled “government” was so caught out by all that nasty white global warming covering Scotland.

Mr Salmond’s proudest boast is that, within 10 years, 80 per cent of all Scotland’s electricity will come from renewable sources, most of it from thousands more wind turbines. Like many other politicians, Mr Salmond does not seem to have registered that the wind is not always blowing. Last Tuesday evening, when many places in Britain were registering their lowest temperatures on record, UK electricity demand was a staggering 60 gigawatts. But the amount coming from wind turbines was just 0.2 per cent – one 500th of what we were using. Ten times as much was coming from nuclear reactors in France, through the interconnector under the Channel.

Mr Salmond insists that he will not allow any replacements for the nuclear and coal-fired power stations in Scotland which will be forced to close in the next few years, although they currently generate almost as much as Scotland’s average demand of 4GW. So any hope of keeping Scotland’s lights on will rest on being able to import much of the power it needs from the hated English. So much for Scottish independence...

After the cop-out in Copenhagen, it's chaos in Cancun

Marcus's picture

After the cop-out in Copenhagen, it's chaos in Cancun

The latest climate talks are at risk of achieving nothing

By Michael McCarthy

Friday, 10 December 2010

The UN climate change talks in Cancun are "poised on a knife edge" as they enter their final day this morning, with the possibility of success, but also the possibility of "a car crash," according to Britain's Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Chris Huhne.

Mr Huhne, who is leading a special group of ministers tackling the meeting's key problem – how to replace the current international climate treaty, the Kyoto Protocol – gave a solemn warning last night that the conference could very possibly end in outright failure, as happened at Copenhagen last year.

Such an outcome would be "very very serious" not only for the issue of global warming, but also for the whole UN process which has been set up to deal with it, he said, and it would risk turning future talks into a "zombie conference", at which there would nobody of sufficient seniority in attendance to take any serious decisions...
........................................................................................

UK public say human rights should be key factor determining UK aid

Human rights are more important to aid spending than influence over security, economy or climate change

From IDS, part of the Guardian Development Network
guardian.co.uk, Friday 10 December

New survey results suggest that most people in the UK would support the promotion of human rights as the key factor determining where and how the UK's overseas aid is spent.

Most respondents thought the promotion of human rights was more important than factors such as promoting UK security, benefiting the UK economy and offsetting the impacts of climate change. UK aid spending is one of the few areas protected from public spending cuts and is set to rise to £11.5bn by 2014.

The research by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) finds that more than eight out of 10 people think the promotion of human rights should be an important driver of UK aid to developing countries, with over half saying it is 'very important'...
............................................................................................................................

'Climate change could give you cancer': UN report warns of deadly pollutants from glaciers

By David Derbyshire
9th December 2010

Melting glaciers and ice sheets are releasing cancer-causing pollutants into the air and oceans, scientists say.

The long-lasting chemicals get into the food chain and build up in people's bodies - triggering tumours, heart disease and infertility.

The warning comes in new international study into the links between climate change and a class of man-made toxins called persistent organic pollutants.

The study – due to be published next month – says rising temperatures and more extreme weather are increasing human exposure to pollutants around the world, including in Britain.

Scientists are concerned about Persistent Organic Pollutants, or POPs, because they last decades in the environment and accumulate in body tissue.

They include pesticides such as DDT and chemicals called PCBs used in electrical goods.

Donald Cooper, of the United Nations Environment Programme which published the report at the UN climate talks in Cancun, Mexico, said melting glaciers and ice sheets were releasing POPs trapped years ago into the air and seas...

Alarmist Doomsday warning of rising seas 'was wrong'

Marcus's picture

Alarmist Doomsday warning of rising seas 'was wrong', says Met Office study

By Daily Mail Reporter
6th December 2010

Alarming predictions that global warming could cause sea levels to rise 6ft in the next century are wrong, it has emerged.

The forecast made by the influential 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which would have seen cities around the world submerged by water, now looks ‘unlikely’.

A Met Office study also rules out the shutdown of the Atlantic Ocean’s conveyor belt, which would trigger Arctic winters in Britain like those seen in the film The Day After Tomorrow.

However, the report says the IPCC was right to warn of a sea level rise of up to 2ft by 2100, and that a 3ft rise could happen.

The IPCC underestimated the danger posed by the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the release of methane from warmer wetlands, the report adds.

Vicky Pope, head of climate science at the Met Office, said: ‘In most cases, our new understanding has reinforced results from the IPCC report – and the degree of impact is about the same.’

The 2007 analysis was criticised last year after it was found to have wrongly claimed Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

The Met Office analysis comes as world ministers fly to Cancun, Mexico, for the second week of UN climate change talks...
...........................................................................................................................

Latin American radicals call for Kyoto renewal

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor, in Cancun

Monday, 6 December 2010

Three radical Latin American leaders may make the difference between agreement and failure at the UN climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, which reaches its climax this week.

Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua – socialist firebrands all – are planning to attend the "high-level" segment of the Cancun meeting which begins tomorrow – and they each have a specific, potentially deal-breaking demand: that the Kyoto Protocol be renewed. This is because it obliges rich industrialised countries to bind themselves to cut their emissions of greenhouses gases, without a similar commitment by the developing nations.

Their delegates at the conference have already made clear there will be no deal without renewal. Yet last week three major industrialised countries – Japan, Russia and Canada – declared in Cancun they would refuse to renew their initial Kyoto commitments, which run out in 2012.

The rich and poor countries seem so far apart that at the weekend the EU's lead negotiator, Artur Runge-Metzger, said it was "like a sword of Damocles hanging over the conference"...
.................................................................................................

Britain needs to revert to central planning of market

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor, in Cancun

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Britain needs to go back to old-style central planning of its electricity market, with the Government deciding who builds power stations where, so that it can take on the world’s toughest target to cut its emissions of the greenhouse gases causing global warming, the independent Committee on Climate Change tells the Government today.

The only way of getting the £150bn worth of new low-carbon energy generating plant – whether offshore windfarms, nuclear power stations or loaw-carbon and gas plants – will be for the Government to offer contracts with guaranteed prices for the electricity, the committee says.

In pursuit of its ultimate goal of slashing carbon dioxide by 80 per cent by 2050, the Government should now set a new, legally-binding interim target of a 60 per cent cut by 2030, the committee says in its latest report – which would be far and away the most demanding emissions target anywhere.

The committee, set up under the Under the Climate Change Act, 2008, says that anything less would not be compatible with the 80 per cent objective, and says it is making the recommendation after an extensive review of recent climate science which looked at 500 recently published peer-reviewed papers.

This led to the conclusion, the committee says, that “the science remains robust and the case for action is stronger than ever.”

Acting on recommendations from the committee, the Government has already set itself a legally-binding target of cutting UK emissions by 34 per cent by 2020, which is believed to be tougher than any other.

This should now be tightened to 37 per cent, the committee says, and tightened further to a 42 per cent cut if a world-wide climate change deal can be achieved through UN negotiations, like those going on this week at Cancun in Mexico.

Although a 60 per cent cut by 2030, on 1990 levels – which actually means a 46 per cent cut in carbon emissions from where Britain is now, in a mere 20 years – would represent an unprecedented level of ambition, the committee chairman, Lord Turner of Ecchinswell (who as Adair Turner was the director general of the Confederation of British Industry) characterised it yesterday as “stretching but realistic.”

Lord Turner said: “The case for action on climate change is as strong as ever. Climate science remains robust and suggests that there are very significant risks if we do not cut emissions. And countries acting now will gain economic benefits in an increasingly carbon-constrained world.”

The 60 per cent target would be achievable “at a cost of less than one per cent of GDP,” Lord Turner said, adding: “Any less ambition would not be compatible with the 2050 target in the Climate Change Act.”

In its new report the committee sets out in detail how the 60 per cent target could be reached, with its most striking recommendation being that Britain’s ultra-liberalised electricity market should return to a form of central planning...

Cancun climate conference: the warmists' last Mexican wave

Marcus's picture

Cancun climate conference: the warmists' last Mexican wave

The global warming scare was fun while it lasted, but the joke's over, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
04 Dec 2010

If, last week, frozen behind a snowdrift, you heard a faint hysterical squeaking, it might well have been the sound of those 20,000 delegates holed up behind a wall of armed security guards in the sun-drenched Mexican holiday resort of Cancun, telling each other that the world is more threatened by runaway global warming than ever. Between their tequilas and lavish meals paid for by the world’s taxpayers, they heard how, by 2060, global temperatures will have risen by 4 degrees Celsius; how the Maldives and Tuvalu are sinking below the waves faster than ever; how the survival of salmon is threatened by CO2-induced acidification of the oceans; how the UN must ban incandescent light bulbs throughout the world.

“Scientists”, we were told, are calling for everyone to be issued with a “carbon ration card”, to halt all Western economic growth for 20 years.

Meanwhile, Dr Rajendra Pachauri was telling us that we must spend hundreds of billions on covering the world’s oceans with iron filings, on building giant mirrors out in space and on painting all the world’s roofs white to keep out the heat from the sun.

The most obvious thing about all this ritualised scaremongering was how stale it all was. Not one of these points hasn’t been a cliche for years.The only scientist who believes we should all be issued with carbon ration cards is a Prof Kevin Anderson, who has been saying it since 2004. It is only those same old computer models that predict that Tuvalu and the Maldives are about to drown, when real measurements show the sea around them not to be rising at all. Far from the oceans acidifying, their pH currently ranges between 7.9 and 8.3, putting them very firmly on the alkaline side of the threshold, at 7.0.

The prediction that global temperatures will rise by four degrees in 50 years comes from that same UK Met Office computer which five weeks ago was telling us we were about to enjoy a “milder than average” winter, after three years when it has consistently got every one of its winter and summer forecasts hopelessly wrong. (And the reason why our local authorities are already fast running out of salt is that they were silly enough to believe them.)

When Vicky Pope, the Met Office’s Head of Climate Change Advice, wanted to fly out from Gatwick to Cancun to tell them that 2010 is the hottest year on record, she was trapped by inches of the same global warming that her £33 million computer had failed to predict...
..............................................................................................................................................
Cancún climate talks in danger of collapse over Kyoto continuation

• Latin America outraged at foot-dragging by rich
• Wealthy countries say little chance of deal now

John Vidal, Environment editor
The Guardian, Saturday 4 December 2010

The UN climate talks in Cancún were in danger of collapse last night after many Latin American countries said that they would leave if a crucial negotiating document, due to be released tomorrow, did not continue to commit rich countries to emissions cuts under the Kyoto Protocol.

The Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (Alba) group of nine Latin American countries – who claim they are backed by African, Arab countries and other developing nations – said they were not prepared to see an end to the treaty that legally requires all of its signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

They challenged the Mexican presidency of the UN summit to prepare a negotiating text including a commitment by rich countries to set fresh targets for a second period of Kyoto beyond 2012.

The Guardian understands that if the new text includes a reference to a continuation of the Kyoto protocol, the talks will continue. But if it omits the wording and opts only to support negotiations based on the weaker Copenhagen accord agreed last year, then developing countries are likely to stop the talks...
.................................................................................................................................................

Climate talks on knife edge over Chinese demands

Developing nations accuse West of intransigence, as corruption is cited as obstacle to progress

By Jonathan Owen

Sunday, 5 December 2010

Environment ministers from around the world flew in to Mexico yesterday for the final days of the climate-change talks in Cancun, which threatened to fracture over Chinese-led demands for concessions from the West. Campaigners marched in London yesterday to demand action.

As a sign of the work still to be done, only 170 words out of 1,300 on two pages of a key text were undisputed on the "shared vision" of what delegates hoped to accomplish.

However, a further issue is now being cited as a significant obstacle in the fight against climate change – corruption.

The extent of the problem could see any agreements doomed to failure, according to leading global risks analysts. New research to be released this week shows that among the countries most at risk from climate change are also to be found those that are most corrupt – making it difficult to counter the effects of flooding, desertification and deforestation...
...................................................................................................................

What happened to the 'warmest year on record': The truth is global warming has halted

By David Rose
5th December 2010

A year ago tomorrow, just before the opening of the UN Copenhagen world climate summit, the British Meteorological Office issued a confident prediction. The mean world temperature for 2010, it announced, 'is expected to be 14.58C, the warmest on record' - a deeply worrying 0.58C above the 19611990 average.

World temperatures, it went on, were locked inexorably into an everrising trend: 'Our experimental decadal forecast confirms previous indications that about half the years 2010-2019 will be warmer than the warmest year observed so far - 1998.'

Met Office officials openly boasted that they hoped by their statements to persuade the Copenhagen gathering to impose new and stringent carbon emission limits - an ambition that was not to be met.

Last week, halfway through yet another giant, 15,000delegate UN climate jamboree, being held this time in the tropical splendour of Cancun in Mexico, the Met Office was at it again.

Never mind that Britain, just as it was last winter and the winter before, was deep in the grip of a cold snap, which has seen some temperatures plummet to minus 20C, and that here 2010 has been the coolest year since 1996.

Globally, it insisted, 2010 was still on course to be the warmest or second warmest year since current records began.

But buried amid the details of those two Met Office statements 12 months apart lies a remarkable climbdown that has huge implications - not just for the Met Office, but for debate over climate change as a whole.

Read carefully with other official data, they conceal a truth that for some, to paraphrase former US VicePresident Al Gore, is really inconvenient: for the past 15 years, global warming has stopped...

Are we freezing because of global warming?

Marcus's picture

Are we freezing because of global warming?

Climate change could bring Britain ever more extreme weather, says Roger Highfield.

By Roger Highfield
03 Dec 2010

...The Gulf Stream relies on the fact that as the water loses its heat in the north Atlantic, it cools, sinks and flows back to the south. The fear has been that, as the planet warms, melting Arctic ice will weaken these currents, plunging Europe into the cooler.

On this count, however, there is good news. According to Prof Mark Maslin, of University College London, there seems – at present – "to be no evidence of changes in the Atlantic circulation which could account for the last two harsh winters". There are, he says, shorter-term patterns in ocean circulation which have a major effect, and have been linked to the severe winters in the 1940s and 1960s. But again, that is probably not the case today.

So why is it so bone-chillingly cold? Well, Prof Maslin thinks the cause of the big freeze can be found in the atmosphere. As Ewen McCallum, the chief meteorologist at the Met Office, explains, this year and last have seen large areas of high pressure develop in the Atlantic, blocking the westerly winds and allowing chilly Arctic air to move south across Europe.

Winds from the east are always freezing – and at this time of year, the long nights cool the European land-mass more rapidly, meaning that the air remains bitterly cold when it reaches us. To make matters worse, the winds pick up moisture and heat as they cross the North Sea, which is dumped on us in the form of snow (explaining why coastal areas to the east have seen the heaviest falls).

But before we write off our current cold snap as the British weather playing its usual tricks, we still need to explain why the Arctic high pressure has strayed so far south. And here, says Prof Maslin, is the more likely, and more subtle, link with climate change. "For me," he says, "this shows that the climate is becoming more dynamic, and thus large shifts in the wind patterns are possible – in this case, sub-tropical air being trapped further south than usual."...

.....................................................................................

Global warming TV series urges kids to 'stop Santa's runway melting'

CiTV's Mission: Green Santa asks children to make an eco-pledge – or else risk receiving no Christmas presents

Posted by Leo Hickman
Friday 3 December 2010

Mixing children and climate change produces a volatile cocktail. Not because children can't readily grasp the complexities and implications of the science per se, but because some parents, given their own prejudices about climate science, will inevitably view such instruction as politicised indoctrination.

Does this mean, as some ideologues/zealots in the US are now arguing, that the topic of climate change, alongside evolution, should be banned from lessons? Of course not; that would be absurd, given the weighting the subject is now accorded by the adult world, not least the scientific community.

But, as I have written before, working out how you go about discussing climate change with children is a vexing debate, given that it inevitably sucks into the discourse issues beyond just the science.

Choosing a strategy for tackling this multi-faceted subject in the classroom is one thing. But schools are only one – albeit a hugely important one – source of knowledge for children. Whether we like it or not, children's television is where many of our kids glean a significant proportion of their learning, too.

It is, therefore, noteworthy that CiTV, the children's arm of ITV (the UK's oldest and most-viewed terrestrial commercial network), is set to feature a new series called Mission: Green Santa, during the run-up to Christmas...

Over at the website for Chief Productions, the Manchester-based production company responsible for the series, this is how the programme is being described:

Dr Maurice Bergs is a climate scientist and he's discovered something truly shocking that he needs to tell the world. We know the ice-caps are melting, and that it's all our fault. But did we know that global warming is threatening Christmas itself? Why? Because Santa's ice runway is melting too. If it gets much shorter, then Santa's sleigh won't make the take-off on Christmas eve and good children across the world will go without their presents.

The objective of Green Santa is to engage kids with the story of Santa's melting runway and then encourage them to make online pledges to save energy in their homes and schools. Kids will be given direct feedback on the positive impacts of their pledges and will be kept up to date on what's going on at Santa's compound. Get involved at www.green-santa.com [not yet live].

This description alone is sure to raise hackles is certain predictable corners...
......................................................................................................................

Global warming talks just hot air?

3 December 2010

"Hot weather always gives a good result," muses one veteran of countless United Nations climate conferences.

"Cold weather, like in Copenhagen, that is the problem."

It would be worrying if it were true, but world leaders will be forgiven for hoping so.

Last year, in the bitter cold at the Danish capital, they promised £100bn a year to tackle climate change and its affects by 2020 - mostly from the private sector.

Now, as the 2010 UN Climate Change Conference continues in Cancun, Mexico, even that limited pledge is looking optimistic.

Money dries up

The Kyoto treaty put a cost on carbon emitted in some western countries, and allowed polluters to pay for projects to reduce emissions in the developing world.

“We've been through a very significant financial crisis, and environmental projects are clearly affected”

But that treaty expires next year.

The latest World Bank report for 2009 showed investment in new projects down by more than half....

UN calls for worldwide phase out of incandescent bulbs

Marcus's picture

Cancun climate summit: UN calls for worldwide phase out of incandescent bulbs

Traditional light bulbs should be banned across the world as part of plans to help tackle climate change, according to a new United Nations report.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent in Cancun
01 Dec 2010

Britain is already phasing out traditional bulbs as part of European regulations to save energy, with high wattage bulbs no longer on the shelves.

The scheme has been unpopular with many because compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) take longer to warm up and can give some people headaches.

However they last ten times longer and require far less electricity to produce the same amount of light.

A UN study found that if every nation switched from incandescent lamps to energy-efficient alternatives, it would cut the world’s electricity demand for lighting by over 2 per cent. This is equivalent to saving around 800 million tonnes of emissions...

The UN said it is up to different countries to decide the best way to encourage a switch to energy efficient models, but many may choose a ban on incandescent bulbs.

Other ways to encourage the switch include taxing incandescent bulbs and subsidising the alternative or public awareness campaigns.

As well as Europe, the US, Australia, Cuba, Canada and the Philippines are all banning incandescent bulbs.

The UN is working with the lighting industry to try and phase out incandescent bulbs in countries including China, Russia, Vietnam and Morocco.

Achim Steiner, the head of the UN’s Environment Programme, said it would not only be good for climate change but the economy, as businesses save money on lighting and less power stations are needed...
................................................................................................................................

Japan derails climate talks by refusing to renew Kyoto treaty

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

Thursday, 2 December 2010

The world's climate negotiations in Cancun were faced with deadlock at their outset yesterday after Japan insisted it would not agree to renewing the Kyoto Protocol, the current treaty under which rich countries are cutting their emissions of greenhouse gases.

Kyoto, signed in the Japanese city in 1997, runs out in its current form at the end of 2012, yet its renewal carries enormous symbolic significance for the developing countries – who see it as a sign of good faith by industrialised nations in the fight against global warming – and who are not legally bound by it, as the rich countries are.

Richer countries, led by the European Union and US, would like to replace Kyoto with a treaty that brings all the world's countries into a legally binding pact to cut carbon emissions.

It was over this difference that negotiations collapsed at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen last December. Since then Europe has taken the lead in suggesting a way forward by having two new climate treaties, with Kyoto being renewed, as long as there was a parallel legally binding agreement which brought in all countries, including the US and China.

The Japanese refusal to renew the treaty, the first country to do so, throws this arrangement into jeopardy, and threatens to make a Cancun version of the Copenhagen deadlock likely, with the world further than ever from tackling climate change...
.............................................................................................................................................

Climate change aid will cost British taxpayers £2.9bn over four years

By David Derbyshire
1st December 2010

British taxpayers will have to fork out £2.9 billion over the next four years to help the world’s poorest countries cope with global warming, the Government said last night.

The Coalition said the 'climate finance' package was essential if the world was to get a legally binding treaty to stop global temperatures rising by more than 2c.

In the last year alone, the UK has paid £500 million for new wind farms, solar panel power plants and forestry protection schemes across Asia, Africa and South America.

But critics say British taxpayers are paying more than their fair share in green aid - and that other Western countries should shoulder more of the burden at a time of massive cuts in public spending...
.........................................................................................................................

‘LEARN TO LIVE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE’, SAYS LEADING EXPERT

Wednesday December 1,2010
By Daily Express Reporter

TRYING to halt global warming is a waste of time – we should simply adapt to it, a leading climate expert claimed yesterday.

Reducing carbon dioxide emissions is an “illusory goal”, said Professor Bob Carter of James Cook University, Australia.

He said that CO2 – emitted by burning fossil fuels such as oil, coal and gas – is a “minor” greenhouse gas. And he argued that the past decade has seen a “lack of warming” and that “no significant warming has occurred since 1958.

Professor Carter spoke out as governments from around the world gather for the latest climate talks in Cancun, Mexico.

He told Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation: “Despite an estimated spend of more than £64billion since 1990 looking for a human global temperature signal, assessed against geological reality, no compelling empirical evidence yet exists for a measurable, let alone worrisome, human impact on global average temperature...
..........................................................................................................................

David Cameron will not attend climate change talks

Marcus's picture

Cancun climate change summit: David Cameron will not attend climate change talks

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has turned down the chance to attend the latest round of climate change talks, as there is little chance of a global deal this time.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
30 Nov 2010

At the last round of United Nations talks in Copenhagen more than 100 world leaders turned up to ‘save the planet’.

However the latest round of talks in Cancun, Mexico, has already been played down as just a ‘stepping stone’ on the way to a global deal.

Patricia Espinosa Espinosa, Mexico’s Foreign Minister and President of the talks, said that world leaders were invited to the talks if they want.

She said around 25 have agreed to come.

“All those heads of state interested in participating are welcome by the Mexican Government it will be a pleasure and an honour for all of us to have them here,” she said.

It is understood Mr Cameron was invited but declined to come...
...........................................................................................................................

Al Gore's Ethanol Epiphany

He concedes the industry he promoted serves no useful purpose.

NOVEMBER 27, 2010.

Anyone who opposes ethanol subsidies, as these columns have for decades, comes to appreciate the wisdom of St. Jude. But now that a modern-day patron saint—St. Al of Green—has come out against the fuel made from corn and your tax dollars, maybe this isn't such a lost cause.

Welcome to the college of converts, Mr. Vice President. "It is not a good policy to have these massive subsidies for first-generation ethanol," Al Gore told a gathering of clean energy financiers in Greece this week. The benefits of ethanol are "trivial," he added, but "It's hard once such a program is put in place to deal with the lobbies that keep it going."

No kidding, and Mr. Gore said he knows from experience: "One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for President."

