Heliogenic Climate Change

“The climate secretary, Ed Miliband, last night warned of the danger of a public backlash against the science of global warming in the face of continuing claims that experts have manipulated data.  …

[I]n the government’s first high-level recognition of the growing pressure on public opinion, Miliband declared a “battle” against the “siren voices” who denied global warming was real or caused by humans, or that there was a need to cut carbon emissions to tackle it.

“It’s right that there’s rigour applied to all the reports about climate change, but I think it would be wrong that when a mistake is made it’s somehow used to undermine the overwhelming picture that’s there,” he said.

The danger of climate scepticism was that it would undermine public support for unpopular decisions needed to curb carbon emissions, including the likelihood of higher energy bills for households, and issues such as the visual impact of wind turbines, said Miliband, who is also energy secretary.  …

“There are a whole variety of people who are sceptical, but who they are is less important than what they are saying, and what they are saying is profoundly dangerous,” he said.”  “Ed Miliband declares war on climate change sceptics“

“The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountain tops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.

However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.

The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master’s degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.

The revelations, uncovered by The Sunday Telegraph, have raised fresh questions about the quality of the information contained in the report, which was published in 2007.  …

Professor Richard Tol, one of the report’s authors who is based at the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, Ireland, said: “These are essentially a collection of anecdotes.  … [I]t is illustrative of how sloppy Working Group Two (the panel of experts within the IPCC responsible for drawing up this section of the report) has been.  …[W]hat they claim is complete nonsense.”  …

[N]either the dissertation or the magazine article cited as sources for this information were ever subject to the rigorous scientific review process that research published in scientific journals must undergo.  …

Roger Sedjo, a senior research fellow at the US research organisation Resources for the Future who also contributed to the IPCC’s latest report, added: “The IPCC is, unfortunately, a highly political organisation with most of the secretariat bordering on climate advocacy.  …

The IPCC failed to respond to questions about the inclusion of unreliable sources in its report … “  “UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article“  h/t Larry Tomasson

“What has changed over the past few months? Certainly not the science.  … [T]he “climategate” e-mails … do not call into question the robustness of the surface temperature record produced by UEA. There are two other independent [NOT!] data sets that show clearly that global-average temperature has increased over the past century and this warming has been particularly rapid since the 1970s.  …

What has not been called into question is the basic science.

The key finding that “warming is unequivocal and very likely due to man’s activities” remains robust.  …

The big difference then, is not in the physics of climate change but the public’s perception of what climate research is all about.

That means it is a communications problem and the blame for that has to lie at least in part with the scientists and in part with the way that science is reported.”  “Research is robust but communication is weak“

“Another day, another IPCC-gate.  …

The attachment of “gate” to this scandal is more than appropriate.  In its original 1973-4  incarnation, little bits of information, snippets of foul play, and deletions of records dripped out one-by-one over a year.  Ultimately the person responsible, President Richard Nixon, had to resign.

We’re seeing the same with climategate and the IPCC.  Wouldn’t if just save everyone a lot of time and trouble if Rajenda Pauchari resigned and the United Nations disbanded the IPCC.  Neither its head nor its body have any remaining credibility, so why not put it out of its misery?”  “Kill the IPCC“

“A trade publication is reporting this afternoon that President Obama’s 2011 federal budget proposal will assume receipt of [hundreds of] billions of dollars in revenue generated from the cap-and-trade program even though that proposal appears now to be all but dead in Congress.  …

“Obama last year proposed in his fiscal 2010 budget that a cap-and-trade program would raise some $650 billion over 10 years via a full auction of emission credits, … “  Energy and Environment News senior reporter Darren Samuelson wrote in the publication that is subscription-only.  …

The House bill projects cap-and-trade revenues of $873 billion.

Whether it’s the $650 billion projected by the Senate bill or the $873 billion of the House bill, it appears highly unlikely, to put it charitably, that either measure will make it to Obama’s desk with the cap-and-trade program intact. That means Obama will be counting phantom revenue as part of his next federal budget proposal.”  “Obama’s 2011 budget will include phantom cap-and-trade revenue“

“President Obama this week also ordered the federal government to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 28% below current levels by 2020.  This order follows from Executive Order 13514, which the President signed last fall and which requires federal departments and agencies to set targets for cutting emissions.  He has now set their target for them.  The most practical way to meet this goal would be to shut down large parts of the federal government.  Let’s hope President Obama seizes this opportunity and achieves the most drastic downsizing of government in history.”  Cooler Heads Digest 29 January 2010

“Corporate CEOs who have been actively lobbying for cap-and-trade climate legislation may soon find themselves in an embarrassing position thanks to a new Securities and Exchange Commission regulation, says Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Free Enterprise Project.