Mr. Gore's mea culpa underscores the degree to which ethanol has become a purely political machine: It serves no purpose other than re-electing incumbents and transferring wealth to farm states and ethanol producers. Nothing proves this better than the coincident trajectories of ethanol and Mr. Gore's career...
................................................................................................................................................

29 November 2010

Climate change failure is moral outrage: Faith leaders

Scotland's religious leaders have described the West's failure to help developing nations cope with climate change as a "moral outrage".

Senior members of the country's Christian and Islamic communities outlined their position in a letter to Prime Minister David Cameron.

They urged the UK government to do all it could to ensure progress was made at the UN climate change conference.

The summit is due to open in Cancun, Mexico, on Monday.

The letter to Mr Cameron has been signed by the Moderator of the Church of Scotland's General Assembly, John Christie, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, David Chillingworth, and Shaykh Ruzwan, a senior figure in the Islamic community.

It highlights disappointment at the outcome of last year's UN climate change conference in Copenhagen and says every day that passes sees lives "affected and even lost".

The faith leaders write that: "Millions of people in developing countries are already being affected by increasingly severe storms, droughts and changing weather patterns, despite having done little to cause the problem...

It's also a fantastic object lesson...

Marcus's picture

...in how many ways the media can spin the same story in just one day.

If you were an observer from outer space you'd have to think that left-wing and right-wing referred to brain hemisphere rather than political ideology Smiling

It's dismaying ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... to contrast the justified accolades for scientists by Ingersoll in his Thanksgiving Sermon from 1897 with the politically servile subsidy-seeking spinning of "scientists" today. They are traitors to their profession, and intellectual midgets to boot. Clearly, half the time they have no idea what they're talking about, and the other half of the time they are lying.

The wonderful world of Orwellian doublespeak

Marcus's picture

World is warming quicker than thought in past decade, says Met Office

"The world warmed more rapidly than previously thought over the past decade, according to a Met Office report published today, which finds the evidence for man-made climate change has grown even stronger over the last year.

The report comes ahead of the first major UN climate negotiations since the Copenhagen summit last December, which begin on Monday in Cancún, Mexico, and as scientists predict that 2010 could be the hottest year on record."

Forget the cold – the world is warmer, says Met Office

"There is "overwhelming" evidence of warming in a wide range or climate indicators, not just surface temperature, Met Office scientists said, although the rate of warming in the last 10 years has slowed compared to the rate over previous decades. The Met Office released its new report as motorists battled with hazardous conditions on many roads yesterday, especially in northern and eastern Britain, as the most widespread November snowfall for 17 years gripped the country. There were falls of 15cm (6ins) in Aberdeenshire, 12cm in the Scottish Borders and 10cm in Durham, and the freezing conditions are likely to spread south and west and last over the weekend, with the weather in general "turning increasingly wintry".

Global warming has slowed down over the past 10 years, say scientists

"The rate at which global temperatures are rising has slowed in the past decade, scientists said today.

In a report published today, the Met Office said the recent decrease seen in the rate of warming was the result of natural variation in the weather and pollution.

Scientists say one of the major reasons for the decrease in global warming is the rise in heavy industry and pollutant 'aerosols', particularly in Asia.

An upsurge in industrial emissions such as sulphur which are being pumped into the atmosphere could reflect sunlight and lead to a cooling effect."

Global warming has slowed because of pollution

"The latest figures from more than 20 scientific institutions around the world show that global temperatures are higher than ever.

However the gradual rise in temperatures over the last 30 years is slowing slightly. Global warming since the 1970s has been 0.16C (0.3F) but the rise in the last decade was just 0.05C (0.09F), according to the Met Office."

World is growing warmer, but pace slows

“There’s still a warming trend but it’s not as rapid as it was before,” conceded Vicky Pope, Met Office head of climate science. “The question is why has that happened. It’s a question sceptics often bring up.”

According to the Met Office, the most likely answer is natural variability – random fluctuations in climate – perhaps supplemented by a cyclical reduction in solar activity and the man-made cooling effect of pollutant “aerosols” emitted by the rapidly industrialising countries of Asia.

In addition, said Ms Pope, “we may be underestimating the warming that is actually taking place”. New analysis shows that sea surface temperatures, measured increasingly with floating buoys, need to be corrected upwards.

Making this adjustment, the Met Office says that the global temperature has risen over the past decade by 0.08°C-0.16°C; the long-term warming trend is 0.16°C per decade."

Climategate is Still the Issue

Marcus's picture


.......................................................................................

Copenhagen targets will not be enough to stop global warming

The world is on track for ‘mutually assured destruction’ as even the most ambitious pledges to cut carbon emissions are not enough to stop runaway climate change, the United Nations has warned.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
23 Nov 2010

Under the Copenhagen Accord, signed at the end of last year, 80 countries promised to take action to reduce their greenhouse gases by 2020.

But even if every target is met it will deliver less than two thirds of the cuts needed to stop global temperatures rising above 2C (3.8F).

The sobering report casts doubt on the ability of the world to tackle global warming just as countries are preparing to meet for the next round of UN talks in Cancun, Mexico.

The talks are aimed at bringing cutting global greenhouse gases in order to prevent the warming of the atmosphere.

Scientists have warned that if temperatures rise above 2C it could cause the ice caps to melt and more extreme weather like droughts and floods.

Achim Steiner, the UN’s top representative on the environment, said unless targets are increased global warming will increase to dangerous levels.

Referring to threat of 'mutually assured destruction' (MAD) that existed during the Cold War, he urged countries to work together this time through the UN to come to a global agreement on climate change.

The world is heading for "mutually assured destruction" if we do not act, he warned...
...............................................................................................................................................................

BBC News, Kathmandu

22 November 2010

Supermodel meets Nepal 'climate change victims'

By Joanna Jolly

Supermodel Helena Christensen has been visiting a village in southern Nepal to see how it is coping with the changing climate.

The Dane, who is a global ambassador for the UK-based aid agency Oxfam, said mothers she met were fearful for their children's lives and their livelihood.

Photographs she took on the trip will be shown next week to delegates at the UN Climate Change Conference in Mexico.

The 41-year-old spent three days seeing how village life had changed....
..............................................................................................................................

There Will Be Fuel

By CLIFFORD KRAUSS
Published: November 16, 2010

THREE summers ago, the world’s supertankers were racing across the oceans as fast as they could to deliver oil to markets growing increasingly thirsty for energy. Americans were grumbling about paying as much as $4 a gallon for gasoline, as the price of crude oil leapt to $147 a barrel. Natural gas prices were vaulting too, sending home electricity bills soaring.

A book making the rounds at the time, “Twilight in the Desert,” by Matthew R. Simmons, seemed to sum up the conventional wisdom: the age of cheap, plentiful oil and gas was over. “Sooner or later, the worldwide use of oil must peak,” the book concluded, “because oil, like the other two fossil fuels, coal and natural gas, is nonrenewable.”

But no sooner did the demand-and-supply equation shift out of kilter than it swung back into something more palatable and familiar. Just as it seemed that the world was running on fumes, giant oil fields were discovered off the coasts of Brazil and Africa, and Canadian oil sands projects expanded so fast, they now provide North America with more oil than Saudi Arabia. In addition, the United States has increased domestic oil production for the first time in a generation...

Canada senate kills climate bill ahead of UN summit

Marcus's picture

18 November 2010

Canada senate kills climate bill ahead of UN summit

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government has defeated a climate change bill calling for cuts in CO2 emissions.

Conservatives killed the motion backed by opposition parties 13 days before a UN climate change summit is held in Cancun.

The bill called for a reduction of greenhouse gases in the country by 25% from 1990 levels.

Canada's House of Commons originally passed the legislation last year.

It was then reintroduced in May and passed again, before being struck down by the Conservative-led Senate late on Tuesday...
.......................................................................................................................................

16 Nov 2010

Climategate scientist insists sceptics will accept global warming when Arctic ice melts

Last year Prof Jones was accused of manipulating climate change data after leaked emails showed he resisted Freedom of Information requests to the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit from climate change sceptics.

An independent review in July found that staff at the unit were "unhelpful" and not sufficiently open about research, but cleared them of dishonesty.

Recently reinstated to his post, Prof Jones said he had been the victim of a deliberate sabotage of the Copenhagen talks.

Although he has admitted that his comments had damaged public perception of the threat of global warming, he told The Times that he thought most people would be persuaded when the Arctic became ice-free in summer.

Others would eventually be won over as the planet continued to warm. He said: "I don’t know how long it’s going to take. It's potentially going to take years."

Prof Jones, 58, blamed the way that research papers are posted on Google for providing people with easy access to long lists of dismissive blog postings by sceptics, while making it difficult to source original research papers that support climate change....

Cool it!

Marcus's picture

Lomborg is sceptical about alarmism, but not warmism.

His new film should be half good then Smiling


................................................................................

Another Video Report that's half good...

Monday, 15 November 2010

Climategate: Sceptic sorry for UEA staff in scandal

"Mr Holland told BBC Inside Out he did not regret his enquiry, but felt sorry for the staff involved in the scandal."

Watch here

Arnold Schwarzenegger demands action at final climate summit

Marcus's picture

Arnold Schwarzenegger demands action at final climate summit

California's 'green governor' says leaders can learn from golden state's example as environmental pioneer

Suzanne Goldenberg in Davis, California
The Guardian, Tuesday 16 November 2010

Arnold Schwarzenegger used one of his last big moments as California's governor to rally regional and business leaders on climate change today, saying that together they had the muscle to force national governments to act.

At the opening of his third and last climate summit, Schwarzenegger said leaders could learn from California's example as an environmental pioneer.

"I know that together we can usher in a new era and build a cleaner and brighter, more prosperous future, so I say: let's do it," Schwarzengger told the summit at the University of California at Davis.

The two-day summit is one of his final opportunities to shore up his reputation as California's green governor. His successor, Democrat Jerry Brown, takes over in January. Schwarzenegger plans to drive home the message tomorrow with the launch of his R20 partnership of regional and business leaders, which aims to function like a financial matchmaking service, finding investors from the World Bank and private corporations for renewable energy projects in developing countries. The UN climate chief and the state department have endorsed the programme. The governor is also expected to announce a conservation agreement covering 20% of the world's tropical forests in 14 US states and Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and Nigeria.

The two-day summit, which brings together US, Canadian and international leaders along with celebrities such as Harrison Ford and Deepak Chopra, was perfectly timed to show up the fragility of green reforms: it comes just two weeks after Republican victories in the mid-term elections shut off prospects for action on global warming in Washington....

................................................................................................................................

Kiribati climate change conference calls for urgent cash and action

Liz Ford and Aaron Pickard
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 November 2010

The Tarawa climate change conference in Kiribati, a chain of low-lying islands in the South Pacific, ended with the signing of an 18-point declaration, recording concerns over the impact of climate change on some of the most vulnerable countries and calling for immediate access to adaptation funds.

Signed by 12 countries (Kiribati, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, the Maldives, Cuba, Brazil, Fiji, Japan, China, the Marshall Islands, New Zealand and Australia - the US, UK and Canada chose to act as observers and not sign), the Ambo declaration expressed "deep concerns" over the slow pace of international negotiations to reach a legally binding agreement to tackle climate change and called for an "urgent package" to be agreed at Cancun later this month to help the most vulnerable states respond to the impact.

The president of Kiribati, Anote Tong, said: "I am realistic enough to understand that the process will go on for quite some time, the negotiations will carry on, but I also believe that there is sufficient conscience and goodwill existing in this global community at least to address the urgent issues now."

He added: "What the Ambo declaration has said is that adaptation finance is urgent, it's got to be accessible, we don't talk about it, we must do it. That is basically the desire of countries on the frontline that are facing the problem."

But will the Ambo declaration have any real impact at Cancun?...

......................................................................................................................................

Save the world from climate change - by computer

Tuesday, 16 November 2010

Computer gamers who like a challenge can now take on one of the toughest around: saving the entire planet, this time from climate change.

Billed as a strategy game with a social conscience, "Fate of the World" sees players try to protect the world's climate and resources while managing a growing population demanding more power, food and living space.

"'Fate of the World' is a scenario-based game where you run Earth for 200 years and you save it or potentially destroy it. The whole power is in your hands," said the game's British inventor Gobion Rowlands.

The player takes charge as head of the fictional Global Environment Organisation (GEO). They can impose policies such as banning logging in the Amazon rainforest, making all Europe's public transport run on electricity or slapping a one-child policy on the whole of Asia.

However, such power comes with grave consequences...

"Even if they choose to destroy the world, they still learn more about the subject," said Rowlands, the 35-year-old head of video games developer Red Redemption, which employs 15 people at its base in Oxford, southern England...

The climate change scare is dying, but do our MPs notice?

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

The climate change scare is dying, but do our MPs notice?

The collapse of the warmist position on climate change has not impinged on politicians in Britain or Brussels, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
13 Nov 2010

Nothing more poignantly reflects the collapse of the great global warming scare than the decision of the Chicago Carbon Exchange, the largest in the world, to stop trading in "carbon" – buying and selling the right of businesses to continue emitting CO2.

A few years back, when the climate scare was still at its height, and it seemed the world might agree the Copenhagen Treaty and the US Congress might pass a "cap and trade" bill, it was claimed that the Chicago Exchange would be at the centre of a global market worth $10 trillion a year, and that "carbon" would be among the most valuable commodities on earth, worth more per ton than most metals. Today, after the collapse of Copenhagen and the cap and trade bill, the carbon price, at five cents a ton, is as low as it can get without being worthless.

Here in Britain, as the first snows fall, heralding what may be our fourth cold winter in a row, it is time we addressed one of the most glaring political "disconnects" in our sadly misgoverned country.

Next Friday is the first anniversary of the leaking of the "Climategate" emails – the correspondence of a small group of scientists at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC). By exposing their manipulation of data and suppression of dissent, these called their reputation as disinterested scientists seriously into question. But that was only the first in a series of events that, in the past year, saw the climate scare going off the rails.

Next month sees the anniversary of the Copenhagen conference – the largest ever held, with upwards of 100,000 people present – which collapsed in an acrimonious shambles, without the treaty that would have landed the world with the biggest bill in history. This was followed by all those scandals surrounding the IPCC itself, hitherto regarded as the supreme authority on global warming. It emerged that the most recent IPCC report was riddled with errors, and that many of its more alarming predictions were based, not on proper science, but on claims dreamed up by environmental activists.

Since then, despite a series of unconvincing attempts to clear the Climategate scientists, it has become clear that the 20-year-old climate scare is dying on its feet. The money draining away from the Chicago exchange speaks louder than all those inquiries – and the same point will be made obvious in a fortnight's time in Cancun, Mexico, as the UN attempts to salvage something from the wreckage at a conference that will draw scarcely a tenth of the numbers that met in Copenhagen...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
.................................................................................................

Daily Mail

Environmentalists 'exaggerated' threat to tropical rainforests from global warming

By David Derbyshire
12th November 2010

The threat to tropical rainforests from climate change may have been exaggerated by environmentalists, according to a new study.

Researchers have shown that the world's tropical forests thrived in the far distant past when temperatures were 3 to 5C warmer than today.

They believe that a wetter, warmer future may actually boost plants and animals living the tropics.

The findings, published in the respected journal Science, come from a study of pollen trapped in rocks during a natural period of global warming 56.3million years ago.

The extreme warm spell - called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum - saw global temperatures soar by 6C (11F) within a few thousand years.

The cause of the PETM is unknown. However, some scientists believe it was triggered by the release of vast amounts of carbon dioxide from volcanic activity over a few thousand years.

The injection of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere set off a spiral of events that warmed the climate and led to even more greenhouse gas entering the atmosphere, they say.

Researchers at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama examined pollen trapped in rocks in Colombia and Venezuela before, during and after the PETM.

They found that the amount of plant-life in the forests increased rapidly during the warming event with new plant species evolving much more quickly than the older species became extinct.

Pollen from the chocolate family and passionflower plant family were found for the first time.

The researchers believe the hotter, wetter conditions - and additional carbon dioxide in the atmosphere - boosted plant-life and increased biodiversity...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...
.................................................................................................................................................

BBC News

12 November 2010

Greenpeace seeks offshore drilling ban in UK

Greenpeace is taking the government to court to try to stop new UK deep-sea drilling licences being issued until the causes of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico are fully established.

The environmental group's lawyers filed a claim at the High Court asking for the right to seek a judicial review.

If successful, more than 20 oil production licences could be affected and future licensing rounds halted.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change has declined to comment.

Greenpeace lawyers argue that the drilling licences are close to environmentally sensitive sites which support species such as whales and dolphins and are legally protected.

They say that in the wake of the BP disaster in April, the government cannot be certain that drilling in these areas will not result in environmental damage, so should not be handing out licences until a proper assessment, required by law, has been carried out...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-1...

Scientific American readers’ survey rejects Warmism

Marcus's picture

Scientific American readers’ survey rejects Warmism

November 9, 2010

Roger Helmer, MEP - Blog

I cannot recall ever before seeing such a huge mismatch between the views of the establishment — the politicians, the media, the chattering classes — and real people, on any issue. The leaders have hitched their wagons to climate hysteria, but the people have seen that this Emperor has no clothes. The gap is perfectly illustrated in the case of the prestigious publication “Scientific American”.

A new survey of reader opinions comes to some remarkable conclusions. Although the journal itself cleaves to the old orthodoxy on Warmism, it’s clear that its readers take a different view, and by a very wide margin. More than 6000 have responded, with nearly 20% claiming PhD status. More than three quarters (77%) believe that current climate change is caused by natural processes. More than two thirds (68%) think we should do nothing about climate change, and are powerless to stop it. No fewer than 90% think that climate scientists should debate their findings in public (they are notoriously reluctant to do so), while 83% believe that the UN-IPCC is corrupt, prone to group-think, and has a political agenda...

http://rogerhelmermep.wordpres...

http://www.scientificamerican....
..................................................................................................................................

Gas glut threatens investment in renewables sector, IEA warns

• Liquefied gas capacity will shoot up 47% by the end of 2013
• Shell and Exxon-Mobil are repositioning as gas producers

Tim Webb
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 9 November 2010

A global gas glut which could last a decade will act as a "major barrier" to the development of renewable energy, cleaner coal plants and nuclear power, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

"The golden age of gas" will lead to cheaper gas prices for consumers, particularly in Europe. But the IEA added that it is also likely to result in a rush to build gas-fired power plants at the expense of much cleaner forms of electricity generation.

The IEA's chief economist Fatih Birol also said that "Big Oil" – oil majors such as Shell and Exxon-Mobil – are suffering an "identity crisis" because they find themselves increasingly shut out of regions like the Middle East where most of the world's remaining oil reserves lie. They are repositioning themselves as gas producers, which companies like Shell are marketing as a cleaner form of energy, he said. "In terms of climate change, gas is definitely a good solution compared to coal and oil. But it's not very innocent compared to renewables and nuclear."

The world faces a long term gas glut because of recent technical advances which have made possible the exploitation of previously untapped shale gas, coal bed methane and tight gas deposits, mostly in the US, China and Australia. The IEA, publishing its annual world energy outlook now estimates that 35% of the increase in global gas production to 2035 will come from such unconventional projects. Last year it estimated that unconventional gas production would account for 20% of the growth, although this covered the period 2007 – 2030. Gas is also the only fossil fuel for which it expects demand to grow by 2035...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/busi...
.................................................................................................................

BBC News

9 November 2010

Call to stop fossil fuel subsidy

By Roger Harrabin

Environment analyst

A global energy think tank has urged nations to stop subsidising fossil fuels as soon as possible.

It says that last year governments, mainly in the developing world, spent $312bn subsidising coal oil, gas and coal.

This was even though they agree these fuels cause climate change.

The International Energy Agency says removing the subsidies would be the quickest way to control the soaring demand for energy.

It would also cut CO2 emissions by 5.8%

But the IEA report admits that vested interests and political inertia will be major barriers to making progress on the issue.

Cutting out fossil fuel subsidies by 2020 would allow fuel prices to rise and reduce overall energy consumption 5% - this equates to all the fossil fuel used by Japan, South Korea and New Zealand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...
.........................................................................................................

Independent

US scientists to speak out on climate change

Wednesday, 10 November 2010

Hundreds of US scientists are joining a mass effort to speak out on climate change, experts said Monday after skeptics gained political ground with last week's Republican gains in Congress.

The moves signals a bold approach by scientists, typically reluctant to get involved in policy debates, as US President Barack Obama's efforts to set stricter penalties for polluters face near-certain defeat in the legislature.

Scientists involved insisted the mobilization was not in direct response to conservative gains in power and did not aim to influence public policy, but would offer the opportunity to present the facts when needed.

"I think it is important for scientists to assure that the public and policy makers have a clear view of what scientific findings are and what the implications of those findings are," said Princeton University scientist Michael Oppenheimer.

"To the extent that some members of the new majority in the House have exhibited a contrarianism to science, I think it is a good way to have a scientific community there to help keep its facts clear."

One group of about 40 scientists has been mobilized as a "rapid response team" to dive into the often hostile media environment and try to correct misinformation about global warming, said organizer John Abraham...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
.................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Crops that reflect sunlight could offset global warming, scientists claim

Planting ''climate friendly'' crops that reflect sunlight could help offset the effects of global warming, a study suggests.

The crops, spread across large fertile regions of North America and Europe, would send a small percentage of the sun's light and heat back into space.

Different strains of crops such as wheat have significantly different levels of reflectivity, or albedo, say scientists.

Selecting those that reflect the most could make summers in Europe more than 1 per cent cooler, they claim...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sci...

David Cameron letting China off climate change hook, says Labour

Marcus's picture

David Cameron letting China off climate change hook, says Labour

Official delegation heads for Beijing even as £14.4m fund set up to advise on alternatives to coal is slashed

Toby Helm
The Observer, Sunday 7 November 2010

David Cameron was accused last night of sending the wrong signals on climate change to China, the world's biggest polluter, as he prepared to lead the largest-ever official UK delegation to the country. He will be accompanied by George Osborne, the chancellor, business secretary Vince Cable, the climate and energy secretary, Chris Huhne, and Michael Gove, the education minister, as well as more than 50 business leaders on the two-day visit starting on Tuesday.

Efforts to boost bilateral trade, and concerns over human rights, are expected to head the agenda in talks with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao. China is the UK's second-biggest trade partner after the EU.

But last night Labour claimed that carefully constructed efforts to bind the Chinese into international efforts to invest in low-carbon technology and improve energy security were being undermined by government cuts. Shadow foreign secretary Yvette Cooper said William Hague, the foreign secretary, was giving the wrong message by slashing a £14.4m fund set up in 2008 to provide expertise to China and other countries on low-carbon technology and to help them to move away from coal-based technology.

Funding was cut by £3m in the summer for the Low Carbon High Growth Fund and it is believed to be under further threat after the spending review. Hague has said he would examine other ways to finance the fund. Cooper said there was now a danger of international momentum being lost ahead of the UN climate change summit in Cancún starting later this month...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
.........................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

A giant victory for the world

The residents of San Francisco have been waiting for years for a really big reason to celebrate, writes Geoffrey Lean.

By Geoffrey Lean
05 Nov 2010

...The victory, on a state ballot initiative, was all the more significant – and surprising – since it came on a night when the country turned sharply Right, electing scores of Republican Congressmen who, as Barack Obama admitted, will kill off his last hopes of securing national legislation to combat global warming. Yet hundreds of thousands of Republican voters formed part of the 60-40 majority that defeated Proposition 23, which would have forced the state to shelve its far-reaching climate law indefinitely...

Flushed with the success of what he called “an extraordinary coalition”, Schwarzenegger promised to go to Washington to try to “jump-start” national legislation. That seems a very tall order, but his fellow Republican George Schultz – Ronald Reagan’s treasury secretary, who chaired the campaign against Proposition 23 – stresses that, for the first time, an electorate has spoken. “Pay attention, politicians,” he warned at Tuesday’s celebrations. “Pay attention.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

Binding climate change deal is impossible after election defeat

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

Binding climate change deal is impossible after Barack Obama's election defeat, says John Prescott

Barack Obama's setback in the US mid-term elections has killed of any hope of securing a legally binding global climate change deal, John Prescott has said.

04 Nov 2010

Negotiators should ditch hopes of enforcable targets on emmissions reductions and push instead for a voluntary framework at the upcoming Cancun summit, the former deputy prime minister said.

After President Barack Obama's ''shellacking'' at the hands of Republican opponents in mid-term elections, there was no prospect of the US Congress approving legal requirements to cut greenhouse gas emissions, said Lord Prescott, who was a key UK negotiator at the Kyoto global warming conference in 1997.

Lord Prescott, now the Council of Europe rapporteur on climate change issues, said that the Kyoto Protocol should be extended for five years beyond its 2012 expiry date to allow time for a voluntary system of verifiable emission reductions to be introduced...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
.................................................................................................................................

Independent

Greens angered over C4 claims they 'caused starvation'

By Daniel Howden, Africa Correspondent

Saturday, 6 November 2010

A Channel 4 documentary accusing the green movement of causing mass starvation in Africa by getting it wrong on genetically-modified food has been attacked as "malicious" and "ridiculous" by farm groups on the continent.

"What the Green Movement Got Wrong", broadcast this week, by the same channel that aired the hugely controversial "Great Climate Change Swindle" suggests that the Western green consensus against GM foods had impoverished the southern hemisphere.

"The programme suggests that were it not for the external pressure of northern environmental organisations, Africans would be happily eating genetically modified foods by now, and hunger would be a distant memory," said a statement from the African Biodiversity Network. "We oppose these ridiculous and malicious claims."

Several groups including Greenpeace, which called the documentary "comically misleading" and one of the programmes contributors, Adam Werbach, have suggested they may complain to British regulator Ofcom..

A storm of similar complaints followed the screening of the "Great Climate Change Swindle" when Ofcom ruled in 2008 that the channel had breached section seven of its code by failing to inform participants the programme was polemic..

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
..................................................................................................................

UN told climate funding is 'feasible'

Money raised from banks, taxes, and carbon permit auctions could match the $100bn promised at Copenhagen, says report

John Vidal, environment editor
guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 November 2010

Seventeen finance ministers, leading economists and heads of state say that it is "challenging but feasible" to raise $100bn (£62bn) a year by 2020 to allow poor countries to adapt to the effects of climate change and reduce emissions. If their findings, contained in a major report handed to the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, are politically acceptable, the chances of a new global climate agreement are substantially increased.

Money from banks, carbon taxes, carbon permit auctions and new transport taxes could raise the $100bn promised to developing countries at the Copenhagen summit last December, said the high-level advisory group which was chaired by the prime ministers of Norway and Ethiopia and included Lord Nicholas Stern, the financier George Soros, UK energy secretary, Chris Huhne, and South African, Indian and French politicians.

The authors suggested public money could be raised from carbon taxes ($30bn), possible aviation and shipping taxes ($10bn), the redirection of fossil fuel subsidies ($10bn), and by increasing the flows of money from multinational development banks such as the World Bank ($40bn). Private funding of between $30bn and $50bn could come from carbon offset markets and a further $100bn -$200bn could be generated from private sector flows. A possible "Tobin-type tax on all financial transactions was effectively ruled out by the high-level group which argued that it was complicated to implement because it would require global agreement...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Leading environmental campaigners support nuclear and GM

Marcus's picture

Leading environmental campaigners support nuclear and GM

Leading environmental campaigners have performed a u-turn on two key technologies they have opposed for decades by openly calling for greater use of nuclear power and genetically modified crops to help the world tackle climate change.

By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
31 Oct 2010

For years they campaigned against nuclear power and genetically-modified food. But now some leading environmental campaigners have performed a U-turn and said that they got it wrong.

The activists now say that by opposing nuclear power they encouraged the use of polluting coal-fired power stations, while by protesting against GM crops they prevented developing countries from benefiting from a technology that could have helped feed the hungry.

Mark Lynas, a campaigner who has been a member of action groups on GM foods and climate change, said the environmental lobby was losing the battle for public opinion on climate change because it had made too many apocalyptic prophecies and exaggerated claims.

He said: "We have got to find a more pragmatic and realistic way of engaging with people."

Stewart Brand, an American activist and former editor of Whole Earth Catalog, said: "I would like to see an environmental movement that says it turns out our fears about genetically engineered food crops were exaggerated and we are glad about that. It is a humble and modest stance to take to the real world.

"Environmentalists did harm by being ignorant and ideological and unwilling to change their mind based on actual evidence. As a result we have done harm and I regret it."

Patrick Moore, one of the founding members of environmental campaign group Greenpeace, added: "We were right that the nuclear industry had problems, but that didn't mean we should be against nuclear energy completely.

"We have caused extra gigatons of greenhouse gases to be released into the atmosphere by being so precious about nuclear."

The activists feature in the Channel 4 documentary What the Green Movement Got Wrong, which will be broadcast this week...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
....................................................................................................

Climate change game launched

An educational computer game in which users have to save the world from climate change offers an interesting solution – decide the problem is overpopulation and design a virus to kill millions.

01 Nov 2010

Fate of the World goes on sale on Tuesday and has been praised by gaming experts and climate campaigners as a way of reaching new audiences in the fight against carbon emissions.

However, climate change sceptics may be surprised and angered by some of the strategies on offer in the game which is being released on PCs and Apple Macs.

As the head of a fictional international body the user must save the world from soaring temperatures, increasing floods and deadly droughts.

The game, developed by Red Redemption, an Oxford-based design company, uses real data and input from scientists and has best been described as a Football Manager for eco-enthusiasts.

Users are presented with a budget, environmental data, and a series of energy policies which range from emissions caps and investment in biofuels to continue investing in fossil fuels.

Other more extreme policies are also available such as creating a disease to reduce the world's population or geoengineering, such as cloud seeding from planes...

The blurb reads: "You must manage a balancing act of protecting the Earth. Resources and climate versus the needs of an ever-growing world population, who are demanding ever more food, power, and living space. Will you help the whole planet or will you be an agent of destruction?"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

Thomas Noyes = asshole

gregster's picture

"The GOP's sharp right turn on environmental matters will reverberate well past this year's election."

Another admittance that this whole climate fraud is leftist politics. The leftists are EVIL FUCKERS. Of course, so are any halfwits who buy this human-induced global warming shite!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republicans go climate sceptic

Marcus's picture

Republicans go climate sceptic

Not so long ago, cap-and-trade enjoyed bipartisan support. Now, the Tea Party has polluted the GOP's environmental agenda

Thomas Noyes
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 31 October 2010

One of the most distressing developments of this most distressing political season is the almost complete abandonment of interest in the environment by the Republican party. Opposition to action on climate change – particularly, the once-obscure market mechanism called cap-and-trade – has become one of the principle tenets of the Tea Party movement.

Only one GOP candidate for the Senate, Mark Kirk of Illinois, has dared to voice any support for acting on climate change, and he has since repented for his vote for the Waxman-Markey climate bill. Mike Castle of Delaware was another Republican who voted for Waxman-Markey, and he was beaten by the now-famous Christine O'Donnell in the Republican primary. O'Donnell now trails Chris Coons by 21% in recent polling, though she is strongly ahead among Tea Party supporters...

The GOP's sharp right turn on environmental matters will reverberate well past this year's election. Barack Obama couldn't get climate change bill through Congress even with Democratic majorities, in part because of Democratic senators from coal states like Pennsylvania and West Virginia. But Republicans like Lindsey Graham and John McCain, formerly with a positive record on cap-and-trade, will now think long and hard before they even consider supporting a climate bill. Environmental advocates are looking for gridlock on climate change for the next two years.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...
............................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Green tax burden could see cement firms quit the UK

Punitive environmental taxes are threatening to drive Britain's cement producers abroad, a leading think tank has warned

By Philip Aldrick
01 Nov 2010

According to research from Civitas, the UK is undermining its domestic industry even though it is one of the world's most environmentally sensitive and efficient.

Emissions trading, industry-financed subsidies to the renewable energy sector and the Climate Change Levy are making it harder for UK-based cement producers to compete with rivals in countries that do not have equally exacting environmental regimes.

Companies are increasingly sourcing their cement from countries such as Turkey, Civitas claims, where lower environmental standards make it cheaper to produce. Shipping costs are relatively cheap compared to the energy required to produce cement.

Britain has already gone from being a net exporter to a net importer of cement. Civitas fears that similar oversight of the effect regulations and taxes can have on competitiveness will undermine other manufacturing industries with potentially damaging consequences for the economy...

Cement is an energy intensive industry. As a result, it is excluded from the EU's taxation of energy products directive, but the UK does not exclude it from the Climate Change Levy, albeit charged at a 35pc rate. Cement producers are also paying a large share of the £1.3bn renewable subsidies levy, imposed on business regardless of how energy intensive they are.

The Mineral Products Association fears that the next phase of Europe's emissions trading scheme in 2012 will be so expensive it will make cement production in the UK "impossible".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...

Climate sceptics launch campaign to overturn green targets

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

Climate sceptics launch campaign to overturn green targets

Climate sceptics, including a number of high profileTory backbenchers, are launching a campaign to overturn the Coalition’s green targets.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
27 Oct 2010

Climate Sense, a loose affiliation of ‘climate sceptic groups’, are calling for the Climate Act, that commits the UK to cutting greenhouse gases by 80 per cent by 2050 to be repealed.

Philip Foster, a retired Church of England Reverend who is leading the campaign, said the legislation will cost taxpayers £480bn over the next 40 years because of the cost of new technologies like wind farms.

He said Tory backbenchers John Redwood, David Davies and Christopher Chope have agreed to attend the launch of ‘Climate Fools Day’ in the House of Commons. Labour MP Graham Stringer, who is a member of the Science and Technology Committee, also supports the campaign. Johnny Ball the television presenter is expected to attend the launch.

“There is no evidence that human input has anything to do with global temperatures,” Rev Foster said. “Therefore we should not be wasting any money on climate change through things like this legislation.”

The group, made up of Copenhagen Climate Challenge, Weather Action and the Campaign Against Carbon Capitalism, have also written a letter to the Prince of Wales on behalf of climate sceptics. It asks the Prince, who has accused sceptics of “peddling pseudo science”, to prove climate change is happening and is signed by 166 scientists including David Bellamy...

The ten challenges sceptics have asked 'supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change' to prove:

1. Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries.

2. Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate.

3. Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate.

4. Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities.

5. The incidences of malaria and other infectious diseases are now increasing due to recent climate changes;

6. Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past.

7. Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in polar regions, is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions.

8. Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes.

9. Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency.

10. Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of global surface temperature trends.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
.....................................................................................................................

Financial Post Staff October 20, 2010 – 9:01 pm

Global warming may just be statistical fluctuations

By Václav Klaus

The global warming dispute starts with a doctrine which claims that the rough coexistence of climate changes, of growing temperatures and of man-made increments of CO2 in the atmosphere — and what is more, only in a relatively short period of time — is a proof of a causal relationship between these phenomena. To the best of my knowledge there is no such relationship between them. It is, nevertheless, this claim that forms the basis for the doctrine of environmentalism.

It is not a new doctrine. It has existed under various headings and in various forms and manifestations for centuries, always based on the idea that the starting point of our thinking should be the Earth, the planet or nature, not man or mankind. It has always been accompanied by the plan that we have to come back to the original state of the Earth, unspoiled by us, humans. The adherents of this doctrine have always considered us, the people, a foreign element. They forget that it doesn’t make sense to speak about the world without people because there would be no one to speak. If we take the reasoning of the environmentalists seriously, we find that theirs is an anti-human ideology.

To reduce the interpretation of the causality of all kinds of climate changes and of global warming to one variable, CO2, or to a small proportion of one variable — human-induced CO2 — is impossible to accept. Elementary rationality and my decades-long experience with econometric modelling and statistical testing of scientific hypotheses tell me that it is impossible to make strong conclusions based on mere correlation of two (or more) time series.

In addition to this, it is relevant that in this case such a simple correlation does not exist. The rise of global temperature started approximately 150 years ago, but man-made CO2 emissions did not start to grow visibly before the 1940s. Temperature changes also repeatedly moved in the opposite direction than the CO2 emissions trend suggests.

Theory is crucial and in this case it is missing. Pure statistical analysis does not explain or confirm anything. Two Chinese scientists, Guang Wu and Shaomin Yan, published a study in which they used the random walk model to ­analyze the global temperature fluctuations in the last 160 years. Their results — rather unpleasantly for the global-warming alarmists — show that the random walk model perfectly fits the temperature changes. Because “the random walk model has a perfect fit for the recorded temperature … there is no need to include various man-made factors such as CO2, and non-human factors, such as the Sun” to improve the quality of the model fit, they say. It is an important result. Do other models give a better fit? I have not seen any...

http://opinion.financialpost.c...

'Climate Fools Day'

Marcus's picture

RT

Keeping cool about global warming
Published 27 October, 2010

Global warming skeptics have gathered to air their views in the UK on what they have dubbed 'Climate Fools Day'.

It is also the second anniversary of the signing of the UK Climate Change Bill, which critics say is simply a waste of tax-payers' money.

The skeptics claim that the global warming issue has become a business scheme to tax industry and consumers, and make money from ‘green’ schemes.

Global warming has simply been made up, insists Piers Corbyn, one of the organizers of the annual Weather Action Climate Fools Day conference...

http://rt.com/Top_News/2010-10...

Climate Heretic: Judith Curry Turns on Her Colleagues

Marcus's picture

Scientific American

Climate Heretic: Judith Curry Turns on Her Colleagues

Why can't we have a civil conversation about climate?

By Michael D. Lemonick

October 25, 2010

In trying to understand the Judith Curry phenomenon, it is tempting to default to one of two comfortable and familiar story lines.

For most of her career, Curry, who heads the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, has been known for her work on hurricanes, Arctic ice dynamics and other climate-related topics. But over the past year or so she has become better known for something that annoys, even infuriates, many of her scientific colleagues. Curry has been engaging actively with the climate change skeptic community, largely by participating on outsider blogs such as Climate Audit, the Air Vent and the Black­board. Along the way, she has come to question how climatologists react to those who question the science, no matter how well established it is. Although many of the skeptics recycle critiques that have long since been disproved, others, she believes, bring up valid points—and by lumping the good with the bad, climate researchers not only miss out on a chance to improve their science, they come across to the public as haughty. “Yes, there’s a lot of crankology out there,” Curry says. “But not all of it is. If only 1 percent of it or 10 percent of what the skeptics say is right, that is time well spent because we have just been too encumbered by groupthink.”

She reserves her harshest criticism for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). For most climate scientists the major reports issued by the United Nations–sponsored body every five years or so constitute the consensus on climate science. Few scientists would claim the IPCC is perfect, but Curry thinks it needs thoroughgoing reform. She accuses it of “corruption.” “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC,” she says, “because I think I don’t have confidence in the process.”

Whispered discreetly at conferences or in meeting rooms, these claims might be accepted as part of the frequently contentious process of a still evolving area of science. Stated publicly on some of the same Web sites that broke the so-called Climategate e-mails last fall, they are considered by many to be a betrayal, earning Curry epithets from her colleagues ranging from “naive” to “bizarre” to “nasty” to worse.

All of which sets up the two competing story lines, which are, on the surface at least, equally plausible. The first paints Curry as a peacemaker—someone who might be able to restore some civility to the debate and edge the public toward meaningful action. By frankly acknowledging mistakes and encouraging her colleagues to treat skeptics with respect, she hopes to bring about a meeting of the minds...

http://www.scientificamerican....
.............................................................................................................................

Space tourism will accelerate climate change, warn scientists as Sir Richard Branson unveils world's first commercial spaceport

By Daily Mail Reporter
25th October 2010

A decade of commercial space flight would have a devastating impact on climate change and global temperatures, according to a new study.

Scientists believe that vast amounts of black soot created by a new generation of spacecraft could lead to temperatures in polar regions rising by as mush as one degree Celsius.

The study comes as the dream of whisking tourists edged closer to reality with the official opening of the runway at the world's first commercial spaceport by Sir Richard Branson.

The billionaire said he expects flights for space tourists to begin in nine to 18 months, and he will be among the first passengers.

Scientists found that black soot from commercial space flight will dramatically change global temperatures because of the particular fuel they use for sub-orbital flight.

Firms like Virgin Galactic plan on using a 'hybrid' rocket engine that ignites synthetic hydrocarbon with nitrous oxide. These hybrid engines emit much more black carbon than conventional commercial engines.

Their simulations how that space flight would lead to polar surface temperatures by 1 °C, and a reduction in the polar sea ice by 5–15 per cent.

And a layer of black carbon caused by commercial space flights caused the temperature to decrease about 0.4 °C in the tropics and subtropics.

The study, reported in Geophysical Research Letters1, suggest that emissions from 1,000 private rocket launches a year would travel high in the stratosphere, changing how ozone is circulated and produced, with dramatic consequences within just ten years.

The study's author Martin Ross said: 'There are fundamental limits to how much material human beings can put into orbit without having a significant impact'.

Unveiling the new spaceport, which stretches across a flat dusty plain 45 miles north of Las Cruces, New Mexico, Sir Richard Branson said: 'Today is very personal, as our dream becomes more real. People are beginning to believe now.'...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

James Cameron - Hypocrite

Marcus's picture


........................................................................................................

25 October 2010

Sea urchins tolerate acid water

By Rosalind Pidcock

Reporter, BBC News


Echinoderm larvae showed no adverse effects when exposed to water that was relatively high in CO2

Sea urchins are likely to be able to adapt to increasingly acidic oceans resulting from climate change, according to new research.

When the animals, known as echinoderms, were exposed to water high in carbon dioxide early in their lives, there were no adverse effects.

Echinoderms are a diverse group that includes sea cucumbers and starfish.

Their natural resilience could represent a competitive advantage under some climate change scenarios.

The experiments, carried out by Nadia Suarez-Bosche, exposed larvae of the shallow-dwelling sea urchin Psammechinus miliaris to deep-sea water naturally rich in CO2.

After five days of incubation in the water samples, the scientists measured the physiological responses of the larvae and found that they were still growing and developing well even under the highest CO2 concentrations of up to 600 parts per million (ppm).

The current atmospheric CO2 concentration is around 390 ppm...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...
....................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Global warming: 'Climate hawks' win the name game

What to call people who accept man-made climate change? A US magazine has come up with some odd suggestions, reports Geoffrey Lean.

By Geoffrey Lean
22 Oct 2010


Earth angels?

What's in a name-call? In the great global warming slanging match, those accepting man-made climate change probably win on politeness, usually calling their opponents "sceptics", though sometimes "deniers". Sceptics, on the other hand, retort with "warmists", when they're feeling generous, "eco-Nazis" when they're not.

But now Grist, an American green web magazine, has been trying to find its own name for what it calls People who Care about Climate Change and Clean Energy (or PCCCCEs). That's never going to catch on but, believe me, the scores of apparently serious suggestions for alternatives are almost all equally dire. What price "decarboners", "balancers", "planeteers", "terranauts", "transitionists", "anthro-adaptors", or the equally verbose "People for a Prosperous Future for the Next Generation"? Or the self righteous ("stewards", "saviours", "concerned citizens", "the sane bunch", or even just "parents") and the weird ("earth angels", "lightbulb heads", "neo-earthlings" and the Tolkienesque "Frodosapiens")? But I did rather warm to the "warmist" who suggested substituting "hotties".

You'd have thought that they'd be better off without a special name: after all, they are in the majority. But Grist picked "climate hawks", though it did somewhat spoil things by initially running a picture of a vulture. It cited Donald Rumsfeld, of all people – he defined a hawk as someone who "leans forward", whatever that may mean – and decided the term evokes "a visceral sense of both peril and resolve". I suppose it might just resonate in the US, but here, surely, it's for the birds.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

Introducing the Not So Cool Farm Tool

gregster's picture

“.. some of PepsiCo's 350 farms have started to test 'icrop', a web-based crop management tool developed with Cambridge University, which allows growers to track crop inputs and outputs and accurately calculate water use and carbon emissions.”

Credit where credit's due. These warmist programmers sure know how to make a fast buck.

Potato farmers will be able to use a computerised carbon calculator called The Cool Farm Tool, which shows how much carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted during each part of the agricultural cycle in an attempt to help farmers understand how much carbon results from different practices.

The Not So Cool Farm Tool, NSCFT.

“Richard Perkins, WWF senior commodities adviser, praised the new targets, predicting they could have a major impact across the UK's agricultural sector.

"PepsiCo UK has taken a leadership role in recognising that it is, at its heart, an agricultural business," he said. "The focus of the business on improving its key environmental impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions – in the field and on the farm – is most welcome."

Perkins is correct. This will amount to another layer of costs, and encourage imports from lower cost countries.

Doubts over scientists' climate change debate claims

Marcus's picture

BBC News

19 October 2010

Press coverage has cast further doubt on climate scientists' claims that man-made global warming is real and adversely affecting the planet.

Polls show that the public are becoming increasingly confused about the issue. Adam Fleming reports.

Watch here: http://www.newzfor.me/news/104...
..................................................................................................................

Heartland in Sydney: Part 2
by Barry Brill

October 19, 2010

At the Heartland Climate Conference in Sydney, David Evans and Jo Nova blasted the ‘cheating culture’ which permeates the field of climate science world-wide.

David Evans denounced instances of blatant deception by Government scientists responsible for temperature records.

Official thermometers sit near refrigeration and air-conditioning outlets, walls, effluent grates, jet exhausts, etc. 89% of USA sites breach NOAA standards, and are too close to an artificial heating source. NOAA has an annual budget of over $4 billion.

Despite the bias and flaws, there is no long-term warming trend. All of the USA warming during 1930-2000 is created by adjustments to the recorded data.

The 6,000 sites formerly used globally have been reduced to only 1079, and the discards were predominantly in cooler latitudes. Half those remaining are near airport tarmacs, and over 80% are in urban areas.

Urbanisation effects on temperature are non-linear, but a city of 1 million people is 1-3°C warmer on average. The record keepers designate some stations as “rural” and correct all others downwards by a constant 0.2°C. This is within a precision system where changes of hundredths of a degree have massive world-wide policy implications.

Reliable data on all-important ocean temperatures were unavailable until the Argos programme commenced in 2003. For 5 years, readings from 3,000 oceanic areas showed a steady cooling trend. But all data has been embargoed since January 2008.

• Why don’t agencies like NOAA and BOM correct their flawed sources?
• Why are there no auditors and no competition and no regulators?
• Why won’t Government scientists use the satellite temperature records?
• Why isn’t Argo ocean data available on a public website?
• Why is there no media coverage of these scandals?

Global temperatures have been on a long term gradually-rising trend since the Little Ice Age bottomed just before 1700 AD.

In a landmark BBC interview, Phil Jones confirmed that there have been three warming periods in the last 150 years, and the warming rate was the same in all cases. But 85% of all fossil fuel emissions have occurred since 1945; and 25% of the total has occurred since 1998 – during a period of zero warming...

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blo...
.................................................................................................................................................