The SEC voted January 27 to provide public companies with interpretive guidance that encourages corporations to disclose the possible business and legal impact of climate change to shareholders. Full disclosure will require companies to assess and describe how cap-and-trade legislation can harm company earnings.

“Fully disclosing the business risk of cap-and-trade will embarrass many CEOs who are lobbying for emissions regulations. Shareholders will discover that these CEOs are pursuing legislation that will negatively impact their company,” said Borelli.  …

“Finally, the SEC is taking a position on the business risk of climate change regulation.  … While CEOs find it easy to ignore an individual shareholder, they can’t ignore the SEC,” said Borelli.

“Shareholders are going to discover that many CEOs have not been forthcoming about the business risk posed by cap-and-trade legislation and that they have failed to exercise their fiduciary responsibility by not assessing and communicating the impact of emissions regulations on their businesses.”“  “New SEC Guidance on Climate Change Disclosure Will Force CEOs Who Lobby for Cap-and-Trade to Expose the Business Risk of Cap-and-Trade Legislation to Shareholders“  Prior post here

“Wind turbines placed in cities across Minnesota to generate power aren’t working because of the cold temperatures.

The Minnesota Municipal Power Association bought 11 turbines for $300,000 each from a company in Palm Springs, Calif.

Special hydraulic fluid designed for colder temperatures was used in the turbines, but it’s not working, so neither are the turbines.”  “Cold keeps Minn. wind turbines from spinning“  h/t Green Hell Blog

Go over to No Frakking Consensus and read an expose of how the IPCC is citing unscientific claims by Greenpeace and claiming they are peer-reviewed science.

We all, even journalists, should know how the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) supposedly works:  CO2 absorbs infrared, heating the atmosphere, and because of supposed high climate sensitivity (not) and strong positive feedback (not), runaway warming ensues.  The point is, AGW theory leads only to warming, warming, and more warming.  In spite of this simple truth, alleged journalists continue to parrot absurd nonsense from enviro groups alleging AGW causes cooling, which it cannot.  Proof that AGW is a religious belief:

This winter’s extreme weather — with heavy snowfall in some places and unusually low temperatures — is in fact a sign of how climate change disrupts long-standing patterns, according to a new report by the National Wildlife Federation.  “Harsh winter a sign of disruptive climate change, report says“

Even Biden and Pelosi laugh:

“Australia faces a possible 300 percent increase in extreme bushfires by 2050 unless world leaders can agree to dramatically cut greenhouse gas emissions, a new report said on Thursday.

The report, commissioned by Australia’s firefighters and environmental group Greenpeace, said the failure of U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen to agree on a treaty to tackle climate change had left Australia facing future catastrophic bushfire seasons.”  “Australia “Faces Worse Bushfires Without CO2 Deal”“

In the light of controversies swirling around the U.N.’s climate change body, a retired top military officer urged President Obama Wednesday to set up an independent expert commission to examine the much-touted link between climate change and national security.

“It is too important an issue to be driven by unsubstantiated claims, tainted by scandal and to result in counterproductive policies,” Adm. James Lyons, Jr., former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said in a letter to the president.  …

Lyons, who is chairman of the Center for Security Policy’s military committee, suggested that climate change policies could have a detrimental effect on the military.

“To the extent, for example, that the national response to climate change makes energy more expensive and less available, and distracts the military and national security agencies from their core mission of keeping America safe, it could very well be that the true threat to national security is not climate change, but our response to it,” he wrote.  …

“When it comes to the climate change-national security link and the cap-and-trade legislation now being considered by Congress, any confidence in scientific pronouncements that may have existed in 2009 does not exist in 2010,” he added.  …

Testifying before a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing last October, Heritage Foundation scholar James Jay Carafano argued that the real climate change-related security concern was the financial cost of climate change legislation before Congress.”  “Obama Urged to Set Up Commission to Probe National Security-Climate Link“

“U.S. securities regulators on Wednesday nudged companies toward disclosing in their annual reports their risks from climate change [and government climate change regulations] …

In a 3-2 vote, a divided SEC heeded investors’ calls and suggested that companies have a responsibility to discuss the effects of the environment and pending rules on their business.