£1 billion to launch green investment bank

PA

Wednesday, 20 October 2010

The Government will provide £1 billion in funding for a green investment bank, as part of efforts to make the UK a leader in the low-carbon economy, the Chancellor George Osborne said today.

He also said up to £1 billion funding would go towards building one of the first power stations in the world with technology to capture and permanently store carbon emissions, to help cut greenhouse gases from electricity generation.

The announcement of the cash for carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology came just hours after energy giant E.ON announced it was pulling out of the competition for the funding - leaving just one shortlisted candidate, ScottishPower.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change confirmed there would be a second round of CCS projects, with up to four more schemes given the go-ahead, although funding mechanisms had yet to be decided.

And £200 million would go to developing offshore wind technology and manufacturing, and support the upgrade of ports to support the industry.

Setting out green measures in the comprehensive spending review, Mr Osborne said it was necessary when money was tight to "ruthlessly prioritise" areas of the economy which would support economic growth, including low-carbon infrastructure.

He joked that yesterday protesters had scaled the Treasury urging ministers to go ahead with the Green Investment Bank - the first time anyone had protested in favour of a bank...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Professor Hal Lewis is not an irrelevant, senile, old fool

gregster's picture

October 15th, 2010

From Delingpole's blog. An article describing how skewed Wikipedia could be.

"Anyway, Connolley’s latest escapade has proved to be the straw that broke the camel’s back for the Wiki administrators. He has now been banned from writing on “Climate Change” for Wikipedia. (H/T Bishop Hill). As too has the similarly fanatical KimDabelsteinPetersen.

This is glorious news for those of us on the side of truth and reality. According to Solomon “he is arguably the world’s most influential global warming advocate after Al Gore”, which sounds like overstatement until you remember that Wikipedia is “the most popular reference source on the planet” and that Connolley managed to skew almost every one of its entries on Climate Change to his fervently warmist perspective. The Climategate scientists tried and failed to disinvent the Medieval Warm Period. But on Wikipedia, Connolley very nearly succeeded by pouring cold water on its significance and by trying to rename it the Medieval Climate Anomaly.

Remember too that it was Connolley who helped up the Warmist propaganda site RealClimate which – despite its reassuring-sounding name – is essentially the black ops wing of Michael Mann’s Hockey Team. So his scalp – (bushy, with comedy bear attachment, see sexy photograph above) – represents a considerable coup for the cause of climate realism."

Climate protesters close road to UK's biggest oil refinery

Marcus's picture

50 oil tankers stranded as climate change protesters close road leading the UK's biggest oil refinery

By Daily Mail Reporter
17th October 2010


Road closed: Local police were forced to close the road leading the refinery after 12 female protesters handcuffed themselves to vehicles parked to deliberately block the way for fuel tankers

Hundreds of demonstrators blockaded the road to an oil refinery and claimed they stopped 375,000 gallons of fuel from leaving the depot.

The protesters, who barricaded the road leading to the Coryton Oil Refinery near Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, said they prevented more than 50 oil tankers getting to and from the site, which they accuse of exacerbating climate change.

Police were forced to close the road after 12 female protesters handcuffed themselves to vehicles parked to deliberately block the way for fuel tankers.

Hundreds more demonstrators travelled from London to join the Crude Awakening protest and set up another blockade close to the entrance of the Shell Haven Oils Site on the same road.

A number of them clambered up man-made wooden tripods and many wore white boiler suits.

There were minor scuffles between officers and activists and Essex police described it as 'a peaceful protest'. A spokesman said: 'There have been no incidents during the protest and no arrests have been made.'

The demonstration came as protesters took to streets around France as unions there announced that all 12 fuel producing refineries in the country are on strike and many depots were blocked by protesters.

Fuel levels are critical as workers took to the streets as part of a nationwide protest against President Nicolas Sarkozy's plan to raise the retirement age to 62

Yesterday's demonstration in Essex, which was supported by a number of action groups including Camp for Climate Action and Plane Stupid, is part of a global week of action against the fossil fuel industry...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
.............................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Renewables will add £880 a year to bills

Trying to meet our EU renewable energy target would cost more than we currently spend on our entire electricity production, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
16 Oct 2010

Is there any subject on which more nonsense is talked and written than the mindblowing proposals being bandied about by the Government for meeting our EU target of generating, within 10 years, 30 per cent of our electricity from renewable sources? (That is roughly six times the current total, meaning that we have by far the most challenging target of any country in Europe.)

For instance, the industry regulator, Ofgem, recently announced that by 2020 we will need to have spent £40 billion on connecting up our new renewable energy sources to the national grid – £4 billion a year. Alistair Buchanan, the head of Ofgem, blithely claimed, on the BBC Today programme and elsewhere, that this would only add £6 a year to the average electricity bill of Britain’s 25 million households. Yet ten seconds with a calculator shows that the cost per household of that £4 billion a year works out to £160...

In reality, there isn’t the faintest chance that any of the Government’s targets will be met. But the massive diversion of resources that it is doing its best to encourage will not help when it comes to filling the looming 40 per cent gap in our electricity supplies, as 17 of the older nuclear and coal-fired power stations are forced to close. There is virtually nothing, then, in these plans to ensure that we can keep Britain’s lights on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
......................................................................................................................................

Severn barrage plan likely to be sunk

Government expected tomorrow to refuse to back controversial £21bn tidal energy project with public finance

Damian Carrington
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 17 October 2010

Plans for the world's biggest tidal energy project, spanning the Severn estuary between Somerset and Wales, are likely to be dashed tomorrow when the government announces its refusal to back the controversial £21bn project with public finance.

The 10-mile-long scheme, which the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) believes could provide 8.6GW of renewable electricity - equivalent to 5% of the UK's needs and two or three nuclear power stations - has long proved controversial. Engineers first proposed plans for a barrage across the Severn in the 1930s. The scheme has divided environmentalists, some of whom say it would destroy an internationally important marsh and mudflat habitat, increase local flooding and reduce fish stocks.

The department will publish its decision on whether or not to back the project tomorrow morning, but sources close to the process have told the Guardian they cannot conceive of the government backing it with public finance at a time when it is focused on cutting the budget deficit. The department's own documents state that the Cardiff-Weston barrage could not be built without government funding. The financing and ownership options report, published in December 2008, says: "A larger scheme would not be constructed without public sector intervention [because] the private sector would not have the capacity to finance or build the scheme without government support."

Jonathon Porritt oversaw a 2007 report that backed the giant barrage while he was chair of the government advisory body, the Sustainable Development Commission, which was itself abolished last week. Last night he said: "If the government is not prepared to find any mechanism to put public funds into the pot, it will die...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Scary Shit: Eco-NAZIs team up with tobacco lawyers

Marcus's picture

BBC Radio

"Climate change has already claimed its first victims. Displaced people from the Carteret Islands, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya and the Niger delta have already become climate refugees but from whom can they seek refuge or even compensation?

Environmental Justice Foundation is calling for legally binding agreements to protect those displaced and there are various legal cases in action that could set a precedent for compensation."

Listen here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/e...
...............................................................................................................

Chilean miners leave BBC too broke for live coverage of Cancún climate talks

Damian Carrington
Thursday 14 October 2010
guardian.co.uk

The rescue of the miners trapped deep underground in Chile is clearly a vivid, compelling and wonderful story. But it appears to be hindering the BBC's ability to cover other news, including the UN climate change talks in Cancún, Mexico, at the end of November.

At the last climate talks in Copenhagen, the BBC went in with, I am told, 30 people on the ground. They were saving the planet, after all. (We sent seven people.)

But according to a BBC memo leaked to me, reproduced in full below, the cost of the Chilean mining spectacular means just one solo correspondent in Cancún will have to feed the many and ravenous mouths of the BBC's television, radio and online output. I pity the fool . . .

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
...............................................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Is climate change activism dead?

A year ago climate change activists were storming Parliament. This year they are holding meetings with cupcakes and copious amounts of tea. So is climate activism dead or has it just been sleeping?

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
14 Oct 2010

In a wood panelled room in East London more than 100 people, including Britain’s only Green MP Caroline Lucas, gathered earlier this week for the ‘Climate Rendezvous’. The meeting was organised by activists Climate Rush to discuss strategies for raising the profile of climate change before international talks in Cancun, Mexico next month.

The last round of United Nations talks in Copenhagen has left climate change activists a little scarred. At the end of 2009 civil society mobilised in a mass movement that saw around 20,000 people march on Parliament and violent protests in the Danish capital.

But despite this, the two week meeting achieved little. Hopes of a global deal to bring down greenhouse gases were dashed as the biggest emitters, the US and China, refused to sign up to legally-binding targets.

Since then, things have been fairly quiet. The annual ‘Climate Camp’ in Edinburgh targeted the banking sector and led to a few arrests, while a flurry of protests against BP hit the headlines in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon Disaster.

It is only now that the various factions have had time to re-group and develop a ‘post-Copenhagen’ strategy.

The general theory seems to be that it was a mistake to focus on Copenhagen as a goal in itself. Instead activists are looking at the much slower and more arduous process of changing minds and lifestyles in the long term. This has meant going back to the grassroots and working with local groups to lobby regional government and business...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

GLOBAL WARMING IS ‘THE GREATEST FRAUD IN 60 YEARS’

Marcus's picture

Daily Express

GLOBAL WARMING IS ‘THE GREATEST FRAUD IN 60 YEARS’

Tuesday October 12,2010
By John Ingham, Environment Editor

A TOP American professor has quit a prestigious academic body after claiming that global warming has become a “scam” driven by “trillions of dollars” which has “corrupted” scientists.

Professor Harold Lewis, 87, described his “revulsion” at last year’s leaked “Climategate” emails which appeared to show scientists at East Anglia’s world-leading Climate Research Unit rigging evidence in favour of man-made climate change.

He branded man-made climate change “the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud” he has ever seen.

The scientists involved have been cleared of wrongdoing by a series of investigations. But Prof Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has formally resigned from the American Physical Society after nearly 70 years as a member.

He claims that the APS, the society for America’s top physicists, has refused to engage in proper scientific debate about climate change and ignored climate sceptics.

Yesterday Benny Peiser, of the climate-sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Prof Lewis has agreed to join its advisory council.

Dr Peiser said: “In America they have failed to do what the Royal Society in Britain and the Academy of Sciences in France have done – which is to engage with sceptics and allow them to debate this issue. At least we are making progress here in trying to generate some semblance of scientific debate.”

Prof Lewis’s resignation comes as governments around the world press ahead with costly green policies despite growing controversy about whether climate change is man-made...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts...
........................................................................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

BBC told to ensure balance on climate change

Climate change sceptics are likely to be given greater prominence in BBC documentaries and news bulletins following new editorial guidelines that call for impartiality in the corporation’s science coverage.

By Neil Midgley
13 Oct 2010

The BBC has been repeatedly accused of bias in its reporting of climate change issues.

Last year one of its reporters, Paul Hudson, was criticised for not reporting on some of the highly controversial “Climategate” leaked emails from the University of East Anglia, even though he had been in possession of them for some time.

Climate change sceptics have also accused the BBC of not properly reporting “Glaciergate”, when a study from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) saying that glaciers would melt by 2035 was discredited.

But the BBC’s new editorial guidelines, published yesterday after an extensive consultation that considered over 1,600 submissions by members of the public, say expressly for the first time that scientific issues fall within the corporation’s obligation to be impartial.

“The BBC must be inclusive, consider the broad perspective, and ensure that the existence of a range of views is appropriately reflected,” said BBC trustee Alison Hastings...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cul...
....................................................................................................................................

Independent

Green fatigue hits campaign to reduce carbon footprint

Car sales, flights and waste all increase as the recession takes its toll on consumers' motivation

By Rachel Shields

Sunday, 10 October 2010

Britons are less environmentally conscious than they were five years ago, with twice as many people now "bored" by talk of climate change as in 2005. Four in 10 take no action at all to reduce their household carbon dioxide emissions. Experts warn that green fatigue is a major reason why there are more cars on the roads, more planes in the sky and no reduction in the mountain of packaging waste.

As a new energy report reveals that too few people are making an effort to reduce their household CO2 emissions, environmentalists believe the recession is further undermining public commitment.

The report, by market researchers Mintel, shows that many of Britain's 26 million homes fail to make simple adjustments such as turning down thermostats, switching off lights and switching off appliances rather than leaving them on standby. The findings also reveal people are less willing to spend money on energy-efficient appliances than they were five years ago. Analysts believe the recession together with a backlash against "extreme" environmentalist pressure has reduced people's enthusiasm to combat climate change.

The report also found that resistance to saving the planet was greater among men: one in four said they think there is too much concern over the environment, compared with one in six women.

Other evidence of waning public interest in consumers' carbon footprint includes a rise in air and car travel. The number of cars on UK roads has risen from just over 26 million in 2005 to more than 31 million in 2009. Air travel has also increased, the number of passengers rising from 227 million in 2005 to 235 million in 2008...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...

Solar surprises raise questions for climate models

Marcus's picture

Independent

Solar surprises raise questions for climate models

Saturday, 9 October 2010

Scientists found that a decline in the Sun's activity did not lead as expected to a cooling of the Earth, a surprise finding that could have repercussions for computer models on climate change.

The Sun's activity is known to wax and wane over 11-year cycles, which means that in theory the amount of radiation reaching Earth declines during the "waning" phase.

The new study was carried out between 2004 and 2007 during a solar waning phase...

The investigation, based mainly on satellite data, is important because of a debate over how far global warming is attributable to Man or to natural causes.

Climatologists say that warming is overwhelmingly due to man-made greenhouse gases - invisible carbon emissions from gas and coal that linger in the atmosphere and trap solar heat.

But a vocal lobby of sceptics say that this is flawed or alarmist, and point out that Earth has known periods of cooling and warming that are due to variations in the Sun's output...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
....................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Ed Miliband is the costliest politician in British history

When Ed Miliband won the Labour leadership, the commentators overlooked his most startling achievement, says Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker
09 Oct 2010

Signally missing from all the attempts to find any substance in the strangely two-dimensional figure who is now leader of the Labour Party has been any reference to Ed Miliband's most spectacular achievement – the fact that he is potentially the most expensive politician in Britain's history,

The only real contribution David Miliband's little brother has so far made to our lives in his meteoric political career was to put through the 2008 Climate Change Act. This commits Britain, uniquely in the world, to cutting its CO2 emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, at a cost estimated, on the website of his old Department for Energy and Climate Change, at up to £18.3 billion every year for the next four decades. In cash terms this amounts to £734 billion, making it far and away the most costly law ever put through Parliament. It will equate to more than £700 a year for every household in the land, as we pay for thousands more useless windmills and other quixotic gestures through fast-rising taxes, soaring electricity bills, draconian regulatory costs and heaven knows what else. Furthermore, neither Mr Miliband himself, nor any of his Act's supporters, could begin to explain how that 80 per cent target is to be attained without closing down virtually our entire economy...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
.........................................................................................................................

Climate deal is closer, says UN envoy, despite China and US locking horns

Jonathan Watts in Tianjin
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 9 October 2010

The international community has edged closer to a climate deal after this week's talks in Tianjin, a top United Nations diplomat has insisted, despite a public rift between the two top carbon emitters, China and the United States.

UN climate chief Christiana Figueres said the latest round of discussions had paved the way for an agreement in Cancun in December.

"This week has got us closer to a structured set of decisions that can be agreed in Cancun," said Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

"I understand there is disappointment with the multilateral process but this issue is not easy. This is the greatest societal and economic transformation that the world has ever seen."

Several negotiators agreed there had been progress at the talks in Tianjin on how to transfer funds and technology from rich nations to developing countries.

Another step forward was a widening acceptance of the need for all parties to legally enshrine the emission reduction targets made last year at Copenhagen.

To do this, Europe and several other parties to the Kyoto protocol said they were willing to sign up – with conditions – to a second period after the end of the treaty's first term in 2012. The majority of developing countries also expressed a willingness to formalise their actions in a separate document...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Global warming theory in chaos

Marcus's picture

Global warming theory in chaos after report finds increased solar activity may COOL the Earth

By Daily Mail Reporter
7th October 2010

A puzzling discovery has raised a question mark over the Sun's impact on climate change and could provide ammunition for sceptics, it was revealed today.

Until now it has been assumed that less activity from the Sun equates to less warming of the Earth.

But the new research, which focuses on a three-year snapshot of time between 2004 and 2007, suggests the opposite may be true.

As solar activity waned at the end of one of the Sun's 11-year cycles, the new data show the amount of energy reaching the Earth at visible wavelengths rose rather than fell.

Scientists believe it may also be possible that during the next up-turn of the cycle, when sun activity increases, there might be a cooling effect at the Earth's surface.

A further twist arises from the fact that over the past century, overall solar activity has been increasing.

If the new findings apply to long as well as short time periods, this could translate into a small degree of cooling rather than the slight warming effect shown in existing climate models. It would effectively turn received wisdom on its head.

Sceptics are likely to say the results further undermine the reliability of climate change science, especially with regard to solar effects...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

NIWA’s Statement of Defence

Marcus's picture

NIWA has issued a Clayton’s statement of defence. You know – the defence you mount when you’ve decided to surrender.

Richard Treadgold | October 6, 2010

Three weeks ago NIWA released their Statement of Defence in response to the NZ Climate Science Coalition’s Statement of Claim regarding an Application for a Judicial Review. You have to be a lawyer (which I’m not) to see the ramifications and it’s taking a while to work through it, but these are my first reactions and I can’t hold them back any longer.

Most of this will upset NIWA’s supporters. If you’re a NIWA supporter, go find a buddy to hug before reading on. This will rock your world.

Because NIWA formally denies all responsibility for the national temperature record (NZTR).

Now that is surprising – shocking, really. Forget their defensive posturing since our paper criticising it last November – now they’ve given that up and say the NZTR isn’t their problem, they’re not responsible for maintaining it and apparently there’s no such thing as an “official” New Zealand Temperature Record anyway.

Will the MSM pick this up? I think they should, but I rather doubt they will.

If I was a long-term NIWA supporter, I’d be a bit miffed to hear this revelation. I’d think that NIWA had betrayed us. We’d been supporting them for months and months against scurrilous attacks on their reputation, arguing that they had good reasons for doing what they did, then they turn around and say the temperature graph is nothing to do with them!...

http://www.climateconversation...
........................................................................................................................................................

China and US clash at climate talks

Jonathan Watts in Tianjin
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 6 October 2010

The world's two biggest carbon emitters clashed at UN climate talks in China today as the United States' top climate envoy accused his counterparts of trying to renegotiate last year's global climate agreement, and threatened to pursue alternatives to the United Nations negotiation track. China retaliated by calling the US's overall negotiating stance "totally unacceptable."

Jonathan Pershing, the US deputy special envoy for climate change, said the first three days of talks in Tianjin had yielded disappointing results because participants were revisiting old arguments over procedure rather than building on the Copenhagen accord.

"What is frustrating in these negotiations is to see countries not using that as the basis, but relitigating things that we more resolved over the course of the Copenhagen negations," he said.

His comments underline the wide differences between nations despite efforts to try to identify common ground this week so that a partial agreement can be signed at a ministerial level meeting in Cancún later this year...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
......................................................................................................................

BBC World Service

"American atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen was one of the lead authors for the IPCC's third report on climate change. But he's not on this week's One Planet show to talk about the need for action on carbon emissions - quite the opposite in fact. Professor Lindzen believes the impact of human induced climate change has been exaggerated, and is urging political leaders to abandon their pursuit of costly carbon markets.

His views may not be shared by the majority of the world's climate scientists, but Professor Lindzen is undoubtedly a formidable scientist - he's written (or co-authored) well over 200 scientific papers, and has been the recipient of numerous awards for his work on atmospheric physics.

Debate is the foundation of science, so this week Mike questions the professor about why he feels the IPCC has become biased in favour of climate change, and hears his views on how humans have had a marginal impact on global warming."

Listen Here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/e...

Climate change film blows up in Richard Curtis's face

Marcus's picture

Independent

Climate change film blows up in Richard Curtis's face

By Cahal Milmo

Monday, 4 October 2010


Stills from the 10:10 campaign film show pupils who are 'blown up' and reduced to a bloody mess

When it comes to galvanising support for the fight against climate change, many methods have been tried, from switching out the lights in London skyscrapers to handing out free low-energy bulbs. Until now though, no one had thought of detonating two schoolchildren in front of their blood-smeared classmates.

A short film scripted by leading British comedy screenwriter Richard Curtis on behalf of the 10:10 environmental campaign has achieved the dubious distinction of becoming one of the more short-lived propaganda tools designed to help save humanity after it was withdrawn following complaints about its graphic scenes of exploding climate change refuseniks.

The four-minute video was taken down from the 10:10 website this weekend and plans to distribute it to cinemas were ripped up after members of the public and key backers of the campaign, including the charity ActionAid, said they were "appalled" by its portrayal of zealous greenhouse gas activists using a red button to blow up reluctant supporters, such as the actress Gillian Anderson and former footballer David Ginola.

Organisers of the film, called No Pressure, said Curtis, whose credits include Four Weddings and a Funeral and Blackadder, had tried to harness the blood-stained comedic spirit of Monty Python or South Park to bring the climate change agenda "back into the headlines". The writer himself said he had wanted to create something "unexpected"...

Franny Armstrong, the director of The Age of Stupid film in which a future world looks back on the mistakes that allowed climate change to run rampant, founded 10:10 last year with the aim of getting individuals, businesses and other organisations to sign up to cutting their emissions by 10 per cent by the end of this year.

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
..................................................................................................................................

Climate change talks open in China

UN climate chief urges countries to 'search for common ground' on global warming ahead of a year-end meeting in Mexico

Associated Press
guardian.co.uk, Monday 4 October 2010

The UN's climate chief today urged countries to identify achievable goals for fighting climate change ahead of a year-end meeting in Mexico, after last year's Copenhagen summit failed to produce binding limits on greenhouse gas.

Christiana Figueres told 3,000 delegates at the opening of a six-day conference in China – the world's biggest carbon emitter – that they must "accelerate the search for common ground" ahead of November-December talks in Cancún to make progress toward securing a global climate change treaty.

"As governments, you can continue to stand still or move forward. Now is the time to make that choice," she told delegates in the northern port of Tianjin.

"If you want a tangible outcome in December, now is the time to clarify what could constitute an achievable and politically balanced package for Cancun, and what could be subject to further work after Cancún," she said...

Much of what needs to happen in Tianjin is the less tangible task of restoring trust and some momentum in order to "set the stage for what's realistically possible in Cancún," said Jake Schmidt, international climate policy director for the US-based Natural Resources Defence Council.

Two of the key pieces will be financing and transparency, he said. At Copenhagen, rich countries had pledged to give $30bn (£19bn) over three years in climate funding to poor nations, rising to a total of $100bn (£63bn) annually by 2020, but little money has materialised so far.

"It's critical that countries move on really delivering the 'prompt-start' funding and show those commitments are real. We have a long history of developed countries promised a lot of money and not committing so it's a chance for developed countries to prove this time is different," he said...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
............................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Osama bin Laden 'trying to change image with climate change message'

Osama bin Laden's message of worry about climate change and the Pakistan floods could be an attempt to improve his image among Muslims according to a Western analyst.

01 Oct 2010

Paul Pillar, a former US intelligence official said bin Laden was seeking to capitalise "on any crises or problems which are of concern to the people whose favour and support he seeks."

"At least for many Pakistanis, the floods have most recently been concern number one," said Prof Pillar, of Georgetown University, who added the al-Qaeda chief "projects a compassionate image" by focusing on social issues.

His aim is "to counteract his loss of support among people who have come to perceive him as an uncaring terrorist who has no hesitation about spilling the blood even of fellow Muslims," he said.

Some US officials have taken pains to highlight the number of Muslims killed by al Qaeda and its offshoots in a bid to sap support for the network behind the September 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the United States.

Bin Laden, whose latest message avoided direct calls for violence, may also be taking note that militant Islamist groups like Hamas and Hizbollah win public support by providing services, Prof Pillar said...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

The hypocrisy is shocking (excuse the pun)

Sandi's picture

This global warming tsarina has the gaul to patronise New Zealand individuals by telling them that "The main part of your footprint is due to electricity consuption"

Meanwhile this corporate monopolist of the "food chain" requires the energy to freeze and chill approximately 16.1 MILLION cubic feet on a daily basis.

"The world, through the United Nations, has recognised that we must take steps immediately to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions which cause global warming and climate change."

http://www.climatechange.govt....

Royal Society admits climate change uncertainty

Marcus's picture

Daily Mail

Royal Society issues new climate change guide that admits there are 'uncertainties' about the science

By Niall Firth
30th September 2010

The UK’s leading scientific body has been forced to rewrite its guide on climate change and admit that it is not known how much warmer the Earth will become.

The Royal Society has updated its guide after 43 of its members complained that the previous version failed to take into account the opinion of climate change sceptics.

Now the new guide, called ‘Climate change: a summary of the science’, admits that there are some ‘uncertainties’ regarding the science behind climate change.

And it says that it impossible to know for sure how the Earth's climate will change in the future nor what the possible effects may be...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

Excerpt:

"Measurements show that averaged over the globe, the surface has warmed by about 0.8oC (with an uncertainty of about ±0.2oC) since 1850.

This warming has not been gradual, but has been largely concentrated in two periods, from around 1910 to around 1940 and from around 1975 to around 2000.

The warming periods are found in three independent temperature records over land, over sea and in ocean surface water.

Even within these warming periods there has been considerable year-to-year variability.

The warming has also not been geographically uniform – some regions, most markedly the high-latitude northern continents, have experienced greater warming; a few regions have experienced little warming, or even a slight cooling."

http://royalsociety.org/climat...

CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE EXPERT WHO CRIED WOLF

Marcus's picture

Daily Express

CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE EXPERT WHO CRIED WOLF

Friday September 24, 2010

THIS newspaper has long been in the sceptical camp when it comes to the great man-made global warming scare.

It is not the warnings of some scientists about the possible impact of climate change that are most objectionable but rather their elevation into an orthodoxy that it is not permissible to challenge.

Yet there has always been the whiff of hyperbole surrounding claims made by the high priests of the climate change movement.

One of the most alarming predictions was the forecast of Dr Rajendra Pachauri that the Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035, causing an environmental disaster. As chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the official United Nations body in this area, Dr Pachauri’s warning commanded massive attention. But now even he admits it was not justified.

So no wonder he is under pressure to step down. In Britain even adherents of the climate change panic wish him to depart. As Tim Yeo, chairman of the all-party Commons committee on the subject, observes: “Climate science needs a guarantee of utmost reliability and Dr Pachauri can no longer guarantee that.”

It is obvious that Dr Pachauri should resign and take the rest of his discredited panel with him. But there is a very good reason why those who first challenged his views need not bother to press the issue: while Dr Pachauri and his allies remain in place few people will believe future IPCC scare stories about the world drastically overheating...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts...
...................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

The Thanet wind farm will milk us of billions

The media remain conspicuously silent about the real price we pay for wind energy, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
25 Sep 2010

In all the publicity given to the opening of "the world's largest wind farm" off the Kent coast last week, by far the most important and shocking aspect of this vast project was completely overlooked. Over the coming years we will be giving the wind farm's Swedish owners a total of £1.2 billion in subsidies. That same sum, invested now in a single nuclear power station, could yield a staggering 13 times more electricity, with much greater reliability.

The first all-too-common mistake in the glowing coverage accorded to the inauguration of this Thanet wind farm by the Climate Change Secretary, Chris Huhne, was to accept unquestioningly the claims of the developer, Vattenfall, about its output. The array of 100 three-megawatt (MW) turbines, each the height of Blackpool Tower, will have, it was said, the "capacity" to produce 300MW of electricity, enough to "power" 200,000 (or even 240,000) homes.

This may be true at those rare moments when the wind is blowing at the right speeds. But the wind, of course, is intermittent, and the average output of these turbines will be barely a quarter of that figure. The latest official figures on the website of Mr Huhne's own department show that last year the average output (or "load factor") of Britain's offshore turbines was only 26 per cent of their capacity.

Due to its position, the wind farm's owners will be lucky to get, on average, 75MW from their windmills, a fraction of the output of a proper power station. The total amount of electricity the turbines actually produce will equate to the average electricity usage not of 240,000 homes, but of barely half that number.

A far more significant omission from the media reports, however, was any mention of the colossal subsidies this wind farm will earn. Wind energy is subsidised through the system of Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs), unwittingly paid for by all of us through our electricity bills. Our electricity supply companies are obliged to buy offfshore wind energy at three times its normal price, so that each kilowatt hour of electricity receives a 200 per cent subsidy of £100...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
.......................................................................................................................................

24 September 2010

Neanderthals were able to 'develop their own tools'

By Katia Moskvitch

Science reporter, BBC News

Neanderthals were keen on innovation and technology and developed tools all on their own, scientists say.

A new study challenges the view that our close relatives could advance only through contact with Homo sapiens.

The team says climate change was partly responsible for forcing Neanderthals to innovate in order to survive.

The research is set to appear in the Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory in December.

"Basically, I am rehabilitating Neanderthals," said Julien Riel-Salvatore, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Colorado in Denver, who led the seven-year study.

"They were far more resourceful than we have given them credit for."...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...

Join Us in Sydney!

Marcus's picture

"On Friday, October 1, The Heartland Institute will host a day-long seminar on climate change -- the fifth in a series of international conferences on climate change Heartland has hosted since March 2008, and the first to be held outside the United States.

The seminar is part of the Pacific Rim Policy Exchange, sponsored by Heartland, Americans for Tax Reform, the Property Rights Alliance, and the Institute of Public Affairs."

http://www.heartland.org/event...
.................................................................................................................................

Pollution not to blame for rapid ocean cooling, says Phil Jones paper

Research from UEA finds drop in temperature is too quick to be caused by the build-up of sulphur aerosols from fossil fuels

Shanta Barley
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 22 September 2010

Scientists studying a rapid cooling of the oceans around four decades ago have found that the traditional explanation for the phenomenon, which involved pollution in the atmosphere, does not stack up.

The discovery does not cast doubt on the overall science of human-caused climate change. But the study will receive more scrutiny than normal because it is the first scientific paper co-authored by Prof Phil Jones since he was cleared of accusations of manipulating data in the row over the hacked climate science emails which were written by University of East Anglia staff. .

Between 1968 and 1972, in the time it took Nixon to serve one term as president of the United States, the surface temperature of oceans in the northern hemisphere plummeted by 0.3C. That might not sound large, but because water is so effective at storing heat it represents a huge amount of released energy.

Researchers had thought that the drop was due to the build-up of sulphur aerosols in the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning. These cool the planet by reflecting sunlight. But Jones and his colleagues conclude that it happened too quickly for that explanation to work...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
...............................................................................................................................

Independent

Leading article: Not as green

Wednesday, 22 September 2010

Coalition ministers have repeatedly pledged that this will be "the greenest Government ever". That is not setting the bar terribly high, given the meagre record of previous administrations on the environment. But nor, at this early stage, is it at all clear whether the promise is likely to be kept.

The Coalition has yielded little of great benefit for the environment thus far. There are promises of a Green Investment Bank to finance new renewable energy infrastructure. Councils have been permitted to sell their surplus renewable energy back to the grid. But the Government has walked away from a pledge to ban the sale of non-sustainable rainforest timber in Britain. And ministers have reneged on a commitment to allow early adopters of domestic solar panels and wind turbines to sell electricity back to the grid at the same rate as new installers. So the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Chris Huhne, had a lot of convincing to do in his speech at the Liberal Democrat conference yesterday...

http://www.independent.co.uk/o...

The times they are -a-changin

HWH's picture

What a welcome sight to see that the tide is turning aginst the opprtunistic "warmist" misanthropes

I love seeing how the Internet is allowing us to unseat these bastards. First Copenhagen , now this.

Small wonder they're doing what they can to entwine their grubby little mits around the throat of the Internet.

I cannot see any other reason for them rolling out a $43 Billion "National Broadband Scheme" here in Aus, other than for the priviledge of censoring it someday soon.

film scanning

ICSC appoints Professor Bob Carter as Chief Science Advisor

gregster's picture

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, September 17, 2010: "The Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), Mr. Tom Harris, announces the appointment of Professor Bob Carter, an Adjunct Research Fellow at James Cook University in Queensland, Australia as the Chief Science Advisor to the coalition. Professor Carter is the author of the important new book on climate science and policy, “Climate: the Counter Consensus”.

The ICSC thanks Carleton University (Ottawa, Canada) Professor Tim Patterson who acted as the coalition’s lead scientist during his 2.5 years as ICSC Chairman, and we look forward to continuing to work with Dr. Patterson as a member of the ICSC Science Advisory Board.

Dr. Carter has been on the ICSC Science Advisory Board since 2007. He now comments that “Working with ICSC as Chief Science Advisor is a welcome opportunity to counter the widespread but erroneous belief that dangerous global warming is occurring, and that it has human causation”. Professor Carter continued: “Science has yet to provide unambiguous evidence that problematic, or even measurable, human-caused global warming is occurring. Governments need to recognize that the really dangerous climate hazards are those of natural change, and to prepare more fully for them.”

The appointment of Professor Carter has been warmly welcomed by ICSC Founding Chairman, Terry Dunleavy of New Zealand. "Professor Carter is an ideal choice to be ICSC’s Chief Science Advisor,” said Mr. Dunleavy. “Like Dr. Patterson before him, Dr. Carter’s approach has always been measured, attracting converts from all sides of the political spectrum, always insisting that governments use evidence-based, unbiased science as a foundation of climate policy.”

Mr. Harris commented that ”Professor Carter has often noted that natural weather and climate hazards form a seamless continuum, and he has therefore long been a leading proponent for government climate policies that are based upon adaptation to dangerous climatic events as they occur, both warmings and coolings. Such an approach has recently been adopted by the British centre-right coalition government; importantly, the UK’s new policy of adaptation to natural change prudently serves also to cover the eventuality of human-caused change, should it ever emerge at measurable magnitudes.”

Good on ya Bob.

White House replaces global warming- 'global climate disruption'

Marcus's picture

Daily Mail

White House solves the problem of global warming overnight... by officially changing the phrase to 'global climate disruption'

By Carol Driver
17th September 2010

Global warming could be a thing of the past, thanks to the Barack Obama administration.

No, the White House has not single-handedly managed to stop the apparent rising temperature – but it does think the terminology oversimplifies the problem.

According to U.S. science adviser John Holdren, the public should start using the phrase ‘global climate disruption’ because it makes the situation sound more dangerous.

During a speech in Oslo, Norway, Mr Holdren said global warming is a ‘dangerous misnomer’ and is not an accurate description of the issues facing the planet.

It comes as Congress prepares to adjourn for the season without completing work on the stalled climate bill, which, after facing a barrage of obstacles, was declared effectively dead in the Senate in July.

But advisers believe using the new terminology could help to drive the message to ordinary people - and put the bill back on the agenda for next year's legislative session.

Referring to the Democrats launch of a new logo, Republican pollster Adam Geller told Fox News: ‘They’re trying to come up with more politically palatable ways to sell some of this stuff.’...

It’s not the first terminology change the White House has pushed for – previous examples include ‘man-caused disaster’ and ‘overseas contingency operation’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
.....................................................................................................

Newsweek

The Earth Doesn’t Care
About what is done to or for it.

The cover of The American Scholar quarterly carries an impertinent assertion: “The Earth Doesn’t Care if You Drive a Hybrid.” The essay inside is titled “What the Earth Knows.” What it knows, according to Robert B. Laughlin, co-winner of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Physics, is this: What humans do to, and ostensibly for, the earth does not matter in the long run, and the long run is what matters to the earth. We must, Laughlin says, think about the earth’s past in terms of geologic time.

For example: The world’s total precipitation in a year is about one meter—“the height of a golden retriever.” About 200 meters—the height of the Hoover Dam—have fallen on earth since the Industrial Revolution. Since the Ice Age ended, enough rain has fallen to fill all the oceans four times; since the dinosaurs died, rainfall has been sufficient to fill the oceans 20,000 times. Yet the amount of water on earth probably hasn’t changed significantly over geologic time.

Damaging this old earth is, Laughlin says, “easier to imagine than it is to accomplish.” There have been mass volcanic explosions, meteor impacts, “and all manner of other abuses greater than anything people could inflict, and it’s still here. It’s a survivor.”

Laughlin acknowledges that “a lot of responsible people” are worried about atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels. This has, he says, “the potential” to modify the weather by raising average temperatures several degrees centigrade and that governments have taken “significant, although ineffective,” steps to slow the warming. “On the scales of time relevant to itself, the earth doesn’t care about any of these governments or their legislation.”...

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/0...
...................................................................................................................................

Global warming could cut number of Arctic hurricanes, study finds

Research says storms that hamper the exploitation of Arctic reserves may halve by 2100, but experts warn against oil rush

Shanta Barley
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 16 September 2010

Global warming could halve the frequency of Arctic hurricanes – extreme storms that strike the north Atlantic during winter – by 2100, according to a new study, potentially encouraging exploitation of the region's oil reserves.

"Our results provide a rare example of climate change driving a decline in extreme weather, rather than an increase," says Matthias Zahn at the University of Reading. His study, published in the Nature journal, is the first to use a global climate model to assess how Arctic hurricanes may behave in a warmer world.

The results of his study may provide encouragement to oil and gas companies that currently consider drilling in the northern north Atlantic very risky, he says. "As the likelihood of hurricanes destroying oil rigs declines, drilling in the region may become a more attractive option."

Arctic hurricanes, also known as polar lows, are explosive storms that develop and die over a few days. They form when cold air from the Arctic flows south over warmer water: the air takes up heat, expands and rises, generating convection currents that sometimes snowball into storms...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

BP insists deepwater drilling in North Sea will go ahead

Marcus's picture

BP insists deepwater drilling in North Sea will go ahead

Outgoing chief executive Tony Hayward says less risk than in Gulf of Mexico, as Shetlands work is expected to start next year

Terry Macalister guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 15 September 2010

BP is determined to press ahead with plans to drill deepwater wells west of the Shetlands despite criticism of its "outrageous" attitude to the risks of drilling in the US and worries about its North Sea safety record.

The company is still in talks with the government and privately recognises the Deepwater Horizon disaster makes it a highly sensitive issue but said it would probably start work next year.

The optimism about its chances of drilling the North Uist prospect at water depths of 5,000 feet (1,500 metres) – similar to that in the Gulf of Mexico – was spelled out as BP came under attack today from MPs on the Commons energy and climate change committee.

Tony Hayward, the company's outgoing chief executive, told the committee investigating the implications of the Gulf oil spill that no definite decision had been taken on whether to proceed west of the Shetlands but he argued that drilling risks were different from the Gulf because reservoir pressures were much lower.

An oil spill response team was already being assembled in Southampton, he said, so BP could in future react much quicker than it had with the rogue Macondo well, which killed 11 rig workers and despoiled the beaches of the southern states of the US.

Bernard Looney, managing director of BP North Sea, said the company had not yet chosen a rig to drill North Uist this year but "we will most likely drill there next year".

The plans for the Shetlands triggered an angry response from Albert Owen, a Labour member of the committee, who said the Deepwater disaster raised concerns that BP seemed unable to comprehend...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/busi...
....................................................................................................................................

16 September 2010

Climate change advisers urge UK to prepare for change

By Richard Black

Environment correspondent, BBC News

The UK needs to prepare itself quickly to deal with the impacts of climate change, government advisers warn.

The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) says climate effects are already being felt in the UK in the form of higher temperatures and changing seasons.

Using land more sensibly, adapting buildings and planning for emergencies are areas where it recommends action.

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman describes the CCC's adaptation report as "a wake-up call".

"There is no part of our society which is immune from the effects of climate change," she is due to say in a speech on Thursday.

"Britain's economy will only be as resilient and prepared as British firms, communities and infrastructure."....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...

Doubt remains over 'climategate'

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

Doubt remains over 'climategate'

A ‘huge cloud of doubt’ remains over the case for man made global warming, according to Lord Lawson of Blaby, following a new study into the ‘climategate’ scandal.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
14 Sep 2010

Sceptics claim that emails stolen from the University of East Anglia last year showed scientists were willing to manipulate the data to show a rise in global temperatures since the industrial era.

Three official inquiries were quickly launched by the university and the House of Commons that showed the scientists did nothing wrong.

But a new report by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), a think tank set up by Lord Lawson, claims that the inquiries were "rushed and seriously inadequate".

Lord Lawson said the “defective” nature of the inquiries means that doubts remain about the science behind man made global warming...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
..............................................................................................................................

Republican hopefuls deny global warming

Report reveals all bar one of party's 48 mid-term election candidates are sceptical about climate change

Suzanne Goldenberg
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 14 September 2010

All but one of the 48 Republican hopefuls for the Senate mid-term elections in November deny the existence of climate change or oppose action on global warming, according to a report released today.

The strong Republican front against established science includes entrenched Senate leaders as well as the new wave of radical conservatives endorsed by the Tea Party activists, says a report by the Centre for American Progress.

As election season gets under way, Tea Party favourites such as Joe Miller, who caused the biggest upset of the primaries when he defeated the Republican incumbent Lisa Murkowski in Alaska last month, have been upfront about their doubts on climate science. "We haven't heard there's manmade global warming," Miller told the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

But the challenge to science goes beyond Tea Party favourites to corporate titans such as Carly Fiorina, who was the chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, and is running for the Senate in California. Fiorina has said on repeated occasions that she is "not sure" climate change is real.

Even John McCain, the two-time presidential candidate who worked for years to get climate change legislation through the Senate, has now cooled on the idea, calling a recent cap-and-trade bill a "monstrosity"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...

Prince Charles 'baffled' by climate change sceptics

Marcus's picture

Independent

Prince Charles 'baffled' by climate change sceptics

Friday, 10 September 2010

The Prince of Wales said today he found the views of climate change sceptics "extraordinary".

He also made an impassioned plea for the country to adopt greener ways as he gave a breakfast television interview.

He warned that living on the planet would be "no fun at all" for future generations unless people took action to combat climate change.

Charles has spent the week touring eco-projects across the country and emphasised how some local people were taking up the challenge of adopting more sustainable lives...

Asked by Bleakley what he thought of climate change doubters, the Prince responded: "I find it quite extraordinary, because to me it seems only sensible to take a precautionary approach. There is something going very wrong.

"And I would say to all these sceptics - alright it may be very convenient to believe that somehow all these greenhouse gases we're pouring into the atmosphere just disappear through holes conveniently into space, it doesn't work like that."

The Prince also emphasised how ordinary people had taken up the challenge of sustainability, saying how books on bee keeping and looking after chickens had become prized and allotment keeping, once a declining hobby, was now popular...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
...................................................................................................

The hockey stick graph remains an illusion

Bob Ward failed in his attempt to prove the arguments in my book wrong

Andrew Montford
guardian.co.uk, Friday 10 September 2010

Two weeks ago, Bob Ward, the communications director of the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics, wrote on this website what I will politely refer to as a "hit piece" about me and my book, The Hockey Stick Illusion. The book tells the story of the famous hockey stick graph, which was used as a sales tool to promote the idea of catastrophic manmade global warming, and the extraordinary steps that scientists were willing to take to protect it from criticism.

Promoters of the green cause now seem to feel a pressing need to discredit me or the book, ahead of the publication of a report I am writing for the Global Warming Policy Foundation on the 'climategate' emails affair. Those who would rather I hadn't written The Hockey Stick Illusion have tried for months to pretend it didn't exist. But then, as positive reviews started to appear, in the Spectator and Sunday Telegraph, and a senior climatologist named Judith Curry challenged her scientific peers to debate the questions raised by the book, this approach was no longer tenable. One abortive attempt was made to challenge the facts in the book but subsequent critiques have been either fallacious or ad hominem...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
..................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

An ill wind blows for Denmark's green energy revolution

Denmark has long been a role model for green activists, but now it has become one of the first countries to turn against the turbines.

By Andrew Gilligan
12 Sep 2010

To green campaigners, it is windfarm heaven, generating a claimed fifth of its power from wind and praised by British ministers as the model to follow. But amid a growing public backlash, Denmark, the world's most windfarm-intensive country, is turning against the turbines.

Last month, unnoticed in the UK, Denmark's giant state-owned power company, Dong Energy, announced that it would abandon future onshore wind farms in the country. "Every time we were building onshore, the public reacts in a negative way and we had a lot of criticism from neighbours," said a spokesman for the company. "Now we are putting all our efforts into offshore windfarms."

Even as parts of the British Government continues to blow hard for wind, other countries seem to be cooling on the idea. This summer, France brought in new restrictions on wind power which will, according to the French wind lobby, jeopardise more than a quarter of the country's planned windfarm projects.

According to the latest Wind Turbine Price Index, produced by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, world prices for new wind turbines are down by 15 per cent on their 2008 peak amid a sharp slump in European and global demand. William Young, manager of Bloomberg's Wind Insight Service, says: "Expectations for turbine prices have never been so low, and the current market oversupply will continue for quite a while longer."

But it is in Denmark, the great windfarm pioneer, where some of the most interesting changes are taking shape. In 1980, the Danish government was Europe's first to bring in large-scale subsidies - on which, just as in Britain, the wind industry depends.

The results have been dramatic. According to the Danish Wind Energy Association, there are more than four thousand onshore turbines – two-thirds more than Britain - in a country a fifth the size. Nowhere else has more turbines per head, and Denmark is also a global centre of wind turbine manufacturing – with Vestas, the world's leading turbine firm, based in the country.

Unfortunately, Danish electricity bills have been almost as dramatically affected as the Danish landscape. Thanks in part to the windfarm subsidies, Danes pay some of Europe's highest energy tariffs – on average, more than twice those in Britain. Under public pressure, Denmark's ruling Left Party is curbing the handouts to the wind industry.

"Since 2005 alone, 5.1 billion kroner [£621 million] has been paid to the wind turbine owners. That cost has been borne by businesses and private consumers," says the party's environment spokesman, Lars Christian Lilleholt. "It seems to have become a political fashion to say that there should be more support for wind. But we have to look at other renewables. We cannot go on with wind power only."

The subsidy cuts are almost certainly the main reason behind Dong's move out of onshore wind. But public anger is real enough, too. Until recently, there was relatively little opposition to the windmills. But now a threshold appears to have been crossed. Earlier this year, a new national anti-wind body, Neighbours of Large Wind Turbines, was created. More than 40 civic groups have become members...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Polar Glacial Rebound

Frediano's picture

The inconvienient truth of growing southern ice cap ice extent needed to be addressed, and they thought they had an explanation based on 'sea ice may be growing, but land ice is shrinking.'

The basis for that argument was interpretation of spaceborn measurements (gravity anomalies on NASA/GRACE and radar), adjusted for something called "Polar Glacial Rebound." (PGR).