“Climate change and related governmental action can create risks and opportunities for companies,” said SEC Commissioner Luis Aguilar.   …

The agency told companies they should consider whether existing or pending laws, rules and international treaties will have a material impact on their business.”  “SEC Adds Climate Risk to Disclosure List“

“The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen [leaked] e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.

The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach.

The stolen [leaked] e-mails , revealed on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, showed how the university’s Climatic Research Unit attempted to thwart requests for scientific data and other information, and suggest that senior figures at the university were involved in decisions to refuse the requests. It is not known who stole the e-mails.

Professor Phil Jones, the unit’s director, stood down while an inquiry took place. The ICO’s decision could make it difficult for him to resume his post.”  “Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data“

“President Obama is redefining the mission of NASA … away from space and aeronautics and toward the monitoring of global warming:

When the White House releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program that was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020. The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon. . . .

In the meantime, the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects — principally, researching and monitoring climate change — and on a new technology research and development program that will one day make human exploration of asteroids and the inner solar system possible.

Perhaps NASA could use the extra climate-babysitting money, as a new report suggests the agency may have been complicit in skewing the record on global warming …”  “A Hansen Stimulus?“

““I would like to submit that this could increase the credibility of the IPCC, not decrease it.” That was the verdict of Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the IPCC, after the organisation was forced to admit the total invalidity of its scare-mongering claims that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.” “IPCC’s vice-chairman thinks its glaciers gaffe has increased its credibilty: up to a point, Lord Copper“

“Global warming has the world’s richest man very worried, but for a different reason.

Bill Gates, who has now taken to full time philanthropy, is worried that financial commitments being made by rich donor countries for climate change could come at the cost of life-saving healthcare projects.   …

“I am concerned that some of this money will come from reducing other categories of foreign aid, especially health. If just 1% of the $100 billion goal came from vaccine funding, then 700,000 more children could die from preventable diseases,” he said.

“With an additional pledge for global warming, the budget of rich countries will be out of balance and they will look to cut down on expenditure … ,” he added.”  “Climate funds are a worry for Bill Gates”
-

“A £1.5bn pledge by Gordon Brown to help poor countries cope with the ravages of climate change will drain funds from existing overseas aid programmes to improve health, education and water supplies, the government admitted today.

The move, revealed in an email exchange between campaigners and an official at the Department for International Development (DfiD), appears to undermine repeated government pledges that such climate aid should be additional to existing overseas development aid (ODA).”  “Climate fund ‘recycled’ from existing aid budget, UK government admits“

As the credibility of the IPCC, the “scientific” basis of Rudd’s ETS scheme, collapses, Rudd reintroduces the ETS:

“Australia’s ruling Labor Party, seeking to pass a carbon trading scheme, will reintroduce the already-rejected climate change proposal to the House of Representatives when parliament returns next week.  …

Global warming is at the top of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s agenda as he heads into a year that may see an election fought over the issue. Australia’s Senate rejected Rudd’s carbon bill for a second time in December, a day after the issue forced a leadership change in the opposition Liberal Party that saw Malcolm Turnbull replaced by Tony Abbott.

Abbott argues the proposal will raise costs without mitigating climate change.”  “Australia’s Govt to Reintroduce Carbon Plan Next Week“

“Every time I have questioned our politicians about global warming they have fallen back on the mantra that “2,500 scientists can’t be wrong”, referring to the vast numbers supposedly behind the IPCC consensus.

But it is now clear that the majority of those involved in the IPCC process are not scientists at all but politicians, bureaucrats, NGOs and green activists.   …

[W]hat has become clear in the past couple of months is that, contrary to what many leaders have claimed, the science as promulgated by the IPCC is very far from “settled” and that there are important questions still to ask. The mainstream media has been slow to do this.

The bloggers, too easily dismissed in the past, have set the pace with some real scoops — and some of the mainstream media is now rushing to catch up.

The sceptics may be about to get their first scalp. Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman often wrongly described in the media as the world’s leading climate scientist (he’s actually a railway engineer), at first attacked those who questioned the IPCC’s alarming glacier prediction as “arrogant” and believers in “voodoo science”.

He’s since had to retract the prediction but can’t quite manage an apology — and is now under mounting pressure in his Indian homeland to resign.”  “The dam is cracking“