PGR theory is, the earth's crust acts like a viscoelastic rubber ball. During ice ages, when the polar/glacial regions have gigatonnes of ice bearing down, the crust is compressed. (Like a bowl of Jello...so, if land mass is pushed down, the surrounding sea floor might actually raise up, and vice-versa when the ice receded.) When the ice ages recede the crust springs back at some unknown rate. If not corrected for PGR, spaceborne measurements of glacial height over these regions would show a trend of increasing height which must be subtracted, or else the 'true' loss of ice mass will be hidden by this effect.

And here is the rub. PGR is a theory and has not itself been directly measured. It has instead been modeled. And here is the punchline: one of the primary inputs into the model is an assumed histroical trend of ice loading. In otherwords, the conclusion is in the assumption. So, since 2002, when the interpretation of the NASA/GRACE spaceborne data did not show the loss of ice that the researchers 'knew' was there, they could adjust the PGR models to nudge the 'measurements' in the direction of greater ice loss, not just in Antarctica but Greenland as well.

And then there was this, by JPL/Dutch team: http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

However, it now turns out that these results were not properly corrected for glacial isostatic adjustment, the phenomenon that the Earth's crust rebounds as a result of the melting of the massive ice caps from the last major Ice Age around 20,000 years ago. These movements of the Earth's crust have to be incorporated in the calculations, since these vertical movements change the Earth's mass distribution and therefore also have an influence on the gravitational field...."The corrections for deformations of the Earth's crust have a considerable effect on the amount of ice that is estimated to be melting each year. We have concluded that the Greenland and West Antarctica ice caps are melting at approximately half the speed originally predicted." The average rise in sea levels as a result of the melting ice caps is also lower.

regards,
Fred

Global warming? It doesn't exist, says Ryanair boss O'Leary

Marcus's picture

Independent

Global warming? It doesn't exist, says Ryanair boss O'Leary

Outspoken airline chief says climate change is a plot by scientists seeking research cash

By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent

Friday, 10 September 2010


Michael O'Leary claims there is 'no link' between man-made carbon and climate change.

Charging for toilets, weighing passengers and flying with a lone pilot: Ryanair's combative boss Michael O'Leary is renowned for backing unusual ideas, but some passengers may feel that even he has overstepped the mark with his latest comments – denying the existence of global warming.

In an interview with The Independent littered with expletives, the chief executive of Europe's largest airline branded the scientific consensus that man-made pollution is heating up the planet with potentially grave consequences for the future of humanity as "horseshit".

He agreed the climate was changing but denied it was caused by man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, such as those from his planes. "Nobody can argue that there isn't climate change. The climate's been changing since time immemorial," he said.

"Do I believe there is global warming? No, I believe it's all a load of bullshit. But it's amazing the way the whole fucking eco-warriors and the media have changed. It used to be global warming, but now, when global temperatures haven't risen in the past 12 years, they say 'climate change'."

"Well, hang on, we've had an ice age. We've also had a couple of very hot spells during the Middle Ages, so nobody can deny climate change. But there's absolutely no link between man-made carbon, which contributes less than 2 per cent of total carbon emissions [and climate change]."

He suggested scientists had invented and perpetuated the theory in order to gain research grants. "Scientists argue there is global warming because they wouldn't get half of the funding they get now if it turns out to be completely bogus," he said.

"The scientific community has nearly always been wrong in history anyway. In the Middle Ages, they were going to excommunicate Galileo because the entire scientific community said the Earth was flat... I mean, it is absolutely bizarre that the people who can't tell us what the fucking weather is next Tuesday can predict with absolute precision what the fucking global temperatures will be in 100 years' time. It's horseshit."

He mocked global warming campaigners, describing the United Nations as "one of the world's most useless organisations", its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as "utter tosh", and US politician Al Gore as someone who "couldn't even get fucking re-elected" after a boom.

His comments come amid rising taxes on flights, ostensibly introduced by politicians to curb emissions. Green groups also want a levy imposed on jet fuel. Aviation causes 6.3 per cent of UK emissions but is rising rapidly along with the growth in popularity of budget travel and could represent Britain's entire "sustainable" carbon by 2050, according to the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.

Of air passenger duty, which will rise by between £1 and £30 in November, Mr O'Leary said: "When they introduced it the Treasury said: 'We will ring-fence this money and use it for global climate change initiatives'. We've written to them once every six months – they never answer the letter – saying: 'What do you use the money for?' It's a straight-forward tax scam... My average fare is £34. I pay passenger tax of £10: I pay 33 per cent of my revenues in these aviation taxes.

"Aviation gets a crap deal. This is the great historical justification among environmentalists for taxing air travel: 'They don't have tax on fuel'. The only reason we don't pay tax on fuel is that governments can't tax it because you'll upload fuel somewhere else if they tax it."

To date, the US, UK, Germany, Japan, India, and China have all agreed on the existence of global warming, but have failed to agree binding emission targets to limit it. More than 2,500 scientists contributed to the IPCC's fourth assessment report in 2007, which warned that freak weather events such as flooding and drought will intensify, threatening agriculture and the livelihoods of millions.

Greenpeace issued a light-hearted response to Mr O'Leary's comments. "Personally, I wouldn't trust 'O'Really' to tell me the price of a seat on his own airline, but to be fair his position does have the support of such intellectual heavyweights as Nick Griffin, Sarah Palin and George W Bush," said Joss Garman, a Greenpeace spokesman...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
......................................................................................................

EU emissions trading scheme on course to make tiny savings, says report

Campaign group Sandbag calls for tighter caps on greenhouse gas emissions in Europe

Damian Carrington
The Guardian, Friday 10 September 2010

The entire five-year period of the European Union's emissions trading scheme (ETS) that ends in 2012 is set to deliver carbon savings of less than a third of 1% of total emissions, according to a new report.

The analysis by emissions trading campaign group Sandbag predicts that only 32m tonnes of pollution permits will need to be surrendered to meet the cap on greenhouse gas emissions – a tiny fraction of the 1.9bn tonnes of carbon emissions covered by the ETS each year. The "miniscule" saving is the result of the economic crisis having driven down industrial activity while the caps remain at the same level.

"The ETS is the best thing we have but it is being held back by industry lobbying," said Sandbag's founder, Bryony Worthington. "We think the European commission wants to lower the caps but they need to win the political battle. As it stands, no one needs to do anything to curb their emissions until about 2016 – the ETS is locking Europe into a carbon trap rather than a carbon cap."

The report also finds that the number of "hot air" permits held by steel and cement manufacturers has risen sharply. These permits were awarded in anticipation of high levels of production, but since the recession has caused production to crash, the companies no longer need the permits. They can sell them on the open market or hoard them until the next ETS phase, when the carbon price may have risen. In 2009, the top 10 holders of surplus permits had 119m – four times the number of the previous year...

Both industrial and steel lobby groups, Business Europe and Eurofer, have opposed changes to the ETS, saying it would put jobs at risk. In April, a UK steel company executive told the Guardian that a tighter ETS cap would be "death by a thousand cuts" for the industry.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
...................................................................................................................

Green groups press Barack Obama for 60MPG fuel efficiency standard

Environmental campaigners focus on more modest goals as hopes of US climate legislation dwindle ahead of expected Republican gains

Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Friday 10 September 2010

America's environmental groups have given up on getting climate change legislation through Congress at a time of Republican ascendancy, and have downsized to a series of more modest goals like fuel economy.

In a sign of that strategy reshift, 20 environmental groups launched a new campaign yesterday to press Barack Obama to propose far more ambitious fuel efficiency and pollution standards for cars of 60mpg by 2025.

Meanwhile, Clean Energy Works, a coalition of 80 grassroots groups that had 45 paid staff in Washington to lobby to get a climate change law through Congress, is shutting up shop.

The rethink, which is still a work in progress, gets underway at a dispiriting time for greens.

The election of the greenest-ever president in Barack Obama failed to produce the hoped-for sweeping climate and energy legislation in Congress. Democrats are now preparing themselves for heavy losses in November's mid-term elections, which will make it even harder for Obama to get his agenda through Congress.

Greens say they are refocusing their energy on ensuring that existing institutions - such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - take action on climate change. The EPA is poised to begin using its authority to order industries to curb emissions...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Windsor gets shafted over mining tax

Marcus's picture

Daily Express

TENSIONS ON FIRST DAY OF GOVERNMENT

Wednesday September 8,2010

Tensions have emerged on the first full day of Australia's new minority government's rule between the deputy PM and a kingmaker independent legislator over plans to make mining companies pay more tax.

The disagreement between deputy prime minister Wayne Swan and Tony Windsor underscores the fragility of the centre-left Labour Party administration that could be brought down by a single politician defecting.

As part of a deal to get Mr Windsor and fellow independent Rob Oakeshott to throw their support behind a Labour government on Tuesday, Mr Swan and Prime Minister Julia Gillard promised to hold a public summit of tax experts by June 30 next year to discuss options for tax reforms recommended last year in a Treasury department report.

But Mr Swan surprised Mr Windsor by saying that Labour's plan to impose a new 30% tax on iron ore and coal miners' profits, which are burgeoning with the voracious demand for raw materials from Chinese and Indian manufacturers, will not be submitted for review at the summit.

Mr Swan said some of the 10.5 billion Australian dollars (£6.2 billion) to be raised from the tax over two years was needed to pay for other sweeteners offered to Mr Windsor and Mr Oakeshott, including 10 billion Australian dollars for upgrading rural schools, hospitals and other infrastructure outside major cities.

"There are going to be vigorous debates and the mining tax is one where we do disagree," Mr Swan told reporters.

Mr Swan said he hoped to introduce the mining tax legislation in Parliament as soon as possible.

Mr Windsor said he understood that the mining tax plan would be scrutinised at the tax summit and would talk to Swan about having it included.

"I thought it was going to be included in any discussions in relation to taxation" and the Treasury report, Mr Windsor told Australian Broadcasting radio on Wednesday...

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/...

Climate shifts 'not to blame' for African civil wars

Marcus's picture

6 September 2010

Climate shifts 'not to blame' for African civil wars

By Mark Kinver

Science and environment reporter, BBC News


The Darfur conflict in Sudan was linked to climate shifts

Climate change is not responsible for civil wars in Africa, a study suggests.

It challenges previous assumptions that environmental disasters, such as drought and prolonged heat waves, had played a part in triggering unrest.

Instead, it says, traditional factors - such as poverty and social tensions - were often the main factors behind the outbreak of conflicts.

The findings have been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in the United States.

"Climate variability in Africa does not seem to have a significant impact on the risk of civil war," said author Halvard Buhaug, senior researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo's (Prio) Centre for the Study of Civil War.

"If you apply a number of different definitions of conflict and various different ways to measure climate variability, most of these measurements will turn out not to be associated with each other.

He added that it was not too hard to find examples of where politicians were publicly making the link between the projected impact of climate change and the associated security risks.

Margaret Beckett, when she held the post of British Foreign Secretary, tabled a debate on climate change at the UN Security Council in 2007.

Ahead of the gathering, the British delegation circulated a document that warned of "major changes to the world's physical landmass during this century", which would trigger border and maritime disputes.

In his paper, Dr Buhaug questioned the findings of research that appeared in PNAS in November last year...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...
......................................................................................................

Ice caps melting 'at half the speed that had been predicted'

By Daily Mail Reporter

6th September 2010

The Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps are melting at half the speed previously predicted, it has been announced.

Scientists measured the change in the ice caps by analysing changes in Earth’s gravitational field using two satellites, which monitor the distribution of mass on Earth including ice and water.

When ice melts and joins the sea, this has a small, but detectable effect on the Earth's gravitational field.

This finding has emerged from research by a joint US/Dutch team from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Delft University.

The average rise in sea levels as a result of the melting ice caps is also lower, the team discovered...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

Australian Greens Seek ‘Fast, Furious’ Climate Steps

Jameson's picture

Sept. 7 (Bloomberg) -- "The Australian Greens plan “fast and furious” action to establish a climate change committee and impose a price on carbon emissions under a government led by the Labor Party’s Julia Gillard.

“This is the best political opportunity collectively we’ve ever had,” Christine Milne, deputy leader of the Greens Party, said in Sydney today before Gillard won the support needed to form a government. With Labor retaining power, “this committee will be on track fast and furious,” Milne said.

Two independent lawmakers, Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor, backed Gillard’s minority government after the closest election in 70 years left neither of the main parties with a majority. Gillard, 48, gained support last week from the Greens and agreed in exchange to establish a climate change committee made up of lawmakers and scientists with the aim of setting a penalty for carbon emissions...

Hunt today reiterated support for the A$2.55 billion ($2.3 billion) emissions reduction fund, saying it would provide certainty compared with the lack of clarity of when emissions trading would begin."

[hat tip: Ken Shock]

Booker : Hero

gregster's picture

Does this not all add up to the most bizarre and outrageous scandal in the history of the world?

After belief in the goblin, yes!

Gillard to form minority government in Australia

Marcus's picture

Independent

Gillard to form minority government in Australia

Tuesday, 7 September 2010


Today's decision means Ms Gillard can continue with her plans to introduce a 30% tax on iron ore and coal miners' burgeoning profits and make Australia's biggest polluters pay for carbon gas emissions.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard's center-left Labor Party will form a minority government to rule Australia for a second three-year term, after two independent lawmakers joined her coalition Tuesday in the interest of stable government.

The decision by Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott gives Gillard's party control of 76 seats in the 150-seat House or Representatives and avoids the need for another round of polls, following inconclusive elections late last month.

It also means Gillard can continue with her plans to introduce a 30 percent tax on iron ore and coal miners' burgeoning profits and make Australia's biggest polluters pay for carbon gas emissions...

Labor won only 72 seats but has enlisted the support of a lawmaker from the Greens party plus three independents.

Liberal Party lawmakers argue that the Greens' influence will make the Labor minority government Australia's most left wing government in years.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

A cunning bid to shore up the ruins of the IPCC

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

A cunning bid to shore up the ruins of the IPCC

The Inter-Academy report into the IPCC, led by Rajendra Pachauri, tiptoes around a mighty elephant in the room, argues Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
04 Sep 2010

A report on the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, on behalf of the world's leading scientific academies, last week provoked even some of the more committed believers in man-made global warming to demand the resignation of Dr Rajendra Pachauri as chairman of the IPCC. But is the report all that it seems?

Last winter, the progress of this belief – that the world faces catastrophe unless we spend trillions of dollars to halt global warming – suffered an unprecedented reverse. In Copenhagen, the world's leaders failed to agree a treaty designed to reshape the future of civilisation. This coincided with a series of scandals that blew up around the IPCC's 2007 report.

Since then several inquiries, including three into the leaked "Climategate" emails, have tried to hold the official line, all following a consistent pattern. Each has made a few peripheral criticisms, for plausibility, while deliberately avoiding the main issue. Each has then gone on to put over the required message: that the science of global warming remains unchallenged.

At first sight, last week's Inter-Academy report on the "processes and procedures of the IPCC" seems to have played it more cleverly. It criticises the IPCC's abuse of its own procedures in very trenchant terms, and suggests some radical reforms to them. Passages on "conflict of interest", and a recommendation that top officials should serve only one term, seem to hint that Dr Pachauri, reappointed to serve until 2014 after presiding over the IPCC's last controversial report, should step down. But, as with the reports that preceded it, this one also tiptoes round a mighty elephant in the room, in order to put over the familiar message: the IPCC has generally "served society well", the science remains unchallenged. It is as one might expect of a report produced on behalf of bodies such as Britain's Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, which have long been leading advocates for the belief in global waming.

When, some years ago, I began the research for my book The Real Global Warming Disaster, nothing surprised me more than discovering how widely the nature of the IPCC is misunderstood. It is invariably portrayed as a body representing the top scientists in the world, objectively weighing the complex forces that shape Earth's climate. In reality, it's nothing of the kind...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
..................................................................................................................

Temperature records to be made public

Climate scientists are to publish the largest ever collection of temperature records, dating back more than a hundred years, in an attempt to provide a more accurate picture of climate change.

By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
04 Sep 2010

The UK Met Office is leading the project to create a new set of temperature records from around the world.

The move is being seen as a response to criticism by global warming sceptics of the withholding of data used in climate change research.

The records, taken from land-based temperature recording stations around the world, will be made open to the public and researchers to carry out analysis to help answer key questions about how climate change will affect individual countries and local regions.

Climate scientists have come under intense pressure following the Climategate scandal at the University of East Anglia, where researchers were criticised for withholding crucial information, meaning their research could not be independently checked.

Sceptics have also attacked climate change research over the quality of the records being used as evidence for the impact mankind has had on the world's climate since the industrial revolution...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
................................................................................................................

6 September 2010

Tony Blair: 'Heavy price' for climate inaction

By Roger Harrabin

Environment analyst, BBC News

World leaders may pay a heavy price in history if they fail to tackle global warming, Tony Blair has warned.

He said politicians did not have to wait for chaotic climate change in order for them to act.

The risks of not cutting emissions, given the potentially massive consequences, was enough to justify action, he told BBC Radio 4.

The former prime minister added that it had always been a struggle to explain the uncertainties in climate science.

He told Radio 4's Uncertain Climate documentary: "It's very hard to say 'this is the precise warming there's going to be, this is the maximum amount you can allow this (emissions) to continue'."...

"But it doesn't need to be certain for us to act. It just needs to be likely, probable or actually even - if you look at the consequences possible because if you find out 2030 or 2040 'that was a real problem, we should have dealt with that', you're going to pay a pretty heavy price in history."...

The documentary points out that under Mr Blair's tenure as prime minister, emissions in the UK actually rose if embedded emissions from goods imported into the UK were included in the national figures.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...
................................................................................................................

Germany agrees to extend life of nuclear power stations

Angela Merkel's coalition government decides to lengthen service of plants by average of 12 years

Kate Connolly in Berlin
guardian.co.uk, Monday 6 September 2010


Anti-nuclear protests outside the chancellery in Berlin as Angela Merkel's government held talks on nuclear power stations.

The German government today agreed to extend the working lives of its nuclear reactors by an average of 12 years, in a controversial move that will shape the energy strategy of Europe's largest nation for decades to come.

Having put the seal on a deal that was hammered out after lengthy talks between politicians and power companies, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, hailed it as a "revolution in energy provision". She said it would help to ensure Germany's place at the forefront of "the most environmentally and worldwide most efficient" energy policy.

Under the agreement, the four power companies E.ON, RWE, EnBW and Vattenfall have agreed to pay the German government €30bn (£25bn) to allow the operating lives of its 17 nuclear plants to be extended. The companies will also pay €2.3bn in nuclear-fuel rods tax over the next six years, as well as an annual €300m for the next two years and €200m between 2013 and 2016 into a special renewable energy investment fund.

The decision marks a turnaround on the decision reached almost a decade ago under the Social Democratic (SPD) and Green party coalition of Gerhard Schröder to phase out nuclear power early in the next decade.

Opposition politicians and environmental groups referred to today variously as "heartbreaking" and "a black day"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...

Overhaul of UN climate change body 'could lead to more mistakes'

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

Overhaul of UN climate change body 'could lead to more mistakes'

A major overhaul of how the UN advises the world on climate change could lead to more mistakes on the impacts of global warming, an Oxford academic has warned.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
31 Aug 2010

In a damning report out earlier this week, The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was criticised for making a number of errors about the potential impacts of global warming. The most notable mistake was wrongly predicting that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

The IPCC was also told to stick to the science rather than straying into the politics of climate change.

The review, by the InterAcademy Council, called for “fundamental reform”, including a more formal review process.

But a leading British academic said the recommendations are in danger of making the situation worse by imposing so much bureaucracy on reviewers they are unable to spend enough time actually assessing the science.

There is also a risk it may lead to top scientists refusing to take part, leaving only Government scientists that are more likely to be influenced by politics.

Dr Myles Allen, Head of the Climate Dynamics Group at the University Of Oxford, said wasting time on red tape could lead to more mistakes...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
........................................................................................................................

The Economist

Nuclear power? Um, maybe

Angela Merkel agonises over a planned phase-out of Germany’s nuclear capacity
Sep 2nd 2010 | Berlin

WHEN Angela Merkel cares about an issue she does not give a speech. Instead, she hits the road. Lately Germany’s chancellor has travelled to a wind park in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, a nuclear reactor in Lower Saxony, and an energy-generating house in Hesse. Aiming to draw attention to Germany’s dilemmas in deciding how much and what sort of power to produce and consume in the coming decades, Mrs Merkel will bundle her answers into a comprehensive “energy concept”, to be unveiled at the end of September.

This is like coming up with a menu that pleases both carnivores and herbivores. Much of the debate revolves around whether to scrap a plan devised by an earlier government to cease nuclear-power generation by 2022. The decision will affect Mrs Merkel’s political standing and the public finances, as well as Germany’s energy future. With roughly a quarter of generation capacity due to reach retirement age by 2020, decisions made now will shape the energy profile of Europe’s biggest economy for years. There is “a window of opportunity for good changes or for messing up the situation for the next 50 years,” says Olav Hohmeyer, an economist at the University of Flensburg...

But nuclear power is not a complement to renewable energy, insist the greens. Renewable power is fickle, available when the wind blows or the sun shines but absent when it does not. Until enough can be stored (perhaps behind Norwegian dams) Germany will require flexible backup generators during the lulls. Plants fired with natural gas can do this. Nuclear plants, which require 50 hours to restart, claims the anti-nuclear lobby, cannot.

Nuclear power is unpopular: 56% of Germans want to phase it out on schedule and just 38% favour an extension, according to one poll. Some 150,000 people across Germany demonstrated against it in April; another big protest is planned on September 18th in Berlin. Opinion is divided within the government on whether a nuclear extension would have to be approved by the Bundesrat, the upper house of parliament, which will probably vote against it. Any future government that includes the Green Party or Social Democrats “will reverse any [extension] decision this government takes,” says Hermann Ott, a Green member of the Bundestag. It would wreck any prospect of a future coalition between the Greens and Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), an option she had hoped to keep open...

Regardless of the nuclear decision, the government will stick with its ambitious climate goals: a 40% reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2020 (double the European Union’s current target), plus 30% of electricity from renewable sources by then.

The “energy concept” cannot stop there. Herbivores and carnivores alike want to unblock the expansion of the electricity grid, which will be needed to ship power from wind farms in the North Sea to consumers in southern Germany. But citizens’ movements mobilise against almost any energy project, no matter how green. It takes eight to ten years to get approval to add to the grid, complains Hildegard Müller of BDEW, which represents utility companies. Everyone thinks households and offices, which account for half of energy consumption, should conserve more. Mrs Merkel has whetted Germany’s appetite for cheap, secure, green energy. She is still fussing with the recipe.

http://www.economist.com/node/...

Why it's time for change at the IPCC

Marcus's picture

New Scientist

Why it's time for change at the IPCC

01 September 2010 by Fred Pearce

Having collectively bagged a Nobel peace prize, the only path for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was down. And the forceful analysis of the panel's failings just published by the InterAcademy Council is a strong dose of realism about the organisation's failings – and about our own inflated expectations about what it can achieve. Change must come if the panel is to have a useful future.

The IPCC has tried hard to preserve the normal rules of scientific discourse and to explain continuing uncertainty, but it has been pushed towards simple sound-bite conclusions. Some of this pressure has come from the desire of many scientists to underline their concerns about the dangers the world faces. Sometimes, in the process, "could happen" has become "will happen", and analysis has veered close to advocacy. Journalists have been willing colluders.

On occasions, this has led to exaggerated claims and a reluctance to subject eye-catching research findings to proper scrutiny. Most notoriously, the most recent IPCC report, published in 2007, included a claim that the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035. This turned out to be an old and unassessed argument cut and pasted from magazine articles, including one in New Scientist in 1999.

This error, swiftly dubbed "glaciergate" after it was exposed in New Scientist, became damaging primarily because IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri defended it for several weeks rather than swiftly admitting the mistake. (The year 2350 is a more likely date for an ice-free Himalayas).

But the last IPCC report contained other apparently unassessed claims from literature that is opaque and often not peer-reviewed. They included a claim that agricultural yields in some African countries could fall by 50 per cent by 2020 – a figure that turned out to reflect little more than existing differences between wet and dry years...

http://www.newscientist.com/ar...
...............................................................................................................

Daily Express

CLIMATE CHANGE: HYPOCRISY OF THE GREEN BULLY

Thursday September 2,2010
By John Triggs

RAJENDRA PACHAURI has a chauffeur, lives in luxury and jets across the world on his quest to ban Sunday roasts and cheap flights. Now he's accused of exaggerating the climate change crisis.

MOST mornings he is driven to work from his £5 million home in a 1.8-litre Toyota Corolla by his personal chauffeur, as befits his status as director-general of a New Delhi research institute employing more than 700 staff.

Dr Rajendra Pachauri is also a winner of a Nobel Peace prize, the holder of India’s second-highest civilian award, an officer of the French Legion of Honour and is used to being treated with respect.

But for some of those who challenge the international consensus on climate change he is public enemy number one and his travel arrangements are fair game. That’s because he is also the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body set up in 1988 to conduct regular assessments on the state of global warming.

In that role he has never had any qualms about lecturing other people on how to reduce their carbon
footprint, insisting for instance that we all give up meat to help save the planet. He is of course a vegetarian.

His uncompromising style - he once compared a leading climate sceptic to Adolf Hitler - has long got up the noses of those who question the orthodoxy.

Even those who agree with him that climate change is a massive threat were embarrassed when his landmark assessment in 2007 included the false claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. He added insult to injury on that occasion by refusing to apologise.

His detractors say he is a hectoring hypocrite for urging the rest of the planet to switch to electric cars, take public transport or walk when he is not prepared to set an example himself on his one-mile journey to work.

And this week he took a further knock when an independent team of scientists appeared to issue a signal that his services are no longer required...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts...
.........................................................................................................................................

Energy secretary Chris Huhne warned not to cut subsidies for green electricity

Reducing funding for household generation of renewable energy will jeopardise job creation and energy security, Huhne is told

Adam Vaughan
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 2 September 2010

A coalition of green, countryside and housing groups has warned energy secretary Chris Huhne not to cut subsidies for green electricity and heating as part of the government's spending review. The 22 groups, including green energy trade body the Renewable Energy Association, the National Farmers Union and the Federation of Master Builders, said in a letter to Huhne that cutting schemes that subsidise household generation of renewable energy would jeopardise job creation, energy security and greenhouse gas targets.

The move was sparked by comments from the Department of Energy and Climate Change's minister of state, Charles Hendry, who recently said he was "closely reviewing" the £27bn renewable heat incentive (RHI) scheme due to start in April next year to encourage the take-up of green heating devices such as heat pumps, and the £8bn feed-in tariff (FIT) launched in April which pays small-scale generators of green electricity.

"We inherited a situation where we could see who was going to benefit commercially but we couldn't really see how it was going to be paid for and that it would create pretty substantial bills," Hendry told the Telegraph in an article that suggested both schemes could be "slashed"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

UN climate experts 'overstated dangers'

Marcus's picture

Daily Mail

UN climate experts 'overstated dangers': Keep your noses out of politics, scientists told

By Fiona Macrae
31st August 2010

UN climate change experts have been accused of making 'imprecise and vague' statements and over-egging the evidence.

A scathing report into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change called for it to avoid politics and stick instead to predictions based on solid science.

The probe, by representatives of the Royal Society and foreign scientific academies, took a thinly-veiled swipe at Rajendra Pachauri, the panel's chairman for the past eight years.

It recommended a new leader be appointed to bring a 'fresh approach' with the term of office cut from 12 years to six.
The IPCC is important because its reports are used by governments to set environmental policy.

The review, which focused on the day-to-day running of the panel, rather than its science, was commissioned after the UN body was accused of making glaring mistakes.

These included the claim that the Himalayan glaciers would vanish within 25 years - and that 55 per cent of the Netherlands was prone to flooding because it was below sea level.

An email scandal involving experts at the University of East Anglia had already fuelled fears that global warming was being exaggerated.

The report demanded a more rigorous conflict of interest policy and said executives should have formal qualifications.

It said: 'Because the IPCC chair is both the leader and the face of the organisation, he or she must have strong credentials (including high professional standing in an area covered by IPCC assessments), international stature, a broad vision, strong leadership skills, considerable management experience at a senior level, and experience relevant to the assessment task.'...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
.....................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Climate 'sceptic' Bjørn Lomborg now believes global warming is one of world's greatest threats

One of the world’s most prominent climate change sceptics has called for a $100bn fund to fight the effects of global warning, after rethinking his views on the severity of the threat.

By Matthew Moore
31 Aug 2010

Bjørn Lomborg, a self-styled "sceptical environmentalist" who has long opposed international curbs on carbon emissions, is now urging world leaders to invest heavily in clean energy.

In a new book he argues that global warming is “a challenge humanity must confront" and “undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today".

Prof Lomborg, an author and academic at Copenhagen Business School, is calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fund international efforts to boost wind, wave, solar and nuclear power.

Money is also needed to cover the research and development costs of innovative projects to counter rising temperatures, he argues...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
............................................................................................................................

Independent

Why failure of climate summit would herald global catastrophe: 3.5°

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

Tuesday, 31 August 2010

The world is heading for the next major climate change conference in Cancun later this year on course for global warming of up to 3.5C in the coming century, a series of scientific analyses suggest. The failure of last December's UN climate summit in Copenhagen means that cuts in carbon emissions pledged by the international community will not be enough to keep the anticipated warming within safe limits.

Two analyses of the Copenhagen Accord and its pledges, by Dr Sivan Kartha of the Stockholm Environment Institute, and by the Climate Action Tracker website, suggest that, with the cuts that are currently promised under Copenhagen, the world will still warm by 3.5C by 2100. Such a rise would be likely to have disastrous effects on agricultural production, water availability, natural ecosystems and sea-level rise across the world, producing tens of millions of refugees...

Yet the international community does not seem any closer to consensus on the need to make further reductions in carbon and at Cancun, which takes place from 29 November to 10 December, it is at best side issues on which any progress will be made...

It is hard to exaggerate the dire effect which the failure at Copenhagen has had both on the climate change negotiating process itself, and on the belief of those involved that an effective climate deal might be possible.

A year ago, many environmentalists, scientists and politicians genuinely thought that the meeting in Denmark might produce a binding agreement to cut global CO2 by the 25-40 per cent, by 2020, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has calculated is necessary to keep the warming to below C.

Today that optimism has vanished. The Danish meeting foundered on the disagreement between the developed countries and the developing nations over who should do how much, and when, in cutting emissions; the major point of disagreement was the Kyoto Protocol, the current treaty, which makes developed countries do a lot, and developing nations not very much.

The Kyoto treaty runs out at the end of 2012 and the developing nations, led by China and India, wanted it renewed, while developed countries, including Britain and the rest of the EU, want a completely new treaty to share out the carbon-cutting burden.

At Copenhagen last December, world leaders cobbled together an agreement which ended up devoid of any binding carbon emissions targets (but did recognise the need to stay under 2 degrees C for the first time). Instead of the legally-binding treaty which had been hoped for, nations were invited to "register" voluntary targets, saying by how much they thought they could cut their CO2 by 2020...

If there are no further breakdowns, it is possible that the meeting may at least restore faith in the UN climate process. "Nobody thinks Cancun will be a big-bang moment," said Keith Allott, head of climate change for the World Wide Fund for Nature. "What the world needs to do is put some wheels back on the climate truck."

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...

Hannity Special

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Excellent feature, "The Green Swindle" on Hannity right now:

Controlling your carbon footprint has become a global fad, but is it all just a con job? And how much green is it costing you? Sean investigates the truth behind the billion dollar industry!

James Cameron: Chicken

Jameson's picture

Ann McElhinney accepted James Cameron's challenge for a debate on AGW where he was going to personally "call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads."

Except he chickened out.

Ann writes: "Everyone on our side agreed with their conditions. The debate was even listed on the AREDAY agenda.

They wanted to change their team. We agreed.

They wanted to change the format to less of a debate—to “a roundtable”. We agreed.

Then they wanted to ban our cameras from the debate. We could have access to their footage. We agreed.

Bizarrely, for a brief while, the worlds most successful film maker suggested that no cameras should be allowed-that sound only should be recorded. We agreed

Then finally James Cameron, who so publicly announced that he “wanted to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out,” decided to ban the media from the shoot out.

He even wanted to ban the public. The debate/roundtable would only be open to those who attended the conference.

No media would be allowed and there would be no streaming on the internet. No one would be allowed to record it in any way.

We all agreed to that.

And then, yesterday, just one day before the debate, his representatives sent an email that Mr. “shoot it out ” Cameron no longer wanted to take part. The debate was cancelled."

Climate protest camp targets RBS headquarters

Marcus's picture

BBC News

19 August 2010

Climate protest camp targets RBS headquarters

Climate change protesters have set up camp close to the Royal Bank of Scotland headquarters in Edinburgh.

The Camp for Climate Action is angry about the banking group's role in financing oil industry developments which they believe could be dangerous for the environment.

Dozens of protesters are in an open area close to the building, which is to the west of Edinburgh.

RBS said its offer to meet with the protest leaders had been declined.

Police made two arrests at the site on Wednesday night. Officers are currently surrounding the building, along with security staff.

The environmentalists have criticised the banking group for backing the fossil fuel industry in the UK and around the world...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-s...
.........................................................................................................................

Daily Mail

One must take shorter showers, says Charles: Prince urges British families to 'snub the bathtub'
By Fay Schlesinger

Prince Charles has told British families to take shorter showers to help protect the environment.

The instruction came at the end of a list of 20 lifestyle changes recommended by the Prince of Wales for his new green campaign, Start.

In separate advice endorsed by the Prince, he was more detailed – urging people to give up baths in favour of 'short, refreshing' five minute showers.

His campaign website reads: 'Snub the tub. If everybody in a four-person family replaced one bath a week with a five-minute shower, you could save between £5 and £15 per year off your energy bill.'

However, the 61-year-old Prince might need to tackle his own family's washing habits before telling the rest of the country how to behave. His father the Duke of Edinburgh, 89, takes baths.

He slipped in one in 2005 and badly bruised his left eye after catching it with his thumb.

And Sarah Ferguson, Charles's former sister-in-law and the mother of his nieces, has spoken of taking ice-cold baths on a daily basis to tackle her 'dark' moods.

As for the Prince of Wales himself, Clarence House last night remained tight-lipped on whether he takes short showers...

Prince Charles has previously spoken of being born into his position as heir to the throne 'for a purpose' – to tackle global warming...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
..............................................................................................................

Australian election: breakthrough forecast for Greens

Major parties' failure to address public climate change concern may hand Greens up to 14% of vote and balance of power in senate

Alison Rourke in Sydney
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 August 2010

Australia's Greens party is poised for a breakthrough in this weekend's elections, cashing in on the incoherence of the major parties on an issue that has claimed more than one political scalp.

The Greens could win up to 14% of the vote, according to opinion polls, nearly double what they achieved last time. It could give them the balance of power in the senate (elected by proportional representation), and a seat in the lower house.

The party is benefiting from uncertainty towards climate change on the left and denial on the right. The former prime minister Kevin Rudd lost the faith of the public after calling climate change ''the greatest moral challenge of our times" only to shelve legislation on a carbon tax. His successor, Julia Gillard, seeking her own mandate in Saturday's election, has been criticised for offering little more than a citizens' assembly on the issue.

Tony Abbott, the opposition leader, is a climate change sceptic. He assumed the Liberal party helm when his predecessor, Malcolm Turnbull, fell on his sword over the emissions trading scheme.

The leader of the Greens, Bob Brown, says his party's central message is action on climate change...

If the Greens gain the balance of power in the senate on Saturday it means they can block legislation. Whichever party wins overall, it will have to negotiate with them...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...

Niwa sued over data accuracy

Marcus's picture

Niwa sued over data accuracy
NZPA

15/08/2010

The country's state-owned weather and atmospheric research body is being taken to court in a challenge over the accuracy of its data used to calculate global warming.

The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition said it had lodged papers with the High Court asking the court to invalidate the official temperatures record of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa).

The lobby of climate sceptics and ACT Party have long criticised Niwa over its temperature data, which Niwa says is mainstream science and not controversial, and the raw data publicly available.

The coalition said the New Zealand Temperature Records (NZTR) were the historical base of NIWA's advice to the Government on issues relating to climate change.

Coalition spokesman Bryan Leyland said many scientists believed although the earth had been warming for 150 years, it had not heated as much as Government archives claimed...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nationa...
.............................................................................................................

Short-termism fails the environment

As seen in the current cuts, the environment always goes to the bottom of the priority pile in a war of political expediency

Leo Hickman guardian.co.uk,
Tuesday 17 August 2010

Is the coalition government now demoting the environment in light of its spending cuts? After a string of headlines over the past few days, it would appear so.

First we learned that the 40% cuts being earmarked for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs could see nature reserves being sold off and spending "slashed" on pollution and waste controls. Last month, a coalition of 25 leading conservation charities, including the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, attempted to head off these predicted cutbacks with a joint plea arguing that cuts "could have profound and perhaps irreversible consequences for wildlife, landscapes and people" and would be a "false economy – short-term savings would translate into huge long-term costs for our economy and our national wellbeing".

Then came the revelation in the Guardian that large coal-fired power stations could, according to green campaigners, be back on the table if, as now appears likely, the so-called "environmental performance standard" aimed at restricting power-station emissions fails to make it into the coalition's first energy bill, scheduled to be published later this year. Could this trigger a renewed fight over Kingsnorth, the proposed rebuilding of the coal-fired power station in Kent that came to symbolise the UK's climate legislation battleground in recent years?

In other spending cuts news, there have been reports of rail fares rising by up to 8% – the biggest increase since privatisation in the mid 1990s – should the Department for Transport also feel the force of the spending review, as is expected. As if our ludicrously priced trains weren't already pushing people into their cars.

And there was the news last month that the sustainable development commission, the government's sustainability watchdog, was to be axed. Cuts, as we are fast learning, are an inevitability for all sectors, but where will it end? The Times reported this week that the Treasury – that old adversary of the environment – is "planning to axe hundreds of millions of pounds from Britain's renewable energy and nuclear clean-up budgets" – a move being "robustly" resisted by Chris Huhne, the energy secretary.

The most telling line in the report is that Treasury officials "view the [Department of Energy and Climate Change's] £3.2bn budget as among the least damaging options for cuts". That's to say, the government's energy and climate change policies are now bottom of the pile when it comes to spending priorities...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...
..........................................................................................................................................................

Independent

Julie Burchill: So the Prince of Green Hypocrites is going on tour. Thank God I'll be abroad

Green is the first socio-political movement in which every single leader and spokesperson is filthy rich.

Wednesday, 18 August 2010

As if the idea of a summer "staycation" in Blighty hasn't been discredited enough by the soggy old weather, those of our countrymen unwise enough to linger anywhere in the vicinity of these sceptered isles in early September are going to get a nasty shock. (I personally shall be whooping it up among the fleshpots of 5-star Tenerife in tanning preparation for my October holiday in Israel – no staycation for me, ta!)

For they run the risk of running into Prince Charles in full-on, emerald-green hypocritical flight. Though he won't actually be flying this time – not like he did in 2007 to the US, first class, with an entourage of 20 people, to collect an environmental award. Or like he did last year, when he used a private jet on an "environmental" tour of South America, costing approximately £300,000 over a 16,000-mile trip.

No, this time he'll be riding the Royal Train, which runs on sustainable biofuel – and hot air – hosting a five-day series of meetings and receptions along the way. You know, that shag-palace-on-sidings where back in the day this man of principle used to sleep with the wife of a brother officer while engaged to a virgin he chose like a broodmare. Happy days of our glorious heritage!...

http://www.independent.co.uk/o...

COALITION ARM TAKES NIWA TO HIGH COURT

Marcus's picture

[I hope they win!]

NZ CLIMATE COALITION ARM TAKES NIWA TO HIGH COURT
Posted 16 August

The New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust, a newly registered arm of the Coalition, has filed a claim in the High Court seeking a declaration to invalidate the NZ Temperature Record, currently promoted by NIWA, and featured on its website.

http://nzclimatescience.net/in...
.............................................................................................................

[I hope they're right!]

Daily Telegraph

Government accused of shelving greenhouse emissions standards

The Government was last night accused of reneging on its promise to tighten rules on greenhouse gas emissions in a move which could see new coal-fired power stations built.

16 Aug 2010

Plans to introduce tough new environmental emissions standards are likely to be shelved despite both the Tories and Lib Dems previously pledging their commitment to the idea.

The policy will not be implemented in the coalition’s first energy bill to be published this year, reports suggested.

Instead, ministers intend to open a consultation on the idea in the autumn with the results being put to parliament in a white paper next year.

The introduction of the standards would have restricted emissions from coal and gas powered plants and encouraged companies to use more efficient technology.

Greenpeace energy campaigner, Joss Garman, said: "David Cameron made the introduction of new rules to stop the most polluting power stations one of his flagship green policies, and Nick Clegg helped ensure it was a key part of the coalition agreement.

"Both Lib Dem and Conservative MPs voted for the introduction of such a measure just a few months ago, and if they U-turn on this and fail to put this measure into their new energy law, how can they claim to be the greenest government ever?"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
........................................................................................

[Another one for the Daily Onion!]

Guardian

Artificial meat? Food for thought by 2050

Leading scientists say meat grown in vats may be necessary to feed 9 billion people expected to be alive by middle of century

John Vidal, environment editor
The Guardian, Monday 16 August 2010

Artificial meat grown in vats may be needed if the 9 billion people expected to be alive in 2050 are to be adequately fed without destroying the earth, some of the world's leading scientists report today.

But a major academic assessment of future global food supplies, led by John Beddington, the UK government chief scientist, suggests that even with new technologies such as genetic modification and nanotechnology, hundreds of millions of people may still go hungry owing to a combination of climate change, water shortages and increasing food consumption...

But novel ways to increase food production will also be needed, say the scientists. Conventional animal breeding should be able to meet much of the anticipated doubling of demand for dairy and meat products in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, but this may not be enough.

Instead, says Dr Philip Thornton, a scientist with the International Livestock Research Institute in Nairobi, two "wild cards" could transform global meat and milk production. "One is artificial meat, which is made in a giant vat, and the other is nanotechnology, which is expected to become more important as a vehicle for delivering medication to livestock."...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Climate scientists to predict where natural disaster will strike

Marcus's picture

Climate scientists in race to predict where natural disaster will strike next

Conference in Boulder will step up world's efforts to establish an early warning system for extreme weather events

Robin McKie
The Observer, Sunday 15 August 2010

The world's leading climate scientists will gather this week in the United States to hammer out plans to set up an early warning system that would predict future meteorological disasters caused by global warming.

The meeting, in Boulder, Colorado, has been arranged at diplomatic level amid fears that storms, hurricanes, droughts, flooding and other extreme weather events now threaten to trigger widespread devastation in coming decades. A series of meteorological catastrophes have dominated headlines in recent weeks, while scientists have warned that figures so far for this year suggest 2010 will be the hottest on record.

Recent events include a record-breaking heatwave that has seen Moscow blanketed with smog from burning peatlands, the splintering of a giant island of ice from the Greenland ice cap, and floods in Pakistan that have claimed the lives of at least 1,600 people and left 20 million homeless.

Scientists say events like these will become more severe and more frequent over the rest of the century as rising greenhouse gas emissions trap the sun's heat in the lower atmosphere and bring change to Earth's climate and weather systems. However, their ability to pinpoint exactly where and when the worst devastation will occur is still limited. The aim of the Colorado meeting is to develop more precise predictive techniques to help pinpoint the location and severity of droughts, floods, and heatwaves before they happen and so save thousands of lives...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
......................................................................................................................................

BBC News

13 August 2010

Ban for 13 protesters from Merthyr opencast site

Thirteen people who admitted obstructing a railway taking coal from an opencast site to a power station have been given conditional discharges.

The group, from Bristol and western England, were sentenced at Merthyr Crown Court over the 2009 protest.

They were also banned from the Merthyr site, Ffos-y-Fran, and Aberthaw power station in the Vale of Glamorgan.

Meanwhile, a "climate camp" protest has begun near Dyffryn Cellwen, north of Glynneath, near other opencast sites...

After the case, activist group Rising Tide said: "Opencast mining trashes the landscape, contributes massively to climate change and threatens the health of local people.

"We need to leave coal in the ground, and that's why we put our necks on the line to stop a coal train."

James Poyner, joint managing director of Miller Argent, said: "Their action was very irresponsible.

"They have to realise they're not above the law, however strongly held their beliefs are."

The sentencing came as organisers of Climate Camp Cymru said a camp had been set up camp near Dyffryn Cellwen.

The protest camp is expected to continue until Tuesday.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-w...
..................................................................................................

Independent

Poll puzzle for immigrants as Australia votes

With both major parties talking tough on refugees, who will its settlers support in this week's election?

By Kathy Marks in Adelaide

Sunday, 15 August 2010

...During the run-up to what is expected to be one of the most closely fought elections in years, the two major parties – led by the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and the opposition leader, Tony Abbott – have been vying to appear tough on asylum-seekers. Indeed, "border protection" has been one of the few concrete policy issues aired during a campaign light on substance and heavy on stage-managed photo-opportunities...

Many voters are disappointed that climate change has barely figured during the election campaign, despite warnings that Australia will be the first developed nation to be afflicted badly by global warming. Mr Abbott, who once described climate change as "crap", has ruled out setting a carbon price. Ms Gillard has proposed to establish a "citizens assembly" to gauge community support for an emissions-trading scheme. Mr Rudd's deferral of such a scheme was one of the reasons his popular support plummeted, triggering the events that led to Ms Gillard overthrowing him.

Disillusionment with both Labor and the Liberals is prompting many Australians to consider voting Green. Although Green votes for members of the House of Representatives (the lower house) ultimately benefit the larger parties, under the preferential voting system, the Greens seem set to hold the balance of power in the Senate (upper house)...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Free app to counter skeptics’ arguments on climate change

Marcus's picture

Independent

Free app to counter skeptics’ arguments on climate change

Tuesday, 10 August 2010

A free application for smartphones allows users who believe climate change is the result of human activity to counter arguments to the contrary by providing them with a range of scientific materials.

Skepticism over climate change or the causes of climate change has become an increasingly fraught issue as many countries in the world adopt alternative energy measures and encourage consumers to reduce their carbon footprint. The most recent data from survey database Gallup World view revealed that the percentage of Australians who attribute climate change to human activity fell from 52 percent in 2008 to 44 percent in 2010. The latest available data indicates that 48 percent of British people, 49 percent of Americans, 58 percent of Chinese, 63 percent of French and 88 percent of Japanese attribute climate change to human activity.

For those that believe climate change is caused by human activity, a free downloadable app for iPhones, Android phones and Nokia phones has been developed which allows users to counter the argument of climate change skeptics, by using a range of scientific resources.

The Skeptical Science app, developed by physicist John Cook of skepticalscience.com allows users to browse arguments commonly used by climate change skeptics, such as ‘it's not caused by us,' or ‘it doesn't matter;' once the category has been selected the app links the user to a series of papers, scientific arguments, data and graphs which can be used to to refute the argument. The app also allows users to report new counter climate change arguments and re-tweet their findings...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
..................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Climate change round the world

The simultaneous catastrophes of flooding in Pakistan, wildfires in Russia and landslides in China are evidence that global warming predictions are correct, according to climate change experts.

10 Aug 2010

Here is a list of some of the major events since the start of the year:

China - At least 702 people die in northwestern Gansu province at the weekend when torrent of mud and rocks engulfs town of Zhouqu, with more than 1,000 missing. Year of heavy flooding has already killed nearly 1,500.

Pakistan - UN announced on Monday that the Pakistan flooding was the greatest humanitarian crisis in recent history, with more people affected than the South-East Asian tsunami and the recent earthquakes in Kashmir and Haiti combined. More than 1,600 killed, while almost 14 million have suffered losses requiring long or short-term help.

Central Europe - At least 11 killed and hundreds of homes damaged this week. Flooding in May and June caused hundreds of millions worth damage, killing 18 in Poland, others died in Czech Republic, while thousands were forced to flee homes in Slovakia and Hungary.

Kashmir - Hundreds of people still missing in Indian Himalayas after flash floods hit the remote region of Ladakh, killing at least 177.

Russia - Summer heatwave estimated to have cost almost 5,000 lives. Vladimir Putin ordered a halt to all exports of wheat and other grains due to the “abnormally high temperatures” and most of harvest being wiped out by fires. Heatwave could wipe up to $14 billion off economic growth according to economists.

Australia - Coldest June in nearly 30 years in Sydney with temperatures dropping to 39F (4C).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

Global warming: Our survey of MPs shows worrying apathy

Marcus's picture

Global warming: Our survey of MPs shows worrying apathy

Only 11% of MPs responded to our email, but they have to respond to you so help us out by chasing them for their views on climate change

Christine Ottery and Damian Carrington
Wednesday 11 August 2010
guardian.co.uk

Does the UK's new parliament think global warming is happening and manmade? A simple but important question, we thought, especially as more than a third (232) of the members elected in May are new to parliament. So we sent three "yes or no" questions by email to all 650 MPs. The result? Stunning apathy, mainly. Only 74, about 11%, answered. We are going to need your help, it seems – more on that at the end.

Virtually all who did reply – 70 – were believers and said yes to all three of the questions below. Two said no to all three – hard-core climate sceptics, in other words – and two objected to the phrasing of one of the questions – moderate climate sceptics, if you like. The party breakdown was as follows:

• 7 Conservative MPs: 5 believers, 1 hard-core and 1 moderate sceptic

• 16 Lib Dem MPs: all believers

• 48 Labour MPs: 46 believers, 1 hard-core and 1 moderate sceptic

• 2 Plaid Cymru and 1 SDLP MPs: All believers

It would be wrong to draw many conclusions from this small and self-selecting sample but perhaps considering the response rate is the safest: 28% of the parliamentary Lib Dem party replied, 19% of Labour and just 2% of Tories. That would fit with many observers' ideas of the importance of the climate change issue to MPs in those parties.

We asked the MPs if they agreed or not with the following statements:

1. Scientific evidence strongly suggests the world has been warming since the Industrial Revolution and will continue to do so?

2. Scientific evidence strongly suggests that most of this warming is caused by emissions from human activities? (The two MPs who challenged the question objected to the word "strongly" here.)

3. The UK government should take urgent action to cut the nation's greenhouse gas emissions, in order to meet a target at least 20% lower by 2020?

In our email, and the reminder we sent, we promised not to name and shame individual MPs, but one felt compelled to ring us. Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP, is one of just five MPs, all Tories, who voted against the 2008 climate change bill. He is now chair of the rather important Treasury select committee, but his elevation has not dimmed his sceptical views. He claimed that one-third of scientists do not blame global warming on emissions from human activities. "Stern [Nicholas Stern, the economist who put climate change on the political agenda] is radically wrong," he added, in arguing that acting now to cut carbon would be cheaper in the long run. There was more: "There are lots of armageddon scenarios, all of them fringe views, none are supported by any leading scientists. Most of the world's leading scientists do not support tipping point theories."

Tyrie did have an ally, and a rather blunt one, in the Labour party. This MP dismissed the evidence for climate change as "rubbish", writing: "Volcanoes spew out more crap in a week than mankind and all other forms of life do in a year." When asked if policy should reflect scientific evidence on climate change, he responded: "Are you kidding?"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
.................................................................................................................................

Daily Mail

The nuclear champion: I was never against atomic power says Huhne as he promises eight new plants

By Gerri Peev
10th August 2010

The country will have a new generation of nuclear power stations within eight years, Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne said yesterday, as he insisted he had been miscast as an opponent of atomic energy.

In a move that will surprise many of his Liberal Democrat colleagues who oppose nuclear power, Mr Huhne insisted that he had not changed his stance on atomic power.

‘My views on nuclear power have always been much misunderstood,’ he said. ‘We are on course to make sure that the first new nuclear power station opens on time in 2018.’

He said it was clear that MPs would vote in favour of new nuclear power stations provided there was no public subsidy involved...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
......................................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Business facing a wave of green taxes

Thousands of British businesses will be liable for significant fines and charges under a new government “green tax” scheme.

Companies that fail to register their energy use by next month will be hit with fines that could reach £45,000 under the little-known rules.

Those that do participate in the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) initiative by declaring their energy use will face charges for every ton of greenhouse gas they produce.

These payments are expected to average £38,000 a year for medium-sized firms, and could reach £100,000 for larger organisations.

Surveys have shown that thousands of businesses are unaware they are supposed to be taking part, or even that the scheme exists at all.

The imposition of new charges and fines will put pressure on firms at a time when economists are warning of a “double dip” recession as companies, consumers and the public sector all cut their spending.

Business leaders criticised the CRC — which was created by Labour but implemented by the Coalition — as “complex and bureaucratic”. One accused ministers of swinging “a big hammer” at companies and questioned whether it would have any environmental benefits...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...

Australians change their mind about climate change

Marcus's picture

Independent

Australians change their mind about climate change

Monday, 9 August 2010

Fewer Australians believe that humans are responsible for climate change, but despite this, the market for environmentally friendly products such as LED bulbs is growing and manufacturers are releasing increasingly innovative and eco-friendly products.

An August 6 report by Gallup Worldview has revealed that while Australians are still concerned about climate change, fewer blame it on human activities.

The percentage of Australians who are aware of climate change and say it results from human activity fell from 52 percent in June 2008 to 44 percent in March 2010, while the number of Australians who attributed climate change to natural (i.e., not man-made) causes, rose by 10 percent from 21 percent in 2008 to 31 percent in 2009. Only 2 percent of Australians had not heard of climate change, down 1 percent from 2008.

This shift in attitude is surprising as Australia is considered one of the most knowledgeable countries in the world on climate change; 97 percent say that they know at least ‘something' about the issue...

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
..........................................................................................

Daily Express

FORMER AUSTRALIAN PM TO WORK FOR UN

Tuesday August 10,2010

Australia's dumped prime minister has accepted a part-time UN job in a development that the opposition leader argues is a reason that the governing party should not be re-elected this month.

The United Nations announced that Kevin Rudd, who was replaced by Prime Minister Julia Gillard in an internal Labour Party revolt in June, was appointed to a 21-member panel on global sustainability.

Ms Gillard promised Mr Rudd a senior ministry in her government if Labour wins a second three-year term in elections next week.

But opposition leader Tony Abbott said Mr Rudd's part-time job meant that Ms Gillard's Cabinet was in "complete flux", with two senior ministers quitting at the August 21 poll.

"Climate change is important and this is a way in which I can make a modest contribution to the future of acting globally and nationally on climate change," Mr Rudd said...

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/...
.........................................................................................................................................

NY Times

In Crackdown on Energy Use, China to Shut 2,000 Factories

By KEITH BRADSHER
Published: August 9, 2010

Earlier this summer, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China promised to use an “iron hand” to improve his country’s energy efficiency, and a growing number of businesses are now discovering that it feels like a fist.

The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology quietly published a list late Sunday of 2,087 steel mills, cement works and other energy-intensive factories required to close by Sept. 30...

The announcement was the latest in a series of Chinese moves to increase energy efficiency. The National Development and Reform Commission, which is the government’s most powerful economic planning agency, announced last Friday that it had forced 22 provinces to halt their practice of providing electricity at discounted prices to energy-hungry industries like aluminum production.

The current Chinese five-year plan calls for using 20 percent less energy this year for each unit of economic output than in 2005. But surging production by heavy industry since last winter has put in question China’s ability to meet the target.

The success or failure of China’s energy-efficiency campaign is being watched closely not just by economists, who cite the campaign as one reason that growth of the Chinese economy has slowed down a little this summer...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08...
............................................................................................................................

10 August 2010

Climate change 'partly to blame' for sweltering Moscow

By Katia Moskvitch

Science reporter, BBC News

Global climate change is partly to blame for the abnormally hot and dry weather in Moscow, cloaked in a haze of smoke from wildfires, say researchers.

The UK Met Office said there are likely to be more extreme high temperatures in the future.

Experts from the environmental group WWF Russia have also linked climate change and hot weather to raging wildfires around the Russian capital.

Meteorologists say severe conditions may linger for several more days.

The Moscow health department said earlier that the number of people dying daily in the city had reached about 700 - twice the usual number.

Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.

The recent El Nino, a climate pattern that occurs across the tropical Pacific Ocean and affects weather around the world, and local weather patterns in Russia may have also contributed to this summer's abnormal conditions...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...

Climate change: Behold, the gospel according to the UN

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

Climate change: Behold, the gospel according to the UN

The Methodist Church is adopting the IPCC's report on global warming as holy writ, finds Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker
07 Aug 2010

Anyone who has observed the way the belief in man-made global warming has become for many a new religion might be intrigued by a lengthy document published by the Methodist Church, in the hope that next year it will become official Methodist policy.

Entitled Our Hope in God’s Future, it kicks off by proclaiming that “the theological task is to reflect on modern scientific accounts of the threats posed by climate change in the context of affirming the triune God as creator and redeemer of the universe”. “What is required of God’s people,” it goes on, “is repentance.” The first step must be “confessing our complicity in the sinful structures which have caused the problem”.

The document makes it clear that all good Methodists must take as their new Bible the latest report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, along with the famous report by Lord Stern. Inspired by this holy writ, like any Old Testament prophet it reels off all those familiar apocalyptic warnings of the catastrophes sinful mankind is bringing on the planet – floods, droughts, hurricanes, killer heatwaves, melting ice caps, sea levels rising by 20 feet (although they did get that one from the prophet Gore).

One cannot imagine how they left out plagues and swarms of locusts, since they could have found biblical evidence for this in the IPCC report. But, of course, only the most devout disciple will still believe in all these apocalyptic predictions anyway, since in every case there is plenty of sound science to suggest they are no more than scare stories...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...
........................................................................................................................

Daily Mail

BBC says sorry to Climategate unit for grilling by John Humphrys

By Martin Delgado

8th August 2010

The BBC has apologised for ‘ill-judged’ remarks made by Today presenter John Humphrys during the ‘Climategate’ scandal last year.

Corporation chiefs said the host of the Radio 4 flagship programme should not have accused researchers at the University of East Anglia of ‘distorting the debate about global warming to make the threat seem even more serious than they believed it to be’...

Following the inquiry, a complaint was made to the BBC by the university’s Pro-Vice Chancellor, Trevor Davies.

In response, the Corporation’s Head of News Programmes, Stephen Mitchell, told Prof Davies that Mr Humphrys’s ‘misconceived assertion’ that facts had been distorted was ‘incorrect’.

Mr Mitchell added: ‘I apologise wholeheartedly on behalf of the Today programme. We were dealing with a matter that hadn’t at that stage been fully investigated and which was the subject of widespread comment and conjecture.

‘Having spoken to John Humphrys and his editor about it, I can assure you that they too regret that his script was not more precise.’

He adds the remark was ‘an isolated but significant lapse’.

Three inquiries cleared the scientists of wrongdoing, although Prof Jones was criticised for being secretive and unhelpful when dealing with critics with opposing views.

Prof Davies praised the BBC for acknowledging its mistake.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
............................................................................................................................

Independent

Australian opposition attacks 'divided' government

Sunday, 8 August 2010

Australia's resurgent opposition party officially launched its election campaign today with an attack on a bitterly-divided government while the prime minister pledged to fight through the adversity facing her party.

The conservative Liberal Party campaign launch comes a week before the ruling Labour Party's, with most opinion polls pointing to a change of government in the August 21 general elections.

The Labour Party has faced a series of setbacks, including opposition to a proposed profits tax on mining companies, public disenchantment over a lack of climate change policy and in-party animosity.

Julia Gillard replaced Kevin Rudd as prime minister in June in a surprise Labour Party coup, to become Australia's first female leader.

"It's time to end this soap opera and to give Australia back a grown-up government," Liberal Party leader Tony Abbott told a gathering of party faithful in Brisbane today.

Lingering anger over Mr Rudd's sudden ousting has overshadowed Ms Gillard's attempt to win a second three-year term for her centre-left government.

She has had to deal with a string of government leaks to the media, including claims she unsuccessfully argued in confidential Cabinet meetings against increasing pensions because old people did not vote for Labour.

"I'm not going to be distracted by the hurdles in my way," Ms Gillard told Nine Network television in an interview Sunday. "I'm going to crash through them."...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

U.N. climate deal retreats as Bonn talks end

Marcus's picture

U.N. climate deal retreats as Bonn talks end

Fri Aug 6, 2010

BONN, Aug 6 (Reuters) - U.N. climate talks have moved backward rather than forward toward a hoped-for deal later this year as nations make slow progress on pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions and add more proposals to the working document.

As talks in Bonn on a new climate treaty draw to an end on Friday, the frustration of delegates with the process this week is clearly felt, and a deal in Mexico this year seems unlikely.

This week's meeting is the penultimate before a meeting set for the end of November in Cancun, Mexico.

"I came to Bonn hopeful of a deal in Cancun, but at this point I am very concerned as I have seen some countries walking back from progress made in Copenhagen," said Jonathan Pershing, the U.S. deputy special climate envoy...

http://af.reuters.com/article/...
.......................................................................................

BBC News

6 August 2010

Activists to target RBS in Edinburgh

Activists are to target the headquarters of RBS to highlight deals which they say contribute to climate change.

The Camp for Climate Action intend to set up a camp by "swooping" on a site in or near Edinburgh from 19 August.

Protesters are expected to target the bank on 23 August.

The campaign group said it had chosen RBS because of its commitment to financing the fossil fuel industry in the UK and around the world.

This includes loans to coal, oil and gas companies.

The activists pointed out that previous camps had successfully targeted the now axed third runway at Heathrow and Kingsnorth power station in Kent...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-s...

EPA left to pick up climate change where Congress dropped off

Marcus's picture

Washington Post

EPA left to pick up climate change where Congress dropped the debate

By David A. Fahrenthold and Juliet Eilperin
Wednesday, August 4, 2010

The Obama administration told Congress to find a way to regulate greenhouse gases -- or else.

Last month, Congress refused: Democratic leaders in the Senate declined to take up climate legislation before their August break, which means it looks effectively dead for this session.

Now the White House is stuck with "or else."

The Environmental Protection Agency will soon begin regulating greenhouse gases factory by factory, power plant by power plant. That could be unwieldy, expensive and unpopular -- even President Obama has said it's not his preferred solution.

But for now, it's his only option.

The next few months could bring a climax to the long-running debate over how to combat climate change, with the EPA trying to implement its rules and industry groups and opponents in Congress seeking to block it with lawsuits or legislation.

The administration will cite a mandate from the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases could be regulated like other air pollutants. But opponents will say it has chosen an approach that stretches the law and could impose serious economic costs.

The result of their fight could be the first limits on greenhouse gases from American smokestacks -- or a significant defeat for the White House and environmental groups...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
.........................................................................................................................................

Daily Express

SEDGWICK VOWS TO FIGHT FOR REJECTED CLIMATE CHANGE BILL

Wednesday August 4,2010

Actress KYRA SEDGWICK has urged her fans to put pressure on U.S. legislators to implement a climate change law - because she's "terrified" of what the future will hold without it.

The Closer star is angry that a proposed new climate bill, designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, was rejected by U.S. Congress members last month (Jul10).

And she's calling on her online followers to contact their local senators in a bid to have the decision reversed...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts...
...................................................................................................................................

Daily Telegraph

Ecuador's 'Amazon bonds': how to raise $3.6bn for doing nothing

Ecuador is seeking $3.6bn (£2.2bn) from rich countries - in return for doing nothing for a decade.

By Rowena Mason
04 Aug 2010

The unusual deal is part of a new United Nations initiative to persuade energy-rich countries not to drill for oil and gas in environmentally sensitive areas. Ecuador has therefore agreed not to touch three oil fields in the Yasuni region of the Amazon for the next ten years, if rich countries buy enough 'Amazon bonds'. Under the terms, donating nations pay an amount per year for a decade - receiving no dividend except an environmental one.

Ecuador's Yasuni reserves are estimated to hold 846m barrels of crude - or a fifth of Ecuador's total.

Raising the money will save the 3,800 square mile forest that is home to rare animals and indigenous peoples. Cutting down trees to develop the area would have released 400m tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...

Oil spill damages legislation thwarted in Senate by Democrats

Marcus's picture

Oil spill damages legislation thwarted in Senate by Democrats

The Democrats' proposed legislation to end a $75m cap on oil spill damages failed due to lack of support from its own party

Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
The Guardian, Wednesday 4 August 2010

Hopes that the worst oil spill in history would bring sweeping reform to America's offshore oil industry were thwarted after Democrats in Senate had to put proposed legislation on hold.

Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, said he could not find support for the oil spill measures, which would have got rid of a $75m (£47m) cap on damages companies like BP would have to pay in the event of a spill.

Reid had earlier planned to open debate on the bill today.

"It's a sad day when you can't find a handful of Republicans to support a bill that … will hold BP accountable for the cost of its disaster," Reid said. "It's clear that Republicans remain determined to stand in the way of everything."

However, at least two Democrats, from the oil-rich states of Louisiana and Alaska, also opposed the bill.

It was the third big defeat for Democrats on the environment in weeks after Reid was forced to abandon a climate change bill, and then even a modest plan to promote the spread of alternative energy sources. America's failure to address climate change has raised concerns that even the flimsy deal on global warming reached at Copenhagen could now be in jeopardy...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...
............................................................................................................................................

Independent

Follow the UN Climate Change Conference online through Facebook, YouTube and twitter

Tuesday, 3 August 2010

...In a press release from the UNFCCC, executive secretary Christiana Figueres outlined the responsibilities of the attending governmental representatives stating that ‘Governments have a responsibility this year to take the next essential step in the battle against climate change' and ‘In Cancun the job of governments is to turn the politically possible into the politically irreversible'.

Though many countries have taken positive steps to ensure they meet the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets they pledged at the Copenhagen accord, some environmentalists feel not enough is being done.

A group of senior academics warned, on the opening of the UNFCCC conference, that the current pledges and gas emission reduction targets put forward by countries involved in climate change negotiations fall short of what is required to prevent temperatures rising more than the 2 Celsius. Scientists generally agree that if the world's temperature was to rise more than 2 Celsius irreversible environmental damage would occur.

The conference is available to follow through a variety of online social media sites including twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The UNFCCC Facebook page which has over 4,000 fans also contains links to images on photo sharing site Flickr. The twitter feed is updated with news on the conference as well as wider news regarding issues related to global warming and climate change.

A series of live webcasts and on demand webcasts are available to view on the website of the UNFCCC, these include press briefings by environmental group Friend's of the Earth and a workshop on the scale of emissions reductions organized by the UNFCCC.

http://www.independent.co.uk/e...

EPA rejects challenges to labelling carbon emissions a pollutant

Marcus's picture

EPA rejects challenges to labelling carbon emissions a pollutant

Environmental Protection Agency rejects petitions challenging its finding that carbon emissions are a pollutant and threat to human health

From the Ecologist, part of the Guardian Environment Network
guardian.co.uk, Monday 2 August 2010


US senator John Kerry's efforts to get a climate bill through US legislation may have failed, but efforts to limit carbon emissions through the EPA continue.

US climate sceptic lobbyists' attempts to stop greenhouse gas emissions from being labelled as a pollutant were last week rejected by The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Climate sceptics and oil and coal lobby groups, including the Peabody Energy Company, had challenged the EPA's ruling from December 2009 that climate change caused by GHG emissions was a threat to public health and the environment. Citing the University of East Anglia 'climategate' controversy they said the science could not be trusted.

The EPA rejected the claims saying they were based on 'selectively edited, out-of-context data and manufactured controversy' and that the evidence of climate change was 'credible and growing stronger'...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

David Cameron runs the greenest government ever?

Marcus's picture

Daily Telegraph

David Cameron runs the greenest government ever? Tell it to the birds

Although the Coalition is likely to come good on its commitment to combat climate change, it is less clear that it cares about the rest of the environment, writes Geoffrey Lean.

By Geoffrey Lean
30 Jul 2010

It says it is the most environmentally friendly government yet – but already many leading greens are becoming distinctly browned off.

Just days after taking office, David Cameron announced that he was "absolutely committed" to leading "the greenest government ever". That might have been setting the bar rather low, considering what had gone before – but, even so, verdant voices warn, ministers are crashing into it.

Already the chairman of the weighty House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee has protested to ministers. More than a quarter of a million people have so far signed a Royal Society for the Protection of Birds petition calling on the Treasury to spare wildlife from its axe – the biggest such response the society has ever had. And Jonathon Porritt, Britain's best-known environmentalist, this week proposed launching a website with the compelling, if scarcely snappy, URL of www.GreenestGovEverYeahRight.com

You can see what he means. As soon as they got into power, ministers scrapped the grants given to families to install heat pumps and other sources of renewable energy in their homes, and cast doubt on whether they would introduce the so-called Renewable Heat Incentive – designed by the last government to take over from them – next April.

The Treasury, which George Osborne promised would be "a green ally, not a foe", is trying to restrict the scope and funding of the much-touted Green Investment Bank, supposed to spur the development of clean technologies – and even attempting to weaken existing incentives for renewables, like the feed-in tariffs for generating electricity at home. The programme for removing and storing carbon from fossil fuel emissions has slipped back, and a scheme for subsidising electric cars, announced on Wednesday, was less than a ninth as big as Labour had planned...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear...
........................................................................................................

Peru declares state of emergency amid plunging temperatures

Hundreds die from extreme cold in remote mountain villages also struggling with severe poverty

Annie Kelly
The Observer, Sunday 1 August 2010

Peru has declared a state of emergency after hundreds of children died from freezing conditions that have seen temperatures across much of the South American country plummet to a 50-year low. In 16 of Peru's 25 regions, temperatures have fallen below -24C.

Reports from the country say 409 people, most of them children, have already died from the cold, with temperatures predicted to fall further in coming weeks.

Worst hit are Peru's poorest and most isolated communities, which are already living on the edge of survival in remote Andean mountain villages more than 3,000 metres above sea level.

Although those living at such high-altitude would expect temperatures to drop below zero at this time of year, NGOs and government officials say many are unable to withstand the extreme cold which they are now experiencing...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.